Send message to Authors

Abstract

Central Asian countries - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan - have introduced public councils into their systems of public administration. These consultative bodies are intended to function as platforms for state–society dialogue. However, the literature on consultative authoritarianism suggests that, in authoritarian contexts, states typically exert control over consultative institutions and mechanisms to manage and contain civic participation.

This comparative study investigates the extent to which the state controls public councils in Central Asia and explores the reasons behind these dynamics. Based on 40 semi-structured interviews with public council members and civil society representatives, as well as four focus groups conducted in 2024 across the four countries, the study offers the following findings.

In countries where civil society operates with a moderate degree of freedom - as indicated by V-Dem’s Civil Society Participation Index - civil society representatives tend to possess stronger civic skills, such as articulating public demands and holding authorities accountable. As a result, public council members in countries like Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan are better positioned to leverage these platforms to advance their interests. In response, the state remains more vigilant and imposes a range of regulatory controls over these bodies.

Conversely, in countries with weaker and more restricted civil societies, such as Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, public councils enjoy relatively greater operational flexibility and, in some cases, even collaborate with foreign donors. This reflects the state’s perception that these councils pose a lower risk of contestation. This study contributes to the consultative authoritarianism literature by offering new empirical insights from Central Asia, illustrating how varying levels of civil society strength shape state strategies of control over consultative institutions.

Send message to Author

Abstract

As the global transport landscape undergoes profound realignments, Central Asia is no longer just a passageway — it is becoming the strategic heartbeat of Eurasian connectivity. The strategic significance of Central Asia as a pivotal land bridge between East and West has grown considerably in recent years, particularly against the backdrop of shifting global supply chains, geopolitical tensions, and a rising demand for alternative trade routes. This study explores the evolving landscape of logistic corridors traversing the Central Asian region, analyzing their current realities, systemic barriers, and future strategic potential. As the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR), and the International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC) gain momentum, Central Asia is emerging as a critical nexus of intercontinental connectivity.

Through a multidisciplinary lens combining geopolitical analysis, transport economics, and regional development studies, this paper assesses the performance and competitiveness of newly established and revitalized transport corridors. It examines key infrastructural advancements, policy frameworks, and regional cooperation mechanisms that are shaping the logistics architecture across Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and their transit partners. Special attention in the study is given to the growing role of Iran as a strategic gateway linking Central Asia to the Persian Gulf and South Asia, highlighting its contribution to the diversification of trade flows and reduction of dependency on northern transit routes.

The analysis identifies a range of structural and operational barriers that continue to hinder corridor efficiency, including inadequate cross-border harmonization, customs bottlenecks, lack of unified regulatory standards, and investment asymmetries. In addition, the study considers the impact of sanctions, regional conflicts, and infrastructural gaps on corridor sustainability and competitiveness.

Despite these challenges, the paper argues that with targeted policy reforms, enhanced regional coordination, and increased public-private investment, Central Asia holds significant potential to become a resilient and diversified logistics hub. It provides a forward-looking strategic outlook, offering policy recommendations for optimizing multimodal transport systems, strengthening institutional capacities, and fostering greater economic integration.

Ultimately, this research contributes to the academic and policy discourse on the future of transcontinental logistics and connectivity, positioning Central Asia not merely as a transit zone, but as an active agent in the reconfiguration of global transport networks. The findings are particularly relevant to decision-makers, international donors, and infrastructure developers seeking to harness the geopolitical and economic advantages of the region's emerging corridors.

Send message to Authors

Abstract

The paper explores the behaviour patterns elected legislators in Central Eurasia apply in order to survive political careers under the centralized control and limited political freedoms. The former communist space in the region maintained closed authoritarian systems despite several waves of democratization, reforms and transition aid provided by neo-liberal institutions. Adopting and inspired by Mac Ginty’s work on social practices that constitute everyday peace such as avoidance, ambiguity, ritualized politeness and others, we further expand the proposed typology with other ‘survival strategies’ or behaviors largely employed from everyday peace and security studies, such as adaptation, coping, joint work and mutual help, mimicry, loyalty and performance, and apply to elected legislators in the former Communist space (Central Asia and Russia). We claim that similar to everyday individual security behaviors, the behaviors of the elected MPs and their decisions stem from own or individual interest and security needs, whereas practices such as contestation and resistance in authoritarian contexts are risky and detrimental for their careers.

Key words: survival strategies, parliament, authoritarian regimes, everyday, Central Eurasia