Galvanizing U.S. Business Ties with Central Asia
With their expansive deposits of critical minerals, youthful populations and growing GDPs, the economies of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan) – the C5 - have inched onto the United States’ geopolitical and national and economic security radars.
But in a region where Russia and China have a tremendous foothold, three actions in which the United States can play a pivotal role might help enlarge and firmly plant the U.S. business footprint in the region:
(1) Clearer metrics about doing business in these economies.
(2) Building capacity with traditional U.S. business practices that encourage transparency and good governance; and
(3) Extending Permanent Normal Trade Relations to all the countries in the region to send the message that the U.S. and U.S. business is keen to engage and compete in these economies.
Background
We are witnessing a flurry of activity between U.S. government, business, and the Central Asian countries:
· From President Biden’s Mineral Security Partnership and President Trump’s follow-on Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement (FORGE)[1], to the C5+1 and B5+1 summits in Washington and Bishkek, the region is garnering attention at the highest-levels of the U.S. government.
· A senior delegation led by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in April 2026 met with Administration officials and Congressional leaders, as well as the business community to sign deals worth tens of billions of dollars in U.S. aviation exports and agreements to expand U.S. investments in agricultural machinery, workforce training, and additional energy cooperation.[2][3]
· In May, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Armenia briefly to sign agreements, including the TRIPP (the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity), which holds promise for the development of the Middle Corridor, a multi-modal route linking the broader region of Central Asia with Turkey and Europe.
· U.S. Ex-Im Bank Chair John Jovanovic is expected to travel to Uzbekistan this month to participate in the 5th Tashkent International Investment Forum and meet with senior leaders and business representatives.; and
· Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed last week that he plans a trip to the 5 countries later this year – an unprecedented tour for a Cabinet official – attending the next C5+1 summit.
There is no doubt that U.S. business is benefitting from the revamping of the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC)’s charter, allowing it to now operate in these economies. It is supporting investments in Central Asia in energy security, critical minerals, infrastructure, and private sector development. [4]
However, in somewhat of a Catch-22, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) has no active portfolio in Central Asia because it is limited to countries that score highly on such fundamentals as good governance, economic freedom and investing in citizens.[5]
While there is a spaghetti bowl of capacity-building initiatives in the region,[6] few are led by the United States with a focus on creating long-lasting opportunities for U.S. business.
Admittedly, it’s all a bit of a game of catch up with the geopolitical and economic head-start China and Russia have in these markets and their tolerance for more opaque business practices.
But, as Central Asia experts from the World Bank[7] and New Lines Institute[8] suggest, there is ample room for the United States - and U.S. business - to make a significant difference in the economic trajectory of these countries - by offering growth models that strengthen institutions and improve the economic well-being of citizens, not to mention the often overlooked positive impact that people-to-people connections can have.
U.S. business likely sees a disjointed picture when it evaluates Central Asia:
Certainly, intra-regional trade is growing – but transportation routes are challenged, customs rules are disparate, custom valuations rules are lacking, and logistics professionals need training.
Certainly, the countries are resource-rich with critical minerals and plans to become parts of the AI value chain, but water challenges are daunting, energy needs will be great, and local businesses would benefit from training in sanctions compliance.
Certainly, the combined GDPs of the countries grew 70% over the last several years to about US $450 billion[9] - but Kazakhstan’s oil-rich economy is triple the size of Uzbekistan’s and Turkmenistan’s, and all of these dwarf the economies of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan which are smaller service and agricultural-based or rely on remittances.
Certainly, the median age of the region is 26.8 years according to UN data, but the distribution is skewed with the lion’s share of the 85 million sitting in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.
Certainly, the strides these countries have made and are continuing to reform and liberalize their commercial environments is piquing the interest of Western business, yet as many U.S. corporations will often confide, the fundamentals of transparency, accountability and good governance are lacking. Policymaking is opaque and can seem arbitrary and confounding. There is ample room for much-needed capacity building.
Promising Developments
Recent developments have been promising, the region’s leaders have recognized the insert greater coherence and harmonization in digital connectivity, transportation, energy, and trade - via an institutional construct of leaders known as the Council of National Coordinators.
Moving towards greater harmonization of trade and investment rules with the creation of an Economic Council would be a gamechanger in moving this forward, as some have argued.[10]
The EU’s Global Gateway Initiative is an excellent foray into much needed development funds and technical assistance. This initiative involves billions of dollars, and just last December, announced a small but strategic program to speed up trade and transportation linkages between the EU and Central Asia with infrastructure improvements in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. The program is also expected to include trade facilitation and customs digitalization – which has been key to improving transparency and accountability in other markets around the world.
The question, then, is what the United States can do along these lines to lay the foundation for U.S. business to step up in Central Asia.
CONCLUSION
If the region is relevant for U.S. national and economic security, as recent high-level engagements would suggest, the U.S. should use its influence and resources to not only support investments but the overall environment in which business takes place.
U.S. government support for coherence and capacity building in rules and regulations will benefit the region, the people, and their institutions – and U.S. business interests - for the long-term.
This should be done with an eye towards supporting the positive integration underway, but also by ensuring the economic well-being of the populations and promoting the standards and economies of scale that sustain successful business ventures.
Business needs certainty. Here are some initial ideas:
1. Let’s borrow an old idea to get back to basics: Business would benefit from a transparent and complete set of metrics measuring the business environment in the Central Asian economies as part of a global ranking.
U.S. business looking to do business in Central Asia – and elsewhere - would likely appreciate and utilize something akin to the former World Bank Doing Business In reports[11], which evaluated 190 economies across the globe using 41 metrics, and compared them across 10 basic indicators.
Let’s have the U.S. Department of Commerce fund an examination of just these 10 informative indicators, as the Bank did, to rank the Central Asian economies and others:
ü Starting a business
ü Dealing with construction permits
ü Getting electricity
ü Registering property
ü Getting credit
ü Protecting minority investors
ü Paying taxes
ü Trading across borders
ü Enforcing contracts
ü Resolving insolvency
2. Let’s focus USG resources at the State Department (where much bilateral capacity building now sits), the Commerce Department (giving the Commercial Law Development Program an extra boost) - and perhaps even review where MCC might be able to flex? – to entrench in Central Asia a U.S. model for capacity building and training that involves local governments and focuses on data-driven results to promote economic growth; and
3. Let’s pass Permanent Normal Trade Relations with the rest of the C5 (U.S. business has enjoyed PNTR benefits with Kyrgyzstan since 2000) and remove the outdated Jackson-Vanik yoke from their shoulders. Kazakhstan and Tajikistan are already in the WTO. Turkmenistan receives annual waivers from the President. With Uzbekistan expected to complete its accession negotiations this year – can this be an action forcing event? The original intent of the legislation (Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union) has long been a non-issue, there is Administration support, and U.S. business needs to be on a level playing field in these markets with trading partners.
Getting all of this done will not be easy – it will require Resolve, Resources and Resilience – but the benefits will have far-reaching positive consequences for U.S. economic growth and U.S. economic security.
***
[1] FORGE is global partnership that will enforce minimum prices on critical minerals to avoid dumping practices and enable domestic producers to compete in the global marketplace. The United States assumes the chair of FORGE in July 2026.
[2] https://kz.usembassy.gov/a-new-era-in-u-s-kazakhstan-relations/
[3] An MOU between the United States and Kazakhstan, however, has not been made public, inviting questions about transparency by both governments.
[4] The DFC is working on debt financing and project development in Kazakhstan, a Joint Investment Framework with Uzbekistan, the creation of a Central Asia Investment Partnership and general support for broader regional trade and economic stability.
[5] https://www.mcc.gov/resources/doc/report-fy2026-eligible-country/
[6] See, e.g., the EU Global Gateway; IFC projects; the IMF Institute for Capacity Development, the Center for International Private Enterprise,
[7] https://nationalinterest.org/blog/silk-road-rivalries/how-central-asia-can-seize-the-critical-minerals-moment?utm_source=linkedin&utm_campaign=web-share
[8] https://newlinesinstitute.org/workstream/silk-seven/
[9] https://eurasiamagazine.com/central-asian-gdp-climbs-70-percent-to-s450bn-over-seven-years
[10] https://centralasiacaucasusinstitute.substack.com/p/a-new-central-asia-emerging-opportunities
[11] . The newer B-READY[11] reports by the World Bank are a shadow of the former Doing Business reports and lack the details and specificity that business needs.
