Evolution of US influence in Central Asia: New approaches and prospects Geopolitical landscape 

U.S. President Donald Trump is making attempts to radically alter Washington’s foreign policy course. However, judging by his political conflict with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy, he tends to adopt a tougher stance not only towards geopolitical rivals but also towards partners. Trump acts rather spontaneously, driven by emotions. The American president seeks to cut expenditures, tighten immigration policy, and bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine war. However, these efforts have led to mixed results, drawing criticism both on the global stage and from segments of the American establishment.

Trump aims, in his own words, to "restore America’s former greatness as a global power." One of his key objectives is to end the armed conflict in Ukraine. Additionally, he is focused on strengthening the U.S. position in the world, as evidenced by the introduction of tariffs against China—an obvious attempt to counter Beijing’s growing military-political and economic influence. At the same time, from a political standpoint, Trump’s trade war with the United States’ closest neighbors—Canada and Mexico—remains puzzling, as tariffs were also imposed on their goods. It is likely that similar measures could be extended to European countries in the near future.

It can be argued that Donald Trump’s decisions are disrupting the balance of U.S. political and economic relations with the world, including with its allies. As for Central Asia, there has also been a reduction in American assistance for social projects, which in turn signals a decrease in U.S. presence in the region. Washington's interest in Central Asia grew significantly after the events of September 11, 2001. During that period, American airbases were established in Kyrgyzstan (from 2001 to 2014) and Uzbekistan (from 2001 to 2005) to support the logistics of counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan.

The years 2001–2014 can be considered the "golden period" in U.S. relations with the Central Asian republics. During this time, the U.S. temporarily secured the loyalty of local political elites through lease payments for military bases and military-technical assistance. However, even in this period, Washington showed little interest in actively developing an investment policy in the region.

Following the withdrawal of U.S. military bases, American influence in Central Asia began to decline, becoming more symbolic than tangible. China seized this opportunity, viewing the absence of U.S. military installations as a security guarantee for its investments. Over the past decade, Beijing has made significant strides in financing infrastructure projects in the region, providing assistance to Central Asian armed forces, and integrating them into China's defense cooperation framework. Today, U.S. successes in Central Asia are incomparable to China's achievements—the Americans no longer play a meaningful military-political or economic role in the region. The only remaining tools of U.S. influence were NGOs, human rights organizations, independent media, and social programs. However, Trump’s directive to scale down USAID operations has effectively nullified these efforts in Central Asia.

In Kyrgyzstan, USAID played a key role in supporting the development of agriculture, small and medium-sized enterprises, women's entrepreneurship, as well as education and healthcare systems. The winding down of USAID operations could have negative consequences for certain segments of the population in Central Asian countries. However, the U.S. is now losing even this symbolic presence in the region. Under these circumstances, Washington will no longer have any soft power tools to counterbalance China and Russia in the future.

At the same time, Azerbaijan’s growing military-political and economic influence in Central Asia is worth noting. Over the past four years, official Baku has significantly strengthened its position in the region. The Turkic-speaking states of Central Asia are increasingly willing to cooperate with Azerbaijan. Today, it is safe to say that Azerbaijan has emerged as a new regional player in Central Asia.

If we consider the geopolitical situation in Europe and internal developments in the United States, it is likely that Central Asia, as before, will not be among President Trump’s top priorities. At present, the American leader is attempting to rein in the Ukrainian president with a firm hand, threatening to suspend military aid to Kyiv.

European allies and Ukrainians themselves perceive Trump’s emotional outbursts more as the actions of a businessman rather than those of the leader of a global power. On social media and news platforms, Trump’s refusal to continue supporting Kyiv, along with his attempts to ease sanctions on the Kremlin, are seen as efforts by the U.S. president to appease Russian President Vladimir Putin.

European political elites are, to put it mildly, perplexed. There is a growing recognition in Europe that the continent will eventually need to establish a new military-political alliance without U.S. participation but with Ukraine’s mandatory inclusion. For Europe, including the Baltic states, Ukraine has become a key security partner for the EU, provided that its military is supplied with the necessary logistical and technical support and that Kyiv’s budget deficit is covered through loans and grants.

Trump is sending a clear message to Europe that under his leadership, the U.S. has no intention of spending money or supplying weapons to ensure the security of France or Germany. As a result, Paris and Berlin appear to be considering the creation of an independent military bloc in the format of "Europe + Ukraine." It is even possible that, with European backing, the size of Ukraine’s armed forces could be expanded to two million personnel, effectively turning the country into a formidable shield for Europe.

Mederbek Korganbaev, Kyrgyzstan, exclusively for Caliber.Az