The sixth meeting of the Central Asian Summit took place in Astana, Kazakhstan, on August 9. Attended by Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev again as guest of honor and Kakha Imnadze, head of the UN Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy for Central Asia, the meeting marked the start of a new cycle of consultations after the first five meetings were successfully held in 2018 and were only interrupted once in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The 6th Consultation in Astana had some positive aspects, such as the continuation of meetings of the leaders of the Central Asian countries, but despite the hopes of a qualitative evolution in the format and in the proposals and documents approved, there were no fundamental or radical changes in what for the time being appears to be a unified format.
The President's address during the conference was marked by the usual pattern of simultaneously presenting very general proposals and very specific innovative proposals in several areas, such as agriculture, industry, connectivity and energy.
New ideas range from the creation of a Central Asian TV channel and a news Internet portal, as emphasized by Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, to the development of new, effective forms of cooperation in the security sphere, as proposed, albeit in a very vague form, by Tajik Presidents Emomali Rahmon and Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev.
For the first time, the idea of a Central Asian image and identity was on the agenda. Tokayev spoke of a “new image of Central Asia” in international politics, while Mirziyoyev, endorsing Tokayev's paper “Central Asian Renaissance: The Path to Sustainable Development and Prosperity,” noted “the beginnings of the formation of a pan-regional identity in Central Asia.” Mirziyoyev argued that “the time has come to jointly consider the issue of further improving the format of the consultative conference in order to deepen regional integration and meet the agenda of long-term partnership.”
Turkmenistan President Serdar Berdimuhamedov made an unusually strong statement about the purpose of the meeting, which now has the status of a “tradition,” saying it “should be consultative in nature and a forum for political communication without strictly regulating rules and procedures.”
From an evolutionary perspective, the Sixth Consultative Conference was a natural outgrowth of the previous five consultative conferences, which were tasked with finding common normative ground, workable rules of engagement, a flexible and non-sensitive legal framework for interactions, and trust-building mechanisms. The fact that the “Concept for Cooperation Development to 2040” was signed by all parties indicates that sufficient trust and mutual understanding now exists to plan for medium- and long-term coordination and cooperation.
The first conference, held in Astana in 2018, adopted and accepted the idea of ”historic responsibility” for the stability and survival of the region. The second conference, held in Tashkent in 2019, approved the rules of procedure for the consultative conference, confirmed mutual respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the countries of the region, and made the first reference to the 21st century Treaty of Friendship and Good Neighborliness. The third conference, held in Abaza, Turkmenistan in 2021, more consistently included science diplomacy, interregional dialogue, women's diplomacy and humanitarian cooperation in the conference. The fourth conference, held in Cholpon-Ata, Kyrgyzstan in 2022, proposed a friendship treaty, but only Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan signed it. The fifth conference, held in Dushanbe last year, approved guidelines on national coordinators, adopted agreements on youth policy and transportation, and promoted joint educational and humanitarian projects.
So, what are the main outcomes of the Sixth Conference?
First, and most importantly, the challenge for the next few years will be to find common ground on issues of institutionalization and regional identity. Taking Mirziyoyev's statement and Tokayev's article together with the speeches and positions of the other three, especially Berdymukhamedov's, it seems that there are some differences on how to proceed in terms of formalizing and deepening cooperation.
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan all consider the current trends to be irreversible and beneficial, but at present there is less emphasis on the search for a common identity or on building supranational structures. Of course, this does not mean that there are no conflicts of interest and open differences of opinion. But the priorities and sensitivities of all regional countries need to be fully taken into account and interwoven. Central Asia, too often viewed as a monolith with no distinctions, is characterized by complex political, social, ethnic and cultural differences.
It is significant that President Tokayev was the only one of the five presidents to mention the friendship treaty during the conference. The proposals on identity, image building and integration appear to be based on the bilateral meeting between President Tokayev and President Mirziyoyev on the day before the conference. Perhaps for the time being there will continue to be “blanket proposals” that need to be considered at the national institutions, national coordinators and bilateral levels, but the aim is to maintain momentum, political imagination and subjectivity. The role of young people and other actors on the ground will be key in developing these ideas and avoiding awkwardness.
Second, it is important to reflect on the fact that, despite its light-hearted approach, the consultative conference managed to produce a solid and clear set of fundamental norms and principles that define Central Asia and its close intra-regional interactions, including increased meetings between ministers, experts and parliaments, such as the Regional Security Council Presidents’ Meeting on May 16 and the Birlestikh-2024 military exercises in July (both held in Kazakhstan).
Stability, sustainable development, equality, respect, pluralism and diversity, consensus. These are some of the normative features that characterize Central Asia, in addition to those enshrined in the UN Charter. They can be seen being codified in conferences, if not always put into practice. This set of principles gives the region what Tokayev recently called “subjectivity”, giving it agency at the international level. Moreover, thanks to the constant process of defining the rules of engagement and norms of behavior, significant achievements have been achieved. For example, over the years, Turkmenistan has become a full participant in conferences at all levels, the difficult border situation has been smoothed out in private, economic and development indicators have steadily risen, and intra-regional trade has increased by 73.4% (from $5.8 billion to $10 billion) between 2018 and 2022.
Third and last, there are many similarities with the 1990s. Although the times, expertise, resources and actors were different then, some of the projects sponsored by the conference, especially in the cultural-humanitarian, media, scientific and environmental fields, are directly linked to proposals and initiatives made during the time of the Central Asian Union and Central Asian Economic Cooperation. The idea for a magazine called “Central Asia: Issues of Integration” was first proposed in 1996, and the idea of a regional security system for the five Central Asian countries dates back to 1992, when the newly independent countries needed to adjust their position within the CIS, and was materialized in 1996 as the Regional Battalion CentrAsBat.
Senior diplomats told me that one of the roles of the national coordinators of the consultative conference is to reflect on past experiences, build on the positives and avoid the negatives. Today, regional countries have more diplomatic and institutional experience, as well as younger, more dynamic and imaginative people who believe in the idea of regional “oneness,” as demonstrated by the recent Olympics. To avoid a back-to-the-future scenario, it will be necessary to balance continuity and change, and top-down and bottom-up approaches.
