On a tactical level, the US-Central Asia summit on November 6 can be classified as a resounding achievement given the cascade of deals announced.But it is too early to judge whether the White House gathering can be considered a strategic success.
For that to happen, the United States will have to demonstrate a prolonged commitment to not just developing the critical minerals sector but to helping regional states address long-term infrastructure and development challenges that enable trade and modernization.
And all participants will need to develop collective institutions to fulfill their respective political and economic agendas, experts say.The summit’s immediate results were impressive, with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan leading the way.
President Trump on his Truth Social channel lauded Uzbekistan’s intent to purchase $100 billion of American goods and services over the next 10 years covering a variety of sectors, including critical minerals, aviation, infrastructure, agriculture and information technology. “We look forward to a long and productive relationship between our Countries!” Trump wrote.
Kazakhstan announced 30 deals worth a collective $17.2 billion, in addition to finalizing a $1.1 billion agreement giving a US firm rights to develop major tungsten deposits.
Kazakhstan also agreed to sign on to the Abraham Accords, the signature Trump initiative to promote peace in the Middle East.Trump described the Kazakh move as “a major step forward in building bridges across the World.” On a strategic level, there is lots of work to be done.
Sodiq Safoyev, the Uzbek Senate’s first deputy chair, hailed the summit, which occurred within the framework of the C5+1, as a milestone in advancing US-Central Asian relations. “For the first time, we see a clear and unambiguous signal from the White House attesting to the long-term strategic interests of the United States in Central Asia,” he said during a November 7 speech at the Atlantic Council.
But Safoyev and other speakers at the Atlantic Council event underscored that taking full advantage of the possibilities created by the summit will require regular and systematic engagement to expand transportation routes, while taking action to develop the region’s manufacturing capacity and human capital.
Dina Titus, a Democratic congresswoman from Nevada, stressed in video comments that the Washington summit represented a “pivotal opportunity” to stimulate “actionable collaborations.” She added that the C5+1 format required a “paradigm shift” in which high-level contacts become the norm.
For the C5+1 format to succeed, Central Asia cannot be considered merely a source of raw materials, Safoyev said.Trade deals “must be supplemented” by US assistance in developing complete supply chains within the region.
Central Asian states should no longer be considered “passive objects” on a Great Power chessboard but rather “active actors” with their own agendas, intent on pursuing multi-vector policies that encourage economic competition among China, the United States and other states. “Competition is good,” he said.
Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev issued a statement following the summit calling for the creation of institutions to promote the strengthening of ties, including the establishment of a C5+1 permanent secretariat with a rotating chairmanship.
In addition, Mirziyoyev advocated for a “Central Asian Investment Partnership” Fund, a “Special Committee” to manage the extraction and processing of critical minerals and “a regional partnership” to modernize Central Asia’s agricultural sector and promote effective management of water resources.
The statement went on to stress a need for “creating a ministerial-level coordinating council on investment and trade … to ensure a systematic dialogue between government institutions, companies and financial institutions.” Beyond institutionalization, a long-term commitment in building out the Middle Corridor trade network, along with transport routes, will be required to fulfill the C5+1’s potential, experts say.
Some estimates put the price tag of infrastructure investment needed for Middle Corridor development at over $20 billion.Expanding trade will also require the United States to think about potential engagement with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which sits between landlocked Central Asia and outlets to seaports. “Afghanistan is part of Central Asia,” Safoyev said.
Central Asian states themselves also need new, collective institutions to take full advantage of emerging opportunities, Frederick Starr, one on the foremost American academic experts on Central Asia, said at the Atlantic Council event.
Only recently have Central Asian states shown a willingness to cooperate on common regional political, economic and social challenges.Cooperation needs to be systematized via a “region-wide, exclusively Central Asian” organization, Starr argued.
The focus of all participants in the Washington summit should now turn to promoting a “shift toward institutionalization … and not lose ourselves in self-congratulation,” Starr said.