As the Silk Road Region enters a new era of strategic importance, it is time for the countries of Central Asia and the South Caucasus to ask a critical question: How can we ensure that the Middle Corridor becomes more than just a promising idea?
Carlos Roa.
The answer may lie in building something new; an institution designed not to replace existing efforts, but to tie them together. A Trans-Caspian Development Bank (TCDB), focused on the region’s unique infrastructure, trade, and logistics needs, could be the key to turning this vision into reality.
Encouragingly, this idea is already gaining traction. At this year’s Astana International Forum, during a panel titled Future Dynamics: Middle Powers in a Multipolar World, moderator Darren Spinck raised the possibility of establishing such a bank. The concept was met with support from panelists who emphasized its potential to bolster Kazakhstan’s development as a transportation hub – and, more broadly, to help realize the Middle Corridor’s strategic promise.
Over the last two years, the Middle Corridor, formally known as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, has captured the attention of strategists across Europe and Asia. Stretching from China through Central Asia and across the Caspian Sea to the South Caucasus and Türkiye, the corridor offers a politically neutral alternative to northern and southern routes dominated by Russia or Iran.
Freight volumes have surged. International investment has increased. And governments across the region, from Tashkent to Tbilisi, have launched projects aimed at upgrading ports, railways, and digital systems.
But success will depend on more than ad hoc improvements. What’s needed now is a dedicated mechanism to pool resources, align priorities, and provide consistent financing over the long term. That’s where the idea of a Trans-Caspian Development Bank (TCDB) comes in.
Charles Yockey.
The TCDB would be a regional institution designed specifically to support infrastructure, logistics, and connectivity within the Middle Corridor. Its purpose would not be to replicate the work of existing development banks or donors, but to complement them by focusing squarely on the cross-border needs of the corridor itself. It would offer financing for high-impact projects—modernized rail segments, intermodal ports, digital customs platforms, renewable energy upgrades—while also supporting the technical and institutional reforms needed to make the corridor truly competitive.
Importantly, the TCDB would be regionally led. Founding members could include the five Central Asian republics, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Türkiye—countries that collectively span and anchor the corridor. External partners, such as the EU, Japan, Gulf sovereign wealth funds, and the United States, could also be invited to contribute financially as non-governing stakeholders. This would preserve regional ownership while attracting the capital and expertise needed to succeed.
Kazakhstan, in particular, is well-positioned to champion this idea. As the largest economy in the region, and one of its most proactive in terms of logistics and infrastructure development, Astana has both the credibility and the capability to lead such an effort.
The government has already made bold moves to improve rail capacity, expand port throughput, and digitize customs operations. The Port of Aktau, the Almaty-Shu rail junction, and the Digital Trade Corridor platform are just a few examples of Kazakhstan’s commitment to regional connectivity.
But as any planner knows, national efforts alone are not enough. The Middle Corridor crosses multiple borders, jurisdictions, and institutional systems. Without coordination, even the best-laid plans risk inefficiency or underuse. A bank like the TCDB would help solve that problem by providing a common platform for investment, governance, and technical assistance.
Ibrahim Mammadov.
Moreover, it would signal that the region is ready to move from being a transit zone between other powers to becoming a cohesive, autonomous hub of Eurasian commerce. It would institutionalize cooperation in a way that matches the growing agency of regional states – a trend that Kazakhstan has done much to advance.
Of course, launching a development bank is no small task. It would require feasibility studies, technical consultations, and careful diplomatic groundwork. But now that the conversation has been initiated at the Astana International Forum, the opportunity exists to carry that momentum forward – to convene interested parties, refine the concept, and begin laying the institutional foundations.
The public discussion of the TCDB at the forum marks an important first step. What’s needed now is sustained political will and technical engagement to turn that initial spark into a long-term strategic asset for the region.
There is a precedent for this kind of leadership. Kazakhstan has helped lead initiatives on nuclear non-proliferation, energy security, and multilateral diplomacy. Creating the conditions for a regional development bank would be a continuation of that legacy. And while a Trans-Caspian Development Bank would not solve every problem, it would provide a much-needed framework for solving them together.
And what better place to explore this idea than in Astana, at a forum built to imagine the future of our shared region?
The authors are Carlos Roa, the director of the Keystone Initiative at the Danube Institute (Hungary) and an Associate Washington Fellow at the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy, North American international affairs think tank and the former executive editor of The National Interest; Charles Yockey, a legal policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute, a Budapest Fellow of the Hungary Foundation, and a Visiting Researcher at the Mathias Corvinus Collegium Center for International Law (Hungary); and Ibrahim Mammadov, a researcher at the Danube Institute.
The views expressed in this essay are their own.
