GRADUATE SCHOOL OF DEVELOPMENT

Institute of Public Policy and Administration

Policy Brief

International transport in Central Asia:

Current problems and ways forward
Elena Kulipanova, July 2012

The four Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have great hopes for the
development of their transport networks. Each wants to
become a transit corridor for growing trade flows between
Europe and China, South and South-East Asia. Additionally, they are concerned about addressing the high costs of
international transport. By virtue of their regional history
and landlocked geography, each Central Asian country has
to rely on border-crossings and transit through neighbouring states. Strained bilateral relations within Central Asia,
in particular with Uzbekistan, make transport in the region
even more costly and less reliable. However, the realization
of these two goals serving as transit corridors and reducing transport costs is not assured. This policy brief offers
an overview of key barriers and recommendations on how
Central Asian countries can tackle them.
The first issue is that of prioritization. While the development
of international transit potential might be a good long-term
goal, regional transit issues are currently the most urgent
ones to address. The development of transcontinental transit
potential looks unpromising in the short- to mid-term. Only
1 to 2 % of goods between Europe and South-East Asia are
transported overland through Central Asia and this situation
is unlikely to change soon. In contrast, international rail and
road routes, especially those in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan,
are heavily used for regional transit between the southern
Central Asian countries and their main trading partners Russia, Europe and China. This underscores the deep mutual
(inter)dependence of Central Asian countries and the vulnerability of the most disadvantaged states. The implications of
this (inter)dependence within a context of strained bilateral
relations are most apparent in the transport conflict between
Tajikistan and Uzbekistan that has been going on since 2009
and has had serious consequences for the Tajik economy. Regional transit issues have been on Central Asian official agendas, yet governments and international organizations have
achieved only modest results in this area.
Secondly, there is a need to focus on non-physical barriers
to efficient and cost-effective transit. Regional determinants

such as geography and interdependence are not necessarily

disadvantages; although there is a need to improve quality
and modernize systems, Central Asian countries inherited
fairly well-developed and integrated pre-Soviet and Soviet
rail and road networks. All four countries have worked to
construct and rehabilitate their transport infrastructure and
technical facilities on the international transport corridors.
However, improving infrastructure alone does not guarantee success. The major impediments to both international
and regional transport are actually non-physical barriers,
which have not received adequate attention: restrictive national regulations, high official charges, excessive controls
en route and at border-crossing points and widespread corruption. Uzbekistan, in particular, has the most restrictive
transport policies towards its Central Asian neighbours. The
Central Asian countries will not reduce their transport costs
and attract transcontinental flows unless policy-related and
political issues are addressed.

Thirdly, regional cooperation is essential to reduce these

physical and non-physical barriers. The landlocked position
and interconnectivity of transport networks suggest that
going it alone is, in most cases, neither efficient nor economically viable. Yet it is exactly what all the Central Asian
countries are trying to do. Within the current political environment they have preferred to establish alternative transport routes and integrated national transport networks to bypass their neighbours to the greatest extent possible. While
diversification of transport routes might be a natural desire
for every independent state, these policies have caused a decline in interconnectedness. Realistically, however, complete
self-reliance is not achievable. This is particularly true for
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan which are doomed
to cooperate as a result of their geography. Non-physical and
political barriers are common across the four countries, but
they differ in magnitude. Varying but high fees, regulations
and visa requirements and unresolved political tensions will
continue to make Central Asia the least desirable choice for
international forwarders. The realization of the two goals
reducing transport costs and attracting transit is only possible if the states cooperate with each other.

Recommendations
Transport issues need to be addressed at the three levels of
goals, policies and the general political environment. Results
at each of level will require different timeframes. Countries
should view and pursue their activities as a whole, whether
they are meant for short-, mid- or long-term implementation. Taking small steps, while keeping larger goals in view,
is the most beneficial and viable way for all Central Asian
countries to succeed.
Recommendations to Central Asian governments:
1. Utilize and/or enhance independent skills and capacities to conduct research and analysis on transportation
trends, conditions and problems. Sharing the results of
cost-benefit analyses of various options can be a confidence-building measure in the region and help develop a
regional perspective on realistic assessments of the most
urgent priorities. Suggestions for solutions are often
available at the international level, so one might learn
and apply lessons and best practices at lower costs.

2. Reconsider primary goals in the transport sector based

on assessments of regional realities and capacity. Central
Asian countries should focus first on improving conditions for regional transit. Specifically:
Emphasize the interconnectedness of Central Asian
road and railway routes. Currently, the focus is on
Central Asian routes which are part of the Euro-Asian
transport corridors. Creating a good working map of
Central Asias transport network with surrounding
landscapes would increase awareness of the interdependence and the extent of regional connectivity;
Establish more favorable policies towards each other.
As major transit countries, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have a special responsibility in this respect. Due
to the asymmetry of infrastructural interdependence
in Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have to
rely on their larger neighbours much more than vice
versa. Uzbekistan, in particular, should adopt more
favorable regulations for and assure predictability of
international freight transport to Tajikistan.

3. Kazakhstan should participate in infrastructure and

capacity-building projects in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. While pursuing internal reforms, such as customs reform, Kazakhstan could be involved in organizing training and seminars regionally, as in the case of
training-of-trainers under the European Unions Border Management Programme in Central Asia (BOMCA).
This would facilitate improvements across Central Asia
on the basis of regional expertise, and enhance the
states capacities to cooperate.

4. Implement trade facilitation at border-crossing points

as advocated by various international organizations.
The use of available policy solutions proposed at international conventions and in recommendations, guides
and handbooks helps avoid additional costs and ensures
the use of best practices. Reflect on the results of regular
monitoring activities along major routes, which are conducted by the Central Asian business associations and by
the World Bank. Implement large-scale systemic reforms
to improve governance and the rule of law.
5. Harmonize transit policies and regulations to make regional and international transport easier and more reliable. Research how policies developed over time and
develop a comprehensive list of relevant national legislation. Exchange and compare results with other Central
Asian countries and develop policy measures to achieve
convergence.

6. Coordinate rehabilitation and construction of cross-border infrastructure. The rehabilitation of the Sarytash
KaramykZhergetal road in Kyrgyzstan, and the road
from Zhergetal to Dushanbe in Tajikistan, financed by an
ADB loan, are encouraging steps in this direction.
7. Improve interstate relations in Central Asia, in particular within the triangle of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan. Over the short-term, promote cooperation
among willing states. Disadvantaged countries such as
Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan should cooperate more with
each other to alleviate the negative effects of their mutual situation.
Recommendations to international organizations:
8. Play a more pro-active role in trade facilitation and
transport sector reform in Central Asia, as facilitators
and custodians of the norms and rules of international
behavior. Central Asian governments, particularly those
of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, have been sensitive to the
results of international surveys. A naming and shaming
strategy might be an effective tool to reinforce compliance.

9. Continue to emphasize the importance of cooperation in

both infrastructural and policy-related issues, along the
lines of the work done by Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Program (CAREC). Frame transport and
trade facilitation activities in terms of regional cooperation, and redesign policies to prioritize regional projects.

See Working Paper NO.2, 2012 for the full analyses

University of Central Asia

138 Toktogul Street, Bishkek 720001, Kyrgyz Republic
Tel.: +996 (312) 910 822, E-mail: ippa@ucentralasia.org
http://www.ucentralasia.org/ippa.asp