- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 29
- Reaction score
- 11
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
The struggle of the great powers for Central Asia did not begin yesterday and it will not end soon. When the USSR collapsed, the Central Asian republics that went on their on. Along the way they began to trade in their natural wealth. Every republic has something to sell. Kazakhstan has oil and gas, uranium, copper, nickel, bauxite. Turkmenistan - gas and oil. Kyrgyzstan - gold, uranium, rare earth metals. Uzbekistan - gas and oil (virtually untouched!), Coal, uranium. Tajikistan - aluminum, lead, zinc, rare earths and the largest hydropower potential.
In assessments of the geopolitical significance of Central Asia there are two transatlantic myths. The first is the US interest in the military-political stability in the region (due to the fabulous abundance of strategic energy resources that American businesses need). The second is the disinterested desire of the United States to defeat international terrorism, for the sake of which American soldiers still die in Afghanistan.
The American policy in Uzbekistan is following: the position of the United States in this country should not be shaken, and for this it needs to be well-established. For this, Washington is even ready to “feed” Tashkent with finances.
The main direct investor of Uzbekistan in the first quarter of 2018 became the United States. From the published statistics, it follows that 28% of the total volume of direct investments in the amount of $ 4.3 billion that came into the republic in the first three months of last year, are in the United States.
In May 2018, President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev visited the United States on a three-day official visit - he met with President Donald Trump. At the meeting, Mirziyoyev said that Uzbekistan seeks membership in the WTO, and Trump promised him assistance in this.
For the sake of investment, official Tashkent is ready to meet even such difficult for official Tashkent demands as the release of political prisoners, guarantees of freedom of movement, a ban on torture, protection of religious freedom and the rights of the LGBT community. Such requirements, in particular, were imposed on Uzbekistan by the head of Amnesty International, American Margaret Huang, who, in general, positively assessed Mirziyoyev’s first steps in this direction.
According to Russian analysts, Central Asia has historically been united with the help of an external force - the Mongols, the Russian Empire, the USSR; the rest of the time she was in a state of political fragmentation. Now the United States is trying to assume the role of a “unifier”. The goal of such a union is to oppose Russia, but this is necessary for the American owners of money, and not for the people of Central Asia. For this, the State Department at the time when it was headed by John Kerry created the regional format "C5 + 1", which is a regular
meeting of the countries of the region with American diplomats with a view to creating regional structures without participation of Russia and China.
Who wins?
The confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation involves provoking instability in the former Soviet republics throughout the geopolitical periphery of the Russian Federation. And special attention in the Central Asian direction is paid to Uzbekistan.
As for the thesis about the “new subjectivity” of the countries of Central Asia, it should be emphasized once again that neither the EAEU, nor the CSTO or the SCO do not deprive them of this subjectivity. The special position of the EAEU member countries, be it Belarus or Kyrgyzstan (as when signing the new EAEU customs code in December 2016), is always taken into account by Moscow. But the "friendship" of the United States is costly to those countries that impose this "friendship". A good example confirming this constant is Ukraine.
The leaders of the Central Asian states do not want to be simply an anti-Russian ram in the hands of the United States, knowing full well that America is far, and Russia is within reach. In fact, the political elite of these countries has a small choice - either to lead a pro-American policy, or to turn towards Russia, or to go towards Islamization. What is unacceptable categorically.
The United States never enters one country or another to exit without gaining a benefit, as evidenced by their actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and a number of countries of the former Soviet Union.
In assessments of the geopolitical significance of Central Asia there are two transatlantic myths. The first is the US interest in the military-political stability in the region (due to the fabulous abundance of strategic energy resources that American businesses need). The second is the disinterested desire of the United States to defeat international terrorism, for the sake of which American soldiers still die in Afghanistan.
The American policy in Uzbekistan is following: the position of the United States in this country should not be shaken, and for this it needs to be well-established. For this, Washington is even ready to “feed” Tashkent with finances.
The main direct investor of Uzbekistan in the first quarter of 2018 became the United States. From the published statistics, it follows that 28% of the total volume of direct investments in the amount of $ 4.3 billion that came into the republic in the first three months of last year, are in the United States.
In May 2018, President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev visited the United States on a three-day official visit - he met with President Donald Trump. At the meeting, Mirziyoyev said that Uzbekistan seeks membership in the WTO, and Trump promised him assistance in this.
For the sake of investment, official Tashkent is ready to meet even such difficult for official Tashkent demands as the release of political prisoners, guarantees of freedom of movement, a ban on torture, protection of religious freedom and the rights of the LGBT community. Such requirements, in particular, were imposed on Uzbekistan by the head of Amnesty International, American Margaret Huang, who, in general, positively assessed Mirziyoyev’s first steps in this direction.
According to Russian analysts, Central Asia has historically been united with the help of an external force - the Mongols, the Russian Empire, the USSR; the rest of the time she was in a state of political fragmentation. Now the United States is trying to assume the role of a “unifier”. The goal of such a union is to oppose Russia, but this is necessary for the American owners of money, and not for the people of Central Asia. For this, the State Department at the time when it was headed by John Kerry created the regional format "C5 + 1", which is a regular
meeting of the countries of the region with American diplomats with a view to creating regional structures without participation of Russia and China.
Who wins?
The confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation involves provoking instability in the former Soviet republics throughout the geopolitical periphery of the Russian Federation. And special attention in the Central Asian direction is paid to Uzbekistan.
As for the thesis about the “new subjectivity” of the countries of Central Asia, it should be emphasized once again that neither the EAEU, nor the CSTO or the SCO do not deprive them of this subjectivity. The special position of the EAEU member countries, be it Belarus or Kyrgyzstan (as when signing the new EAEU customs code in December 2016), is always taken into account by Moscow. But the "friendship" of the United States is costly to those countries that impose this "friendship". A good example confirming this constant is Ukraine.
The leaders of the Central Asian states do not want to be simply an anti-Russian ram in the hands of the United States, knowing full well that America is far, and Russia is within reach. In fact, the political elite of these countries has a small choice - either to lead a pro-American policy, or to turn towards Russia, or to go towards Islamization. What is unacceptable categorically.
The United States never enters one country or another to exit without gaining a benefit, as evidenced by their actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and a number of countries of the former Soviet Union.
