ASTANA – Astana will host the inaugural Astana Think Tank Forum 2024 on Oct. 16-17. Organized by the Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies (KazISS) as part of the Astana International Forum (AIF), the forum will explore the role of middle powers. The Astana Times spoke with Sanat Kushkumbayev, a chief research fellow at the KazISS, about the forum’s goals and objectives, who the middle powers are, and the future of Central Asian regional cooperation.
Sanat Kushkumbayev. Photo credit: KazISS
Q: The Astana Think Tank Forum 2024 is dedicated to discussing the place and role of middle powers in a changing global order. Could you please tell us more about the upcoming event?
The forum’s theme focuses on the strategic and diplomatic role that middle powers play in today’s global landscape, particularly in strengthening security, ensuring stability, and promoting sustainable development. Essentially, this is the first time Kazakhstan is initiating a discussion on the fundamental principles of the global international system from the perspective of middle powers.
Leaders of prominent Kazakh and international think tanks, researchers, experts, and diplomats have been invited to participate in the event.
I should also mention that as part of the forum, we will host the second Central Asian Forum on Security and Cooperation. At this event, together with our colleagues from Central Asia, we plan to focus on how our countries can leverage their unique positions to shape regional dynamics and increase their contribution to global governance.
Q: In your opinion, what defines a country as a middle power? In a world where political and economic power is concentrated in the hands of a few, is there truly space for middle powers to significantly influence the global agenda?
This is not a new concept, nor an invention of the 21st century. It existed as far back as the 19th century. The concept arose in response to the fact that there were major powers capable of setting the agenda and influencing neighboring countries, and there were small countries that often became objects of expansion rather than subjects of international relations. In this context, countries emerged that had the ability to influence the actions of major powers, altering their behavior, yet without being able to impose their own agenda on others. This is where the concept of a ‘middle power’ came into being.
The middle power concept reflects the increasingly mosaic nature of today’s world. The weight of different countries varies, and it is not only about economics. It is primarily about a country’s behavior and diplomatic capabilities and only then about its economic and military potential and other resources. Multilateralism is one of the key characteristics of middle powers’ behavior. Skillful use of multilateral tools, combined with bilateral approaches and other factors, enhances a country’s agency and diplomatic potential. As is well known, Kazakhstan has developed a strong diplomatic practice and role. Our country can influence regional and, in certain aspects, global politics.
It is also important to note that middle powers are not a uniform group. There is variation among them.
Q: Many experts define Kazakhstan as a middle power. Given that Kazakhstan is situated between two major players—Russia and China—can the country truly claim the role of a middle power in a geopolitical sense?
What is important is not how certain experts define us but how we perceive ourselves and whether we can actually influence the agenda. Both China and Russia recognize the significance of our country. Both nations are keenly aware and sensitive to what happens in Kazakhstan and how Astana conducts its foreign policy. There is a mutual consideration of interests. We take into account the interests of our neighbors, and at the same time, our neighbors also strive to understand and consider what is happening in Kazakhstan. In this regard, Kazakhstan’s agency has grown compared to 30 years ago, when the nation first gained independence.
Kazakhstan has strengthened its international position. Why? Ultimately, it is due to globalization, and the fact that Kazakhstan has become an important part of the global economy and politics. As an actor in international relations, we are recognized and valued by various stakeholders—both in the East and the West. Cumulatively, this is what truly matters.
Q: How is the concept of middle powers relevant to Kazakhstan’s multi-vector foreign policy in an increasingly polarized world?
It aligns well with Kazakhstan’s diplomatic practice because one complements the other. It is already evident to everyone that, in terms of advancing our interests, the multi-vector approach has stood the test of time and proven its effectiveness.
I don’t believe middle powers need to be static or adhere to rigid positions. Quite the opposite. For better protection of their interests, middle and smaller countries can and should be more flexible—not choosing one side but cooperating with both, as Kazakhstan consistently does. We aim to maintain constructive and productive relationships with countries that may even be at odds with each other. On one side, we have neighboring Russia and China, and on the other, we have the United States and the European Union. We maintain mutually beneficial relationships with all of these countries.
For middle powers, the key approach is to pursue their own pragmatic economic and political interests, which involve minimizing conflicts with various players in the international system while behaving responsibly on the global stage. Multi-vector diplomacy supports and even strengthens the position of middle powers.
Q: How can Central Asian countries use their status as middle powers to strengthen regional integration and promote sustainable development? What examples of successful cooperation already exist, and how can they be expanded?
In regional integration, productive goal-setting, consistency, and responsibility are key. Kazakhstan has always been consistent in supporting various forms of regional cooperation. For example, President Tokayev, in an article published ahead of the recent consultative meeting of Central Asian heads of state, emphasized that Kazakhstan is ready to integrate as much as our neighbors are prepared to do. This demonstrates, first and foremost, a responsible approach—we take into account the interests and concerns of our neighbors while treating them as equal and fair partners. This is crucial because if the balance of interests is disrupted in regional integration—if a larger country pushes an agenda without considering others’ interests—it will immediately derail the regional process.
When it comes to regional integration, middle powers bear even greater responsibility, as they need to consider not only their own interests but also those of their partners. The principle of ‘one country, one vote’ is a principle we can observe in one of the most advanced regional unions in the world—the European Union. In the EU, two locomotives—Germany and France—have driven European integration through their political will and economic strength. Similarly, we can say that in Central Asia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, due to their potential, can and should become the driving forces of regional integration. These two countries are comparable in their parameters, and without them, regional cooperation is impossible.
Such a process requires greater flexibility and respect for countries with smaller potential. This is only possible when countries feel a sense of responsibility. Responsible behavior, in turn, enhances a country’s agency on the international stage.
Q: Integration in Central Asia is seen as key to regional stability, but economic and political differences between the countries remain strong. Do you believe full integration is realistic, or is it still more of a declarative goal?
The answer lies in how integration happens in practice. For instance, how quickly trains and cars cross borders, how efficient the customs system is, and what the actual business climate looks like. How quickly can investors resolve their issues? And overall, how much do ordinary people feel the changes? Only then can we speak about the success of integration.
The key foundational aspect is the political will of the Central Asian elites, which has already been established. The countries are willing to resolve all issues through dialogue. This is a significant achievement. For example, 94% of the border between Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic has now been delimited, which is a major step forward, and they are ready to continue this process. There is no other way, and they understand that everything can only be resolved through compromise. Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic have also delimited their borders, resolved issues with reservoirs, and even addressed enclave-related matters.
Most of the Aral Sea dried up during the post-independence period; it practically no longer exists as a sea. Of all the cooperation institutions in Central Asia, the only one that has never ceased its activities is the International Fund for Saving the Aral Sea, which celebrated its 30th anniversary last year.
At each consultative meeting, all the countries in the region raise pressing issues that exist between them and propose various paths and solutions. It is important that this dialogue continues to deepen. However, at this stage, we are still reacting to existing challenges, but we need to be more proactive—that is the next phase of development.
