FERGANA, Uzbekistan—In September 2022, violent confrontations along the border between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan raised alarms about renewed instability in the Fergana Valley, a historically significant region in Central Asia. However, just three years later, the two nations, alongside Uzbekistan, have finalized a landmark trilateral peace agreement, marking a shift toward sustained diplomatic engagement. Tashkent, which is also advancing wide-ranging economic reforms, envisions that strategic investment and regional cooperation could transform the once-turbulent valley into a hub of stability and growth.
I attended the inaugural Fergana Peace Forum on October 15 and 16, an event designed to foster mutual understanding and establish a roadmap for continued peacebuilding. Organized by the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies under the President of Uzbekistan, in coordination with the United Nations Regional Center for Preventative Diplomacy in Central Asia, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and other international partners, the forum brought together regional governors from Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, as well as representatives from the OSCE, European Union, various UN agencies, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
Opening remarks were optimistic, though delivered with the cautious tone typical of diplomatic settings. Attendees expressed genuine appreciation that the three neighboring countries had not only achieved peace but also agreed to participate in an open, multilateral dialogue—a notable shift given that armed forces from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan had exchanged fire just miles from the forum site only a few years prior.
Discussions became more candid once high-level officials departed. An analyst from one of the previously conflicted nations voiced doubts about the transparency of the peace agreement, noting that key details, including border demarcations, remain undisclosed. Over the two-day event, Kyrgyz and Tajik participants engaged openly with foreign experts but avoided direct dialogue with each other, highlighting lingering tensions.
Russia and China were frequent topics, though their official presence was minimal. China was represented by Sun Lijie, former ambassador to Uzbekistan, the only sitting diplomat from outside Central Asia. No other Chinese experts attended. A Russian speaker from the state-affiliated Russian Academy of Sciences criticized Western sanctions and the so-called weaponization of financial systems—a clear reference to measures against Moscow over Ukraine. He left immediately after his panel and declined further discussion, a move that reportedly frustrated several Central Asian attendees.
The role of the United States also drew attention, particularly former President Donald Trump’s suggestion about reopening Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan. Experts from Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan debated the implications, agreeing that a renewed U.S. military presence could strengthen their strategic autonomy by balancing influence from Beijing and Moscow. This perspective was striking: four years after the U.S. withdrawal from Kabul, regional analysts now view a potential American return not as a security threat, but as a counterweight to growing Chinese and Russian dominance.
The second day focused on technical aspects of peacebuilding, including water management and transportation infrastructure—key drivers of the 2022 conflict. Officials presented joint development plans, though Kyrgyz and Tajik analysts I spoke with remained cautious, citing unresolved disputes over transit routes and diplomatic protocols. The fragility of the peace process remains evident.
Young civil society leaders from nongovernmental organizations across the three Fergana Valley nations discussed the vital role of youth and independent civic groups in sustaining peace and fostering inclusive development. Their inclusion in the forum was a notable departure from the region’s traditionally restrictive governance models.
Following the event, I traveled to Tashkent for meetings with government officials, financial analysts, and think tank representatives. The capital displayed strong economic momentum, with construction underway across the city, including plans for a new international exhibition center, airport, and residential zones. The Ministry of Investment is preparing a $1.7 billion initial public offering of select state-owned enterprises, expected in early 2026 in either London or New York. Meanwhile, Uzum, the country’s first tech unicorn and a leading fintech firm, is gaining momentum.
In a major signal of confidence in future growth, Uzbekistan recently agreed to purchase up to twenty-two Boeing passenger aircraft in a deal valued at up to eight billion dollars. The country’s economy is projected to expand by 6.8 percent this year, driven in part by reforms under President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, who has promoted privatization and empowered ministries to negotiate foreign investment deals. However, entrenched bureaucratic structures continue to hinder transparency and efficiency, particularly in sectors like banking, where executives resist relinquishing control over state assets.
Uzbekistan’s rich deposits of critical minerals and rare-earth elements—essential for batteries, semiconductors, and defense technologies—have attracted renewed U.S. interest. A critical minerals cooperation agreement was signed in April, and in September, U.S.-based Cove Capital committed to launching geological exploration projects.
Speed is crucial. Economists and policy analysts in Tashkent emphasized the urgency for American firms to accelerate their projects, warning that delays could allow Chinese companies to secure prime mining rights. While the U.S. government cannot mandate corporate investments like China’s central authorities, Washington could enhance its influence by empowering agencies like the Commerce Department and the Development Finance Corporation with greater resources, staffing, and flexibility to offer loan guarantees, equity financing, and support for fair market access.
The progress in regional peace and Uzbekistan’s economic trajectory offer promising signs for Central Asia’s stability and prosperity. With increased U.S. engagement, Washington could position itself as a constructive partner, unlocking mutual strategic and economic advantages.
— news from Atlantic Council
— News Original —
Dispatch from Uzbekistan: Regional peace progress and economic growth reveal opportunities for US engagement
FERGANA, Uzbekistan—In September 2022, deadly border clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan threatened to open a new front of violence and instability in the Fergana Valley, the historic heart of Central Asia. But just three years later, the two countries signed a historic trilateral peace agreement with their neighbor Uzbekistan and now actively promote further government-to-government dialogue. Uzbekistan, whose leadership is also pursuing a suite of economic reforms, hopes that diplomacy and investment can usher in a new dawn to the once-restive Fergana Valley. n nI traveled to Uzbekistan for the inaugural Fergana Peace Forum on October 15 and 16, which was billed as a platform to advance mutual understanding and provide an analytical framework for next steps in the peace process. The forum was convened by the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies under the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the United Nations Regional Center for Preventative Diplomacy in Central Asia, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and other international partner organizations. n nThe governors of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan’s respective border regions were at the forum, as were special representatives from the OSCE, European Union, various UN affiliates, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The opening speeches were congratulatory and hopeful, if a bit staid in their guarded diplomatic language. In all, speakers and attendees alike seemed impressed that Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan had not only forged peace among themselves, but also agreed to come and engage in a relatively open setting. And rightly so, considering that only a few years ago, Kyrgyz and Tajik forces had been firing at each other just miles away. n nThe interesting discussion began when the principals departed and the state-affiliated think tankers metaphorically loosened their ties. An expert from one of the two countries that had been engaged in the border clashes expressed skepticism about the peace deal itself, noting that its details, including the borders, had not yet been made public. Across the two days of the forum, I saw Kyrgyz and some Tajik attendees speak quite openly with other foreign experts but not with each other. n nRussia and China were ever-present topics of conversation, but their presence at the conference itself was relatively limited. True, China was the only non-Central Asian country to send a sitting diplomat to the forum (former Chinese Ambassador to Uzbekistan Sun Lijie), but no other Chinese experts attended. The one Russian speaker, a China expert from the state-connected Russian Academy of Sciences, railed against sanctions and the “weaponization of currencies,” a barely veiled reference to Western economic measures leveled against Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine. He quickly left the conference after his panel ended and declined to speak with other analysts, which seemed to annoy several of his Central Asian counterparts. n nWashington’s role in the region also garnered interest at the conference, especially US President Donald Trump’s recent musings about reopening Bagram Airbase in nearby Afghanistan. Kyrgyz and Uzbek experts debated what Trump’s comments on Bagram meant but agreed that the US military reopening a base in the region would give them more leverage to resist security overtures from China and Russia, and it would thus be in their countries’ strategic interests. This was a remarkable statement: Four years after the bungled US exit from Kabul, Central Asian policy experts argued that a US return to Afghanistan might make the country’s neighbors more secure, not against the Taliban, but against Russian and Chinese overreach. n nThe forum’s second day was devoted almost entirely to local issues and the technocratic aspects of peacebuilding. Government officials laid out plans to solve water resource and transport issues, two of the main triggers of the 2022 violence. The Kyrgyz and Tajik think tankers I spoke with were not uniformly thrilled by the plans, citing continuing disagreements over transport routes and the terms of diplomatic engagement. It was a reminder of how fragile the peace process still is. n nYoung leaders of nongovernmental organizations from the three Fergana Valley countries, focused on everything from civic engagement to environmental protection to curbing domestic violence, deftly described why youth and independent civil society will be crucial to forging peace and more dynamic societies. That they were given the platform to express such views is a refreshing sign in a region often associated with heavy-handed governance and sclerotic administrative structures. n nFollowing the forum, I traveled to Tashkent for meetings with government officials, financial sector analysts, and think tank leaders. Business appeared to be booming in the capital. Construction projects were everywhere—even in the unmistakably post-Soviet-looking city center—with plans for a new international exhibition center, new airport, and new neighborhoods all slated to be built in the next few years. The Ministry of Investment is working to prepare an initial public offering for a $1.7 billion vehicle of some state-owned enterprises, slated for early 2026 in either London or New York. The country’s first-ever “unicorn,” its national fintech champion Uzum, is not far behind. Last month, Uzbekistan agreed to purchase up to twenty-two passenger planes from Boeing in a deal worth up to eight billion dollars—another sign that it expects growth. n nUzbekistan is making big bets to modernize its fast-growing economy, which is projected to grow 6.8 percent this year. Strong economic growth will be important for providing better job prospects for its population of 37 million people, a majority of whom are under thirty years old. Several of the local experts I spoke with say the growth is being driven in part by the policies of President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, who initiated a push toward privatization and has empowered ministries to make investment deals with international firms. However, the state bureaucracy is vast and faces few incentives to change, so transparency and efficiency reforms may continue to face headwinds from entrenched interests. Bank privatization, for example, has slowed because bank executives are incentivized to maintain their stakes in state assets. n nUzbekistan has recently garnered renewed interest from the United States due to its abundance of critical minerals and rare-earth elements, which are crucial components for batteries, semiconductors, and advanced defense systems. The United States and Uzbekistan signed a critical minerals cooperation deal in April, and in September US mining investor Cove Capital agreed to open geological exploration projects. n nSpeed is critical. Think tankers and economic analysts who I spoke to in Tashkent repeatedly asked that US companies move their critical minerals projects faster, lest Chinese firms scoop up all the licenses for the best sites. Unlike the Chinese Communist Party, of course, the Trump administration cannot direct firms to make specific deals, but it does appear that Washington could be missing an opportunity by not acting faster in Central Asia. The Commerce Department and Development Finance Corporation are aware of these challenges and should be given the political latitude, resources, and staff to help make it possible for US companies to invest in the region by providing loan guarantees and equity financing, as well as by working to ensure a level business playing field for US firms. n nThe advances toward peace in the Fergana Valley and Uzbekistan’s economic growth are positive signs for security and prosperity in Central Asia. With a bit more effort and engagement, the United States could become a constructive partner in the region and reap mutual strategic and economic benefits. n nAndrew D’Anieri is associate director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. Find him on Twitter at @andrew_danieri. n nThe author’s trip to Fergana was supported by the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies under the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan. n nFurther reading n nTue, Oct 21, 2025 n nHow the US should partner with Central Asian states to avoid Russia-China dominance n nNew Atlanticist By Tatiana Gfoeller n nBy acting now, Washington can capitalize on the desire among some Central Asian states to reduce their dependence on Moscow and Beijing. n nFri, Aug 15, 2025 n nWhat Russia’s war on Ukraine means for Central Asia n nNew Atlanticist By Tatiana Gfoeller n nThe course of Russia’s war against Ukraine will have massive implications for Moscow and Beijing’s competition for influence in Central Asia. n nMon, Jun 9, 2025 n nTurkmenistan’s deepening water crisis could have far-reaching regional consequences n nNew Atlanticist By Rasul Satymov n nTurkmenistan’s water crisis could have significant economic and political ramifications well beyond its borders. n nImage: A photo of central Tashkent, Uzbekistan, taken in October, 2025. Andrew D’Anieri.