By Dr Beruniy Alimov
Professor, Doctor of Philology (DSc)
Director, Media and Communication Research Institute, Uzbekistan State World Languages University
Uzbekistan marks the 35th anniversary of its independence, the occasion offers far more than an opportunity to commemorate a historic date. Thirty-five years is a sufficiently long period to assess not only what has been achieved since the country emerged as an independent state in 1991, but also how its understanding of sovereignty, development and its place in the world has evolved. For an international audience, the most compelling aspect of Uzbekistan’s contemporary story is perhaps not the fact that the country has changed — transformation, after all, has been a common experience across the post-Soviet space — but rather the scale, direction and accelerating pace of the changes that have taken place during the past decade. Since 2016, Uzbekistan has entered a new stage of national development, widely described as the era of the New Uzbekistan, in which domestic reform has increasingly been combined with economic openness, regional cooperation and a far more active international presence.
The concept of the New Uzbekistan is sometimes interpreted outside the country primarily as political terminology. Yet viewed in a broader historical context, it represents something more substantial: an attempt to redefine the relationship between the state and the citizen, between government institutions and society, between Uzbekistan and its immediate neighbours, and ultimately between the country and the wider international community. The transformation is neither complete nor without difficulties. Indeed, no serious assessment of a reform process of such scale should pretend that structural problems can disappear within a decade. What is already apparent, however, is a significant change in direction. Uzbekistan today is more open to international engagement, more integrated with its neighbours, more interested in attracting global capital and knowledge, and increasingly conscious of the importance of its international reputation than it was ten years ago. The fundamental question is therefore no longer simply whether Uzbekistan is changing, but whether these changes can develop into sustainable institutions capable of carrying the country through the next stage of its history.
From Independence to a New Philosophy of Government
The first decades following independence were understandably shaped by the formidable task of building the institutions of sovereign statehood. Uzbekistan had to create a national political and administrative system, establish an independent economy, formulate its own foreign policy, maintain social stability and develop a new sense of national identity after decades within the Soviet Union. These were foundational years in which the preservation of sovereignty and stability inevitably occupied a central place in public policy. By the middle of the 2010s, however, the country had reached a point at which maintaining the existing system was no longer sufficient. A young and increasingly connected population, changing economic realities, technological development and the transformation of Central Asia itself created pressure for a new model of governance and development.
The second major phase of independent Uzbekistan’s history began in 2016 with the leadership of President Shavkat Mirziyoyev. One of the most significant characteristics of this period has been the attempt to change the philosophy through which government understands its relationship with society. Concepts such as human dignity, openness, public accountability, dialogue with citizens and the responsibility of government institutions to respond to people’s concerns became increasingly prominent in the language of public administration. The principle that state institutions should serve the people rather than expect the people to serve the state captured an important philosophical shift. Although such a principle may appear straightforward, its practical implementation requires fundamental changes in administrative culture, institutional behaviour and the everyday relationship between officials and citizens.
This new approach gradually became visible in reforms affecting public administration, judicial institutions, social policy, education, public services and digital government. Mechanisms intended to provide citizens with greater access to government institutions expanded, while digitalisation began to reduce some of the traditional bureaucratic barriers that had complicated interaction between citizens and the state. Constitutional reforms also became part of the search for a renewed social contract, placing greater emphasis on human dignity and the social responsibilities of government. Yet legislation alone cannot transform a society. The most difficult stage of any institutional reform is changing established habits and expectations. A law can be adopted relatively quickly; a new administrative culture requires years of consistent implementation. The long-term success of the New Uzbekistan will therefore depend not simply on how many reforms are announced, but on whether their principles become embedded in the daily practices of institutions throughout the country.
Central Asia: From Fragmentation to a New Culture of Cooperation
Perhaps the most visible international consequence of Uzbekistan’s transformation can be found not in distant capitals, but in its own neighbourhood. For many years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Central Asia was frequently described through the language of unresolved borders, restricted movement, competition over natural resources and limited political trust. The region possessed enormous economic and cultural potential, yet political fragmentation often prevented that potential from being realised. Uzbekistan’s change in regional policy after 2016 therefore represented more than a diplomatic adjustment. It contributed to a wider transformation in the political atmosphere of Central Asia.
Tashkent’s renewed engagement with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan helped create an environment in which regional challenges could increasingly be discussed through dialogue and practical cooperation. Relations between neighbouring societies became easier, political contacts intensified, trade expanded and regional connectivity emerged as a strategic priority. This change is particularly important because Central Asian states share challenges that cannot be solved effectively within national borders. Water security, energy, climate change, transport, migration, environmental protection, economic development and regional security are inherently transnational questions. A cooperative Central Asia is therefore not simply a diplomatic aspiration; it is an economic and strategic necessity.
Uzbekistan’s own development is inseparable from this regional context. As one of only two double-landlocked countries in the world, Uzbekistan cannot reach global markets without passing through the territory of other states. Geography therefore gives regional cooperation an unusually practical meaning. Railways, roads, customs procedures, energy networks and logistics corridors are not abstract diplomatic concepts; they determine the cost and speed with which Uzbek products can reach international consumers and foreign investment can enter the country. This explains why regional connectivity and projects associated with emerging trans-Eurasian routes, including the Middle Corridor, have acquired increasing strategic importance. In a world where geopolitical tensions and disruptions are forcing governments and companies to reconsider traditional supply chains, Central Asia’s position between Europe and Asia may become one of its greatest economic assets.
The larger lesson of Uzbekistan’s regional policy is consequently straightforward but important: Uzbekistan cannot achieve its full potential in an unstable, disconnected or economically fragmented Central Asia. Its national success is increasingly linked to the prosperity of its neighbours. This understanding represents one of the most significant conceptual changes in the country’s foreign policy during the past decade.
Samarkand: Ancient Crossroads, Modern Diplomacy
There is also a powerful symbolic dimension to Uzbekistan’s new international identity. For centuries, Samarkand stood at one of the great crossroads of civilisation, connecting merchants, scholars, travellers, religions and ideas across the Silk Road. Today, the city is acquiring a new role as a venue for international diplomacy. Major summits and international conferences held in Samarkand have helped position Uzbekistan as a meeting point between different regions, political traditions and economic interests. The choice of Samarkand is therefore not merely ceremonial. It connects Uzbekistan’s historical identity as a bridge between civilisations with its contemporary ambition to become a platform for dialogue in an increasingly divided international environment.
This development is part of a broader transformation in Uzbek foreign policy. The country has increasingly pursued a pragmatic and multi-vector approach, seeking productive relations with China, Russia, the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, the Islamic world, South Asia and other partners while simultaneously strengthening relations within Central Asia. For a state located at the geographical centre of Eurasia, such an approach is less a matter of diplomatic fashion than a strategic necessity. Uzbekistan’s geography does not allow it the luxury of viewing international relations exclusively through a single geopolitical lens. Its economic and security interests require cooperation in several directions at once.
This pragmatic philosophy can also be observed in Uzbekistan’s approach to Afghanistan. Tashkent has consistently emphasised that the long-term stabilisation of Afghanistan cannot depend exclusively on security instruments. Economic development, education, infrastructure, transport connections and regional integration must also be considered. Afghanistan is not an abstract foreign-policy problem for Uzbekistan; it is a neighbouring country whose stability directly affects the security and economic prospects of the wider region. The Uzbek approach therefore reflects a broader belief that sustainable regional security must ultimately be supported by economic opportunity and connectivity.
The growing diplomatic role of Samarkand and Uzbekistan’s increasingly active engagement with international organisations also contribute to the country’s changing global image. The anniversary concept itself places particular emphasis on Uzbekistan’s new foreign policy, the growing diplomatic significance of Samarkand, relations with the United Nations, climate diplomacy, water security and the country’s expanding international recognition. Together, these developments suggest that Uzbekistan increasingly seeks not merely to participate in international affairs, but to contribute ideas, platforms and initiatives to the wider global conversation.
Economic Transformation and the Search for Competitiveness
Diplomatic visibility, however, can only become sustainable when it is supported by economic transformation. One of the central characteristics of the past decade has therefore been Uzbekistan’s attempt to move away from a relatively closed economic model towards greater market orientation, international investment and global economic integration. Economic liberalisation has been accompanied by measures aimed at improving the investment climate, encouraging entrepreneurship, modernising industry and agriculture, developing infrastructure and creating stronger connections between the Uzbek economy and international markets.
For decades, Uzbekistan’s economic potential was evident in its natural resources, agricultural capacity, strategic location and large population. The contemporary challenge is to transform these advantages into a diversified and competitive economy. This requires much more than attracting foreign investment. It requires predictable institutions, modern infrastructure, skilled human capital, technological development, competitive domestic enterprises and an environment in which innovation can flourish. The growth of free economic zones, industrial development and new investment projects reflects this broader ambition, but the ultimate measure of success will be whether economic modernisation creates sustainable productivity and opportunities across society.
Digital transformation occupies an increasingly important position within this agenda. Uzbekistan’s young population provides the country with a potential demographic advantage, but demographics become an economic asset only when young people possess the skills required by a rapidly changing global economy. The expansion of the technology sector and IT Park Uzbekistan reflects an effort to create a new generation of internationally competitive companies and professionals. Artificial intelligence, digital services, programming and technology exports are gradually becoming part of a national development narrative that would have been difficult to imagine only a generation ago.
Energy represents another crucial area of transformation. Uzbekistan has historically relied heavily on traditional energy resources, but future economic competitiveness will increasingly depend on renewable energy, efficiency and the ability to participate in the global transition towards low-carbon development. Green investment is therefore not simply an environmental question. It is becoming an economic and geopolitical issue that will influence access to capital, industrial competitiveness and international partnerships.
For the United Kingdom, these changes create a particularly interesting field of cooperation. British expertise in finance, education, research, technology, professional services and green investment corresponds closely with many of Uzbekistan’s emerging development priorities. The future of UK–Uzbekistan relations therefore has the potential to move beyond traditional diplomatic cooperation towards a more diversified partnership involving universities, businesses, researchers, financial institutions and technology companies. The broader anniversary concept identifies trade and investment, education and research, green finance, British business engagement and cultural diplomacy as important dimensions of this evolving relationship.
Human Capital: The Reform that Matters Most
Physical infrastructure often receives the greatest public attention because its results are immediately visible. New roads, airports, factories, power stations and urban developments can be photographed, measured and formally inaugurated. Human capital is less visually dramatic, yet in the long term it is far more decisive. Uzbekistan’s future position in the global economy will depend less on the number of buildings it constructs than on the quality of the people who study, teach, research, innovate and create within them.
This is especially important because Uzbekistan possesses a young and growing population. Such demographics can become a major source of economic dynamism, but they can also create social pressure if education and employment opportunities fail to develop at a comparable pace. Education reform, science, research, artificial intelligence, digital literacy and future skills must therefore be viewed not as separate sectors, but as components of a single national strategy for competitiveness. The anniversary concept appropriately places education, scientific research, artificial intelligence, youth development, women’s leadership and healthcare within the broader framework of human-capital transformation.
The frequently articulated idea of a Third Renaissance is particularly interesting in this context. Uzbekistan and the wider Central Asian region can legitimately point to an extraordinary intellectual heritage. Scholars associated with this historical space made foundational contributions to mathematics, astronomy, medicine, geography, philosophy and other fields of knowledge. Yet history alone cannot create a modern knowledge economy. The most meaningful way to honour that intellectual heritage is not simply to celebrate the achievements of the past, but to create institutions capable of producing new knowledge today.
A genuine modern renaissance therefore requires universities that reward research, scientists integrated into international academic networks, schools that develop critical thinking rather than simple memorisation, young people capable of working with emerging technologies and institutions prepared to support intellectual independence and creativity. It also requires wider participation by women in education, science, entrepreneurship and leadership. In the twenty-first century, countries compete not only for markets, capital or natural resources. Increasingly, they compete for human talent, and the states that succeed in developing, retaining and attracting that talent will possess a decisive advantage.
From Ancient Heritage to Modern Soft Power
Uzbekistan’s changing international image represents another important dimension of the transformation. For much of the period following independence, international awareness of the country was disproportionately connected with its historical heritage. Samarkand, Bukhara and Khiva were familiar to historians, travellers and specialists of the Silk Road, yet contemporary Uzbekistan remained comparatively underrepresented in global media and international public debate. This created a gap between the richness and complexity of the country itself and the limited range of images through which it was perceived abroad.
That gap has gradually begun to narrow. Tourism, cultural diplomacy, international summits, academic partnerships, business cooperation and digital communication are exposing wider audiences to contemporary Uzbekistan. The country’s extraordinary historical assets remain central to its attractiveness, but a modern national reputation cannot rely on monuments alone. The challenge is to connect the heritage of the Silk Road with the identity of a society that is also looking towards technology, innovation, entrepreneurship and global engagement.
This is where the concept of soft power becomes particularly relevant. Uzbekistan possesses considerable cultural resources: architecture, literature, music, cuisine, craftsmanship, historical cities and an intellectual tradition associated with some of the great figures of world civilisation. Yet effective soft power is created when cultural heritage is combined with contemporary credibility. The Uzbekistan that wishes to be understood internationally today is therefore not only the Uzbekistan of the Registan, ancient Bukhara or the walls of Khiva. It is also the Uzbekistan of young entrepreneurs, programmers, researchers, filmmakers, designers, artists, women leaders and globally connected students.
For those of us who work in media and international communication, this distinction is especially important. A country’s image cannot simply be manufactured through positive messaging. Nor can international reputation be sustained by presenting only success stories. Modern audiences have access to multiple sources of information and are increasingly sceptical of institutional communication. Credibility, therefore, is more valuable than perfection. The most persuasive international image emerges when a country is sufficiently confident to communicate its achievements while also recognising its challenges and demonstrating its willingness to address them.
This is particularly relevant in the digital age, when reputation is no longer shaped solely by governments or traditional media. Tourists, foreign students, international businesses, academics, bloggers, investors and ordinary citizens all participate in constructing a country’s image. Every visitor with a smartphone can become an informal correspondent. Every international student can become an ambassador of personal experience. Every successful or unsuccessful business interaction can influence perceptions of the investment climate. National reputation has therefore become a distributed phenomenon, and this makes genuine institutional quality more important than ever.
The Next Chapter of the New Uzbekistan
Thirty-five years after independence, Uzbekistan has arrived at another important historical threshold. The first decades were largely devoted to constructing and protecting sovereign statehood. The past decade has increasingly focused on transforming the state, opening the economy, reconnecting Central Asia and establishing a more active international role. The next stage will be more difficult because it will require transforming reform from a political programme into an institutional culture.
The central challenge is sustainability. Reforms become historically significant only when they outlive the circumstances in which they were introduced. This means moving from individual initiatives to strong institutions, from ambitious declarations to measurable outcomes, from economic opening to genuinely competitive markets, and from state-led modernisation towards broader participation by citizens, businesses, researchers, universities and civil society. It also means ensuring that transformation is experienced not only in the capital or major cities, but across regions and communities.
There will inevitably be difficulties. No country can modernise its economy, administration, education system and international relationships simultaneously without encountering contradictions. Rising public expectations themselves become a challenge because reform often creates demand for faster reform. Economic openness creates new opportunities but also exposes domestic institutions and companies to greater competition. Digitalisation improves public services but requires new forms of cybersecurity and media literacy. Greater international visibility brings recognition, but it also invites closer scrutiny.
These should not necessarily be interpreted as signs of failure. They are, in many respects, the natural tensions of a society undergoing rapid transformation. The more important question is whether institutions are capable of learning, adapting and correcting mistakes. The long-term credibility of the New Uzbekistan will depend precisely on this capacity.
For Britain and the wider European community, Uzbekistan deserves closer attention within this changing Eurasian landscape. Central Asia is becoming increasingly important at the intersection of European and Asian trade, energy transition, transport connectivity, climate policy and geopolitical change. Uzbekistan, with the largest population in Central Asia and a strategic position at the heart of the region, is likely to play an increasingly consequential role in shaping these processes.
Thirty-five years of independence should therefore be understood not as the conclusion of Uzbekistan’s national journey, but as the beginning of another stage. The first great task was to establish a sovereign state. The second has been to transform that state and reconnect it with its citizens, its region and the wider world. The challenge of the coming decade will be to consolidate those changes and turn reform into durable institutions, economic opportunity into broad prosperity, regional cooperation into lasting stability and growing international attention into sustainable global partnership.
Uzbekistan’s ancient cities remind us that this part of the world once stood at the centre of global exchanges of knowledge, commerce and culture. The ambition of the New Uzbekistan is not to recreate the past, but to rediscover the principle that made those centuries remarkable: openness to ideas, people, knowledge and cooperation.
If that principle continues to guide the country’s development, Uzbekistan’s most consequential chapter may not be the thirty-five years already written, but the one that is only now beginning.
