Recent events in the world indicate a breakdown of the old system of international relations, says Marat Mamadshoev, IWPR editor in Tajikistan. The point of no return has been passed and the Central Asian countries will need to adapt to new realities in which old alliances have clearly demonstrated their ineffectiveness. This new era of global chaos poses serious challenges for the Central Asian states.
The conflict between Israel and Iran, which was later joined by the United States, allows us to speak about the emergence of a new reality and the disorganization of the previous system of interstate relations. First of all, the decline in the role of international organizations is obvious – the UN and other global initiatives associated with it, such as the IAEA, which literally before our eyes lost control over nuclear facilities in Ukraine and Iran.
Erosion of International Law
The fundamental pillars of the post-war order – international institutions and the rule of law – are experiencing a crisis of effectiveness and legitimacy, making them incapable of managing major global conflicts.
First of all, we can state the actual paralysis of the UN Security Council after Russia, a member of this body, attacked Ukraine. The Council’s capabilities had previously been limited due to the use of the veto right by the body’s permanent members. As a result, for example, Russia and China vetoed resolutions concerning Russian aggression in Ukraine. The United States vetoed resolutions that were unfavorable for Israel.
Overall, UN peacekeeping is facing a funding crisis. No major new missions have been launched since 2014, despite a historically high number of global conflicts. Specialized agencies such as the IAEA are losing their ability to monitor active conflict zones.
A populist attack on international law and institutions
The erosion of international law is accelerated by the rise of populist movements around the world. These movements often view international law and institutions as tools of a “corrupt elite” that encroach on national sovereignty. This populist backlash is manifested in tangible policy shifts such as withdrawal from international treaties, defunding of international organizations, and a general disregard for multilateral norms.
This trend weakens the very foundations of the rules-based order, making international cooperation on global challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and economic stability much more difficult.
The decline in funding for UN peacekeeping missions and the dismantling of Western aid programs such as USAID have become a persistent trend. This creates a governance and development vacuum in regions such as Central Asia, which is then filled by actors such as China and the Gulf States offering aid and investment without the same normative conditions (e.g., human rights, democracy). This fundamentally changes the development model and the leverage of external powers in the region.
The current global system is best understood not as a new, stable order, but as a transitional period of high instability. We are now seeing a sharp increase in US influence in international relations.
But the new order is not only shaped by great powers. Middle powers such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Brazil are increasingly building their own networks of influence. For Central Asia, this means more potential partners, but also more complex regional rivalries to consider. This means that Central Asia’s multi-vector policies will have to become much more nuanced.
Conflicts as a challenge for BRICS, SCO, EU and NATO
The conflict between Iran and Israel and the United States is a mirror image of recent trends.
Iran is a member of two organizations, BRICS and the SCO, which many have seen as alternatives to the “Western order.” The main unifying force of BRICS+ is a shared dissatisfaction with the existing Western-dominated world order. However, internal rivalries and divergent strategic interests of its members prevent it from developing a unified policy in critical situations.
The aforementioned conflict in Iran demonstrated the ineffectiveness of both organizations in such conditions. Iran’s influential partners in these associations did not provide it with any real assistance, for example, in terms of strengthening air defense systems.
Moreover, the recent conflict between India and Pakistan shows the looseness of these structures. Both countries are members of the SCO and Pakistan has also applied to join BRICS. Thus, these organizations are not even capable of ensuring lasting peace among their members.
For Central Asia, this means that BRICS may be a useful platform for economic diversification, but cannot be seen as a reliable alternative partner in terms of security.
The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), created by Russia, also proved ineffective. In particular, Armenia suspended its participation in the CSTO.
In contrast, Western alliances such as the EU and NATO have shown that, despite all their shortcomings, they are more reliable partners. For several years now, Ukraine, which is not formally a member of either the EU or NATO, has been resisting Russian invasion, largely thanks to supplies from the US and Europe.
Predictions that the US would leave NATO under Trump have not yet come true. However, Europe is increasingly talking about the need to take on more responsibility for ensuring its own security.
The principle of multi-vector needs clarification
Historically, multi-vector policy allowed Central Asian states to balance between the great powers. In the current era of tightening blocs, this policy is becoming a source of risk. The region is faced with a choice: continuing economic cooperation with Moscow with the risk of falling under Western sanctions.
First of all, the region needs to think about ensuring its own security. Recent events in the world show that it is difficult for small countries to achieve this without influential allies. Focusing on Russia does not justify itself. Moscow’s sole recognition of the Taliban regime in Kabul rather speaks of the inadequacy and irresponsibility of Russian diplomacy.
Also, certain risks are created by the orientation towards China, where sometimes they talk about territorial claims to Central Asian countries. In general, the orientation towards any single guarantor of security does not justify itself.
The region needs to think about creating a collective security system in the long term and continue to look for reliable allies. These could include the Europeans and possibly Türkiye.
For now, it is useful to continue cooperation within existing organizations for intelligence sharing, coordination in the fight against terrorism, military modernization issues, and the acquisition of military technologies.
With regard to Russia, we need to continue to maintain pragmatic security ties where necessary, but actively reduce strategic dependence on that country.
It is necessary to use and deepen the C5+1 dialogue formats with the US, EU, China, the GCC and others as the main channels for collective negotiations and strategic communication.
The region urgently needs to overcome all existing contradictions on territorial and border issues. In this sense, normalization of relations between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan is a step in the right direction.
International infrastructure projects as a tool for strengthening integration in the region
To ensure security, Central Asian countries should increase their economic capabilities. It makes sense for the countries of the region to develop a common position on some issues.
Central Asia is at the center of massive, competing infrastructure investments: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Europe’s Global Gateway, and the growing interests of the Gulf states. A key artery is the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, or “Middle Corridor,” where traffic has increased sharply since 2022.
China is investing in the Middle Corridor to diversify its routes away from Russia. The European Union has committed €12 billion through its Global Gateway initiative to develop the Middle Corridor and support supply chains for clean energy and critical raw materials.
The competition between BRI, Global Gateway and the Gulf countries is not only a threat but also a big plus for the Central Asian countries.
By developing a unified regional infrastructure and investment plan, the Central Asian bloc can force outside powers to compete on its terms, funding projects that serve regional priorities rather than external geopolitical goals. This allows the region to demand better terms, prevent debt traps, and ensure project compatibility.
Why should civil society actively fight for stability?
Recent events have once again shown that the first victims of any escalation are ordinary citizens. This was noticeable during the clashes between Iran and Israel, although both sides declared that they did not want to harm the civilian population. It was also evident during the recent escalation of relations between Moscow and Baku, where ordinary citizens also became victims on both sides.
Therefore, civil society must step up its work in this regard. Its role is becoming critically important for preventing potential conflicts, since such work is much more effective and less destructive than reacting to conflicts that have already occurred.
The following measures are possible to prevent possible conflicts:
Sharing accurate information about safety, potential threats, crisis management, and available resources can save lives. This also includes combating misinformation and propaganda that can fuel fear and hatred.
Promotion and support of intercultural and interfaith dialogue in the region.
Establishment of regular forums, round tables, seminars and cultural events where representatives of different ethnic, religious and social groups can meet, communicate, understand each other and resolve differences in a peaceful environment.
Developing Joint Projects: Initiating projects that require cooperation between different groups (e.g. environmental initiatives, charitable campaigns, educational programs) to create a common purpose and sense of community.
Educational programs aimed at tolerance and critical thinking:
There is a need to lobby for the introduction of courses on conflict resolution, human rights, cultural diversity and mediation into school and university curricula.
Developing media literacy: Creating programs to help people understand how hate narratives are formed in the media and social media and how they can negatively influence public opinion.
Developing mechanisms for civic monitoring of social networks, media and public sentiment to identify rising tensions, hate speech or signs of radicalization.
Analyzing the underlying causes of potential conflicts (economic inequality, historical grievances, political differences, competition for resources) to understand their roots and develop adequate preventive measures.
Publishing and disseminating reports on potential threats and recommendations to governments and international organizations.
Lobbying for civil society participation in decision-making: Ensuring that the voices of all sectors of society are heard in the development of policies that affect their lives.
Training community leaders, teachers, religious leaders, activists in mediation and conflict resolution skills so that they can defuse sparks of tension at an early stage.
Sharing experiences: Establishing contacts with civil society organizations in other countries that have successfully engaged in conflict prevention and sharing best practices.
These steps require sustained effort and long-term planning, but they can create more resilient and peaceful societies, reducing the likelihood of destructive conflicts.
https://cabar.asia/ru/strategiya-obespecheniya-bezopasnosti-tsentralnoj-azii-v-usloviyah-razrushayushhegosya-mirovogo-poryadka
Machine Translated by Google