Why Washington should pay attention to Turkey’s presence in Central Asia

Report

October 23, 2025 • 9:00 am ET

Why Washington should pay attention to Turkey’s presence in Central Asia

By
Kiran Baez

Table of contents

Introduction

In an increasingly turbulent world, the importance of Central Asia has grown rapidly. Abundant with mineral and energy resources, burgeoning markets, and strategically located between China, Russia, and Iran, the region that includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan is quickly drawing the attention of actors from around the globe—while Turkey burnishes its Central Asia ties. 

Russia and China still dominate the economic and political landscape of Central Asia, though the region is increasingly engaged by a diverse cast of characters. The rise of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route—a project also known as the Middle Corridor, which functions as a multilateral transport network linking China and the European Union through Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Turkey—has opened the door to billions of dollars in funding and associated projects, including over £20 billion ($26.78 billion) from the United Kingdom, and €12 billion from the European Union since 2024. France, Germany, the UK, and India have all fostered ties to the region in recent years, while Japan, South Korea, and the United Arab Emirates have long maintained an economic presence. In recent years few countries have so successfully integrated themselves into the cultural, political, or economic fabric of Central Asia as Turkey.

As the region rises in importance, understanding the increasingly complicated field of actors in Central Asia and its implications for US policy goals is key. A major NATO member with a complicated bilateral relationship with the United States, Turkey’s extensive presence in Central Asia deserves exploration, as well as an analysis of the opportunities and challenges surrounding Ankara’s influence in the region. This report seeks to understand Turkey’s policy toward and presence in Central Asia and offer interpretations for US policymakers.

For this report, the author interviewed thirty-seven foreign policy experts, including former and current government officials from across Central Asia, many of them speaking anonymously given consideration of their respective countries’ political environments. Information that could not be substantiated by open-source media is only included if it was widely agreed upon and regarded as “common knowledge” across several interviews and is explicitly indicated as such.

A brief history: Turkey in Central Asia until the 2010s

Following the Soviet Union’s collapse, Turkey quickly engaged Central Asia’s Turkic states and, to a lesser degree, Tajikistan, leaning heavily into the perception of shared linguistic, cultural, and religious ties to strengthen relations. The region’s opening coincided with Turkish politicians seeking greater global influence.

In 1991, Turkey swiftly recognized the independence of Central Asian countries, in particular building ties through its development agency, Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA), and co-founding the International Organization of Turkic Culture (TURKSOY). Turkish businesses were some of the first to enter newly opened Central Asian markets.

The reception to Turkey’s overtures in the early 1990s was mixed. Relishing their newfound independence from Russia, many Central Asian states were skeptical of Turkish intentions and feared exchanging one “big brother” for another. At the time, Turkey was in an economically precarious situation and unprepared to assume the role it may have imagined; in addition, its growing and complicated relationship with Russia did not aid its outreach in Central Asia. Combined with Turkish aspirations to rapidly liberalize the region economically, many Central Asian leaders feared a loss in their newly gained sovereignty.

The religious aspects of Turkish engagement also raised alarm for many. While Kemal Atatürk’s secular legacy was largely respected by regional post-communist elites, outreach in the 1990s prominently featured religious elements through religious schools and the Turkish Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet). Still a major soft-power institution today, the Diyanet established the Eurasian Islamic Council in 1994 and financed mosques across the region. Despite progress, by the mid-1990s, Turkey’s momentum in the region had notably declined, a product of economic constraints, Russia’s return to the region, and Turkey’s lukewarm reception among the Central Asian states.

Uzbekistan represented the most severe fallout from mismatched expectations. President Islam Karimov deeply distrusted Turkish intentions, linking them with growing domestic terrorism from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). In 1993, Uzbekistani opposition leader Muhammed Salih fled to Istanbul, further fueling Uzbekistani suspicions. Subsequently, Uzbekistani authorities targeted Turkish-associated political movements including the Erk and Birlik parties. Tensions peaked in 1999 when Uzbekistan accused a Turkish citizen of attempting to assassinate Karimov. Over the ensuing years, Uzbekistan would go on to target several Turkish businesses with severe restrictions. Relations did not recover until Karimov’s death in 2016.

By the late 1990s, pan-Turkic ambitions had given way to quieter, steady cultural and economic interactions.  Under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s regime, Turkey reemerged in the late 2000s within a transformed geopolitical environment: Russia’s resurgence and China’s growing influence. Erdoğan’s administration balanced ideological outreach with more pragmatic strategies, emphasizing aid, infrastructure work, military cooperation, and expanded trade.

This era marked a shift toward more inclusive engagement, supporting broader mutual interests, while retaining some of the pan-Turkic undertones. Multilateral forums emerged, notably the Turkic Council (today’s Organization of Turkic States, OTS), which was founded in 2009 on the basis of shared “historical ties, common language, culture, and traditions.” Although Turkish media and politicians continued emphasizing ethnic narratives, relations became driven primarily by pragmatism and Central Asia’s desire for diversification away from China and Russia. Erdoğan’s strong personal relationships with other Central Asian leaders also play a key role in deepening connections. Similarly, Erdoğan’s son, Bilal, is famously interested in and has spent extensive time in the region—both as an unofficial representative of his father and the head of the Turkish Youth Foundation and World Ethnosport Confederation, which was originally established in Bishkek before moving to Istanbul.

Assessing attitudes towards Turkey today

Turkish cultural and business presence across Central Asia has elicited mixed reactions in the region, generally ranging from “lukewarm” to “brotherly.” A 2023 Central Asia Barometer (CAB) survey ranked Turkey as the most favorable country among respondents from Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, ahead of Russia, Iran, China, and the United States. Kyrgyzstan displayed the greatest affection, with 40 percent of respondents holding “very favorable” views and 44 percent holding “somewhat favorable” views. Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan placed Turkey second, behind Russia. Turkish goods, particularly textiles, carry positive cultural associations of quality, bolstered by Turkish companies often importing European goods. Turkish diplomatic visits receive prominent coverage in Central Asian media. In non-Turkic Tajikistan, favorability remains notably lower but positive despite historical Turkish support for its then-regional rival Kyrgyzstan (the survey predated the landmark Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan border agreement).

Among the political and business elites with warm attitudes toward Turkey, motivations vary. Some genuinely support pan-Turkic ideals; others view Turkey pragmatically as a reliable partner or gateway to the West. Debate persists over Turkey’s ideal role, with ideological factions including traditional pan-Turkists, pro-Russian groups, pragmatic nationalists, and advocates for regional integration as independently as possible from major powers.

Central Asia is increasingly trending toward regional integration, yet critical questions persist: How should non-Turkic Tajikistan be incorporated? How close should ties remain with Russia? What is Turkey’s appropriate regional political role? Such discussions remain contentious and vary significantly from country to country.

These questions are particularly important to Uzbekistan, which generally favors regional integration yet appears to remain among the most skeptical of pan-Turkic messaging, especially due to its deep economic and cultural ties with Tajikistan. Beyond the large populations of Tajikistani migrant workers, and a dependence on the Amu Darya and Zeravshan rivers, the two nations are culturally linked at the hip: Tajik is spoken widely in several important Uzbekistani cities, including Bukhara. Many Uzbekistanis interviewed for this project echoed the words of an Uzbekistani political analyst asked about the topic: “Uzbekistan will always put the idea of ‘Central Asia’ above Turkey.”

Despite ideological divides, interviewees across the region expressed that Ankara has cultivated strong institutional trust and bilateral relationships, particularly among senior state officials and younger diplomats who began their careers after the dissolution of the USSR. In contrast, older career bureaucrats trained or educated in Moscow tend to identify more with their Russian past.

Turkey’s reputation and diplomatic standing is not without its limits, however. Several Uzbekistanis and Kazakhstanis interviewed for this paper commented that the “big brother” attitude of Turks famously documented in the 1990s persists in the minds of many Turkish businessmen and diplomats, though most agreed this has improved in recent years. In interviews with Uzbekistani experts, there was a consensus that the decision of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) to admit the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus (TRNC) as an observer state was done with great apprehension. This aligns with Uzbekistan’s later public downplaying of the situation and ensuing confusion about the status of the TRNC in Uzbekistani and Central Asian politics. In April 2025, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan appointed ambassadors to the Republic of Cyprus, and affirmed support for UN Security Council resolutions 541 and 550 which calls “attempts to create a ‘Turkish Republic of North Cyprus’ invalid,” to bolster ties with the EU—marking the pragmatic limits of Turkish influence. A joint declaration at the 2025 OTS summit held in Gabala called for the need to “reach a negotiated, mutually acceptable […] settlement,” to the “Cyprus issue”, and expressed “solidarity with the Turkish Cypriot people,” a statement likely designed to strike a neutral tone that balances both Ankara and Brussels.

Understanding Turkish soft power

Media

Central Asian news media remains dominated by Russia and Russian-language sources, except in Uzbekistan, where local-language media promotion is vigorous. The Turkish state-owned Turkish Radio and Television company (TRT) is the sole major Turkish media outlet distributing content in Uzbek, Kyrgyz, Turkmen, and Kazakh. In December 2024, it expanded to include broadcasts in Farsi, spoken in Tajikistan. TRT also runs Avaz (meaning “voice”), a channel largely focused on promoting pro-Turkey and Turkic narratives through the form of soap operas, documentaries, news, and movies, which is distributed throughout the region in local languages. Other Turkish outlets typically publish only in Turkish or English, restricting local accessibility, while Turkish media that publishes in Russian, such as Anadolu Ajansi (the Turkish state-run news agency), rarely cover Central Asia. Turkish news is not widely consumed, except in Turkmenistan, where 47 percent of respondents in a CAB survey reported “occasionally viewing” Turkish news.

In entertainment media, Turkish films and soap operas enjoy broad popularity throughout the region, including Tajikistan. Kazakhstan’s state television regularly airs Turkish dramas, and the two states have intensified cooperation in the field including jointly producing TV series and hosting a “Turkic film festival”. Some Turkish musicians are well-known, although Uzbekistani, Russian, and Kazakhstani artists still dominate the music scene. Media exchanges are increasingly reciprocal: Kazakhstan’s state-owned Silk Way TV began broadcasting in Turkish in May 2024, and many Turkish shows are filmed in the region. These Turkish TV exports are part of a broader trend, with global demand for Turkish series increasing 184 percent from 2020 to 2023.

Development aid and projects

Turkey’s global development aid programs extensively engage Central Asia, historically prioritizing Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Uzbekistan resisted Turkish aid until rapprochement in 2017, while resource-rich Turkmenistan has shown fluctuating interest  and non-Turkic Tajikistan fell lower on the list of priorities. Between 1991 and 2018, Turkey ranked as Kyrgyzstan’s largest official development assistance provider ($1.156 billion) and the second largest to Kazakhstan ($669 million). Turkish aid often focuses on prominent infrastructure projects—including museums, mosques, hospitals, and universities—typically built by Turkish construction firms.

Recently, Turkey’s soft power model appears to be moving away from direct development aid however, influenced by rising alternative donors such as India, Gulf countries, and the European Union, Turkey’s own economic constraints, and its increasing prioritization of Syria and Africa. Importantly, rapidly developing Central Asian states like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan prefer investments and technical assistance over traditional aid. Kazakhstan has rebranded itself as an aid provider, establishing the Kazakhstan Agency for International Development (KazAID) in January 2021.

Despite this shift, Turkish aid’s legacy continues to enhance its image in the region. TIKA’s projects are often strategically located and visible. Examples include the Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Bishkek Kyrgyz-Turkish Friendship State Hospital, adorned with Turkish flags, and the renovated Kyrgyz State History Museum, featuring a plaque thanking Turkey, adjacent to the Kyrgyzstani parliament.

Turkish-supported projects, such as archaeological excavations in Akmola (Kazakhstan) and a traditional handicrafts center in Khiva (Uzbekistan), frequently reinforce pan-Turkic narratives. Education initiatives explicitly promote Turkic cultural and historical studies, particularly the creation of “Turkology” departments, including in autonomous public universities.  Despite the creation of numerous faculties of Turkology across the region, there is still a major disconnect with everyday people, many of whom assume it is simply the study of Turkey, with one Kazakhstani professor of Turkology describing “even our students didn’t know about Turkology before they came to the department.”

Beyond supporting Turkology departments, the Turkish government maintains a network of schools in the region both through its Maarif program and two joint universities: Hoca Ahmet Yesevi University (Kazakhstan) and Manas University (Kyrgyzstan), alongside quotas designed to encourage Central Asians to study in Turkey. In 2020, Central Asians received 793 university scholarships, comprising 21 percent of all Turkish international scholarships despite representing 6.5 percent of applicants.

Regional integration, changing dynamics, and the Organization of Turkic States

Originally founded as the Turkic Council in 2009, the OTS has grown increasingly influential in Central Asia. Since its 2021 rebranding, OTS has moved toward more concrete regional integration and coordination, addressing significant economic and political issues. OTS’s evolution has involved the establishment of  several working bodies like the Civil Protection Mechanism for disaster relief, the Union of Turkic Chambers of Commerce (TCCI), and the Turkic Investment Fund (TIF), which launched in May 2024 with $500 million in starting capital, and increased to $600 million with Hungary’s entry in February 2025. As of September 2025, the TIF has yet to post its first tenders, which are largely expected to focus on supporting SMEs, renewable energy, and transportation. An announcement from OTS heads of state at a meeting in Budapest suggested the TIF may begin operating  in full by the end of 2025, though few details remain available.

OTS’ primary focus has  increasingly transitioned from cultural to economic integration, supporting standardized customs processes, transport infrastructure development, and logistics improvements through its Transport Connectivity Program and Turkic Investment Fund. These projects have received broad international support, aligning with China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR/Middle Corridor), backed by institutions like the Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the EU. Instead of working through these routes, Turkey prefers to support these initiatives via OTS and the Eurasian Transport Route Association, cofounded in September 2024 with Azerbaijan, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Austria.

It should be noted that OTS is not a military alliance, something that would conflict directly with the charter of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, but is increasingly moving toward security cooperation. The most recent development in this area came during the 2025 OTS summit in Gabala, Azerbaijan, when Azeri President Ilham Aliyev called for joint OTS military exercises, a significant step. Similarly, Kazakhstani President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev called for the establishment of a Turkic cybersecurity council designed to jointly prepare for and respond to cyberattacks and threats. International University of Turkic States, based on Turkey’s university system, and admitting the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus as an observer state.

Economic presence

Turkish businesses have established significant presence across Central Asia, leveraging shared language, culture, geographical proximity, and Western business connections. Predominantly active in construction, hospitality, and manufacturing (especially textiles), nearly 4,000 Turkish businesses currently operate in the region. By 2025, eight years after Uzbekistan’s reproachment with Turkey, nearly 1,900 Turkish companies operated in the country, ranking only behind China and Russia. Since 2008, Turkey has consistently ranked in Kyrgyzstan’s top three sources of foreign direct investment (FDI), sometimes as number one on the list, most recently in 2022. Additionally, Turkish markets are increasingly attracting Central Asian investors, exemplified by Kazakh fintech firm Kaspi.kz’s acquisition of Turkish e-commerce giant Hepsiburada in October 2024.

Turkish businesses enjoy key competitive advantages in Central Asia, particularly easier access to capital and financial transactions through established Turkish banks. Demir Bank in Kyrgyzstan, now owned by HSBC, has operated for over twenty years and was Kyrgyzstan’s first fully foreign-capitalized bank. In September 2024, the Turkish state-owned Ziraat Bank announced plans to open a Bishkek branch, and was already operating subsidiaries in Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan. By 2018, shortly after Turkey’s rapprochement with Uzbekistan, Ziraat’s Uzbek subsidiary had roughly 1,000 institutional customers and 13,000 individual clients, and it secured a $350 million credit line.

Turkish businesses also maintain extensive connections and experience working alongside Russian banks and corporations, which are crucial to regional operations. Turkish companies often serve as intermediaries for Western firms hesitant about local market conditions, particularly in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. Three of sixteen US businesses in Kyrgyzstan operate through Turkish intermediaries. Additionally, US Chambers of Commerce (aka AmChams) in Central Asia increasingly welcome third-country involvement, promoting regional dialogues with Western businesses. Central Asian AmChams established partnerships with those from Turkey, Greece, and Bulgaria during the October 2024 Eurasian Economic Summit in Istanbul.

Turkey’s economic footprint in Central Asia is increasingly shaped by bilateral agreements and diplomatic ties. Public pledges to aggressively increase bilateral trade often follow high-level meetings. Between 2018 and 2024, Turkey announced bilateral trade targets of $5 billion with Turkmenistan, $2 billion with Kyrgyzstan, $15 billion with Kazakhstan, $5 billion with Uzbekistan, and $1 billion with Tajikistan. Despite the goals, actual bilateral trade has only increased substantially with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, largely stagnating or inching forward elsewhere, according to UN Comtrade data. Nonetheless, Turkey has struck several deals to support its economic position in the region in recent years like preferential trade agreements with Uzbekistan or Turkey’s November 2024 commitment to purchase Kazakh beef at double China’s offered price. Though the economic impact of deals such as these is often limited, they are widely covered in local news, serving to strengthen Turkey’s local image. Economic policy increasingly underpins diplomatic ties, exemplified by an April 2024 memorandum of understanding for central bank cooperation between Turkey and Kazakhstan; Turkey’s November 2024 decision to waive Kyrgyzstan’s $59 million debt in exchange for renewable energy projects; and plans for a Turkish-backed industrial zone in Kyrgyzstan’s Chui province.

Competition is intensifying as Central Asia’s geopolitical importance grows. Gulf-based companies are rapidly entering sectors traditionally prized by Turkish firms, particularly energy and hospitality in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. In Uzbekistan alone, Saudi Arabia recently launched $3 billion in renewable projects, the UAE has signed several agreements on tourism, and Qatar Airways launched flights to Uzbekistan in February 2024, challenging Turkish Airlines’ near monopoly on long-distance routes following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Energy diversification ambitions significantly influence Turkey’s Central Asian strategy. Kazakhstan holds substantial gas reserves and thirty billion barrels of crude oil; Turkmenistan has the world’s fifth-largest gas reserves alongside major oil deposits. Uzbekistan, though comparatively smaller, has considerable undeveloped fossil-fuel reserves. While currently minor suppliers, these countries have long entertained increasing westward exports via Turkey, benefiting both Central Asian energy producers and Turkey by reducing Turkish dependence on Russian energy, enhancing Turkey’s energy hub ambitions, and allowing Central Asian states to gain direct European market access. Accessing Europe’s markets may be increasingly important for Turkmenistan, which exported 70 percent of its gas to China in 2024, while China has taken steps to diversify its energy sources, and Russia moves to corner the Central Asian gas market. Though the theoretical potential for western movements of Central Asian gas is often entertained by some outspoken Turkish energy analysts, there is a wide gap between potential and reality.

The political environment may be changing to make these projects more feasible: Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, international interest in the Middle Corridor, and major infrastructure advancements present new opportunities for westward energy exports. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline (BTC), initially designed for Azerbaijani oil, now increasingly sources from Central Asia. Kazakhstan began BTC oil shipments from its Tengiz field in 2008; Turkmenistan followed in 2010. Discussions are reported to be underway for Turkmenistan to export gas via the Trans-Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP), bolstered by plans to double the pipeline’s capacity from 16 billion cubic meters to 32 bcm. By 2024, Kazakh and Turkmen oil accounted for about 18 percent of BTC’s throughput. In November 2024, Kazakhstan’s energy minister, Almasadam Satkaliyev, announced intentions to significantly reduce oil exports via Russia’s Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), shifting instead to BTC and boosting exports from 1.5 million metric tons annually to 20 million tons.

Security

Over the past decade, defense and intelligence cooperation has become increasingly central to Turkey’s Central Asia strategy, driven by the rapid growth and quality of Turkish arms. Turkish weapons exports grew 29 percent in 2024 alone, with Turkish ships, drones, and armored vehicles appearing in regions including Libya, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Ukraine. Central Asia is no exception, as all four Turkic states now utilize Turkish defense technology, notably the competitively priced Anka, Akinci, and TB drone series to fill gaps left by Russian assistance. Historically reliant on neighboring Russian and, to a lesser extent, Chinese arms, Central Asian countries are cautiously exploring diversification. Kazakhstan’s agreements with Turkish firms YDA and Asfar to expand its Caspian fleet, and Kyrgyzstan’s October 2021 purchase of Turkish armored vehicles, exemplify this slow but steady shift. Turkey also pursued weapons sales to Tajikistan, including a July 2023 agreement offering  to front $1.5 million of arms purchases and, according to Turkish media reports, drone sales. However, Tajikistan’s procurement remains uncertain, even after its landmark February 2025 border agreement with Kyrgyzstan—a recipient of Turkish weapons and military aid. With Russia maintaining its sole regional military base there, and China having built an extensive security apparatus, including private contractors—and a “secret” base, according to The Telegraph (a British newspaper) but denied by China and Tajikistan—external pressures severely limit Tajikistan’s maneuvering space. Considering little has been heard from either Tajikistan or Turkey since their July 2023 agreement, these and other factors may indicate that further cooperation has stalled.

Turkey’s military cooperation in Central Asia extends beyond arms sales. Uzbekistan signed agreements for military and technical cooperation in 2022 and intelligence sharing in 2024. Kyrgyzstan, which first partnered militarily with Turkey in 1993, benefited from Turkish, Uzbek, and Russian support in defeating the IMU’s 1999 Batken incursion. By 2024, Kyrgyzstan-Turkey relations elevated to a “comprehensive strategic partnership,” explicitly incorporating security issues. All four Turkic Central Asian nations regularly join military exercises with Turkey and send personnel for training in Turkish military institutions.

Kazakhstan’s security relationship with Turkey is the deepest, particularly in defense industrial collaboration, beginning with the establishment of Kazakhstan Aselsan Engineering (KAE) in 2011, a joint venture between Kazakh Engineering JSC and Aselsan. Operational since 2013, KAE quickly expanded from electronics and optics to aircraft components and complete weapon systems refurbishments. Importantly, KAE is increasingly focusing on producing more sophisticated technologies including circuit-boards and cryptographic communication systems. Beyond KAE, Kazakhstan and Turkey reportedly signed agreements on broader defense-industry cooperation and intelligence sharing in 2020 and 2023. In 2022, both countries agreed to jointly produce Turkey’s Anka unmanned aerial vehicle, with additional reports of potential collaboration with Turkish drone manufacturer Baykar. Similarly, in August 2024 Turkey and Kazakhstan drafted an agreement opening their airspace to each other’s military personnel and equipment, although the current status remains unclear.

Turkey’s NATO membership is a key consideration for its security engagement with Central Asia. Turkey has actively supported NATO’s Partnership for Peace program’s expansion to the region since the 2004 NATO Istanbul Summit, which also appointed a Turkish official as NATO’s first special representative to the region. Though NATO’s work in the region is collaborative and distributed among members, it is not uncommon to encounter Central Asians who perceive Turkey as a “bridge” to the Alliance. Many Central Asians “count on Turkey, as a member of NATO and the international order, to assist [Central Asian states] with sensitive international issues,” according to a former senior Uzbek foreign policy adviser. Still, Turkey does play a role in boosting NATO’s Central Asia presence through its sale of NATO-compliant arms as well as support for projects like Kazakhstan’s Military Institute of Foreign Languages. The institute has received funding from the United States and United Kingdom because of its perceived value to NATO relations.

The Russia question and limits to Turkish ambitions

Russia remains an unavoidable factor in Central Asia, deeply influential in almost every sector ranging from agriculture to defense, telecommunications to aid (despite low formal official development aid rankings, Russia often acts through intermediaries like the World Food Programme.) Beyond economic and military might, Russians, along with many Central Asians, view the region as firmly within even the most conservative definitions of its sphere of influence, and essential to its interests.

So far, the Russian government’s official reaction to Turkey’s increasing regional presence appears largely muted; Turkey has historically balanced its approach to the region carefully, with consideration for Russia. Russian and Turkish officials in Central Asian countries reportedly maintain amicable relations and have cooperated previously. Yet Russia likely feels increasing discomfort with Turkey’s expanding security and political involvement—domains Russia guards zealously. Turkish firms are gaining market share in sectors prized by Russian companies such as defense, energy, and construction. In just the three months following December 2024, Turkish companies announced major infrastructure projects in areas historically dominated by Russia and China, including a 400 megawatt power plant in Kashkadarya, Uzbekistan; a seaport in Kuryk, Kazakhstan; and four power plants across Kyrgyzstan.

Russia’s policy toward Turkey in Central Asia remains complex. First, Russians generally do not categorize Turkey as a blatantly “Western” entity despite its NATO membership, reflecting the pragmatism that exists between the two countries and Turkey’s often complicated relationship with the West. Additionally, Russia’s regional strategy has suffered from complacency, assuming Central Asia’s permanent alignment despite significant advancements in Central Asia’s economic wealth and development, cultural and political trends favoring increased autonomy, and the entrance of other actors in the region. Only in recent years has Russia begun to refocus on the region, due to both economic necessity amid the war in Ukraine and a response to geopolitical changes in the region. Second, increasing levels of economic interdependence between Turkey and Russia, particularly after the latter’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, complicates direct confrontation; as of August 2025, Turkey is now Russia’s largest purchaser of oil products and third-largest buyer of both crude oil and pipeline gas. This economic interdependence helps ensure Russia and Turkey compartmentalize any issues to avoid broader disruptions; the two countries have sparred in Libya, the Caucasus, and elsewhere, with little impact on broader diplomatic and economic engagement. Third, while Turkey’s regional influence grows, it neither fully replaces nor directly threatens Russia, unlike a US presence would. Instead, Turkey merely provides a degree of relief to Russia’s dominance in security, intelligence, and energy, cautiously pushing boundaries without provoking extreme Russian reactions. Turks, Russians, and Central Asians recognize this dynamic, granting Turkey some protection; any severe Russian response would undermine Russia’s narrative as the region’s “benevolent protector.”

Nonetheless, there are signs that Turkey’s deepening security and economic ties may increasingly unsettle Russia. A leaked internal Russian document addressed to Russian Federation Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin in April 2023 explicitly warned that Central Asian states sought integration “without Russia,” highlighting the Organization of Turkic States. The same document expressed anxiety over the region’s shifting worldview, including English replacing Russian as a second language. Shortly after, all OTS members except Kyrgyzstan adopted new Latin-script alphabets closely aligned with those of Azerbaijan and Turkey. In response, Russia initiated a campaign promoting Cyrillic script in Kyrgyzstan, including launching russian.kg, a website explicitly promoting Cyrillic and Russian use. A September 2025 analysis done by renowned Kazakhstani foreign policy expert Eldaniz Gusseinov found that Russia is increasingly promoting a “Greater Altai narrative” in its outreach to the region as a cultural counterweight to OTS’ pan-Turkic underpinnings, and that “Russia is beginning to see OTS as a challenge to its presence in Central Asia.” Though anecdotal and unquantifiable, many of the Uzbekistan experts interviewed for this paper noted a perceived uptick in “anti-Turkish” and “anti-pan-Turkic” sentiments in Russian-language news media over the past two years.

The drive to diversify relations intensified following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Symbolic incidents such as Tokayev’s last-minute decision to switch a speech to Kazakh to rebuke Putin’s claim that “Kazakhstan is a Russian speaking country,” or Tajik President Emomali Rahmon’s emotional demand for “respect” from Russia, though small were meaningful enough to garner millions of views. Such events do not imply sudden hostility between Russia and Central Asian states but illustrate a trend towards empowerment and regional autonomy.

Despite these subtle shifts, underestimating Russia’s profound influence remains unwise. Turkey, like all other external players, must tread carefully: The decision to expand its presence more aggressively than its current rate could lead to push back from not only Russia but also Central Asians. Beyond political leverage, and despite recent conversations raising a pan-Turkic or pan-Central Asian identity, the lingering cultural impact of nearly 150 years of Russian rule is impossible to ignore; as one Kyrgyzstani former cabinet minister mused when asked about relations with Turks: “I think in Russian.”

Spotlight on Turkmenistan

Special attention should be paid to Turkey’s uniquely strong relationship with Turkmenistan, a reclusive, neutral country that tightly controls its media, economy, and security apparatus. Most countries struggle to engage meaningfully with Turkmenistan despite its vast resources, including the world’s fifth-largest gas reserves, significant oil deposits, critical minerals, and strategic location along the Caspian Sea. Turkey, however, enjoys exceptional access, rooted in its greater linguistic similarities than other Central Asian nations, prompting Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to frequently describe relations as “one nation, two states.”

Energy and construction form the pragmatic foundation of their relationship, initially driven by Turkish businessmen in the 1990s who actively lobbied for deeper economic ties. Today, Turkish-led projects are substantial, including an active role in the construction of the new smart-city project, Arkadag, and a major seaport in Turkmenbashi. Over 600 Turkish companies operate in Turkmenistan, with contractors undertaking $216 million in projects in 2024 and $50 billion since independence. A notable milestone occurred in February 2025, when the two countries agreed on their first gas swap via Iran. They exchanged a modest yet symbolic 1.3 bcm, representing progress toward linking their energy sectors. In March 2025, Turkey publicly invited Turkmenistan to “jointly develop its oil and gas deposits” as well as expand cooperation on electricity transfers, according to Hurriyet Daily News.

The growing economic partnership has expanded into media and security, positioning Turkey alongside a select group of states—including Russia, Azerbaijan, and China (notably, Turkmenistan supplies more than 28 percent of China’s gas imports). Turkey has previously acted as a diplomatic bridge between Turkmenistan and the West, promoting broader regional engagement. Turkmenistan has indicated some receptiveness to the idea of joining OTS as a full member but progress remains slow.

Signs of Turkmenistan’s gradual opening have emerged recently, including the Caspian Sea-Black Sea transport corridor agreement with Romania, Georgia, and Azerbaijan, and a free trade agreement with Uzbekistan. In March 2025, Turkmenistan announced it was considering joining the Gas Exporting Countries Forum, another meaningful step. However, optimism should be tempered, as prior hopeful developments have been undermined by Turkmenistan’s deep-rooted isolationism and stringent security priorities.

Turkmenistan’s potential role in the Middle Corridor

Meaningful engagement with Turkmenistan remains valuable to the West, as the country occupies a critical position between Russia and Iran and could significantly bolster Europe’s energy and mineral security. Turkmenistan’s complicated relationship with Russia, aggravated by Russia’s expanding interests in Central Asian gas markets and China’s ongoing diversification away from Turkmen gas, underscore this opportunity. Furthermore, Turkmenistan’s full participation in the Middle Corridor could notably improve the viability of the project. This would alleviate Uzbekistan’s and Kyrgyzstan’s reliance on Kazakh transit routes, previously a source of concern for Bishkek, and ease congestion in Kazakh ports such as Kuryk and Aktau, enhancing overall transportation efficiency. Despite major progress in the creation of key infrastructure—including port expansion projects in Kuryk, Poti, and Anaklia; Kazakhstan’s plans to purchase 446 new locomotives by 2028; and a 70 percent increase in Middle Corridor freight volume in 2024—significant challenges remain. These include inefficient Caspian port operations, overloaded rail infrastructure in Georgia, outdated logistics software, and inconsistent customs standards. Transportation via the Middle Corridor remains roughly 150 percent more costly than via the Northern Corridor, according to multiple interviews with experts. Turkmenistan seems unusually eager to expand its outside connectivity through corridors beyond the Middle Corridor project, including exploring coordination with Afghanistan.

Interpretations for the American policy maker

Over two decades, Turkey has steadily grown into a major player in Central Asia across economic, security, and cultural spheres. Even in Tajikistan, the region’s sole non-Turkic state closely aligned with Russia and China, Turkey now ranks among the top five import and export partners, having accrued substantial economic and cultural presence. Similarly, Turkey has gained exceptional access to isolated Turkmenistan despite the nation’s restrictive political environment.

Despite Turkey’s significant presence in the region, Russia continues to dominate security, telecommunications, and media, while China holds unmatched economic influence. While Turkish media frequently emphasizes shared ethnic ties as the foundation for Turkey-Central Asia relations, pragmatism likely remains the primary driver of warm relations, with linguistic and cultural commonalities supporting, though not forming, the basis-of deep ties. Yet as the Organization of Turkic States strengthens and cultural and economic exposures increase, ethnic bonds will likely genuinely strengthen over time.

Turkey’s influence in Central Asia faces some external constraints, particularly from Russia, China, and to a lesser extent, Iran, all holding significant leverage over Turkish and Central Asian affairs. By gradually expanding its presence, Turkey can maintain control over its regional narrative and avoid overly provoking nationalist or pro-Russian elements. Attempting a more aggressive strategy risks backlash, both internally within Central Asia and externally from Russia or China. Internally, Turkey’s constraints have somewhat eased as it shifts from foreign aid to energy and security issues, thereby reducing the direct financial burden. Despite this, Turkey’s potential to project power in the region also remains constrained by its increasing commitments to other regions, including Somalia, Libya, and Syria.

On the flip side, the array of international actors interested in transport connectivity across Central Asia may end up bolstering Turkey’s presence and goals in the region, including the EU and China, due to Turkey’s key geostrategic position along the Middle Corridor route. The EU, which has already begun investing billions of euros in Central Asia’s energy, mining, and transport sectors, finds common ground with Turkey on this issue, which has long sought to function as an energy hub for Europe.

All told, American policymakers should regard Turkey’s growing regional presence favorably, even amid broader disagreements between Washington and Ankara. Turkey has historically shown the ability to compartmentalize relations—collaborating and competing simultaneously with other states. Considering geographic distance, local attitudes, domestic politics, and budget constraints, US goals and expectations towards the region should be focused and pragmatic, a far cry from any dreams of hegemony.

US official policy objectives for Central Asia have not been publicly updated since 2019. Based on interviews and existing public documents, this paper proposes defining America’s core objectives in Central Asia today as:

• Securing European and US critical mineral and energy security.
• Providing viable political and economic alternatives to China and Russia to bolster Central Asian autonomy.
• Promoting regional stability.
• Countering Islamic terrorism, especially as radicalized Central Asian fighters and groups have demonstrated their reach as far as Russia, Syria, and Afghanistan, while continuing to threaten the stability of the region.
• Facilitating American business access to Central Asia’s growing markets.

Investing and engaging in Central Asia is in the United States’s interests, though this will inevitably remain severely limited by lack of political will and geographical difficulties. Though there is no substitute for fully focused American economic and military might, these goals may be more achievable at minimized political and economic cost by supporting partner countries already committed to and invested in the region, including Turkey. There is already established business collaboration, with many American businesses opting to partner with companies from friendly nations in joint ventures or as intermediaries to navigate the complexities of the region. Most importantly, Turkey’s activities in the region largely align with US interests, whether by promoting autonomy from Russia and China or developing transport and energy infrastructure. Areas of Turkish policy that don’t align with US interests, such as the emphasis on Turkic heritage or cultural overtures, are largely benign to US goals. Major opportunities for increased coordination remain, bolstered by the Trump administration’s already-indicated interest in working with Turkey on other foreign policy areas such as Libya and Syria. This paper recommends the following cost-effective policy actions:

• Consider informal or technical engagement with the Organization of Turkic States, particularly to coordinate on transit and economic issues. Unlike the C5+1 format, OTS includes Azerbaijan and Turkey, both of which maintain deep and strategic ties to Central Asia and are essential players in projects like the Middle Corridor. Appointing a special envoy may be a solution that allows dialogue without full endorsement of OTS, akin to the US approach to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). At the September 2025 OTS summit in Azerbaijan, the ensuing joint declaration also called for the establishment of an OTS+ framework to significantly expand cooperation with other states, though details remain to be revealed.
• Create a regular multilateral dialogue platform involving major US-allied regional partners with strong existing ties to the region, especially Turkey, South Korea, and Japan, to coordinate Central Asian policy and facilitate greater dialogue. Partially inspired by the 2023 Camp David trilateral summit—which established annual trilateral dialogues, outlined common policy goals, and included a commitment to coordinate policy in the Indo-Pacific—this could further institutionalize policy coordination in Central Asia.
• Contribute targeted technical expertise to partner-led aid programs, especially in agriculture, water management, and resource mapping—fields where US technology outperforms that of many regional donors. For example, American seed and soil management technologies demonstrated superior results in Kyrgyzstan during prior USAID programs compared to a similar Turkish program. With direct US aid scaled back, supporting partner agricultural or environmental initiatives by contributing American tools or knowledge can yield significant development gains and enhance regional food and water security—at minimal cost and without expanding a direct US aid footprint.
• Invest selectively in critical transport and energy infrastructure projects through minority stakes, with Turkish or other allied countries’ firms as primary operators. Though American companies have a long-established presence in Kazakhstan and in Uzbekistan to a lesser degree, elsewhere they often hesitate to lead due to regional complexities and geopolitical sensitivities. Indirect investment through trusted intermediaries, with consideration for political and environmental, social, and governance compliance, when necessary, could mitigate risk while advancing US objectives to link Europe and Central Asia economically.
• Explore consolidating intelligence sharing, particularly regarding Afghanistan and Taliban threats, among NATO allies, particularly Turkey and the UK, with the intention of coordinating with Central Asian states. The Taliban are a source of significant unease to Central Asian states, particularly with their diversion of 20 percent to 30 percent of the Amu Darya River’s water, which poses a serious security threat to Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan. Uzbekistan has made progress in overtures to resolve the issue in recent months, though major concerns remain. Leaked documents widely circulated on Russian and Central Asian social media platforms allege that the United States and the UK may already have intelligence-sharing agreements with Uzbekistan; extending this partnership across the region, as is safe and feasible, would bolster security against Taliban-linked extremism such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.
• Assist partner-led migrant labor exchange programs to reduce Central Asian dependence on Russian remittances,which form the supermajority of total remittance inflows in the region. Remittances are a major portion of the economies of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan, representing 49 percent of Tajikistan’s gross domestic product in 2024, for example. Uzbekistan already actively sends migrant workers to Turkey, South Korea, and several European countries through exchange programs. Expanding such programs with US diplomatic and modest financial support would further loosen Russia’s economic grip at minimal cost.
• Leverage Turkey’s relationship with Turkmenistan to advance US relations with this strategically critical but isolated state. Turkish President Erdoğan’s close ties with the Turkmen father-son presidential leadership of Gurbanguly and Serdar Berdimuhamedov, combined with American private-sector interest in partnering with Turkish corporations already trusted in Turkmenistan, represent strategic opportunities for enhancing Western access.

Over the past twenty years, Turkey has managed to secure a significant foothold in Central Asia, presenting as both a pragmatically useful economic and security partner, while reinforcing its standing through common linguistic and cultural ties. The bonds between Turkey and the region appear to be growing in strength. Though pragmatism largely motivates high-level relations today, future generations will likely bear increasingly tight bonds that supersede only the pragmatic.

Though Turkey’s influence is still overshadowed by the titans of the neighborhood—Russia and China—it is nonetheless noteworthy. For the United States, Central Asia represents a region with great potential value, though the current political and geographic circumstances make major investment difficult. By critically assessing and coordinating with other partners that are far more established and dedicated to working in the region, the United States could see significant progress toward goals that match its foreign policy objectives.

About the author

Kiran Baez is a research assistant at the Atlantic Council’s Turkey program focusing on Central Asia and energy issues.

Related content

Explore the program

Image: Photo by Alexander Serzhantov on Unsplash