This joint report by Hamza Boltaev and Nargiza Umarova co-authored with Mukhit Assanbayev (Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan) argues that Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan pursue a pragmatic, security-first engagement with Afghanistan rooted in dialogue, humanitarian support, and connectivity. Framed as “new horizons of interaction”, the authors contend that Astana and Tashkent see Afghanistan less as a threat than as a land bridge linking Central and South Asia, and therefore prioritize bilateral channels that move faster than complex multilateral formats while still seeking UN-aligned international legitimacy.
A second pillar of the study evaluates southern transit routes designed to rebalance Eurasian freight flows. It highlights the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway (with onward links to Iran and the Caspian) and two competing Trans-Afghan rail concepts: Uzbekistan’s Kabul corridor (Termez–Kharlachi) and the western branch backed by Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan (Torgundi–Herat–Kandahar). The authors note potential synergies with the Middle (Trans-Caspian) Corridor and Lapis Lazuli route, but also underline strategic trade-offs – route choices will shape tariff competition, market access to the EU, Türkiye and South Asia, and the distribution of future transit revenues across the region.
The report devotes a full section to Afghanistan’s Qosh-Tepa canal, presenting it as both a domestic state-building project and a transboundary risk. It traces the thin legal scaffolding governing Amu Darya flows, the scale and pace of construction, and the likelihood of sizable upstream abstraction intensifying water stress downstream in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. In the authors’ view, climate volatility, agricultural dependence, and existing infrastructure deficits compound these risks, raising the prospect of knock-on effects for rural livelihoods, internal migration, and food security across the lower basin.
Policy-wise, the study recommends sustained, interest-based engagement with Kabul; parallel investment in diversified corridors (including links via Iran and the South Caucasus); and a structured, region-wide water dialogue that brings Afghanistan into Central Asia’s resource-management frameworks. Its core message is pragmatic: political stabilization, transport integration, and water governance are inseparable – progress on one track will be fragile without movement on the others.
* The Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS) does not take institutional positions on any issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IAIS.
