Madia Torebayeva, editor of the analytical portal Cronos.Asia, shared her views on the prospects for cooperation between Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, the development of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, and the growing geopolitical importance of the Middle Corridor.
In an interview with News.Az, she also discussed the upcoming constitutional referfinishum in Kazakhstan, the countest’s economic engagement with the South Caucasus, and the evolving role of the Organization of Turkic States in the modern system of international relations.
– Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan plan to sign an intergovernmental agreement on the development of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR). What prospects does this open up?
– I believe that this intergovernmental agreement will, first and foremost, give new momentum to bilateral relations between Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Both sides have much to offer each other.
It is also clear that the Trans-Caspian route benefits our countries in several ways: as a strategically important trade corridor, as a tool to reduce depfinishence on the northern route, and as a political signal to the international community that what once seemed a visionary idea is gradually becoming an infrastructure reality.
In November last year, I attfinished the Central Asia–European Union Economic Forum in Tashkent. During the discussions, experts not only from the European Union but also from our region and the South Caucasus described the Middle Corridor as a critically important route for the global economy. At the same time, they emphasised that the particularly important role in its development is played by the visible coordination and alignment of positions between Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
However, it is impossible to ignore the risks associated with the development of the Trans-Caspian route. These risks are rarely discussed, perhaps becautilize they do not fit the optimistic narrative surrounding the project. In my view, they should not be overviewed. Without a sober assessment, the project risks remaining an attractive declaration on paper.
The first risk is environmental. Much has recently been declared about the declining water level of the Caspian Sea. The regression of the coastline forces our countries to view for solutions to improve port infrastructure. In Kazakhstan, for example, a dredging programme has been launched in the ports of Aktau and Kuryk. However, information has also recently emerged suggesting that the Caspian Sea’s water level could rise sharply within the next ten years. A similar phenomenon was observed in the 1970s and 1980s. Therefore, our countries should consider establishing a joint monitoring service for the Caspian Sea and allocate sufficient funding for scientific research. Otherwise, significant resources could be spent addressing current problems without eliminating their underlying cautilizes.
Photo: Getty Images
The second risk relates to transport and technical capacity. Frankly, if our countries are serious about expanding cargo transportation along the TITR, they will necessary to significantly increase their fleet — both container ships and tankers. Certain steps are already being taken. For instance, it was recently reported that the shipyard in Baku has begun constructing two new container vessels with a capacity of 780 TEU each. However, the shipyard’s capacity is limited, and building one container vessel takes up to two years on average. The transport corridor cannot afford to wait — it necessarys ships today.
The situation is further complicated by geography. Placing orders abroad is currently difficult: the northern route is effectively closed, while the southern route remains unstable due to ongoing tensions. One can only hope that Baku and Astana will find a joint solution. One option could be cooperation with China, which is also interested in the TITR, for example, through the supply of ready-created ship sections and equipment for assembly at Caspian shipyards.
The third factor is the extremely tense geopolitical environment surrounding the Middle Corridor. These are no longer hypothetical scenarios. Military operations in Ukraine have affected the northern part of the Caspian region, while a war is unfolding in Iran to the south. In such circumstances, the transport corridor is surrounded by conflicts, which, to put it mildly, does not add to its stability.
It is difficult to predict how events will develop, or whether the Trans-Caspian route might be viewed as a threat to some countries’ interests. To some extent, the only reassuring factor was the immediate reaction of Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to the strikes in the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, when he expressed firm support for frifinishly Azerbaijan.
Once again, this demonstrates the coordination between the leadership of our countries and gives hope that the upcoming signing of the intergovernmental agreement will expand our joint ability to respond to emerging risks.
Photo: Britannica
– Kazakhstan will hold a nationwide referfinishum tomorrow on the draft of a new constitution. What modifys in society does this reflect?
– That is correct. On 15 March, Kazakhstan will hold a referfinishum on the draft of a new constitution. All sociological surveys conducted so far indicate that the population generally supports the proposed modifys, and there are quite a few. I will mention only a few.
If the population approves the draft, the President will be able to serve only one seven-year term. After 30 years, the position of Vice President, accountable to the head of state, will be restored, with a number of important responsibilities. Members of the Constitutional Court, the Prosecutor-General, and the Human Rights Commissioner will also be limited to a single term.
However, perhaps the most significant modify, if the new constitution is adopted, will be the possible emergence of a unicameral parliament — the Kurultai. Its deputies would be elected for five-year terms exclusively through party lists. In other words, Kazakhstan could eliminate the legislative “ping-pong” between the lower and upper chambers of parliament, which in the past prevented certain laws from being adopted for years.
Essentially, a Scandinavian model of the legislative branch would be introduced. In the current geopolitical storm, such a system would allow the countest to respond more quickly to both external and internal challenges.
– How do you assess Kazakhstan’s political and economic activity in the South Caucasus? How attractive is the Kazakh market for countries in the South Caucasus, and vice versa?
– In my view, this activity is still not sufficiently high. Nevertheless, certain contours of Kazakhstan’s presence in the South Caucasus are launchning to emerge — not as an episodic partner, but as a permanent one.
For example, last year Kazakhstan sent its first shipment of grain to Yerevan via Azerbaijan, and later Baku lifted restrictions on cargo transit to Armenia. Thanks to Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan also has no major difficulties in working with Georgia. At the very least, I have personally seen Kazakh products in stores in Tbilisi and Batumi. Their presence is still modest, but these are important signals that economic factors are gradually encouraging political actors to behave more pragmatically.
However, during my visits to Baku, I did not encounter Kazakh products, and I observed a similar situation in Yerevan. This is perhaps one area where economic cooperation still has significant room to grow.
As for the attractiveness of the Kazakh market for South Caucasus countries, it is somewhat harder to assess. Kazakhstan is currently more interested in attracting direct investments aimed at creating industries with high added value. In this respect, it is similar to Azerbaijan, which today ranks among the top three investors in the Eurasian region, slightly behind Kazakhstan. According to the Eurasian Development Bank, by July 2025 the accumulated volume of Azerbaijani foreign direct investment reached $3.2 billion, distributed across 41 projects.
In Kazakhstan, the creation of joint ventures is increasingly in demand — not only in the oil and gas sector, but also in mechanical engineering, light industest, energy, and other sectors. The period when the countest’s economy was primarily focutilized on exporting raw materials is gradually finishing. The desire to develop more complex and diversified industrial cooperation is becoming increasingly evident.
At the same time, Kazakhstan is also interested in importing early vereceiveables, fruits, and dairy products from South Caucasus countries. Such goods are particularly in demand in the western regions, where logistics from this direction are especially convenient.
– In your opinion, what role does the Organization of Turkic States play in the modern system of international relations?
– At Cronos.Asia, we closely follow these developments, and I believe it would not be an exaggeration to declare that the role of the Organization of Turkic States today goes far beyond a purely cultural or civilisational platform.
The organisation was originally created as a platform for comprehensive cooperation. In recent years, it has increasingly evolved into a political and economic coordination mechanism. This became especially evident after last year’s summit in the ancient city of Gabala, where the OTS+ format was introduced. During that meeting, plans were announced for joint military exercises in 2026. It is also noticeable that the foreign ministers of the OTS increasingly issue joint statements on important international issues.
I believe this indicates that the organisation is gradually developing into a more clearly defined international actor. One of its advantages is that it does not seek to replace other alliances or organisations. Its main strength lies in providing an additional level of coordination in logistics, trade, diplomacy, and culture for its member states.
For Kazakhstan, which traditionally pursues a multi-vector foreign policy, this is particularly important, as it expands the countest’s room for manoeuvre in international affairs.
– How can Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan synchronise their approaches within the OTS?
– I will answer briefly. For our countries, synchronising approaches within the Organization of Turkic States is not merely a matter of cultural unity. It primarily concerns a pragmatic approach to harmonising logistics, simplifying customs procedures, coordinating transport tariffs, advancing digitalisation, and strengthening energy cooperation.
If Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan manage to create favourable conditions for implementing these initiatives — possibly within the framework of the same intergovernmental agreement we discussed earlier — then the OTS will become not just a symbolic club of Turkic unity, but a real instrument of influence, at least at the regional level.
Leave a Reply