At the end of last week, Astana hosted the first summit in the new Russia-Central Asia format. Interestingly, there was very little information on the results of the event. Obviously, the participants sought to discuss pressing issues behind closed doors in order to avoid unnecessary publicity and the transfer of new data to Western countries for secondary sanctions pressure on countries cooperating with the Russian Federation.
The expert community is been divided in opinions about the new mechanism of cooperation. Some argued that this is not a viable format, others spoke about the need to build a new mechanism for interaction between the countries of the region and the Russian Federation in the conditions of breaking the existing world order, moving away from globalization and dividing the world into macroregions. At the same time, most agreed that now, in the context of information wars and attempts by external forces to destabilize the situation along the entire perimeter of the CIS, dialogue at all levels, including between the expert circles of countries, is extremely important.
Below is a conversation between the information portal Podrobno.uz and the director of the Center for Research Initiatives “Ma’no” Bakhtiyor Ergashev, in order to understand what to expect from the new format, whether Russia can act as a guarantor of security in the region, how to interact with the Russian Federation in the context of the possible introduction of secondary sanctions and what was the purpose of Emomali Rahmon’s emotional speech at the summit.
– What main results would you single out after the completion of the first summit in the Russia-Central Asia format?
– The first summit of the heads of state in the “Central Asia and Russia” format, which took place in Astana, is interesting in that the joint statement identified the main areas of activity that will be key for cooperation in this format.
For example, the document raised such issues of economic cooperation as the development of industrial cooperation, joint investment and the creation of new industries, and identified tasks in the field of food security. There are also intentions to work together towards the formation of a system of sanitary and epidemiological control in order to counter future serious epidemics and global pandemics. These are very important vectors, and they are clearly defined.
Even more significant is the fact that an open and honest exchange of views took place between the leaders of the countries. The meetings of the heads of state in the “CA + Russia” format cannot be casual, they must be filled with frank dialogue and discussions on issues that are important and interesting for our countries. I believe that this is what both the countries of Central Asia and Russia need – a platform where you can openly raise questions and make decisions that will work for a greater economic, humanitarian and political relationship between our region and the Russian Federation.
– How viable and in demand does this format look, in your opinion? Some experts say that the countries of Central Asia already have many platforms for interaction with the Russian Federation, and yet another one looks like some kind of artificial formation?
– The “CA + Russia” format arose after such platforms had already been created with other countries. In particular, in 2015, a format of communication between the countries of Central Asia and the United States appeared, then “CA + India” with the inclusion of Afghanistan. In 2020, the format was tested between the region and China. There are attempts to form such a mechanism between the Central Asia and Japan.
However, if we compare, for example, “C5 + 1” (Central Asia – USA), where the foreign ministers of the countries of the region and the US Secretary of State meet, with “CA + Russia”, then in the American version there is no meeting of the heads of state. It seems to me that this is a very important and positive distinction of the summit in Astana.
In general, this format has already demonstrated its viability and relevance. The leading countries of the world – economic, political and technological powers – want to establish a direct dialogue with the countries of Central Asia. Therefore, I believe that platforms in this format will develop. In addition, I am sure that new ones will appear with the participation of other countries.
Interaction and partnership between the Central Asian countries and Russia takes place in different formats: the CIS, the EAEU and the CSTO. But, in any case, there are two things that require the emergence of a new format. Firstly, not all countries of the region participate in these integration associations (meaning the EAEU and the CSTO), which makes it impossible to discuss certain issues in the format “all the countries of Central Asia – the Russia” in a focused manner. Secondly, their participants are also countries outside of Central Asia, so these platforms for our region are in the nature of platforms for discussions of a general nature.
At the same time, Central Asia, like any other region, has its own characteristics. And this requires a discussion platform that would be focused exclusively on the issues of Russia’s interaction with the Central Asian countries. This is very important, interesting and promising, so this format will live and develop.
– During the summit, the parties actively discussed security issues in the region. Do you think Russia can act as its guarantor, including in the Afghan direction?
– Regardless of the existence of such formats, Russia is in any case present in the Central Asian region as a power that has a serious influence in resolving military-political issues and issues of ensuring regional security in Central Asia. However, of course, in this format, security issues will be addressed in a more focused manner, since their discussion, for example, within the framework of the CSTO cannot be considered full-fledged, since Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are not there.
For example, all the countries of the Central Asian region recognize that Russia has its own level of influence on the solution of the problems of intra-Afghan settlement and the formation of a system of interstate ties with Afghanistan.
Of course, there are other players in these issues – China, the United States, Pakistan and Iran. However, the countries of the region, seeing the growing internal instability in this state, which is now on the verge of a new stage of civil war, as a result of the policy of “general Pashtunization” pursued by the Taliban government (as an example, this is the practice of evicting part of the Uzbek and Tajik population from their homes in some provinces of northern Afghanistan, which are then settled by Pashtuns), they understand that every opportunity must be used to somehow resolve this situation in this country. Therefore, all Central Asian countries, both bordering and not having common borders with Afghanistan, will cooperate with Russia in this matter.
– One of the key topics of the summit is that Putin invited the Central Asian countries to actively participate in Russian import substitution initiatives. How do you assess the potential of Uzbekistan in this direction, especially against the background of the possible introduction of secondary sanctions by the United States?
– Of course, at the current stage, the question of how to interact with Russia in the economic direction in connection with the tightening of sanctions is the most relevant. It is clear that for all five countries in the region, Russia is one of the key foreign trade partners and they will not be able to quickly replace Russia in this capacity. It will remain the main supplier for many commodity items – wood, metal, iron products, steel, and so on. In favor of this cooperation, logistics and transport routes are already established, all this cannot be replaced, which means that the interaction will continue.
Of course, it will become more problematic, given that if certain countries continue active economic cooperation with Russia, secondary sanctions may be imposed against them. And there will be more and more such questions. Under such conditions, the countries of Central Asia will need to look for new mechanisms to circumvent certain sanctions and maintain the existing level of cooperation with Russia.
This is an objective reality. And those countries that impose sanctions on Russia will have to take into account the objective economic interests of other countries that cannot, to their own detriment, refuse work, goods or joint projects just because someone decided to impose sanctions on Russia.
– After the summit, there was a lot of talk about the speech of the head of Tajikistan, who called on the President of the Russian Federation not to treat Central Asia as the former USSR. In your opinion, is Russia today interfering in the internal affairs of the Central Asian countries, or is it more concerned with building an economic superstructure of bilateral relations?
– The rather emotional speech of the President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon only at first glance seems so spontaneous. In fact, under it lies a number of serious concerns of the countries of the region, in particular, in connection with a special military operation in Ukraine. Undoubtedly, militaristic rhetoric has intensified in Russia itself. And will it be able to reduce the level of this rhetoric in relation to the Central Asian countries? This is a very serious issue that will be on the agenda and will be discussed more than once between the countries of the region and Russia.
The Central Asian countries have been fed up with various teachings from Western mentors during the 30 years of their independence. And, probably, Russia does not need to repeat the mistakes of the West, which, in the pose of a mentor, taught us what and how to reform, how to build political systems, and so on. There were few economic sense and real projects, but there were plenty of instructive cases from them. It seems more rational to work on the development of live initiatives and practical projects in the spheres of the economy, humanitarian and educational cooperation and other areas.
– The US State Department recently stated that the goal of US policy is to decouple the economies of Russia and Central Asia, for which millions of dollars will be allocated. Is the emergence of a new “Russia-Central Asia” format a way to counter growing American influence?
– In my opinion, these statements remain “Wishlist” of Western diplomats and experts. The Central Asian countries are already diversifying their export supplies and foreign trade relations. However, it is clear that Russia and China will remain key foreign trade partners for a long time to come.
How can the West replace the same Russian wood for the construction and furniture industries? It’s not for us to import it from Canada. This will be golden wood. The same can be said about metallurgical products, Russian machine tool building, technologies in the energy sector. Our farmers need Russian markets: it is unlikely that Uzbek or Tajik fruits will be sold in the same volume on Western markets. The same applies to textiles and other products that are produced in the countries of Central Asia.
How can these flows be redirected quickly and on such a large scale to other markets? Opening new markets and increasing supplies to them is a very long process. In addition, no one has canceled the problems of logistics and the cost of transportation. From a geographical point of view, the markets of Russia and China will long remain priorities for the countries of Central Asia. Therefore, I do not see objective economic justifications for the implementation of these statements.
Source: Podrobno.uz
inozPRESS.kg,
Oct. 23, 2022