TASHKENT, September 3. /Dunyo IA/. Deputy Director of the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies under the President of Uzbekistan (ISRS), Bakhtiyor Mustafayev, commented at the request of a correspondent of the Dunyo IA, on the initiatives put forward by President Shavkat Mirziyoyev at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit held in Bishkek on August 31–September 1:

The outcomes of the SCO Summit held in Bishkek, which was attended by President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev, are now being widely discussed in the international media and expert community. In this regard, we would like to ask: what place does the SCO occupy in Uzbekistan’s foreign policy, and why does Tashkent attach particular importance to this platform?

— For Uzbekistan, the SCO is not a situational diplomatic format, but one of the key areas of its foreign policy. In 2001, Uzbekistan became one of the founding members of the Organization. The Executive Committee of the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure is located in Uzbekistan, while Central Asia is officially recognized as the geographical and strategic core of the SCO.

Through this platform, Tashkent addresses three closely interconnected objectives: strengthening regional security, expanding the economic connectivity of the continent, and pursuing an open, non-aligned and multi-vector foreign policy.

Uzbekistan’s commitment is reflected not only in political statements, but also in the consistent promotion of practical initiatives. In 2018, at the initiative of the President, the SCO leaders adopted a Joint Appeal to Youth. In Samarkand in 2022, the Uzbek side raised issues of transport connectivity, food security and the reconstruction of Afghanistan. In 2023, Uzbekistan proposed the Code of Good-Neighbourliness, Trust and Transboundary Partnership. In 2024–2025, it put forward initiatives aimed at strengthening SCO unity and proposed the concept of a Common Transport Space.

The current proposals continue this line: Tashkent is consistently translating the common principles of the “Shanghai Spirit” into practical mechanisms for cooperation.

You noted that Uzbekistan does not limit itself to political statements and regularly puts forward practical initiatives within the SCO. The Bishkek Summit was no exception: the President proposed developing a vision for “SCO–2040”. Why is such a long-term document needed if the Organization already has a Development Strategy through 2035?

— The Strategy through 2035 primarily addresses the question of what the Organization should accomplish over the medium term. The “SCO–2040: A Space for Common Development” vision is intended to address a more fundamental question: what should the SCO become after this strategy has been implemented? The aim is to move from a set of sector-specific programs toward a common model of an interconnected space, with the movement of investment, technology and knowledge, joint production, and direct links between regions and businesses.

Such a long-term horizon is justified by the scale and diversity of the Organization. The SCO countries account for around 42% of the world’s population and approximately 36% of global GDP in purchasing power parity terms. At the same time, their mutual trade, according to various estimates, has only recently approached $1 trillion. A comparison of these figures highlights the main gap: the SCO’s political and demographic weight still significantly exceeds the depth of its internal economic cooperation.

One of the most practical initiatives presented by the President of Uzbekistan at the Bishkek Summit was the creation of an SCO Industrial Cooperation Map. How can this mechanism turn the Organization’s vast geographical and economic scale into real cross-border production chains?

— The main challenge today is not so much a lack of joint projects as the fragmented nature of information and differences in regulatory conditions. In Uzbekistan alone, more than 1,500 joint projects with SCO countries are currently being implemented. At the same time, businesses still find it difficult to obtain, in one place, systematic information on available industrial sites, raw material resources, potential suppliers, support measures, logistics opportunities and markets across all ten member states. In this context, the SCO Industrial Cooperation Map could serve as a single digital tool, making it easier to identify partners and reducing transaction costs in the preparation and coordination of joint projects.

Its practical impact will depend on the content of the platform. If it includes a verifiable registry of special economic zones, available production capacities, localization requirements, transport tariffs and investment incentives, businesses will be able to build cross-border value chains rather than remain limited to trading raw materials and finished products. This is particularly important for small and medium-sized enterprises, which do not have the resources of large corporations to independently study ten different jurisdictions.

Continuing with the economic agenda of the Bishkek Summit, the President of Uzbekistan called for moving from discussions of general principles to the practical launch of the SCO Development Bank. Why does the Organization need its own financial institution, and how can it avoid becoming another bureaucratic structure?

— The SCO has many transport, energy and digital initiatives, but it does not have its own mechanism for turning them into a pipeline of well-prepared and financeable projects. The Interbank Consortium coordinates banks, but it does not replace a development institution with common criteria for project appraisal, co-financing and monitoring. A development bank could fill precisely this institutional gap, particularly when it comes to multinational projects whose benefits and risks are shared among several countries.

Uzbekistan’s proposal is significant because it links the launch of the bank not to the creation of an administrative structure, but to the formation of a portfolio of mature projects in transport, energy, industry and digital infrastructure. This is the right sequence: first, identify the projects, their costs, expected impact and sources of repayment; then determine the bank’s capital and institutional structure. To ensure reliability, the bank would need a transparent procurement policy, independent project assessment, debt sustainability analysis, and the ability to provide financing in different currencies.

A separate part of the President of Uzbekistan’s address in Bishkek focused on artificial intelligence. Why did Tashkent propose creating an Open Multilingual SCO Data Corpus rather than a single language model, and what practical value could it bring to the countries of the Organization?

— Modern artificial intelligence depends not only on computing power, but also on the availability of high-quality data. Most of the languages spoken across the SCO space are significantly underrepresented in global digital datasets compared with English and Chinese. As a result, AI systems have a weaker understanding of local legal, scientific and cultural terminology, while governments and businesses are often forced to rely on products trained on foreign linguistic and contextual data.

An open data corpus could become shared basic infrastructure: standardized texts, speech and translations in the languages of the member states would enable the development of machine translation, education, healthcare, public services and e-commerce applications. This would be a more realistic first step than creating a single SCO model. Each country would be able to develop its own solutions using a compatible shared dataset, while ensuring compliance with relevant legal requirements.

The key conditions would be the protection of personal data, respect for copyright, quality control, and equal representation of the languages of all member states.

Transport connectivity was given considerable attention at the Bishkek Summit. The President of Uzbekistan proposed establishing a Council for the Integration of Railway Systems of the SCO Member States. What practical problems should this Council address, and what would its creation mean for Uzbekistan and Eurasian transit more broadly?

— New railway lines alone do not create a seamless corridor. Differences remain at the borders in technical standards, track gauges, tariffs, electronic document formats, train schedules and control procedures. The Council is intended to serve as a permanent mechanism for coordinating precisely these “connections” between different systems. For Uzbekistan, as a doubly landlocked country, the predictability of transit across several states is no less important than the length of the route itself.

Its practical agenda could include through-tariffs and coordinated schedules, mutual recognition of electronic waybills, synchronization of border-crossing operations, digital cargo tracking, and coordination of investment in bottlenecks. This would help connect the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway with routes through the Caspian Sea, the North–South Corridor, and prospective routes toward South Asia.

The situation in Afghanistan was also an important part of the agenda of the Bishkek Summit. The President of Uzbekistan called for the resumption of regular SCO dialogue with Afghanistan. Why is such dialogue particularly important now, and what role could a restored SCO–Afghanistan Contact Group play?

— The logic behind the proposal is pragmatic: the absence of dialogue does not eliminate threats; rather, it reduces the ability of neighboring countries to manage them. Afghanistan is directly adjacent to the SCO space, and developments in the country have a direct impact on risks related to terrorism, drug trafficking, illicit arms trade, migration and water issues. Isolating the country could only deepen the economic crisis, expand the social base for radicalization and strengthen the shadow economy. At the same time, regular contacts do not imply automatic recognition of the current authorities; they provide a tool for setting conditions, monitoring their implementation and addressing specific security issues.

In the long term, the best way to strengthen security around Afghanistan is to create legitimate sources of income, jobs and sustainable economic interdependence with neighbouring countries within Afghanistan itself.

In 2025, Afghanistan’s foreign trade approached $13.9 billion. Due to disruptions along the Pakistani route, part of the trade flows has already been redirected through Iran, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. If these links are channelled into legitimate trade, energy, transport and infrastructure projects, greater economic engagement can help reduce the space for extremism and smuggling.

To conclude our discussion of the initiatives put forward at the Bishkek Summit, we should also mention the President of Uzbekistan’s proposal for a program on preserving traditional arts and intangible cultural heritage for 2028–2030. Why does the SCO need a separate program in this area, and what practical results could it deliver?

— The SCO brings together states with different political systems and interests, so its long-term cohesion cannot rely solely on intergovernmental agreements. Traditional arts, crafts, music, oral traditions and cultural festivals create horizontal ties between societies and help shape a shared cultural space while preserving national identities and differences.

In practical terms, the program could include joint registries and digital archives, restoration and research projects, festivals, exchange programs for traditional artisans, youth training, and cultural tourism routes. For Uzbekistan, this would serve both as an instrument of cultural diplomacy and as a means of supporting regional economies: traditional crafts contribute to employment, small businesses and cultural tourism.

During his visit to Bishkek, the President of Uzbekistan also took part in the “SCO Plus” meeting, which focused on the role of the United Nations in shaping a fairer multipolar world order. How could the model of cooperation proposed by Uzbekistan between the UN, regional organizations and individual states improve the effectiveness of international cooperation without creating new dividing lines? And what practical role could the “SCO Plus” format play in this process?

— The central message of the address is that the emergence of a multipolar world should not lead to the weakening of universal international institutions or to the creation of competing geopolitical blocs. The UN should retain its central coordinating role and uphold common principles of international cooperation, while regional organizations should complement its efforts by adapting global decisions to the specific conditions, capacities and needs of individual regions. Such an approach would combine the universal legitimacy of the UN with the practical capabilities of regional organizations, thereby strengthening the effectiveness and manageability of the international system.

It is precisely in this context that the “SCO Plus” format is proposed as a bridge between states, regional organizations and global institutions. It could serve as a platform for coordinating various initiatives in areas such as sustainable development, advanced technologies, climate adaptation, education, healthcare and youth empowerment. The proposed Network of Regional Organizations would help systematize such cooperation, facilitate the exchange of experience and jointly promote solutions within the UN framework. An open bank of interregional projects and technologies, in turn, would help translate political agreements into concrete programs that contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

At the same time, Uzbekistan links the effectiveness of international cooperation to tangible results for states, businesses and citizens: greater access to markets, the development of cross-border corridors, increased investment and the wider use of modern technologies. The proposal to transform “SCO Invest” into a permanent platform is aimed at addressing precisely this objective.

At the same time, the establishment of the “SCO Plus” Forum of Cultures and Civilizations in Khiva is intended to give cooperation a broader societal and humanitarian foundation. In this way, Tashkent is proposing a model of open multipolarity in which the strategic autonomy of states is strengthened not through isolation, but through greater connectivity, complementarity of initiatives, and an expansion of points of contact between countries and regions.