Uzbekistan’s CIS Trade Agenda Puts Special Economic Zones in Focus

FTZ News: At the Avaza summit this month, Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev urged CIS leaders to trim technical trade barriers, adopt a roadmap for special economic zones, and cut transit costs. He also pressed members to shift from shipping raw commodities toward joint manufacturing. Uzbekistan takes over the group’s chair next year.

The CIS free-trade agreement has lasted years, yet formal pacts have failed to erase cross-border friction. Certificate requirements, sanitary standards, and restricted access to state purchasing—particularly in agriculture—continue to stall regional trade. While leaders discussed opening farm procurement and drafting a joint food-security program, border officials still enforce these checks on ground-level shipments.

Mirziyoyev specifically proposed linking member states’ industrial parks and economic zones into a single network. Several countries already run these hubs. Whether a unified network actually helps plants in different zones source parts from each other is unproven; the president’s speech omitted details on mutual permit recognition or streamlined customs checks. Any integration would force capitals to resolve whose regulations apply when supply chains cross borders, including tricky rules of origin. Neighbors like Kazakhstan may hesitate to overhaul their existing zone frameworks for a shared roadmap, given their own established investment regimes.

Transport plans face hard geography. Landlocked Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan must clear at least one foreign border to reach ocean ports. Even Caspian Sea access for Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan offers no direct passage to open ocean trade routes. Meanwhile, key rail corridors are running at capacity, and border inspections frequently add days to transit times. Proposed logistics centers and shared digital tracking could trim red tape, but they do little to widen track bottlenecks or shorten long rail detours. Though construction on the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan line gained pace—with its first Kyrgyz tunnel finished in September 2026—exporters still rely on older, costlier routes until new rails open.

Food and energy proposals take narrower aim. An early-warning system for upcoming export bans on crops or fertilizers would buy importers time to adjust. Similarly, long-range forecasts of seasonal power surpluses could help operators balance hydro, thermal, and renewable grids. Yet this hinges on capitals sharing sensitive operational data on grid load and export capacity—a tough sell for states managing strategic pipelines and power plants.

Russia remains the bloc’s largest market and a vital northern corridor for Central Asian freight. Any changes to procurement or transit rules risk shifting existing revenue streams and corporate arrangements. Meanwhile, states like Belarus and Armenia must balance any new CIS terms against commitments in overlapping trade blocs. Low-cost fixes—like recognizing basic farm certificates—face far fewer hurdles than proposals that threaten transit fees or state contract control.

Ultimately, tying economic zones together requires border agencies to overhaul existing customs and manufacturing permits. A shared transport portal demands real-time data sharing. Uzbekistan can keep these priorities on the table during its presidency, but real progress depends on brick-and-mortar changes: shorter rail lines, expanded track capacity, or a signed joint venture will prove whether the initiative moves beyond summit rhetoric./.