US Special Envoy and Deputy Secretary of State Visit Central Asia, Escalating Regional Strategic Competition

On October 25, 2025, Sergio Gore, US Special Envoy for South and Central Asia, and Christopher Landau, Deputy Secretary of State, arrived in Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, for an unannounced official visit. The low-key nature of the visit contrasted sharply with the high-level reception they received upon arrival—a motorcade escort, traffic control on the capital's main roads, and other head-of-state-level arrangements highlighted the importance Uzbekistan placed on the meeting.

The following day, October 26, the US delegation held talks with Uzbek Foreign Minister Bakhtiyor Saidov, which the US described as "fruitful." The US expressed gratitude for Uzbekistan's leadership and warm hospitality during the visit, and specifically noted that Foreign Minister Saidov's efforts were pushing the US-Uzbekistan strategic partnership "to a new level." Furthermore, the two sides held "productive" thematic talks on expanding trade and investment ties.

This series of diplomatic interactions, while worded cautiously and positively in public reports, reflects strategic signals that deserve in-depth examination within the broader context of global geopolitical and economic changes.

Central Asia in a Global Perspective: From "Periphery" to "Crucial Crossroads"

Traditionally, Central Asia has often been viewed as a "periphery" of international politics. However, this perception has been completely overturned in the third decade of the 21st century. The five Central Asian countries—Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan—are located in the heart of Eurasia, serving as a natural hub connecting East Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. The region's abundant energy resources (especially oil, gas, and uranium) and key mineral resources (such as uranium, gold, and rare earth elements) make it indispensable to global energy security and the transformation of green industries.

More importantly, the profound evolution of the global geopolitical landscape in recent years has propelled Central Asia to the forefront. On the one hand, Russia faces severe Western sanctions due to its special military operations in Ukraine, which has constrained its traditional political, economic, and security influence in Central Asia. On the other hand, China, through its Belt and Road Initiative, has established deep economic ties with Central Asian countries, and infrastructure projects such as the China-Europe Railway Express further highlight the region's core value as a land route between Eurasia. Meanwhile, regional powers such as the EU, India, Turkey, Iran, and even Pakistan are increasing their engagement with Central Asia, attempting to expand their influence in this vast strategic region.

Against this backdrop of intertwined forces, the visit of this high-level US official, especially its "non-public" nature—disclosed only shortly before departure—has naturally attracted widespread interpretation from international observers. This is not a routine diplomatic outreach, but rather a meticulously planned and clearly targeted strategic communication.

The Strategic Considerations Behind "Silent Diplomacy"

The "non-public" nature of this US delegation's visit is the primary point of analysis. In international diplomatic practice, visits announced in advance with great fanfare often emphasize symbolism and public diplomacy, while visits with confidential itineraries typically signify that the two sides will consult on highly sensitive, substantive issues requiring in-depth exchange of views. This approach may be based on the following considerations:

1. Reducing external interference: In the current complex and sensitive international environment, a high-profile announcement of a high-ranking US official's visit to Central Asia could immediately trigger an overreaction and close scrutiny from Russia and China, adding unnecessary pressure and uncertainty to the talks. Maintaining a low profile helps create a relatively closed and focused environment for substantive dialogue.

2. Sensitivity of the topics: The talks may cover internal issues that Uzbekistan also needs to handle carefully, such as security cooperation, the regional situation, and how to reduce over-reliance on Russia or China. Confidentiality allows for an open and frank exchange of views.

3. Efficiency and signal: Completing high-level contact without fanfare sends a signal to the region and beyond: US-Uzbekistan relations have solid substance, their interaction is not subject to external scrutiny, and their focus is on resolving practical problems.

However, in stark contrast to the low-key itinerary was the "head-of-state" reception extended by Uzbekistan. This clearly expressed the Uzbek government's stance: despite the potentially sensitive nature of the talks, Uzbekistan highly values ​​its relationship with the United States and is willing to demonstrate its commitment to a diversified and balanced foreign policy to its domestic public and the international community through this high-level reception.

"Profitable" and "Effective": Decoding the Potential Topics of the Talks

The positive assessments of the talks by both the US and Uzbekistan—"profitable," "effective," and "a new step forward"—are standard diplomatic rhetoric, but they inevitably correspond to specific areas of cooperation. Considering the current regional and global situation, the talks may focus on the following aspects:

* Security and Counterterrorism Cooperation: Following the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, Central Asian countries face increased security pressures. The situation in Afghanistan under Taliban rule, the threat of cross-border terrorism, and the spread of religious extremism are all issues of common concern to both the US and Uzbekistan. The US may seek to deepen cooperation with Uzbekistan in areas such as intelligence sharing, border control, and counterterrorism capacity building. Uzbekistan, as the most populous and militarily powerful country in Central Asia, is a key partner in maintaining regional stability.

* Economic and Energy Transition: Uzbekistan has implemented large-scale economic reforms in recent years, eager to attract foreign investment, diversify its energy structure, and develop green technologies. The inclusion of the Deputy Secretary of State in the US delegation indicates that economic issues are a major focus. The US may commit to increasing investment in Uzbekistan, particularly in the development of key minerals (such as uranium and copper), renewable energy projects, and digital infrastructure. This move would satisfy the US's own need for supply chain diversification and help Uzbekistan reduce its dependence on a single market.

The Middle Corridor and Regional Connectivity: Following the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the traditional trans-Russian transport route connecting Eurasia has become more risky, dramatically increasing the strategic value of the Middle Corridor (the trans-Caspian international transport route). The US has consistently supported the development of this route to strengthen non-Russian ties between Europe and Asia. Uzbekistan is a key node country in the Middle Corridor, and the two sides likely discussed how to cooperate in improving the route's capacity, efficiency, and standardization, which has profound geoeconomic implications. International Affairs Coordination: In multilateral forums such as the United Nations, both sides may coordinate their positions on regional and global issues. Although Uzbekistan maintains close relations with Russia and China, their national interests are not always entirely aligned on specific issues. The United States may use this opportunity to understand Uzbekistan's latest considerations on major issues such as the Ukraine crisis and seek consensus.

Uzbekistan in the Great Power Game: A Skilled Balancing Act

For the government led by Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, this high-level reception of US officials is another skillful demonstration of its "pluralistic pragmatism" diplomatic philosophy. Since Mirziyoyev took office, Uzbekistan has shifted from its previous relative isolation, actively opening up to all major countries and regional organizations.

Its core strategy is: while maintaining its special relationship with its traditional strategic partner Russia and deepening economic cooperation with its largest trading partner China, it actively develops relations with the United States, the European Union, South Korea, Japan, and other Western and emerging economies. This multi-pronged strategy aims to maximize the country's economic benefits, technology transfer, and security guarantees, while avoiding "taking sides" in increasingly fierce great power competition.

Hosting high-ranking US officials allows Uzbekistan to obtain necessary economic and political support from the West, while also sending a subtle signal to Moscow and Beijing: Uzbekistan has other strategic options and desires greater autonomy and bargaining power in its relations with Russia and China. This balancing act is not without risk, but so far, Uzbekistan, with its cautious and pragmatic approach, has successfully navigated between major powers, positioning itself as a sought-after partner rather than a battleground.

Conclusion: One Visit, Multiple Ripples

The visit of the US special envoy and deputy secretary of state to Tashkent, while a single diplomatic event, reflects, like a prism, the complex landscape of current Eurasian geopolitics. It demonstrates that, despite a partial shift in US strategic focus to the Indo-Pacific, the US has not neglected Central Asia—traditionally considered Russia's "backyard" but now a key region of greater global significance. This is a concrete step by the United States to "reassure" and "reactivate" its Central Asia policy.

Simultaneously, it highlights the increased agency of Central Asian countries, represented by Uzbekistan. These countries are no longer passive pawns in great power rivalry, but rather geopolitical players capable of proactively leveraging great power contradictions and seeking to maximize their own interests through flexible and pragmatic diplomacy.

The full extent of the "results" of this visit remains to be seen, and it will take time to observe whether specific cooperation projects can be implemented. However, its immediate effects are clear: it declares to observers in Moscow, Beijing, and other regions that the United States remains an active player on the Central Asian stage with high-level communication channels; and Tashkent has once again demonstrated its important position as a geopolitical pivot in Central Asia, as well as its diplomatic wisdom in navigating complex international situations. In the foreseeable future, this dynamic intertwining of great power competition and the balanced diplomacy of Central Asian countries will continue to define the basic landscape of the region.