Introduction

Central Asia, comprising Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, is a region rich in demographic and historical complexity. Despite housing only 1% of the global population, its history spans from Palaeolithic societies to the dominance of nomadic empires. The region’s environmental significance, particularly in its ice core contributions to climate research, adds to its global importance. However, since gaining independence in 1991, these nations have faced intricate security challenges rooted in societal, transnational, military, and environmental threats.

Security Framework

The Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT) aptly captures Central Asia’s security dynamics, emphasizing the interconnected nature of regional issues. The past decade has seen a sharp increase in radicalization and violent extremism, with countermeasures heavily influenced by Russian anti-terrorism policies. These policies’ vague definitions and repressive applications have introduced legal and social uncertainties, complicating effective governance.

Geopolitical and Strategic Priorities

While traditional issues such as territorial disputes and resource management persist, inter-state tensions and transnational threats dominate the security discourse. Geopolitical maneuvering to address these concerns often overshadows localized threats, further complicating the implementation of comprehensive counter-extremism strategies.

Regional Overview of Security Complex

Despite global counterterrorism commitments, Central Asia’s performance has been suboptimal. The region has been inaccurately portrayed as a terrorism hotspot due to:

• High-profile attacks in neighboring areas.
• Involvement of Central Asian nationals in international conflicts.

Recruitment by militant groups has declined significantly, with current concerns focusing on the residual impacts of the Islamic State’s territorial collapse in 2019 and the presence of sleeper cells in Europe. The primary drivers of radicalization include:

• Religious restrictions.
• Corrupt governance.
• Migration pressures.
• Residual terror networks.

Kazakhstan presents a unique case, where internal migration and displacement significantly influence radicalization dynamics.

Terrorism Statistics and Realities

A closer analysis reveals that Central Asia’s contribution to global terrorism incidents is minimal:

• The region accounts for only 0.001% of global incidents since 1970.
• Between 2008 and 2018, 18 recorded attacks resulted in 142 deaths, predominantly affecting law enforcement and attackers.

Despite these statistics, terrorism in Central Asia is often overstated, necessitating a balanced and data-driven perspective.

Aftermath and Scenarios

Post-Syria and Iraq conflicts:

• Over 800 Central Asians involved in terrorism were killed.
• Approximately 300 returned to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.
• Others relocated to new conflict zones or third countries.

The current threat includes low-tech attacks, political violence, and unrest fueled by corruption and repression.

Legal Context and Counter-Extremism Measures

Extremism laws in Central Asia, modeled on Russian legislation, face several issues:

• Ambiguous Definitions: Broad interpretations lead to inconsistencies between criminal codes and extremism laws.
• Additional Restrictions: Measures such as freezing bank accounts extend beyond legal provisions.
• Inefficient Registers: Prohibited material lists lack clear criteria and accessibility, undermining public awareness and compliance.

Examples:

• Kazakhstan’s Article 174 penalizes actions like inciting discord, which are not explicitly classified under anti-extremism laws.
• Courts often decide on extremist content without informing relevant parties, complicating appeals.

Threat Analysis

Key groups and their operations:

Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)

• Origin: Formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, a branch of Al Qaeda in Syria.
• Activities: Utilizes platforms like Telegram, YouTube, and Twitter for recruitment and propaganda.
• Narratives: Combines religious content with operational updates.

Tavhid va Jihod Katibasi (TJK)

• Origin: Formed in 2014; loyal to Al Qaeda.
• Activities: Active on Telegram, Facebook, and VK.
• Narratives: Focuses on jihad in Syria and opposition to secular Central Asian governments.

Katibat Imam Bukhori (KIB)

• Origin: Largest Uzbek militant group, allied with the Taliban.
• Activities: Prominent on platforms like Telegram and YouTube.
• Narratives: Advocates for global jihad, emphasizing Afghanistan.

Islamic Jihad Union (IJU)

• Origin: Splinter group from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.
• Activities: Operates in Uzbekistan and Afghanistan.
• Narratives: Focuses on combating Uzbekistan’s government.

Malhama Tactical (MT)

• Role: Private military contractor training jihadist groups.
• Activities: Promotes advanced training tactics.

Future Outlook

Uzbekistan

Heavy surveillance measures address external and internal threats but draw criticism for civil liberties violations.

Turkmenistan

Limited terrorist activity, attributed to its “Permanent Neutrality” policy, though border incidents with Afghanistan highlight vulnerabilities.

Tajikistan

Frequent extremist attacks and repressive measures exacerbate instability, risking further unrest.

Conclusion

Central Asia’s approach to countering extremism is hindered by structural and procedural flaws. Over Reliance on repressive tactics, legal ambiguities, and lack of transparency undermine effectiveness. Addressing root causes through education, community engagement, and legislative reforms can enhance resilience and ensure a balanced, sustainable security framework for the region.