Send message to Author

Abstract

Abstract. The purpose of this paper was to comprehensively examine the diplomatic and geopolitical aspects of US policy towards Central Asia, particularly, in Kazakhstan, in order to identify the key factors determining the effectiveness of US strategy. The study applied the historical method, structural-functional analysis, and a systematic approach to assess US geopolitical interests in the region. The empirical foundation of the study drew on a range of reliable sources, reflecting both the official US foreign policy strategy and the regional realities of interaction with Central Asia. The results of the study revealed three key phases in US policy towards Central Asia. The study found that the effectiveness of the US strategy varies depending on the specific area: the US has been most successful in the energy sector. It is revealed that the C5+1 format has become a key tool for strengthening the US influence in the region. It was found that Central Asian states’ multi-vector foreign policy is aimed at maintaining a balance between the interests of the United States, Russia and China. The analysis demonstrates that the US has to balance geopolitical interests and the promotion of democratic values, adapting its policy to changing regional dynamics.

Keywords: regional security, energy cooperation, nuclear disarmament, anti-terrorist cooperation.

Send message to Author

Abstract

Central Eurasia is one unique world region that has been a subject of scholarly inquiry and theoretical debate. Key geopolitical concepts such as heartland and rimland theories have evolved with reference to the region. At the same time, Barry Buzan's regional security complex theory (RSCT) may also serve as a framework to analyze and define the nature of this dynamic region. The region's uniqueness largely lies in temporal alteration between patterns of competition and cooperation within the same geographical space. This variation offers an anomaly to the mainstream 'realist perspectives on great-power engagement in the region' that otherwise dominate the discourse.

While the key geostrategic interests that each of the big players (USA, EU, Russia and China) seek in the broader region are well-known, this research argues that the struggle for spheres of influence here is different from other world regions. Compared to the common pattern where 'one outlasting the competition claims greatest influence' - in Central Eurasia, the Great power that outperforms the others in the domain of collaboration and regional development will have the largest sphere of influence. This implies that the struggle for long-term influence must go beyond transactional and sector-focused dealings with the Central Eurasian states.

By virtue of proximity and connectedness, the Central Eurasian geographic space has gradually become identifiable as a Regional Security Complex where members have developed an understanding of their shared interests in order to balance the strategic ingress by major/great powers. Thus, alignment with region's long-term survival and sustenance will be a key determining variable in how the spheres of influence may be demarcated.

This qualitative study will build upon an analysis of how two sides (the major powers and the regional states) have behaved, responded and dealt with each other regarding key issues that bring long-term well-being into question, such as: intra-regional conflict, energy security, infrastructure development, and water scarcity/stress in Central Asia.

Send message to Author

Abstract

The former Soviet republics share a common imperial legacy and remain entangled with Russia through trade, energy, and political alliances. Yet the extent to which this entanglement affects foreign direct investment (FDI) from third countries has received little empirical attention. This paper examines whether trade with Russia influences FDI inflows into thirteen post-Soviet economies from 1992 to 2023, using panel data and instrumental-variable methods to account for endogeneity.

The results reveal a clear asymmetry: dependence on Russian imports significantly deters FDI. A one-percent increase in per capita imports from Russia reduces FDI (as a share of GDP) by approximately 1.15 percentage points in the short run, with effects concentrated in non-European countries (Central Asia and the Caucasus). This finding suggests that import reliance signals to international investors a structural vulnerability—an exposure to a dominant supplier whose economic and political leverage creates uncertainty about future policy stability, supply-chain resilience, and institutional autonomy. In contrast, exports to Russia show no significant aggregate effect, but regional disaggregation uncovers striking heterogeneity: exports from European post-Soviet states (the Baltics, Moldova) harm FDI, while exports from non-European states attract it. The former likely reflects investor perceptions of political alignment with Russia; the latter probably captures Russian outward investment into dependable partner economies.

These results underscore that Russia is not an ordinary trade partner in the post-Soviet space; it embodies geopolitical weight that shapes investment climates. The paper contributes to debates on regional integration, dependency theory, and the political economy of FDI in transition economies. It also speaks directly to the conference theme of “Power” by demonstrating how asymmetric economic ties translate into perceived risk for global capital. For policymakers, the findings highlight the importance of diversifying trade partners and strengthening institutional safeguards to mitigate geopolitical risk and enhance investment attractiveness.