185
Central Asian countries played a significant role in US and NATO forces following the September 11, 2001, attacks, providing military and technical assistance. In
addition, the United States has aided in the field of military and security to these
countries.
But with the end of George W. Bush’s presidency and the arrival of Barack
Obama in the United States, many analysts claim will coincide with the decline in
US influence and the further development of the presence of China and Russia in
Central Asia. The United States wants to put an end to programs in the Central
Asian countries and to reduce the influence of Russia, China, and Iran. In recent
years, Washington has provided a lot of funding for Russia’s troops to leave the
Tajik border. He has provided security forces in the country, but he has also implemented plans in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, but his policies have failed in the
region (www.bbc.com 2017a, b, c).
The US lost interest in Central Asia as a part of the Pivot to Asia policy. In any
case, other global and regional powers were more active in Transit projects in the
Central Asia and Caspian Sea regions, in absence of the US presence in the region.
Obama’s pivot to Asia was never much to start with, and it is completely dead
now with Trump in office. He’s torn up the TPP and is determined to conduct only
bilateral diplomacy in the region. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has some
problems but the Chinese are the rising power and they will dominate trade transportation and energy in the Eurasian region in the near future. They have far more
economic leverage and political will than anyone else, barring a major political
meltdown within the country (Author’s interview with Charles E. Ziegler 2018).
US New Silk Road and Central Asia
During Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, one of the administration policies expected to make in-roads in terms of US policy toward Central Asia and the
Caspian Sea region was the US’ New Silk Road Initiative. Over the course of the
1990s, in light of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and particularly upon the US’
official announcement of the policy in 2011, the country’s New Silk Road Initiative
constituted an expressive, if ultimately romantic foreign policy framework for the
Central Asia region (Laruelle 2015:361). In 1991, western countries began to use
the Silk Road metaphor as a means to illustrate the concept of an emerging EastWest axis which would link the countries of the former Soviet Union to Europe
(Laruelle 2015:364). By 1993, the EU and US had signed their support for the
Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus (TRACECA) project. This project aimed to
open up Central Asia and the South Caucasus region via the creation of a huge transport and communication corridor (Laruelle 2015:364).
Initially announced in 2011, the New Silk Road seeks to link the countries of
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan with Afghanistan,
Hillary Clinton’s Pivot to Asia
Central Asian countries played a significant role in US and NATO forces following the September 11, 2001, attacks, providing military and technical assistance. In
addition, the United States has aided in the field of military and security to these
countries.
But with the end of George W. Bush’s presidency and the arrival of Barack
Obama in the United States, many analysts claim will coincide with the decline in
US influence and the further development of the presence of China and Russia in
Central Asia. The United States wants to put an end to programs in the Central
Asian countries and to reduce the influence of Russia, China, and Iran. In recent
years, Washington has provided a lot of funding for Russia’s troops to leave the
Tajik border. He has provided security forces in the country, but he has also implemented plans in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, but his policies have failed in the
region (www.bbc.com 2017a, b, c).
The US lost interest in Central Asia as a part of the Pivot to Asia policy. In any
case, other global and regional powers were more active in Transit projects in the
Central Asia and Caspian Sea regions, in absence of the US presence in the region.
Obama’s pivot to Asia was never much to start with, and it is completely dead
now with Trump in office. He’s torn up the TPP and is determined to conduct only
bilateral diplomacy in the region. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has some
problems but the Chinese are the rising power and they will dominate trade transportation and energy in the Eurasian region in the near future. They have far more
economic leverage and political will than anyone else, barring a major political
meltdown within the country (Author’s interview with Charles E. Ziegler 2018).
US New Silk Road and Central Asia
During Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, one of the administration policies expected to make in-roads in terms of US policy toward Central Asia and the
Caspian Sea region was the US’ New Silk Road Initiative. Over the course of the
1990s, in light of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and particularly upon the US’
official announcement of the policy in 2011, the country’s New Silk Road Initiative
constituted an expressive, if ultimately romantic foreign policy framework for the
Central Asia region (Laruelle 2015:361). In 1991, western countries began to use
the Silk Road metaphor as a means to illustrate the concept of an emerging EastWest axis which would link the countries of the former Soviet Union to Europe
(Laruelle 2015:364). By 1993, the EU and US had signed their support for the
Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus (TRACECA) project. This project aimed to
open up Central Asia and the South Caucasus region via the creation of a huge transport and communication corridor (Laruelle 2015:364).
Initially announced in 2011, the New Silk Road seeks to link the countries of
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan with Afghanistan,
Hillary Clinton’s Pivot to Asia