Features of the US Foreign Policy Towards the Central Asian States

The article examines the features of the US foreign policy towards the Central Asian states in the post-bipolar period. The imperatives and constants, as well as the transformation of Washington’s Central Asian policy, have been characterized. It is shown that five Central Asian states have been in the focus of American foreign policy over the past thirty years. In the process of shaping the US foreign policy in Central Asia, the presence of significant reserves of energy and mineral resources in the region was of great importance. Therefore, rivalry for Caspian energy resources and their transportation routes came to the fore. In addition to diversifying transport and logistics flows and supporting American companies, the US energy policy in Central Asia was aimed at preventing the restoration of Russia’s economic and political influence, as well as countering the penetration of China, which is interested in economic cooperation with the countries of the region. During the period under review, the following transformation of mechanisms and means of Washington’s policy in the Central Asian direction was observed: the policy of “exporting democracy”; attempts to “nurture” the pro-American elite; striving to divide states into separate groups with permanent “appointment” of leaders; involvement in a unified military system to combat terrorism; impact on the consciousness of the population in order to destabilize geopolitical rivals; building cooperation on a pragmatic basis due to internal difficulties and external constraints. Central Asian states sympathized with the American course because of their interest in technology and investment. At the same time, these states in every possible way distanced themselves from the impulses of “democratization” from Washington. Kazakhstan was a permanent regional ally of the United States, to which Uzbekistan was striving to join. The second echelon in relations with the American side was occupied by Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. A feature of the positions of the Central Asian countries is the maximum benefit from cooperation with Washington while building good-neighborly relations with Russia and China, which is in dissonance with the regional imperatives of the United States. In the future, the American strategy in Central Asia will presumably proceed from the expediency of attracting regional allies and stimulating contradictions in order to contain geopolitical rivals in the region.

1. Bzhezinskij Z. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya Publishing House; 2005. 256 р. (In Russ.)

2. Kissinger G. Diplomacy. Moscow: Ladomir Publishing House; 1997. 848 p. (In Russ.)

3. Kaplan R. The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate. Moscow: KoLibri, Azbuka-Attikus Publishing House; 2016. 384 p. (In Russ.)

4. Cohen A. The New “Great Game”: Oil Politics in the Caucasus and Central Asia. The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder. 1996;1065:1-13.

5. Zhiltsov S.S. The Infrastructure Projects in the Caspian Region. Post-Soviet Issues. 2019;6(4):324-335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2019-6-4-324-335 (In Russ.)

6. Kryzhko E.V., Pashkovsky P.I. On the Issue of the Energy Dimension of International Competition in Central Asia. International Relationships. 2017;2:118-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0641.2017.2.22126 (In Russ.)

7. Olkott M.B. The Central Asian states are following their own path. Pro et Contra. 2013;1- 2(58):70-78. (In Russ.)

8. Pashkovsky P.I. Integration Policy of Russia in the Post-Soviet Space (1991–2011). Kiev: Interservice; 2012. 189 p. (In Russ.)

9. Garbuzarova E.G. The D. Trump’s Foreign Policy Priorities in Central Asia. Tomsk State University Journal. 2020;455:97-103. (In Russ.)

10. Ionova E.P. The D. Trump Administration’s Policy in Central Asia. Russia and New States of Eurasia. 2020;III(ХLVIII):53-65. (In Russ.)

11. Kryzhko E.V. The Problem of the US Military-Political Presence in Central Asia (2001- 2002). Scientific Bulletin of Crimea. 2017;1:1-6. (In Russ.)

12. Pashkovsky P.I. Parameters of Russia’s Integration Policy Towards the Central Asian States (1992–2009). Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2017;2(26):88-93. (In Russ.)

13. Ponomarev V. A. U.S. Main Policies in Central Asia. Post-Soviet Issues. 2020;7(4):445-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2020-7-4-445-459 (In Russ.)

14. Prijmachuk D. V. Central Asia and the United States of America: Problems and Prospects. International Relationships. 2017;1:90-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0641.2017.1.20600 (In Russ.)

15. Shenin S. Yu. The main stages of US policy in Central Asia during the Obama administration. Contemporary Eurasian Studies. 2017;2:6-13. (In Russ.)

16. Yazmuradov A. Greater South Asia: A New US Approach to Central and South Asia — Evolution and Reasons. Central Asia and The Caucasus. 2006;4(46):93-107. (In Russ.)

17. Mereand R. Civilian Response Corps. National Security Watch. 2008. 3 October. URL: https://www.ausa.org/sites/default/files/NSW08-4-Civilian-Response-Corps.pdf [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

18. Starr S. F. A «Greater Central Asia Partnership» for Afghanistan and Its Neighbors Silk Road Paper. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program. Washington: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins University-SAIS; 2005. 36 р.

19. The Freedom Support Act. 1992. 24 October. URL: https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/senate-bill/2532 [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

20. Silk Road Strategy Act of 1999. 1999. 3 August. URL: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/106/hr1152/text [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

21. Declaration on the Strategic Partnership and Cooperation Framework Between the United States of America and the Republic of Uzbekistan. 2002. 8 July. URL: http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/or/2002/11711.htm [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

22. Kryzhko E.V. The main priorities of Uzbekistan’s foreign policy. In: Sukiasyan A. A. Science of the Third Millennium: Collection of Articles of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. Ufa; 2016;3:11-16. (In Russ.)

23. S.J.Res. 3 (108th): A joint resolution expressing the sense of Congress with respect to human rights in Central Asia. 2003. 9 April. URL: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/sjres3/text/rs [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

24. Silk Road Strategy Act of 2006. 2006. 4 May. URL: https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/2749/text [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

25. Joint Statement of the Co-Chairs of the Ministerial Meeting on the New Silk Road. 2011. 22 September. URL: https://www.mynewsdesk.com/us/u-s-state-department/pressreleases/joint-statement-of-the-co-chairs-of-the-ministerial-meeting-on-the-new-silk-road-685683 [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

26. Clinton H. R. Remarks at the New Silk Road Ministerial Meeting. 2011. 22 September. URL: https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2011/09/173807.htm [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

27. National Security Strategy of the United States of America. The White House. 2017. December. URL: https://www.hsdl.org/?view&-did=806478 [Accessed: 15.12.2020].

28. United States Strategy for Central Asia 2019– 2025: Advancing Sovereignty and Economic Prosperity. February 2020. URL: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/FINAL-CEN-Strategy-Glossy-2-10-2020-508.pdf [Accessed: 15.12.2020].