Prepared under the supervision of Hamza Boltaev and Islomkhon Gafarov, this policy brief by Samandar Soliev, IAIS junior research fellow, explores the broader implications of Abdukodir Khusanov’s transfer to Manchester City, positioning it as a strategic instrument of the United Kingdom’s soft power in Uzbekistan. The author states that while this transfer may seem like a routine football transaction, it aligns with a subtle yet significant shift in the UK’s approach to public diplomacy in Central Asia. The UK has traditionally engaged with the region through cultural initiatives and language promotion, yet the incorporation of football into its soft power strategy reflects an evolving framework that capitalises on the immense popularity of the English Premier League. The extensive media engagement surrounding Khusanov’s transfer, notably the club’s targeted outreach to the Uzbek audience, illustrates the growing intersection of digital diplomacy, sports marketing, and international influence.   The author further examines how the UK employs institutional mechanisms such as the British Council, diplomatic missions, and business networks to shape perceptions and bolster its global standing. He highlights the British Council’s role in expanding access to UK education and increasing English proficiency among Uzbek youth, citing a significant rise in IELTS success rates. The policy brief also underscores the expanding UK-Uzbekistan economic relations, evidenced by increased trade turnover and British investments in various sectors. Football, as an unparalleled vehicle for engagement, serves as an extension of these diplomatic efforts, with Manchester City’s engagement in Uzbekistan reflecting a strategic move to strengthen cultural ties. The author concludes that, despite the absence of a unified UK strategy for Central Asia, soft power remains a vital mechanism for maintaining British influence in the region, with Khusanov’s transfer marking a potential milestone in this evolving approach.   Read in Kun.uz   * 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.

Nargiza Umarova, a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS), analyses the implications of the renewed “maximum pressure” campaign by the United States on Iran, particularly its potential impact on the Chabahar port and broader regional transport dynamics. She explains that the decision by President Donald Trump to reinstate stringent sanctions on Iran threatens India's long-term investment in Chabahar, which serves as a critical gateway for India’s access to Central Asia and Afghanistan. By targeting Iranian port operations, the US may indirectly weaken India’s geoeconomic position while reinforcing the strategic advantage of Pakistan’s Gwadar port, which is being developed under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This could further intensify the competition between India and China over regional connectivity and trade routes.   Ms. Umarova highlights that India has been modernizing Chabahar for years, securing an exemption from US sanctions in 2018 to operate the Shahid Beheshti terminal. However, with the renewed sanctions, India's plans to invest $370 million in upgrading the port may be jeopardized. The Chabahar port is central to several international transport initiatives, including the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the Ashgabat Agreement, facilitating trade between Central Asia and the Persian Gulf. Countries such as Uzbekistan, which relies on external ports for its maritime trade, have shown great interest in leveraging Chabahar’s transit potential. The planned establishment of a logistics center at the port could have significantly boosted Uzbekistan’s trade, especially with India, which saw bilateral trade figures nearing $1 billion in 2024. Additionally, Afghanistan, facing tensions with Pakistan, has increasingly turned to Chabahar as an alternative route for its maritime trade, with the completion of the Khaf-Herat railway expected to enhance connectivity further.   Should Chabahar’s operations be restricted due to renewed US sanctions, Umarova argues that this would leave Central Asian states and Afghanistan with no alternative but to rely on Pakistan for maritime access. This, in turn, would strengthen Islamabad’s strategic importance in the regional transport network while amplifying the geopolitical influence of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). China’s investment in Gwadar port would benefit from Chabahar’s decline, reinforcing Beijing’s regional influence while undermining India’s land connectivity with Central Asia. Furthermore, the shift in regional transport dynamics could inadvertently benefit Uzbekistan by making its Trans-Afghan Railway Corridor (Termez-Mazar-i-Sharif-Kabul-Peshawar) more attractive to investors, potentially accelerating its implementation. Umarova concludes that the US sanctions regime, while aimed at curbing Iran’s economic capabilities, will have far-reaching consequences for regional connectivity, reshaping the geopolitical and trade landscape of South and Central Asia.   Read on The Diplomat   * 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.

In a recent analysis in Kun.uz, Hamza Boltaev, Head of the Centre for Afghanistan and South Asian Studies, and Senior Research Fellow Islomkhon Gafarov argue that the recent Munich Security Conference signified a major shift in the global order, challenging the traditional transatlantic alliance between Europe and the United States. They state that the emerging divergence in U.S. and EU foreign policies — exemplified by Washington’s direct negotiations with Russia on Ukraine, bypassing European involvement — raises critical questions about the future trajectory of European diplomacy. In light of this, the authors explore how the European Union may redefine its engagement with key actors and regions such as China, Central Asia, the Middle East, and South Asia, as it seeks to assert greater strategic autonomy.   They suggest that Europe may reassess its stance towards China, Iran, and Afghanistan, given that past policies were largely shaped by U.S. influence. They highlight the potential for the EU to deepen economic ties with China through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, while also reconsidering its approach to Iran as an energy partner, independent of Washington’s policies. The authors also point out that Afghanistan, previously viewed through the lens of NATO intervention, could now be engaged in a more pragmatic manner by the EU. Furthermore, they examine the evolving dynamics in relations with India and Türkiye, emphasizing that Brussels may prioritize strategic transport corridors and trade expansion. Ultimately, they conclude that while Europe faces significant geopolitical challenges, these changes also create opportunities for strengthened cooperation with emerging regional powers.   Read in Kun.uz   * 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.

In his article Dr. Islomkhon Gafarov analyses the persistent challenges the Taliban faces in securing international recognition, despite having controlled Afghanistan for over three years. The author states that internal divisions within the Taliban, particularly the power struggle between the Kandahari and Kabuli factions, have significantly weakened the regime’s political cohesion. He highlights the discord between Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada and Sirajuddin Haqqani as emblematic of the Taliban’s broader governance struggles, which in turn exacerbate global skepticism towards Afghanistan’s ruling authorities.   He further argues that the lack of recognition stems not only from internal fractures but also from the Taliban’s failure to establish an inclusive government that represents Afghanistan’s diverse ethnic and political groups. The author notes that while the Taliban claims to have built a broad-based administration, Pashtun dominance remains a defining characteristic of its leadership, further alienating both domestic minorities and key international actors, particularly the United States and European Union. Additionally, he contends that the Taliban’s historical ties to extremism and ongoing suspicions of its association with groups such as Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) serve as enduring obstacles to diplomatic legitimacy.   The article also examines the geopolitical dimensions of recognition, noting that while most states remain cautious, some — including China, Russia, and Uzbekistan—have taken steps toward pragmatic engagement. Dr. Gafarov states that China’s acceptance of Taliban envoys and Uzbekistan’s growing economic ties with Kabul indicate a potential shift in regional diplomacy, yet formal recognition remains elusive. Meanwhile, the author underscores the role of global media in shaping Afghanistan’s diplomatic standing, pointing out that shifting international attention toward conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East has further sidelined discussions on Afghanistan’s status.   In conclusion, the expert asserts that the Taliban’s long-term survival on the global stage hinges on internal political reform, economic stability, and a more flexible approach to human rights issues, particularly concerning women’s education. He argues that while Afghanistan’s leadership has demonstrated interest in regional infrastructure projects and economic initiatives, these efforts remain overshadowed by governance deficiencies and global distrust. The author suggests that unless the Taliban addresses these core challenges, its quest for international legitimacy will remain an uphill battle.   Read the article on The Diplomat’s website   * 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.

The policy brief by Professor Ibragim Mavlanov is devoted to the assessment of Uzbekistan’s export potential in the context of its aspiration to join the ranks of developed countries. The author emphasises that the country’s share in world exports is an important macroeconomic indicator reflecting its place in the global economy. The paper examines the dynamics of Uzbek exports since 1992, including periods of growth, stagnation and subsequent recovery. It analyses the government’s strategic goals, including the New Uzbekistan-2026 and Uzbekistan-2030 programmes aimed at increasing exports to $45 billion, as well as the impact of international economic factors on the development of foreign trade.   Based on a comparative analysis with developed and developing countries, the author concludes that to meet the economic standards of developed countries, Uzbekistan needs to multiply its exports – up to $125-500 billion per year. To achieve this goal, it is proposed to pay special attention not only to increasing exports of traditional goods, but also to the development of the services sector and intellectual property. The document underlines the key role of economic diplomacy in creating favourable conditions for export growth and strengthening the country’s international trade relations.   Read the policy brief   * 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.

The authors, Azizjon Ziyodullaev, Sajina Rai, Ogabek Norkulov, and Islomkhon Gafarov, in their policy brief published by the Asian Institute of Diplomacy and International Affairs (AIDIA, Nepal), argue that Nepal and Uzbekistan, despite their shared status as landlocked nations, have yet to fully capitalize on the opportunities for economic and diplomatic collaboration. They state that while historical and cultural ties between the two countries trace back to the Silk Road era, modern bilateral engagement remains minimal due to logistical constraints, lack of direct transit routes, and the absence of institutional frameworks for sustained cooperation. The brief highlights the strategic importance of both nations in the evolving connectivity landscape of Central and South Asia, underlining the potential benefits of enhanced trade, investment, and multilateral engagement.   Authors state that both countries face common economic and infrastructural challenges, such as high transportation costs and dependency on neighboring countries for market access. They highlight that Uzbekistan’s integration into large-scale connectivity projects, including the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway, could offer Nepal alternative trade routes beyond its traditional reliance on India. Conversely, Nepal’s expertise in hydropower development and eco-tourism is identified as a sector where Uzbekistan could benefit through knowledge exchange and joint ventures. Furthermore, the brief underscores the importance of multilateral cooperation, particularly through platforms like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the United Nations, to advocate for the interests of landlocked developing countries.   Moreover, the policy brief asserts that despite existing diplomatic ties since 2018, Nepal and Uzbekistan lack direct diplomatic missions, a crucial hindrance to fostering sustained political and economic engagement. The authors argue that formalizing institutional mechanisms, such as regular high-level dialogues, Track II diplomacy, and trade facilitation agreements, could pave the way for enhanced bilateral relations. Additionally, the brief recommends easing visa restrictions, strengthening educational and cultural exchanges, and establishing sectoral working groups to address shared concerns, particularly in trade, climate change adaptation, and labor migration. The authors conclude that a structured partnership between Nepal and Uzbekistan could significantly contribute to regional stability and economic integration, provided that both nations take proactive steps to overcome current limitations.   Read and download the policy brief   * 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.