The war of the United States and Israel against Iran does not affect only the Middle East.
For the countries of Central Asia, the prospect of a destabilized or even destroyed Iranian state structure constitutes a deeply worrying scenario.
The governments of the region do not view positively the possibility of the collapse of Iran right next to their borders.
On the contrary, they fear that such a possibility could trigger chain geopolitical, terrorist and ethnic crises throughout the wider region.
An incident at the beginning of March 2026 demonstrated how fragile the balance is.
The drone incident in Azerbaijan that changed the data
On 5 March, drones reportedly originating from Iran struck Azerbaijan, injuring four people.
The attack occurred in the isolated enclave of Nakhchevan, targeting the terminal of the region’s international airport.
The strike even reached dangerously close to a school located in the area.
The reaction of the president of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, was immediate and particularly harsh.
Aliyev characterized the attack as a “terrorist act” and warned that there would be retaliation.
Iran, for its part, categorically denied that it had any involvement.
Tehran accused Israel of carrying out a “false flag operation”, that is, an attack intended to falsely attribute responsibility to another country.
However, even more revealing than the attack itself was the reaction of the countries of Central Asia.
The message from Kazakhstan that worried Washington and Tel Aviv
Only a few months before the incident, the accession of Kazakhstan to the Abraham Accords had caused enthusiasm in strategic circles in the United States and in Israel.
The expectation was that Kazakhstan would join a new geopolitical alliance of “moderate Muslim states” that would extend from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea, aligned with Israel and opposed to Iran.
Reality proved to be far more complicated.
The president of Kazakhstan, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, condemned the attack in Azerbaijan.
However his statement also included something even more important: he proposed a joint investigation with Iran for the incident and stressed that the crisis must be resolved through diplomacy in order to avoid escalation in the region.
This wording was considered particularly noteworthy.
Azerbaijan had just directly accused Iran of a terrorist act and Kazakhstan responded by calling for cooperation with the alleged perpetrator.
Kassym-Jomart Tokayev
The stance of Uzbekistan and the diplomacy of balance
A similarly cautious stance was also adopted by Uzbekistan.
The president Shavkat Mirziyoyev condemned the attack “decisively” and expressed full solidarity with Azerbaijan.
However his statement had a remarkable detail: it did not mention Iran at all.
This diplomatic “choreography” was clear:
1) the countries of Central Asia support a Turkic ally
2) but they avoid clashing with Iran
The foreign policy of the region remains faithful to its basic principle since 1991, multidimensional and pragmatic.
Condemnation of the attack, preservation of relations and all doors open.
The strategy of distancing from American bases
So far this balance has protected the countries of Central Asia from direct consequences of the war.
While the allies of the United States in the Persian Gulf see missiles from Iran striking their bases, no attack has occurred in Central Asia.
And this may not be accidental.
In the mid 2000s, Uzbekistan closed the American base Karshi-Khanabad.
Later, Kyrgyzstan closed the American base Manas in 2014.
At that time, the decision was strongly criticized in Washington as a blow to cooperation against terrorism.
Today however many analysts consider it strategic foresight.
The American bases in the Persian Gulf have turned into predetermined targets for Iran.
When the United States enters a war, its allies in the region absorb the first wave of attacks.
Central Asia, on the contrary, remains outside the immediate target.
The real fear is the rise of ISIS-K
Despite the attacks and the tension, the governments of Central Asia fear something even more dangerous than the war, explains The National Interest.
The collapse of Iran.
For years, Iran functioned as a barrier against Sunni jihadist extremism, a threat that the security services of the region consider existential.
The greatest concern concerns the organization Islamic State – Khorasan Province (ISIS-K).
This organization constitutes the branch of ISIS that operates in Central Asia and in Afghanistan.
With Iranian forces occupied on multiple fronts, ISIS-K is searching for security gaps to expand its activity.
The message of ISIS before the war
A few days before the American Israeli attacks against Iran, the official magazine of ISIS, Al-Naba, published an article claiming that “the Iranian ship is on the verge of sinking”.
According to a publication by journalist Tom O’Connor in Newsweek, ISIS-K has already proven that it can penetrate deep inside Iran.
In 2024 it carried out a terrorist attack during a memorial ceremony for the assassinated commander Qassem Soleimani.
The threat also expands to Central Asia
The activity of ISIS-K is not limited to Iran.
The organization is also responsible for the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall in Moscow in 2024, where 145 people were killed.
The perpetrators were migrants from Tajikistan who had been recruited by the organization.
The presence of ISIS-K in Afghanistan creates a constant risk of the spread of terrorism toward Central Asia.
The danger of Iran’s disintegration and ethnic tensions
However there is also another dimension that causes concern among the governments of the region.
In certain Western and Israeli circles, scenarios of territorial fragmentation of Iran are being discussed, with the possible creation of new state entities such as:
1) a “Southern Azerbaijan”
2) an independent “Balochistan”
For the countries of Central Asia, such ideas are considered a dangerous precedent
The region already has complex ethnic balances:
1) Uzbekistan with a minority of Tajiks and the region Karakalpak
2) Kyrgyzstan with a large Uzbek community
3) Tajikistan with the Pamiri communities in mountainous Badakhshan
Changing borders according to ethnic criteria could open dangerous secessionist dynamics.
Economic and humanitarian consequences
The war has already caused practical problems.
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan were forced to organize rescue operations for thousands of their citizens who had been trapped in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.
At the same time, the crisis revealed how vulnerable the southern trade corridors of Central Asia are to geopolitical upheavals.
However the economic damage will probably be overcome.
The strategic consequences perhaps not.
A war that threatens to destabilize the region
If the war seriously weakens Iran, the results for Central Asia could be dramatic:
1) revival of ISIS-K
2) strengthening of secessionist movements
3) dissolution of the regional security architecture
In such a scenario, the consequences will not be measured in commercial losses but in human lives and the destabilization of states.
The irony of the conflict
There is a deep irony in all this.
The United States and Israel started the war against Iran in the name of security.
But for the countries of Central Asia, which observe the developments from the periphery and look at their borders with increasing concern, the war resembles less a solution and more a new serious threat to their stability.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών