Penned by Hamza Rashid Marwat
In a breakthrough for Central Asia’s most volatile frontier, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan signed a landmark peace deal on March 13, 2025, ending decades of deadly clashes between the two neighbors.
The conflict was a combination of social behavior, ethnic differences, unequal resource distribution, and administrative issues. It was triggered by a shift in the lifestyle of a group of people from nomadic to sedentary, which created a wide range of conflicts.
However, the root causes of the conflicts run deep, inherited from the Soviet years, and need to be examined thoroughly before forming preconceived notions.
Legacy of Soviet-Era Transformations in Central Asia
The forced conversion of formerly nomadic to sedentary lifestyles of Central Asian tribes by the Soviets in the early stages and the emergence of Central Asian states from painful post-Soviet transitions since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, leave a legacy of unaddressed border disputes and conflict zones in the region.
This phenomenon is evident in the Fergana Valley, which is home to overlapping borders and interlinked resource-sharing, such as canals and rivers, among the three states of Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.
Soviet-era projects aimed at boosting crop yields were also designed to operate within a single, unified administrative system. The subsequent division of the Fergana valley among three independent post-Soviet states in Central Asia further transformed shared resources into contested assets among them.
With resources such as fertile land, water, and minerals ubiquitous across the region, Central Asia will always hold immense strategic significance for regional and global powers such as Russia, China, and the United States. All three are bound to expand their respective influence amid global challenges in 2025, related to supply chain shocks and the dearth of critical minerals.
The decline in freshwater sources, such as glaciers, due to Soviet-era projects and climate change has also led to water scarcity and droughts across different countries.
The recent clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in September 2022 are stark reminders of the lasting consequences of ill-conceived borders in the absence of due cognizance of unique domestic dynamics and resource-sharing mechanisms in the newly independent Central Asian states.
Geography & Historical Transformation:
Kyrgyzstan, for example, is a mountainous country bordering China to the east, Tajikistan to the south, Uzbekistan to the west, and Kazakhstan to the north.
Approximately three-fourths of the population is also of Kyrgyz descent, and for most of its history, the Kyrgyz remained a nomadic people, often living in felt tents called ‘boz üy’[v] while moving between pastures.
However, under Soviet rule, they were forced to settle, which was in stark contrast to their nomadic status. This, amid scant knowledge of housing and building societies, resulted in an overreliance on external assistance.
Additionally, the Soviet Union prioritized agricultural work, which led to some nomadic people in Kyrgyzstan being forced to settle. Also, as a result of territorial divisions and the settlement of Kyrgyz nomads in the Fergana Valley and its surroundings, Kyrgyz-Tajik tensions over land and water have persisted since 1939 and have repeatedly flared in 1969, 1974, and 1989.
Tajikistan, too, is a mountainous, landlocked country bordered by Afghanistan to the south, China to the east, Kyrgyzstan to the north, and Uzbekistan to the west. The majority of its population is of Tajik descent and for centuries, were primarily engaged in farming in the fertile valley.
Some highland communities practiced semi-nomadic pastoralism, yet Tajikistan remains among the poorest republics in Central Asia, partly due to the Soviets reorganizing agricultural life by consolidating farms and emphasizing cotton production to tie Dushanbe to Moscow’s central planning model.
During Soviet rule, Central Asia was also divided into separate states based on linguistic identification. Importantly, though, Moscow did not place much emphasis on defining borders or adhering to previous ones, leaving unclear demarcations.
Some people settled too close to other ethnic groups and accidentally crossed into their areas. Borders also shifted frequently in the absence of consensus among the parties, leading officials from both states to use different political maps.
Kyrgyzstan, for example, has been using maps from 1958-1959 and 1989 to indicate its sovereign claims over disputed territories. Similarly, Tajik officials used maps from 1924 and 1927 that showed regions such as Vorukh as their territory.
Subsequently, in the 1960s, Tajik settlers in the Isfara region sought to expand their farms into Kyrgyz atken pastures without the Kyrgyz nomads’ approval. Tajiks also built a canal, expanding their irrigated land, prompting the Kyrgyz to file petitions with the government to take action.
Lack of official responses resulted in violence, with the interstate committee in Kyrgyzstan opting to relocate the Kyrgyz villagers from the Batken pasture to a new settlement called Ak-Sai in 1975. This means that Tajik settlers in the Isfara region farms would be obligated to provide Ak-Sai with the water they needed during irrigation seasons.
However, the amount of water available in the canal was insufficient to meet demand, leading the Ak-Sai to build their own water pump station.
Another conflict occurred in 1989, resulting in military intervention. Like the 1960s, Tajik settlers in Vorukh wanted to expand their farms closer to Kyrgyz pastures in Ak-Sai.
However, the residents of Ak-Sai countered this, prompting Tajik settlers to physically block water flowing down the canal transporting water to Kyrgyz villagers further south. This led to another conflict, which was only quelled when Soviet soldiers intervened.
A similar dispute existed between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, particularly in Osh and in the broader Fergana valley. The conflict shared the same underlying causes as the Kyrgyz-Tajik conflict.
In 1990, the major flare-ups arose between them in the Osh region, which erupted over a land dispute linked to the collapse of a collective farm. Official estimate speaks of 300-600 deaths; unofficial number turns higher.
A Tragic turning point was the 2010 South Kyrgyzstan ethnic clashes. In June 2010, violence broke out in Osh and other southern cities. What may have begun as a dispute between a few individuals escalated widely, as both the Kyrgyz and the Uzbek crowds mobilized.
Kyrgyz–Tajik Hydro-political Tensions
Crucially, the Vorukh settlement is a prime location for conflict, as a single road runs through the village, connecting two regions of Kyrgyzstan and forcing local residents to cross the Tajik border twice when traveling between the two regions.
Also, the settlement is completely surrounded by Kyrgyzstan, making it difficult for locals to avoid without crossing into its territory.
Additionally, the Golovnoi transboundary water distribution unit, which distributes water from the Ak-Suu River (a tributary of the Syr Darya River), is also located at Vorukh. Due to the border’s complex nature in this region and its location near a major water source, tensions in this area have remained palpable, frequent, and alarming.
Tensions between the Tajik and Kyrgyz peoples are heightened by the presence of hydraulic infrastructure along their borders. Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan share approximately 40 water channels that feed into their shared hydropower resources.
As river levels decline, the amount of water distributed to each country also declines, leading people in Kyrgyzstan to accuse their Tajik counterparts of taking an excessive amount of water at the expense of downstream Kyrgyz farmers.
From Violence to Diplomacy: The Kyrgyz-Tajik Border Peace Deal
Most recently, in September 2022[xiv], the most violent conflict between the two states occurred in the Vorukh region. The clash resulted in 100 casualties, 121 injuries, and 130,000 displaced on Kyrgyzstan’s side alone. The conflict lasted for four days, with heavy weaponry employed.
The border problem, however, has remained a grey zone, resulting in the prevalence of drug and uranium smuggling on its routes.
Ultimately, on the 13th of March 2025, a peace deal was signed between the two states. Earlier in late February, both countries signed a delimitation agreement concerning their 970-1000 km long shared border. Land exchange also took place, in which each side received 190 hectares, with Kyrgyzstan gaining 155 hectares around Kairagach and 35 hectares in the Kairagach enclave.
Tajikistan also received equal land in Saada, Razzakov, Salkan, Maity, Proletarsk, Ulak-Zhay, Dostuk market, and the Khujand–Kanibadam/Arka highway zone.
The border was also demilitarized, and a road junction called the Tort-Kocho intersection was designated as neutral territory under the deal.
A special highway called the — Dacha–Kapchygai–Khojai-Aalo–Vorukh — is also scheduled to connect the Tajik Vorukh enclave with the mainland. Another neutral road, the Min-Oruk–Samarkandek, will facilitate access in the absence of border disputes, while provisions were added for the joint management of water infrastructure and utilities.
Interestingly, after two weeks of the peace deal, another Agreement was signed between the three countries, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan on March 31, 2025.
The leaders signed this agreement at the junction of the state borders of the three countries, formally demarcating the points where all three countries meet, and ending decades of border-related instability in the Fergana Valley.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the post-Soviet border disputes of Central Asia were drawn without clarity amid the flawed distribution of vital water resources, laying the groundwork for decades of disputes.
The repeated clashes between Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and their local communities are a direct consequence of this historical mismanagement.
The intertwined borders of the three important countries in the Fergana Valley create the most complex fault lines in Central Asia. However, the recent peace deal between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan stands out as a potential game-changer, which, if successfully implemented, could transform a long-troubled frontier into a foundation of stability, cooperation, and prosperity in Central Asia.
- OPED By Hamza Rashid Marwat
- The author is a Research Scholar, Quid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
- He can be reached at hamzarashidmarwat04 (at) gmail.com
