• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "authors": [
    "Evan A. Feigenbaum"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Central Asia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Secretary Kerry’s Visit to Central Asia

The Central Asia 5+1 initiative offers a forum that will inject the United States directly into the regional conversation.

Link Copied
By Evan A. Feigenbaum
Published on Nov 1, 2015

Source: Voice of America

As Secretary of State John Kerry begins his Central Asia tour, Carnegie’s Evan Feigenbaum, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the region, spoke to Navbahor Imamova, VOA Uzbek, about the U.S. role in this part of the world and the challenges Washington faces there. Feigenbaum suggested that the Central Asia 5+1 initiative is a good forum that will inject the United States directly into the regional conversation but draws off prior U.S. experience, including the Bush-era Trade and Investment Framework Agreement with Central Asia. Cynicism over the effort to promote regional economic integration stems from perceptions among regional elites that the U.S. role has been mostly “talk” rather than action, but also from the fact that the United States brings little tangible investment to the table yet has been a greater enthusiast of regional cooperation than the Central Asian governments themselves. Feigenbaum argued that such cynicism does not negate the importance of trying to promote regional cooperation. There is a substantial body of research that shows that noncooperation regionally erects significant transaction costs that hinder growth. Cooperation could, therefore, spur growth. But what is more, China, among others, is making tangible investments that have begun to overcome such obstacles in some areas, such as through the construction of new cross-border pipelines. Before 1991, regional cooperation was unnecessary because the Soviet authorities in Moscow could simply compel cooperation by administrative fiat. Cooperation in a post-independence environment has proved to be hard but nonetheless can be achieved with the right tools. Feigenbaum explored some of these tools in the interview. He also examined at some length the involvement of China and Japan in Central Asia. He contrasted Beijing’s and Tokyo’s activities with the U.S. role, arguing that there are ways, for example, for the United States and Japan to concert their agendas and piggyback on existing initiatives, such as the Asian Development Bank’s Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation program.

This interview was originally broadcast by Voice of America.

About the Author

Evan A. Feigenbaum

Vice President for Studies

Evan A. Feigenbaum is vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he oversees work at its offices in Washington, New Delhi, and Singapore on a dynamic region encompassing both East Asia and South Asia. He served twice as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and advised two Secretaries of State and a former Treasury Secretary on Asia.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    In Its Iran War Debate, Washington Has Lost the Plot in Asia

      Evan A. Feigenbaum

  • Commentary
    Beijing Doesn’t Think Like Washington—and the Iran Conflict Shows Why

      Evan A. Feigenbaum

Evan A. Feigenbaum
Vice President for Studies
Evan A. Feigenbaum
Foreign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesCentral Asia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Looking Past the Wall on Palestine-Israel

    Policy discussion is ignoring that the Palestinian national project is hollowed out and apartheid is a present danger.

      Nathan J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Israel’s Security Means Insecurity in the Middle East

    As negotiations with Iran and Lebanon continue, chaos is at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s calculations.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is Insane

    The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Corrupted by Absolute Power

    In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?

    Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.