Zarina Kamayeva
Central Asia has long been viewed through the lens of crisis and competition, often treated more as a secondary geopolitical entity than a dynamic force. However, this perspective started to shift, particularly in the last few decades. Over the past eight years, the region achieved notable political, economic, and diplomatic progress, driven by growing efforts towards regional unity. As Javlon Vakhobov (2025) notes, since 2016 regional economic cooperation has increased dramatically, with economic activity surpassing $500 billion.
Nonetheless, deeper economic and political integration between the states remains challenged by contrasting foreign policy objectives influenced by international organization memberships. For example, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which promotes free trade through MFN and National Treatment principles, while Uzbekistan is still in the process of accession, marking its 31-year effort – one of the longest in the organization’s history.
Since its independence, Uzbekistan has faced significant challenges integrating into global economy, making WTO accession an important goal. Negotiations began in 1994, when Uzbekistan was one of the first WTO applicants among the former Soviet Union states, but after four working group consultations, little progress was made. Only after 2016, under the presidentship of Shavkat Mirziyoyev, did progress resumed. From 2017, major market reforms were introduced, including the removal of foreign exchange restrictions and easing of export regulations, creating equal opportunities for importers, whether state-owned or private. These changes had a positive impact on the country’s economy, increasing its foreign trade turnover by 20% in 2017.
Progress has accelerated recently: in 2023, a special presidential representative on WTO issues was appointed, and by 2024, the country entered “the final stage” of accession. Uzbekistan has continued moving toward economic liberalization by aligning tariffs and duties with WTO standards, thereby reducing protectionism and state monopoly. The country is now set to join the organization by the end of this year.
One of the main advantages, in my view, is the reduction of tariff rates, which can increase GDP and improve household welfare. According to Niginakhon Saida and Oybek Saidkhodjaev (2025), a 56% reduction in tariffs on current imports could raise real GDP by 0.4% per year above the baseline and household welfare by 0.9%. The growth is not only due to cheaper imports, but also to broader economic effects. As Veronika Movchan and Woldemar Walter (2023) note, Uzbekistan will be able to purchase capital and intermediate goods – raw materials, machinery, components – at lower prices, reducing production costs for domestic firms.
This allows key sectors such as metallurgy, agriculture, and services to increase production and become more competitive. As these industries grow, the need for labor demand creates more jobs and raises wages. At the same time, lower tariffs on consumer goods will help slow inflation, making households benefit from higher incomes and lower prices. This crucial change would allow Uzbekistan to modernize its production in competitive sectors, making local industries more compatible in both local and international perspective.
Beyond the immediate impact on GDP and household welfare, the WTO framework promotes the improved quality of domestic goods and compliance with international standards. As Nilufar Zikitullayeva (2024) notes, aligning with these frameworks has already guided market reforms during Uzbekistan’s first steps towards the accession, particularly after the change of leadership in 2016. For example, quality standards scores improved across key sectors such as cotton and gold, with scores rising from 70 in 2014 to 80 in 2018.
Similarly, improved regulatory compliance scores and market diversification indices were seen in the natural gas sector, demonstrating serious steps towards alignment with international trade norms. In addition, to bring its tariffs and duties in line with WTO standards, Uzbekistan has taken a significant step from protectionism to market liberalization by abolishing special rights in sectors such as metallurgy, chemistry, energy and telecommunications, including elimination of monopolies (UzGazTrade and Uzenergosotish).
Another potential benefit of WTO accession is reduced unemployment in. As Saida and Saidkhodjaev (2025) point out, 5.8%, or 15 million of the country’s working-age population is unemployed, with almost 2 million working as labor migrants abroad. Here, Uzbekistan’s double-landlocked position becomes strategic: foreign investors seeking access to the Uzbek market would find it more profitable to open enterprises locally to reduce logistical costs and import duties. New manufacturing enterprises would raise demand for local, relatively cheap labor, helping reduce unemployment.
However, there might be some challenges in adapting to new organizational practices following the accession. One of the most significant, in my view, is the increased competition between local and foreign businesses. Local manufacturers will need to improve the quality of their products and services to build consumer trust; otherwise, they risk losing their market position to more experienced foreign companies. Weaker domestic firms may not survive the opening of the market, making it difficult for local businesses to thrive. Another one is the potential increase of food prices for local consumers, as foreign markets gain easier access to Uzbek products, particularly agricultural goods.
The accession to the World Trade Organization will bring substantial benefits to Uzbekistan: GDP growth, improved household welfare, reduction of unemployment, standardization and better-quality products. Naturally, all the benefits come with certain risks. However, I see them as transitional and manageable, rather than fundamental, especially if the government supports weaker local enterprises and protects consumers during the adaptation process. In this case, the benefits of accession outweigh the risks.
Zarina Kamayeva is a student of International Relations at Webster University in Tashkent, with a growing interest in foreign policy, diplomacy, human right advocacy and environmental issues.
