• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Democracy
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Martha Brill Olcott",
    "Johannes Linn"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Afghanistan",
    "Central Asia",
    "Kazakhstan",
    "Kyrgyz Republic",
    "Tajikistan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Turmoil in Central Asia

As the security situation in Afghanistan worsens, the international community has overlooked signs of political instability throughout Central Asia that could render Afghanistan even more unstable.

Link Copied
By Martha Brill Olcott and Johannes Linn
Published on Aug 12, 2008
Program mobile hero image

Program

Russia and Eurasia

The Russia and Eurasia Program continues Carnegie’s long tradition of independent research on major political, societal, and security trends in and U.S. policy toward a region that has been upended by Russia’s war against Ukraine.  Leaders regularly turn to our work for clear-eyed, relevant analyses on the region to inform their policy decisions.

Learn More

Source: Wall Street Journal

While the international community focuses on the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, it is paying far too little attention to the storm brewing just beyond the country's northern borders, in Central Asia. That's a serious mistake. Instability in Afghanistan's neighborhood could further destabilize Afghanistan itself.

Central Asian countries are instrumental to the effort in Afghanistan. Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have provided space for NATO bases. The latter two countries form the foundation of the Central Asian South Asian Regional Energy Market project, providing hydroelectric power necessary for Afghanistan's economic recovery. Efforts to secure borders in the area are also key to successful drug interdiction.

Unfortunately, Western leaders have been willing to accept seemingly stable regimes that support their goals in Afghanistan rather than pressing hard for democratization of these states. The one exception is Uzbekistan, where Western engagement is still limited because of the regime's unwillingness to repudiate the shooting of unarmed civilians during civil unrest in Andijan in May 2005.

This is a problematic approach because there's a real danger the status quo won't hold. The Kyrgyz ousted former President Askar Akayev in 2005 after questionable parliamentary elections. Tajiks have held small-scale protests over living conditions this spring and summer, the first of any significance since that country's civil war ended in 1997, and an ominous sign of things to come.

Potent ingredients for political instability are already in place. Skyrocketing fuel costs and the global banking crisis have hit the region hard. A banking crisis in Kazakhstan, fueled by higher interest rates on international bank debt, has triggered a serious economic downturn, costing jobs both for Kazakhs and a large number of migrant laborers from neighboring states.

The region is also suffering through a cyclical drought. Water levels in Central Asia's reservoirs are at record lows, with upstream providers (Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan) holding back supplies to downstream users (Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan). Electricity cutbacks for fall and winter have already been announced. Hard-hit farmers, many of whom lost their food and seed stores during the winter, must now pay record prices for fuel and for seed. Many simply refused to plant and this summer's hot and dry summer means lower yields for those who did.

All of this carries regional implications. In 1989 and 1990, disputes over water and land led to fighting between Uzbeks and Kyrgyz in southern Kyrgyzstan, and between Tajiks and Kyrgyz along their border during the waning days of the Soviet Union. The Kazakhs and Uzbeks are long-standing rivals, as are the Uzbeks and Tajiks. Tensions between the latter came close to boiling over during the Tajik civil war, when Uzbek terrorists found safe haven in uncontrolled territories of Tajikistan. Even today there are no direct flights between the two national capitals, and the border between the two countries is still largely closed by Uzbekistan.

Turmoil in Central Asia could have deadly consequences in Afghanistan. Regime change in either Kyrgyzstan or Tajikistan, for instance, could affect those countries' willingness to host NATO bases. The mere weakening of existing governments would hamper international efforts to stem Afghanistan's drug trade, and could create new safe havens for terrorists. Kazakhstan's role as a regional leader has already been affected by its domestic economic downturn.

The U.S. and NATO need to adopt a genuinely regional recovery strategy. This must include a greater role for the Central Asian states themselves, as well as for Russia and China. The region needs food aid and focused technical assistance to create enhanced food security and encourage the use of renewable energy resources. Engaging Russia and China on these economic questions will not in any way compromise the NATO mission in Afghanistan, or U.S. and European Union hopes of an eventual democratic transition in the region.

In short, the needs of Afghanistan's neighbors must be granted the same consideration as those of Afghanistan itself, or the whole region risks becoming more unstable than it was before September 11.

This article first appeared in The Wall Street Journal Asia

About the Authors

Martha Brill Olcott

Former Senior Associate, Russia and Eurasia Program and, Co-director, al-Farabi Carnegie Program on Central Asia

Olcott is professor emerita at Colgate University, having taught political science there from 1974 to 2002. Prior to her work at the endowment, Olcott served as a special consultant to former secretary of state Lawrence Eagleburger.

Johannes Linn

Authors

Martha Brill Olcott
Former Senior Associate, Russia and Eurasia Program and, Co-director, al-Farabi Carnegie Program on Central Asia
Martha Brill Olcott
Johannes Linn
Political ReformDemocracySecurityForeign PolicyAfghanistanCentral AsiaKazakhstanKyrgyz RepublicTajikistan

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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?

    Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Front of a damaged apartment building
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Is a Conflict-Ending Solution Even Possible in Ukraine?

    On the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Carnegie experts discuss the war’s impacts and what might come next.

      • +1

      Eric Ciaramella, Aaron David Miller, Alexandra Prokopenko, …

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Kremlin Is Destroying Its Own System of Coerced Voting

    The use of technology to mobilize Russians to vote—a system tied to the relative material well-being of the electorate, its high dependence on the state, and a far-reaching system of digital control—is breaking down.

      Andrey Pertsev

  • People in voting booths
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Indian Americans Still Lean Left. Just Not as Reliably.

    New data from the 2026 Indian American Attitudes Survey show that Democratic support has not fully rebounded from 2020.

      • +1

      Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, Andy Robaina, …

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Can European Defense Survive the Death of FCAS?

    France and Germany’s failure to agree on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) raises questions about European defense. Amid industrial rivalries and competing strategic cultures, what does the future of European military industrial projects look like?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.