ASTANA — The growing strategic significance of Central Asia in the global critical minerals supply chain was at the center of discussions at the recent United States–Central Asia Forum, hosted by the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center on June 4 in Washington, D.C. With geopolitical tensions and shifting global alliances redrawing the contours of international trade, speakers underscored how the region could emerge as a vital partner for the U.S. in securing access to critical raw materials.
US–Central Asia Forum on June 4 in Washington, D.C focused on growing significance of Central Asia in the global critical minerals supply chain. Photo credit: atlanticcouncil.org
Opening the forum, Andrew D’Anieri, associate director of the Eurasia Center at Atlantic Council, noted that this is “an opportune time to do more in the region,” as both U.S. foreign policy and Central Asian self-perceptions evolve. Reflecting on his recent visit to the Astana International Forum held at the end of May, D’Anieri observed that governments, businesses, and organizations across Central Asia and beyond are rethinking their strategic priorities in a rapidly changing global environment.
“The U.S. is grappling with the most dramatic shifts in our foreign policy in a generation. This has created uncertainty globally, but in Central Asia, a sharpened U.S. focus on business and supply chain security could unlock as-yet untapped opportunities,” he said.
Central Asia’s moment – unlocking strategic potential
D’Anieri cited World Bank projections showing economic growth between 5–7% in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan by 2025, with Turkmenistan trailing slightly at 2.3%. He also emphasized that Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, in particular, are demonstrating unprecedented independence and confidence on the international stage.
U.S. Senator Steve Daines (R-Montana), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, shared insights from his travels across all five Central Asian republics over the past year. He emphasized the enthusiasm among regional leaders for closer ties with the U.S. and identified several sectors ripe for collaboration, including manufacturing, agriculture, energy, and especially critical minerals.
However, he also pointed to legislative and policy roadblocks such as the lingering Jackson-Vanik amendment, which continues to affect U.S. trade relations with Kazakhstan. “There’s untapped potential here,” said Daines, “but we must remove outdated barriers to unleash it.”
Kazakhstan’s Ambassador to the U.S. Yerzhan Ashikbayev offered a frank assessment of the opportunities and challenges facing bilateral cooperation.
Ashikbayev stressed Kazakhstan’s goal is “to play a vital role in strengthening global supply chain resilience.” Photo credit: atlanticcouncil.org
He underscored Kazakhstan’s credentials as a major mining power, noting that the country currently produces 20 of the 50 critical minerals identified by the U.S., including eight of the 12 that the U.S. is entirely import-dependent on. In uranium alone, Kazakhstan dominates global production with a staggering 40% market share.
“Unlike many resource-rich nations, Kazakhstan offers not only abundant reserves but also developed midstream processing capabilities, strong infrastructure, low operating costs, a skilled workforce, and a stable political environment,” said Ashikbayev. He called for investments that would help build an integrated ecosystem around critical minerals, including energy infrastructure and midstream processing facilities.
Kazakhstan’s goal, he stressed, is “to become a key member of the international midstream group of countries and play a vital role in strengthening global supply chain resilience.” A full-fledged strategic partnership with the U.S., he noted, would be critical in achieving this vision.
Political barriers vs. economic opportunity
But ambassador Ashikbayev didn’t shy away from voicing Kazakhstan’s frustrations with U.S. legislation. He pointed to barriers such as the lack of a free trade agreement, which disqualifies Kazakhstan from U.S. electric vehicle (EV) tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act. He also criticized the “foreign entities of concern” (FEOC) provision, which, in effect, penalizes countries like Kazakhstan for their geographic proximity to China and Russia.
“Thirdly, we still do not have permanent normal trade relations. It’s outrageous, 30 years after the Soviet Union’s dissolution and over a decade since Kazakhstan joined the WTO. This sanctions-like classification severely discourages U.S. businesses from investing. It’s incompatible with a forward-looking partnership,” said Ashikbayev. To top it off, he noted, Kazakh exports face a 27% tariff, a stark reminder of the systemic barriers in place.
“We’re talking about a zero-sum game in the critical minerals sector,” he concluded. “The legislative environment must evolve if the U.S. wants to compete.”
Uzbekistan’s Deputy Chief of Mission to the U.S. Alisher Akhmedov echoed many of these concerns while expressing optimism about potential partnerships. Referring to a high-level delegation from Tashkent that visited Washington earlier this year, he identified critical minerals as a central pillar of the Uzbek-U.S. partnership, alongside broader economic modernization.
“We are open to joint implementation. Uzbekistan can bring its significant untapped reserves, and the U.S. can offer its state-of-the-art technology and market access. This partnership isn’t just about development, it’s about building trust,” Akhmedov said.
Pyatt said, in light of the Trump administration’s push to expand America’s civilian nuclear sector, Kazakhstan can help eliminate the US dependence on Russia. Photo credit: atlanticcouncil.org
Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Center and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources, underlined the urgency of diversifying global critical minerals supply chains.
“Central Asia encapsulates the geopolitical challenges we face – China looms large, Russia has deep historical ties, and the region is entirely landlocked,” he said.
He cited ExxonMobil and Chevron’s long-standing presence in Kazakhstan as proof that U.S. companies can operate there. But the energy transition will require even deeper engagement. Pyatt referenced the IEA’s latest report on critical minerals, which warns of worsening shortages, especially in copper and lithium, by the end of the decade.
“Kazakhstan’s copper resources are enormous, and there’s a strong business case for prioritizing this partnership,” said Pyatt. He also flagged uranium supply as a strategic issue, particularly in light of the Trump administration’s push to expand America’s civilian nuclear sector.
“Kazakhstan can help eliminate our dependence on Russia in this space,” he added.
Infrastructure, logistics, and the full value chain
Reed Blakemore, director of Research and Programs at the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Center, explored the infrastructure realities of turning potential into performance.
“Mining and processing are some of the most energy-intensive industrial activities. Infrastructure, electricity, water access, railways, is not a side issue. It’s core to the economics,” he said.
He stressed that U.S. supply chain resilience efforts will fall flat if they focus solely on upstream extraction. Instead, a full-spectrum approach, including midstream development and logistical enhancements, is essential.
Blakemore said to boost U.S. supply chain resilience efforts, the sides should focus on a full-spectrum approach, including midstream development and logistical enhancements.
“We need strategies that improve electricity transmission and water access to make these projects viable and competitive,” said Blakemore.
Logistics, particularly in a landlocked region, pose another major challenge. Blakemore pointed to the Middle Corridor, a transport route that connects Central Asia to Europe via the Caspian Sea, as a promising but underutilized asset. According to him, its early successes must be scaled because the cost of moving material to markets is a make-or-break factor for these projects.
Blakemore also flagged a crucial blind spot: inadequate mapping of resource deposits. He said that it is imperative to have precise data on the size, quality, and accessibility of these mineral deposits, if the U.S. is to deploy capital effectively.
He noted that the U.S. currently lacks a domestic mining giant equivalent to Chevron or Exxon. “We should leverage our strengths in energy and infrastructure to create compelling partnership packages. That’s how we become a more attractive partner—not just for extraction but for the full value chain,” he said.
Ambassador Ashikbayev later returned to highlight Kazakhstan’s investments in logistics and transit infrastructure. Over the past 20 years, Kazakhstan has invested nearly $35 billion in developing its transportation network. Plans are underway to build an additional 5,000 kilometers of rail by 2030.
He said freight traffic on the Middle Corridor grew by 62% last year, reaching 4.5 million tons.
“Our target is to double that volume to 10 million tons by 2027. We’re also expanding our Caspian Sea fleet from 17 to 34 vessels,” he added.
He cited World Bank and EBRD studies that identify ten key actions to reduce bottlenecks, ranging from railway development to port upgrades, indicating that a roadmap already exists.
“These investments aren’t just for Kazakhstan: they’re a regional public good. Central Asia is landlocked. As I like to say, we’re all in the same submarine. Unlocking our transit potential is key to unlocking our critical mineral potential,” he concluded.
