The expanded Men’s World Cup in 2026 has given fans the chance to cheer on the exploits of qualifying for the first time, some of which previously many might have struggled to find on the map. Highlights have already included Curaçao’s goalkeeping heroics to earn a draw against Ecuador and Cabo Verde’s upset by returning reigning European champions Spain.
But one story has flown largely under the radar: the participation of Uzbekistan. According to some experts, Uzbekistan should have collapsed into violent chaos years ago. Instead, it has become the first Central Asia state to play on football’s grandest stage. Behind this lies a fascinating tale of geopolitics and peace.
In the 1990s, sophisticated geopolitical analysis portrayed the region as dangerous and in desperate need of Western rescue. This was especially true for the US. In 1997, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser and a major pessimist of the US foreign policy establishment, called Central Asia the “Eurasian Balkans” in what he called “big chessboard” of the competition of great powers.
At the intersection of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan is the Ferghana Valley. With its complex patchwork of borders, enclaves and ethnic minorities, it became the focal point of this the discourse of risk. A 1999 policy report written by US academics warned that, without US help, the valley could become “a breeding ground for terrorism” and “a hotbed of religious and political extremism”.
Like most parts of the world, Uzbekistan has had its problems. Rapid economic growth has led to serious urban pollution and youth unemployment is high, thanks to population growth. As is the case with other countries in the region, a lack of political pluralism limits his ability to deal effectively with these problems.
But the dire scenarios predicted by Western analysts have not come true. For my research on borders, nation-building and geopolitics in the Ferghana Valley, I interviewed policymakers across the region. All of them emphasized the region’s ability to sustain historical cultural ties and state-building practices to manage the difficult transition from Soviet republics to independent nations.
After Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan gained their independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the states of the Ferghana Valley inherited a series of complicated and disputed borders originally drawn as internal Soviet borders in the 1920s. These have proved controversial – however in recent years the three countries have made a series of agreements to transfer territory and fully delimit their borders.
of Khujand’s statement of March 2025 demarcated the border between the three states of the valley and ended decades of tensions. In terms of international experience, this counts as extremely rapid progress.
Resolution of boundary tensions
It is in the Ferghana Valley itself that progress is most visible. I saw border tensions rise late 1990s and early 2000s. But in the past decade, a new generation of leaders has not only resolved territorial disputes, but spurred a significant increase in cross-border economic, social and cultural ties. They have reopened dozens of previously closed border crossings, eased red tape and stimulated cross-border trade. This has led to significant growth in regional trade and has eased ethnic tensions.
In October 2025, the first Ferghana Valley Peace Forum brought together governments and civil society under a new platform for dialogue. A main organizer of the event, Akramjon Ne’matov, the first deputy director of Institute for Strategic and Regional Studiesan influential think-tank linked to the state in Tashkent, emphasized that “the purpose of the forum is to strengthen trust and good neighborly relations, promoting a common vision of the region as a space of cooperation and mutual benefit”.
According to Ne’matov, it serves as a strong response to the vision presented in Brzezinski’s “big chessboard”. This outdated narrative was not only flawed, it was in danger of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. It sowed distrust instead of fostering development.
Despite the initiatives as unfortunate Union of Central AsiaCentral Asia has not succeeded in establishing formal EU-style regional institutions. Western academics have routinely dismissed such efforts as simplistic “virtual regionalism. But explorative BY St Andrews University shows that informal agreements between authoritarian governments to respect each other’s sovereignty and not allow single external powers to dominate have led to the emergence of an effective, informal regional order based on personal diplomacy, stability and coexistence.
Common destiny
This digs deep into historical notions of common destiny. As one politician in Tashkent told me: “The important thing to keep in mind is that we are one house in Central Asia, one culture.” As the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, and the wars in Armenia and Azerbaijan and the wars in Russia and Ukraine suggest, Central Asia has probably been more successful in resolving post-Cold War ethnic and border disputes than Europe.
In March this year, I joined a sold-out crowd at an Uzbekistan Super League match, cheering Ferghana Neftchi beat Tashkent Lokomotiv 3-1. The match took place in an impressive modern stadium in Ferghana. This confounded the predictions of analysts in the 1990s who saw the Ferghana Valley as the supposed locus of all the region’s ills.
Other fans were already looking forward to the World Cup – although one bitterly repeated a joke from the comedian to me Hojiboy Tojiboev that the Uzbek team would “go there, eat ice cream and then come back”.
On the field, this first foray into soccer’s biggest stage has been challenging for the “White Wolves,” as the Uzbek team is known. But away from football, in our age of closing borders and rising geopolitical tensions, the West can learn a lot from Uzbekistan about how to manage regional tensions and plan for shared futures.
Nick Megoran is a professor of political geography, University of Newcastle; Independent Social Research Foundation.
This article was reprinted from Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read on original article.
