Khiva Forum Marks Central Asia's Rise as Independent Geopolitical Actor

The recent Central Asia-Germany Expert Forum in Khiva has signaled a fundamental shift in the paradigm of cooperation, according to expert analysis. The event, held on April 16-17, is seen as confirming the region's maturity as a strategic and independent geopolitical space.

Akramjon Nematov, First Deputy Director of the Institute for Strategic and Interregional Studies (ISMI), stated that the forum's outcomes demonstrate Central Asia's definitive move beyond being perceived as a peripheral area. The region is now solidifying its status as an autonomous geo-economic and political subject.

This assessment aligns with views from German analysts, who note a transition from viewing Central Asia merely as a "transit region" to recognizing it as a key node in the emerging Eurasian architecture. The current stage of interaction is developing within the framework of equal strategic partnership, an institutional foundation laid during the 2023 Berlin summit.

The "C5+1" format with Germany is consequently evolving from a simple foreign policy dialogue mechanism into an instrument for strengthening regional agency. A key discursive shift was identified: Central Asia aims not to integrate into others' geopolitical constructs but to build its own agenda. In this logic, external partners, including Germany, are not architects but equal participants jointly shaping solutions.

"We are talking about the formation of a new model of economic interaction, where Central Asia acts not only as a transit space but also as a production and technological hub," emphasized Akramjon Nematov.

The expert highlighted a substantial rethinking of the economic model. The focus is shifting from primarily transport connectivity and transit functions toward deeper integration—incorporating Central Asian countries into global value chains. Consequently, he proposed refocusing cooperation from infrastructure to industrialization, technology localization, and joint production development.

This approach complements Germany's strategy focused on diversification and risk reduction, giving it a more applied and long-term character. Separate attention was paid to Afghanistan, which is viewed not as a peripheral security issue but as a structural element of regional stability.

Unlike the more reserved European approach retaining significant normative components, Nematov advocated for a pragmatic engagement model. He argued that isolating Afghanistan carries destabilization risks, while its integration into infrastructure, energy, and trade processes can mitigate threats and create conditions for gradual normalization.

In this context, Central Asia positions itself as an intermediary for a more flexible interaction model, suggesting Germany utilize existing regional mechanisms for pragmatic dialogue. Another crucial element of the proposed agenda is strengthening the institutional component of cooperation.

Moving beyond project-based approaches—which German experts acknowledge often face implementation limits—the ISMI representative advocated for creating sustainable mechanisms like joint educational platforms, investment funds, and technology centers. This aims to cement Germany's long-term presence in the region not just as an economic partner but also as a bearer of standards, knowledge, and competencies.

In a broader analytical context, Nematov believes the forum participants' common position reflects an effort to synchronize two strategic logics: the European one oriented toward managed interdependence and risk reduction; and the Central Asian one aimed at strengthening autonomy and internal resilience.

This synchronization manifests in an emphasis on complementarity: Germany is seen as a technological and institutional partner; while Central Asia is viewed as an emerging center of economic activity connectivity and regional coordination.

The Khiva Forum confirmed Central Asia's maturity as political space making dialogue with Germany qualitatively new—a partnership of equals where recognizing regional agency becomes both political principle practical condition for effective interaction