In recent years, the geopolitical significance of Central Asia has grown considerably, driven by a convergence of factors, including the increasing global demand for alternative trade routes, the recalibration of regional partnerships following the war in Ukraine, and a renewed Western interest in engaging with post-Soviet Eurasia. Most importantly, we are currently witnessing a “Great Game 2.0” in Central Asia—this time, with more actors involved than ever before. Alongside traditional powers like Russia and China, the United States, the European Union and its individual member-states, the UK, Türkiye, and regional players such as India, Iran, and even South Korea are actively vying for influence, connectivity, and strategic partnerships across the region.

Yet, amidst this crowded and competitive geopolitical field, there remains an underappreciated actor whose strategic positioning and growing diplomatic activism demand more attention: Azerbaijan. With its increasing involvement in Eurasian connectivity, energy corridors, and regional security, Azerbaijan is no longer simply an external observer—it is actively seeking to integrate itself into Central Asia's evolving geopolitical mosaic.

While various 5+1 formats are on the rise—most recently the EU–Central Asia dialogue—Baku’s messaging to Western actors should be clear: the region now requires a 5+1+1 framework. Azerbaijan is no longer merely a neighbor or transit corridor; it intends to be an integral part of Central Asian geopolitics or at the very least a strategic gateway and bridge between the West and Central Asia. Recognizing this role within multilateral platforms will allow for more effective cooperation, deeper engagement, and better alignment of regional interests.

Is the traditional "5+1" format not sufficient?

Historically, the "5+1" format has served as a convenient platform for external actors to engage Central Asia. However, this setup implicitly assumes a static separation between Central Asia and its neighboring regions. As the political, economic, and security challenges facing these countries become increasingly interlinked, this division appears increasingly artificial.

Azerbaijan’s growing engagement with Central Asia calls for a more integrated approach. Following the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, Azerbaijan has actively sought to deepen ties across Eurasia—not only for strategic and economic reasons but also as part of a broader shift from bilateralism to multilateralism. Its recent accession to the D-8 Organization for Economic Cooperation exemplifies this trend.

Geographically, culturally, and economically, Azerbaijan shares multiple touchpoints with Central Asia. It serves as a natural land bridge between the Caspian Sea and the South Caucasus, with vital energy and transport infrastructure such as the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars railway and the Southern Gas Corridor. These routes not only facilitate East–West connectivity but are increasingly viewed by the EU as key to reducing dependency on Russian energy and transit systems.

Azerbaijan's strategic reorientation

Since its independence in 1991, Azerbaijan has directed almost all of its resources toward resolving the decades-long Karabakh conflict. Now, with the finalisation of the Karabakh chapter and the restoration of its territorial integrity, a “what`s next?” question arose before the policymakers in Baku, which necessitates Azerbaijan to rethink and reshape its foreign policy priorities.

With this foreign policy 

Baku’s foreign policy over the past 15–16 years has been marked by a balancing or ‘equidistance’ between Russo-centric Eurasian structures and the Western power bloc. The hostility between Russia and the West has only strengthened Azerbaijan’s determination not to align itself with either of the confronting parties. At the same time, this has led to a quest for a new geopolitical structure and direction for Baku’s foreign policy and economic development. Here, Central Asia emerges as a potential strategic partner for Azerbaijan, offering a mutually beneficial geopolitical and economic alignment.

This geopolitical calculation is driven by several factors, but mostly by common roots, ethnolinguistic kinship, and a shared historical legacy. The concept of Turkic unity itself originated in Azerbaijan during the late 19th century, while Azerbaijan together with Türkiye has been zealously pushing the Turkic agenda and integrationist projects since the 1990s. Although these initiatives were initially rooted in and designed to promote cultural ties between Turkic societies, there has been a noticeable shift, in recent years, towards greater political and economic convergence among the Turkic states. The Organization of Turkic States (OTS), loosely modelled on the EU, possesses the potential to evolve into a supranational organisation if effectively managed. OTS member states have also had the chance to turn their integrationist ideas into tangible projects such as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route – also known as the Middle Corridor – whose significance has only been growing in light of the Russo-Ukrainian war.

The Geopolitical Logic of "5+1+1"

A 5+1+1 format, which formally includes Azerbaijan and the European Union, reflects this new reality. It acknowledges Azerbaijan not merely as a transit corridor but as a political actor and economic partner whose interests and capacities are aligned with both the EU and Central Asia.

This trilateral dialogue platform would create several benefits:

1. Enhanced Regional Ownership: By including Azerbaijan, the format better reflects regional dynamics and promotes intra-regional cooperation. Azerbaijan's active foreign policy, investments in regional transport and logistics, and energy interconnectivity with Central Asia make it a natural partner.
2. EU's Strategic Entry Point: Azerbaijan can serve as a credible interlocutor and bridge for the EU's engagement with Central Asia. With growing concerns over Russian influence and China’s economic footprint in the region, the EU needs more nimble and locally anchored partnerships. Azerbaijan, with its secular governance model, energy cooperation record, and balancing diplomacy, fits this role.
3. Multilateral Efficiency: Joint platforms such as a 5+1+1 dialogue can streamline overlapping initiatives—such as energy corridors, digital connectivity, and climate resilience—by promoting synergy rather than fragmentation among the involved parties.
4. Security and Stability: As regional threats like extremism, water scarcity, and border disputes persist, a broader cooperative format can help in creating coordinated responses. Azerbaijan’s post-conflict experience and expertise in defense modernization may also be of interest to Central Asian states grappling with similar concerns.

Avoiding the Pitfalls of Symbolism

To ensure the 5+1+1 format does not remain merely a symbolic proposal, it must be rooted in practical steps:

• Institutionalization: Regular summits, working groups, and thematic forums (e.g., on trade, energy, connectivity) should be established to ensure continuity and measurable outcomes.
• Private Sector and Civil Society Involvement: Beyond state actors, businesses and academic institutions from all sides should be involved to deepen the network of cooperation.
• Clear Priorities: The format should begin with achievable goals—such as harmonizing customs procedures, facilitating student exchanges, or supporting green energy projects—before tackling more politically sensitive issues.

A Window of Opportunity

The shifting geopolitical context offers a window of opportunity. As the EU diversifies its partnerships, and as Central Asian states seek greater agency in foreign affairs, a new model of engagement is needed—one that is inclusive, agile, and regionally grounded.

Azerbaijan’s increasing regional activism and geostrategic location make it an ideal partner to bridge Europe and Central Asia. The proposed 5+1+1 format is not just a diplomatic innovation—it is a necessary evolution for a region in flux