Event Report: “After the War: What a Ukraine Peace Agreement Could Mean for Central Asia”

What could a potential peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine mean for Central Asia?  The report brings together a collective of scholars on the Central Asian region, including Dr. Eric Rudenshiold, Mr. Clark Adams, and Dr. Erica Marat. Topics addressed include trade and economic developments, security and defense relationships, and postcolonial relations. 

Overview:

The virtual event was held over Zoom on February 26, 2025, by the Central Asia Program at George Washington University’s Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies. Dr. Sebastien Peyrouse, the Director of the presenting program and a Research Professor with expertise on political systems in Central Asia, moderated the panel. Dr. Peyrouse introduced the subject matter to be discussed for the day, highlighting the important role Central Asia plays in global geopolitics. Three discussants presented valuable perspectives on the possible outcomes for Central Asia should a peace deal emerge between Ukraine and Russia.  A diverse range of topics were addressed, including those related to economic, security, and identity developments in the post-2022 Central Asian geopolitical landscape. Emerging relationships between states within Central Asia, as well as the South Caucasus, were considered. Russia and its continued presence were a significant topic of discussion and the state’s role in the security interests of Central Asian countries were critically examined. Speakers considered the US and its security relationship with Central Asian countries beginning in the 1990s, along with developments in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the congruent security interests in the region. Finally, responses to Russian aggression in Ukraine were considered, providing additional background on an important partner for the region. The event concluded with a discussion of postcolonial relations in Central Asia following the invasion of Ukraine, producing a lively question-and-answer period.  

Speaker 1: Dr. Eric Rudenshiold Dr. Eric Rudenshiold, Developing Relations across Central Asia  

Dr. Eric Rudenshiold, a former National Security Council Director for Central Asia under the Trump and Biden administrations and a current Senior Fellow at the Caspian Policy Center, was the first speaker. Dr. Rudenshiold opened his discussion by suggesting that it is it is unknown how the war will end; however, he took note of developments that have emerged since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine that he suggests will outlast the war itself. Arguing that Central Asia is serious about delivering sanctions, moving away from Russia, and developing its own economic sovereignty, Dr. Rudenshiold emphasized the importance of the economic sector in the region’s pivot towards increased independence. 

Dr. Rudenshiold cited new trade relationships, soft and hard infrastructure measures, and economic realignment connecting the countries of Central Asia as reinforcement of the region’s agency. Relationships across the Caspian Sea in the Caucasus have strengthened during this time, further reinforcing emerging regional economic agency. Dr. Rudenshiold noted the development of a new ‘crossroads mentality’ in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, one that did not exist before. He also highlighted that mutual cooperation on the part of Central Asian states has been a significant factor in regional developments. The ongoing war in Ukraine has also contributed to an increase in traffic through the Middle Corridor, placing the region at the nexus of international trade. Though tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan threatens efficiency of the Corridor, a successful peace agreement between the two states could double the capacity of the entire trade route – further highlighting the benefits of interdependence and cooperation. 

Speaker 2: Mr. Clark Adams, Securitization and Partnerships in Central Asia 

Serving as the second speaker of the day, Mr. Clark Adams began his discussion with a thorough overview of the relationships between the US and Central Asian states since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. With an almost forty-year career in the US government, his experience with the region includes serving as the Director for Central Asian Affairs in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy for over fifteen years, as well as a period where he oversaw the management of affairs between the US and Central Asia. Mr. Adams noted that the individual relationships between the US and Central Asian states, though complicated and diverse, have followed similar paths. Beginning in the 1990s, the US helped develop security and military exercises in the region, however following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US began heavily investing in countering terrorist organizations. During that period, Russia served as a partner in the US’ counterterrorism efforts by aiding in military exercises.  

Mr. Adams pointed out that, though the relationship between the US and Russia has strained since the invasion of Ukraine, the one between the US and Central Asian states has grown closer in some ways. Relations have grown economically, but as the war has dragged on, Central Asian countries have become more cautious of approaching Western partners in security relations. Much of that, Mr. Adams said, has to do with the countries’ concerns regarding the possible outcomes of a perceived Russian victory, including an increase in pressure through the (re)assertion of Russia’s regional sphere of influence. Such outcomes are not impossible as Russia’s security sector would be freed up and could influence Central Asian countries to pause diversification efforts. Mr. Adams concluded his discussion by highlighting that, despite positive developments in areas like economics, it is still possible that Central Asia may pivot away from partnering with the US on security issues. Such a development would likely be informed by a feeling of isolation in the region and a fear of risking Russian aggression. 

Speaker 3: Dr. Erica Marat, Decolonial Discourses and Autocratic Trends in Central Asia  

Dr. Erica Marat, a professor at the College of International Security Affairs and the third discussant of the day, looked at the societal impacts of Russian colonialism in contemporary, post-2022, Central Asia. She noted citizens are allowed to engage in discussions regarding colonialism publicly within Central Asian countries, though these discussions are broad and dynamic as there is no singular narrative found. Though, older generations tend to have more friendly attitudes towards the Russian state and its influence on the region while younger generations tend to be more critical of Russia. However, it is important to note these are general observations and do not account for the entire region, as different states have different relations with Russia. However, for nations in Central Asia, Russia is a security guarantor and thus a crucial partner to work with. Dr. Marat pointed out that a perceived Russian victory in Ukraine will only embolden autocrats in the region. As autocrats in Central Asia are happy to copy Russian laws and rhetoric with the support of some Russian sympathizers, Dr. Marat took notice of a larger rift developing between intellectual societies in Central Asia and government alignment with Russia. She also brought attention to a new framework of influence coming out of the US. While Central Asian governments have looked towards Russian and Chinese autocratic processes before, one is now developing in the US, spotlighting how those with access to substantial wealth – particularly from the tech sector – can reshape governance structures. The new framework, Dr. Marat argued, is not only an appealing model for Central Asia, but for prospective autocrats globally.   

Question-and-Answer Period: 

The question-and-answer period encouraged a lively discussion between presenters and audience members, allowing for further examination of some crucial concerns. An audience member inquired regarding the possibility of a Central Asian union emerging out of current conditions. In response, Mr. Adams answered that cooperation on an economic scale is more likely to occur than on security issues. However, Mr. Adams noted that in such a case when economic relationships develop, it is possible for new security relationships to emerge as well. Another audience member raised a question regarding the diversification of Russia as a key feature in the region and the role China plays in this relationship. In response, discussants brought up a possible redline for Russia on the amount of Chinese engagement it is willing to accommodate in Central Asia. Though, China is still a significant factor to think about – especially when considering the state’s own security interests in the region. Following this question, an audience member brought up the significance of security concerns, including terrorism, for Central Asian countries. In response, Dr. Rudenshiold highlighted that regional states pay close attention to emerging security developments, including conflicts such as the ones between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan. As such, Central Asian states are invested in conflict deterrence in their immediate and neighboring regions. Lastly, a question was raised for Dr. Marat about decoloniality and archival access. In response, she highlighted the fact that there are archives which remain closed because of possible social implications, as surviving family members could be traumatized by their uncovering and result in heightened tensions. Despite this, conversations centered around decoloniality continue to be discussed intensely in Central Asian countries.