Paper short abstract:

The paper analyses the growing competition between the two alternative-to-Russia transit routes in the transcontinental railway trade through Central Asia and the Caucasus as the ongoing war in Ukraine shapes the railway cargo flow from China to Europe.

Paper long abstract:

Central Asian railways are usually mentioned as part of the Belt and Road initiative, and most texts deal with the main railway line at the heart of this grandiose China-backed project. The war in Ukraine put the railway routes through Central Asia, bypassing Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, into the attention of cargo companies despite their time and cost disadvantages.

Central Asian states have the unique chance to use their position based on landlocked countries' theory. Two principal railway routes can partially replace the ceased traditional routes through Russia and Eastern Europe - the Middle Corridor through Kazakhstan and the Southern (eventually South-Eastern) corridor through Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Through the landlocked countries' theoretical approach and analysis of available statistics, the paper focuses on the weaknesses and advantages of both routes and their eventual readiness to replace the traditional Trans-Siberian railway and Northern corridor through Kazakhstan, Russia and Belarus/Ukraine. However, the paper does not deny the partial continuity of both routes.