Central Asian nations are finally resolving border disputes after Soviet collapse

Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan have resolved long-standing border disputes, transforming their boundaries from sources of tension into symbols of reconciliation. 

This remarkable shift is a rare example of de-bordering – efforts to weaken the barrier function of borders – amid ongoing wars, rising tensions, and tighter border controls in the rest of the world.

The Soviet collapse

Central Asia comprises five post-Soviet states: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. These nations inherited their borders from the Soviet Union, transforming internal administrative boundaries into international borders after its collapse.

The transition to independence was fraught with challenges. Border delimitation and demarcation, not to mention border control, proved an extremely complex task. The borders often stretched over 1,000 kilometres, cutting through harsh terrain of vast deserts and towering mountains. 

Additionally, the region’s ethnic mosaics rarely aligned with the new state borders, leading to disputes over land, resources, and ethnic rights. These factors turned borders into flashpoints for conflict.

The push for unity

Recent global and regional crises have highlighted the urgent need for cooperation among Central Asian states. Against the backdrop of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, violent clashes along the Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan border, as well as domestic unrest in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, the risks of disunity and the fragility of national and regional stability have become apparent.

In response, Central Asian leaders have made regional cooperation a top priority. Rather than acting independently, the five Central Asian states have engaged in dialogue with international partners such as the European Union, the United States, China and others, within the framework of the 'C5+1', where 'C5' refers to the five Central Asian countries. 

The EU’s attempt to revitalise its partnership with Central Asia has been particularly notable, with a €12 billion investment package announced in 2025 to support projects in transport, water, energy, climate, and digitalisation.

Historic agreements

In 2025, efforts to promote regional cooperation yielded results: Central Asia made historic progress in resolving border disputes. First, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan signed an agreement resolving their long-standing border issues. Shortly after, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan finalised a trilateral border agreement, marking the completion of border demarcation in the region.

These agreements emphasise the region’s growing agency and unity. They are rare examples of peaceful solutions to border disputes reached without interference from external actors.

However, the success of the new border agreements hinges on addressing practical challenges. Central Asia is a region severely affected by water scarcity, and a significant proportion of the local population depends on agriculture and must have unimpeded access to water facilities and irrigation canals. Ensuring equitable access to these resources will be critical for maintaining peace and cooperation.

A beacon of hope

Whilst the world is facing geopolitical tensions and military hostilities, Central Asia’s journey from conflict to cooperation stands out as a success story worth noting. The region’s progress is a powerful reminder that even the most entrenched disputes can be resolved through dialogue and diplomacy.

Whether this newfound spirit of collaboration will endure remains to be seen. But for now, Central Asia offers a hopeful example of how reconciliation can triumph over division, serving as an inspiration for the rest of the world.

Reference to the journal article in Norwegian:

• Mikhailova, E. (2025). Sentral-Asias grenser etter 2022: fra grensekonflikter til prioritering av regionalt samarbeid. Nordisk Østforum, 39, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.23865/noros.v39.7363

Read also:

One graph shows a major threat to US democracy

Is taking control over our own data wishful thinking?