The Center for Analysis of Strategic Policy and International Affairs (CASPIA), in cooperation with its strategic partners, organized an international expert seminar (webinar) titled “Trans-Caspian Corridor: Geopolitical Risk, Supply Chain Security and Strategic Resilience.” The event brought together researchers and policy experts to examine the evolving strategic importance of the Trans-Caspian transport and logistics space.
The primary objective of the webinar was to present ongoing research and facilitate interdisciplinary discussion on key issues related to geopolitical risk perceptions, regional security dynamics, and geoeconomic competition shaping contemporary transit corridors. Participants highlighted the growing relevance of supply chain resilience and the increasing interdependence of political, economic, and logistical systems across the wider Eurasian region.
Discussions focused on a broad range of thematic areas, including the development of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR), legal and institutional frameworks governing transit cooperation, and the geopolitical, economic, and technological factors influencing cross-regional connectivity. Particular attention was also given to long-term structural risks, strategic opportunities, and scenario-based assessments of future corridor development.
At the first panel session, moderated by director of CASPIA Center Orkhan Yolchuyev and Co-moderated by Doctor of Political Science and Expert in Regional Security Vaxtang Maisai, it was emphasized that the Middle Corridor has become a critical strategic route for the participating countries, particularly in a period marked by global turbulence. The moderator noted that transport corridors today play an increasingly significant role in shaping the international order. In the context of the Russia–Ukraine war and the ongoing crisis in the Middle East, the geopolitical and geoeconomic importance of the Middle Corridor has further intensified.
Former diplomat, the head of Georgian analytical center “Geocase” Victor Kipiani highlighted that the Middle Corridor is unique in its ability to strengthen both bilateral and multilateral relations, extending far beyond the scope of cargo transportation alone. He stressed that the expansion of transport flows contributes to broader economic efficiency and the development of service sectors across the region. Kipiani also underscored the competitive nature of the corridor, noting that it operates within a highly dynamic environment and competes with alternative routes, including northern transit corridors, while demonstrating strong potential for long-term sustainability and growth.
He further emphasized the corridor’s potential to serve as a geopolitical bridge linking Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Central Asian states, and Türkiye, thereby fostering greater regional interconnectivity. According to his assessment, Georgia has historically functioned as a default transit hub due to the geopolitical complexities of the South Caucasus. However, he noted that the region is now undergoing rapid transformation, and Georgia has yet to fully leverage its transit and connectivity potential in a multilateral framework to the same extent as Türkiye and Azerbaijan.
In this context, it was underlined that greater regional engagement, enhanced participation in multilateral diplomacy, and the avoidance of isolationist approaches are essential for all countries along the route. The discussion also highlighted the importance of maintaining pragmatic and balanced relations with Western partners while simultaneously deepening regional cooperation in order to fully realize the strategic potential of the Middle Corridor.
Liu Chang, a researcher from Tsinghua University, discussed the ongoing global transformation of supply chains and the increasing strategic relevance of the Middle Corridor. She emphasized that large-scale investments in ports and railway infrastructure—particularly in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan—are playing a crucial role in strengthening the corridor’s operational capacity and regional connectivity.
She further noted that indirect geopolitical shocks, including the Russia–Ukraine war and tensions involving Iran and the United States, have contributed to positioning the Middle Corridor as a potentially more secure and resilient alternative transit route. In this context, shifting global risk perceptions are accelerating interest in diversified logistics pathways across Eurasia.
At the same time, Liu highlighted a number of structural challenges that continue to constrain the corridor’s full potential. These include environmental concerns such as the decline of the Caspian Sea level by approximately two meters in recent years, creating navigational and operational difficulties for maritime transport. She also pointed to gaps in digitalization, as well as regulatory inconsistencies related to customs procedures and taxation frameworks across transit countries.
From China’s perspective, she underlined that the Middle Corridor has gained increasing strategic importance in recent years, particularly as part of Beijing’s broader efforts to enhance westward connectivity and diversify trade routes. In this sense, the corridor is not only a regional infrastructure project but also a significant component of China’s evolving global connectivity strategy.
Fuad Shahbazov, an independent researcher, noted that the year 2020 marked a decisive turning point for Azerbaijan. Following its victory in the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan, in his assessment, moved beyond the status of a small regional state and began actively investing in infrastructure development and enhancing connectivity through the Middle Corridor.
He argued that the South Caucasus is currently undergoing structural transformation, with Azerbaijan pursuing a multi-vector connectivity strategy. According to Shahbazov, this strategy is not limited to the Middle Corridor alone but also includes emerging transport initiatives such as the Zangezur Corridor and broader regional transit concepts aimed at strengthening East–West connectivity. In this framework, Azerbaijan is increasingly positioned not merely as a transit country, but as an active manager of regional logistics flows linking Europe and Asia.
Shahbazov further stated that the Zangezur Corridor is envisioned as a potential northern branch of the Middle Corridor, with the capacity to significantly enhance transport efficiency and increase cargo throughput. He suggested that, in a scenario of full operationalization, regional transport volumes could rise substantially compared to current levels. However, he emphasized that the Zangezur route should not be viewed as a replacement for existing key arteries such as the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars railway, but rather as an additional complementary branch designed to improve overall network flexibility and resilience.
In this sense, he concluded that the future of regional connectivity in the South Caucasus is likely to be defined by a diversified and interconnected system of corridors, rather than a single dominant route.
On the second session, Orkhan Yolchuyev, Director of the CASPIA Center, presented Azerbaijan’s strategic vision for the Middle Corridor, emphasizing the country’s unique geopolitical position and its growing role in Eurasian connectivity.
He noted that Azerbaijan may be one of the very few states bordering two countries that are in a state of conflict, a reality that naturally generates significant geopolitical risks. Despite this challenging environment, Azerbaijan possesses one of the most strategically important locations along the Middle Corridor, placing it at the center of emerging East–West transit architecture.
Yolchuyev also pointed to the broader geopolitical context, particularly the crisis in the Middle East and the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has already created volatility in global energy markets, including oil prices and associated sectors. Against this backdrop, the role of the South Caucasus—especially Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Türkiye—has become increasingly important as a stabilizing and alternative connectivity space.
According to him, Azerbaijan’s core objective is to enhance the attractiveness of the route by facilitating larger, more sustainable, and resilient cargo flows. He stressed that cargo volumes are already growing steadily, citing the Port of Alat as a practical example: last year, the port handled its 100,000th TEU container, reflecting the corridor’s rising commercial relevance.
Addressing ongoing debates regarding competition between the Northern Route and the Middle Corridor, Yolchuyev argued that such discussions are not new and should be viewed as part of the natural evolution of Eurasian transit competition. In his assessment, the Middle Corridor remains highly attractive and continues to strengthen its strategic position.
He concluded by emphasizing that Azerbaijan remains firmly focused on expanding the transit potential of the Middle Corridor through continued investment in infrastructure modernization, port capacity expansion, and long-term logistics planning.
Adilbek Yermekbayev, Research Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations and World Economy at Al-Farabi University, emphasized that the Middle Corridor offers Kazakhstan a crucial opportunity to diversify its trade routes and reduce dependence on any single line of commercial connectivity.
He noted that the corridor plays an important role in strengthening Kazakhstan’s infrastructure, port systems, and its broader function as a strategic transit bridge between East and West. In this sense, the Middle Corridor allows Kazakhstan to maintain a greater degree of flexibility in its trade and logistics strategy, particularly in an increasingly fragmented global environment.
At the same time, Yermekbayev stressed that significant improvements are still needed to unlock the corridor’s full capacity. He highlighted the modernization of Aktau Port, particularly in terms of storage facilities and cargo-handling systems, as a priority area if the corridor is expected to absorb larger transport volumes. He also pointed to the declining water levels of the Caspian Sea as a serious structural challenge that is already creating obstacles for maritime transport operations.
According to his assessment, Kazakhstan must accelerate the modernization of its transport infrastructure and integrate advanced digital solutions into logistics management systems. Equally important is the need to improve coordination on customs procedures, streamline border-crossing mechanisms, and reduce delays for vessels and cargo flows moving across the corridor.
He concluded by underlining that Kazakhstan should approach the Middle Corridor not as a short-term geopolitical response, but as a long-term, sustainable, and strategic national initiative capable of reshaping the country’s role in Eurasian connectivity.
Allouddin Komilov, a researcher at the Center for Progressive Reforms in Uzbekistan, noted that Uzbekistan is currently facing a complex strategic environment due to growing instability in Iran.
He explained that a significant share of Uzbekistan’s export flows and transit operations has traditionally moved through Iranian routes, making the country particularly vulnerable to disruptions stemming from regional instability. In this context, the current geopolitical uncertainties have reinforced the urgent need for more efficient, predictable, and secure alternatives for trade and logistics.
According to Komilov, this reality increases the strategic relevance of the Middle Corridor for Uzbekistan, as it offers a safer and more resilient route for connecting Central Asia with the South Caucasus, Türkiye, and European markets. He emphasized that for Tashkent, diversification of transit pathways is no longer simply an economic preference, but a strategic necessity in response to rapidly changing regional risks.
Dastan Ospanov, Deputy Director for International Relations at the Association of Oversized and Heavy Cargo Carriers of the Republic of Kazakhstan, focused his remarks on the infrastructure constraints and operational bottlenecks affecting the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route. He argued that the Middle Corridor has evolved from an alternative pathway into a critical logistics artery, particularly after the restructuring of global supply chains and sanctions-driven diversification. The redistribution of Asia–Europe cargo flows, combined with the growing demand for resilient transport routes, has significantly increased the corridor’s strategic relevance. He also highlighted the rapid expansion of the road freight segment, which provides flexibility and speed advantages.
A central issue in his assessment was ferry capacity limitations. During peak periods in 2024–2025, around 1,200 vehicles were waiting for loading on both the Kazakh and Azerbaijani sides, creating delays and undermining the corridor’s efficiency. Ospanov contrasted operational models across the Caspian, noting that Turkmenbashi Port’s semi-trailer system improves fleet efficiency and reduces costs, whereas the Kazakhstan–Azerbaijan direction often relies on shipping full vehicles, which burdens fleet capacity and slows vessel turnover. This model, he explained, reduces daily utilization rates and creates inefficiencies in scaling up cargo volumes.
He further pointed to structural vulnerabilities linked to Kazakhstan’s heavy reliance on the Azerbaijan Caspian Shipping Company, which leaves the Kazakh side exposed to operational decisions beyond its direct control. Additional road transport constraints—such as stricter registration requirements, vehicle and company verification procedures, and complex documentation standards—continue to increase transaction costs for Central Asian carriers. EU restrictions on dual-use goods and industrial products transiting Russian territory were also cited as factors complicating logistics and increasing refusal rates.
Looking ahead, Ospanov stressed that the Middle Corridor is moving from a phase of rapid growth to one of large-scale operational scaling. To sustain this transition, he argued, the corridor will require expanded ferry infrastructure, more efficient logistics models, and significant improvements in route throughput. In his view, the long-term competitiveness of the corridor will depend on how effectively these bottlenecks are addressed.
Zeyneb Aybuke Can, a researcher and expert from Türkiye, emphasized that transport corridors today should no longer be viewed merely as trade pathways, but increasingly as instruments of geopolitical power and strategic influence. In her assessment, the rise of the Middle Corridor has significantly elevated the geopolitical importance of middle powers, particularly Azerbaijan and Türkiye, whose positions along the route allow them to shape emerging Eurasian connectivity dynamics.
In this context, she highlighted the Zangezur Corridor as a potentially important complementary route, arguing that its opening would further increase the competitiveness and flexibility of the wider Middle Corridor network. What makes the corridor particularly unique, she noted, is its multimodal structure, which combines maritime, rail, road, and port infrastructure into a single strategic transit ecosystem capable of adapting to shifting global trade patterns.
Can also underlined that the relevance of the Middle Corridor has increased sharply as a result of ongoing global crises and armed conflicts. At the same time, the Southern Corridor passing through Iran currently carries heightened risks due to regional instability, making the Middle Corridor an even more strategic and reliable alternative for East–West connectivity.
She paid particular attention to Azerbaijan’s critical role in the Caspian crossing segment, especially the Port of Alat, which she described not simply as a port facility but as a highly integrated logistics complex supported by a strong ecosystem, a free economic zone, and advanced digital solutions—most notably its digital customs systems. Türkiye, she added, serves as another indispensable transit hub thanks to its large-scale infrastructure capacity. From a European perspective, Türkiye’s logistical capabilities position it as a key guarantor of stable cargo transit across the corridor.
Dr. Zhao Xinli, a researcher from China, President of Silk Road Innovation, and former Principal Adviser at the China Institute for Science and Technology Policy (CISTP) at Tsinghua University, highlighted Azerbaijan’s long-standing and highly proactive role in advancing Eurasian connectivity. Reflecting on his personal experience, he recalled that during his tenure as Minister Counselor for Science and Technology at China’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations (2010–2014), Azerbaijani diplomats approached him in 2012 with a request for China to co-sponsor the UN resolution “Building connectivity through the Trans-Eurasian Information Super Highway.” China, he noted, readily supported the initiative.
Dr. Zhao shared that Azerbaijan demonstrated exceptional diplomatic commitment during the consultation process surrounding the resolution. According to his recollection, both the Deputy Foreign Minister and the Deputy Minister for Digital Development and Transport of Azerbaijan traveled to New York to actively promote the initiative. He emphasized that Azerbaijan played a major strategic role in advancing the Eurasian Information Superhighway concept, and that he personally maintained extensive exchanges with Azerbaijan’s Permanent Representative to the UN as well as senior officials involved in the process. Following the adoption of the resolution, he also assisted—at Azerbaijan’s request—in facilitating contacts with China’s three major telecommunications operators to support related cooperation efforts.
Turning to the present, Dr. Zhao stressed that the development of the Trans-Caspian Corridor is both timely and strategically necessary in order to ensure the barrier-free, low-cost, fast, convenient, and secure movement of goods, information, people, and capital. He compared it with the currently shortest China–Europe route, the Western Europe–Western China International Highway, which stretches 8,445 kilometers from Lianyungang through Kazakhstan to St. Petersburg and allows delivery in approximately 10–12 days. However, he argued that greater strategic attention should now be directed toward the Middle Corridor, whose theoretical transportation time of 13–15 days remains highly competitive despite the additional sea–rail component requiring ferry transit across the Caspian Sea.
In his view, the advantages of the Middle Corridor extend beyond transport efficiency alone. Countries along the route stand to gain substantial economic and strategic benefits, while the corridor itself can significantly increase regional competitiveness and operational resilience. To improve its long-term effectiveness, Dr. Zhao argued that collective action is essential: think tanks should take the lead through high-quality research and policy analysis, while national authorities across participating countries should strengthen coordination in revising and implementing the regulatory and policy frameworks necessary for seamless corridor governance.