Central Asia Eyes Alternative Sea Access, But Afghanistan’s Role Remains Uncertain

The recent standoff in the Strait of Hormuz between Washington and Tehran has pushed governments and businesses to rethink how oil and goods move across the region. Afghanistan is emerging as a possible transit corridor that could bypass the narrow Persian Gulf chokepoint, yet the reality of Taliban rule raises serious doubts about Kabul’s ability to serve as a reliable conduit to ports on the Arabian Sea.

Policymakers and analysts hashed out these questions at a full-day forum on Capitol Hill hosted by the New Lines Institute’s Central Asia Center, which promoted the Silk Seven Plus, or S7+, proposal. The plan envisions a coordinated Central Asian economic bloc and a trade axis linking the Caspian Basin with South Asia. Panelists agreed that whether and how Afghanistan fits into those ambitions is the single most consequential policy decision for the initiative’s prospects.

Speakers cataloged the practical barriers to building cross-border pipelines, rail lines and export hubs through Afghanistan. They cited Kabul’s tolerance of extremist groups, policies that alienate segments of the population, the consequences of a two-decade U.S. military presence, and recurring friction with neighboring Pakistan. All of these factors make investors and transport planners wary of committing to multibillion-dollar projects that would have to run through Afghan territory.

Some experts at the event argued Afghanistan cannot be sidelined if the region is to realize its trade potential. One longtime regional specialist said Central Asian governments are already engaging Kabul quietly and treating the Taliban as the de facto authorities. He pointed to Uzbekistan’s trade with Afghanistan, which he estimated at roughly one and a half billion dollars a year, and noted incremental work on a Turkmenistan-to-Pakistan-and-India gas link. He urged Washington to give regional capitals room to negotiate local arrangements rather than imposing its own timetable.

Others counseled caution. A retired U.S. ambassador with decades of experience in the area said the S7+ concepts look sensible on maps but warned that grand plans must be tempered by on-the-ground realities — from ethnic and historical frictions to security risks — before policymakers commit. He suggested that, under present conditions, the idea of an immediate trans-Afghan corridor may be more aspirational than actionable.

The S7+ blueprint calls for two stages: first, forging a Central Asian economic community so national capitals can bargain together instead of separately; second, pursuing access to a seaport by building links that would ultimately include Afghanistan and Pakistan. Proponents note growing ties between Central Asian states and Pakistan as evidence the second phase is feasible over time, but the current tensions between Islamabad and the Taliban remain a major hurdle. As one observer put it, change in the region happens unevenly — sometimes glacially, sometimes rapidly — and the S7+ will advance only as political and commercial incentives align.