Central Asia is composed of states that share not only a common Soviet legacy, but also overlapping trajectories of political coordination and economic linkage. However, rather than consolidating into a fully integrated regional project, the subregion has evolved as a loosely articulated space shaped by inherited infrastructures, selective cooperation, and strong external influence. Within this context, the World Power Index allows for a systematic assessment of how power is distributed across the subregion.
DISCLAIMER: The geographic boundaries expressed on the map do not necessarily represent the views or positions of its author and of the WPI.
Mapping Power Across the Subregion
Russia stands as the dominant actor in Central Asia. However, its role must be understood in multiregional terms: it is simultaneously a key actor in Eastern Europe, East Asia and Central Asia. Within the subregion, Russia projects influence through institutional frameworks such as the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).
Despite this preponderance, Russia occupies a semiperipheral position in the international system (Apango, Tzili, Rocha & Vargas, 2024: 189-194), while all other Central Asian countries remain in the periphery. This creates a configuration marked by asymmetry, but without the presence of a fully dominant regional core.
Within the subregion, Kazakhstan emerges as the most capable peripheral state, with material capacities that sustain its role as a subregional power (Tzili, Briceño, Ramos & Franco, 2024: 248-250). Azerbaijan follows as a middle peripheral state, having experienced a notable expansion of national power in the early 2000s, although this trajectory slowed around 2014.
A third cluster is composed of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, all of which occupy lower positions as minor peripheral states. Although differences exist among them, their positions remain relatively close, reflecting a narrow distribution of power across the subregion
Patterns of Power and Subregional Dynamics
Unlike Western Europe, where multiple world powers and middle powers generate a dense and relatively balanced configuration, Central Asia is characterised by peripheral convergence. Except for Russia, no country concentrates sufficient power to redefine the subregional balance or operate as a stabilising pole.
As a result, the subregion exhibits a compressed structure: although asymmetries exist, they are contained within a relatively narrow range of power. Rather than the absence of hierarchy, what emerges is a configuration with limited internal distance between states.
These dynamics are closely linked to the subregion’s external articulation. Russia continues to play a central role, yet its semiperipheral position limits its ability to fully organise the subregion. Simultaneously, China’s expanding presence—through infrastructure, trade and connectivity—has introduced an additional axis of influence.
This combination reinforces a configuration in which Central Asia is shaped less by internal integration than by its embeddedness within broader dynamics.
Central Asia in the Global South
From a Global South perspective, the configuration observed in Central Asia reflects a broader pattern in which the accumulation of national capacities does not necessarily translate into improved geostructural positioning. The subregion illustrates how countries located outside the central nodes of the international system often face geostructural constraints that limit their ability to convert power into sustained upward mobility.
In this sense, Central Asia can be understood as a space where external linkages—particularly with Russia and China—play a decisive role in shaping national trajectories. Rather than enabling autonomous repositioning, these linkages tend to reinforce asymmetric relations and condition the scope of national strategies.
This suggests that, within the Global South, power dynamics are not only defined by differences in capabilities but also by the limited ability of peripheral states to alter their relative position. Central Asia thus offers a particularly relevant empirical setting to advance a research agenda on the conditions under which states can convert capacity accumulation into effective repositioning. Future research should focus on how external articulation, subregional differentiation, and state strategies shape divergent trajectories of power across the Global South.
Last updated: March 16, 2026
