American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
10
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue06 2025
PAGE NO.
10-16
10.37547/ajsshr/Volume05Issue06-03
24
Prospects for The Development of Asian Civilization in
New Geopolitical Conditions
Djurayeva Nigora Avazovna
PhD, Senior Lecturer, Doctoral Candidate (DSc) of the Department of Philosophy, NUUz, Uzbekistan
Received:
10 April 2025;
Accepted:
06 May 2025;
Published:
08 June 2025
Abstract:
This paper explores the prospects for the development of Asian civilization in the context of the rapidly
changing geopolitical landscape of the 21st century. Special attention is given to the cognitive processes that
shape Asia’s perception of its own fut
ure, including issues of identity, cultural distinctiveness, and spiritual
orientations. Existential aspects are examined through the lens of changes in the socio-economic structure,
traditional life models, and social relations. In the context of contemporary geopolitical realities, where Asia is
poised to play a key role on the global stage, the processes of internal adaptation and overcoming contradictions
between tradition and modernization are analyzed. The paper emphasizes the importance of integrating cognitive
and existential factors in the context of sustainable and harmonious regional development, as well as the
significance of combining traditional values with modern governance models for the sustainable development of
the Asian space. The author investigates key challenges facing the region, including political instability,
environmental threats, and demographic changes, and suggests possible scenarios for Asia's future development,
concluding that the region’s growing civilizational influence on
global processes is inevitable.
Keywords:
Asian civilization, geopolitics, cognitive processes, existential aspects, cultural identity, globalization,
modernization, global challenges.
Introduction:
In Asian civilization, with its immensely
rich cultural, historical, and philosophical traditions,
has significantly influenced the development of
humanity for millennia. In the modern era, its role is
once again coming to the forefront. The 21st century is
rightfully referred to as the “Asian Century”
[1]
—
the
region is experiencing rapid economic, technological,
and political development. Against the backdrop of
global shifts such as the relocation of the world’s
economic center toward the East, the growing
influence of China, India, and other Central Asian
countries, and the transformation of international
relations, the study of the future of the Asian
civilizational paradigm in new geopolitical realities
becomes especially relevant.
It is also important to recognize that the contemporary
world is undergoing a period of profound
transformation.
The
intensification
of
global
competition, the crisis of traditional paradigms of
international security, and the changing balance of
power are all shaping new conditions under which the
Asian region is developing. The rise of Asian powers is
accompanied by a revival of cultural identity, the
strengthening of regional cooperation, and the
formulation of alternative approaches to the
international order. In this context, a comprehensive
analysis of the prospects for the development of Asian
civilization as an independent and influential actor in
the global historical process becomes particularly
timely. Studying this issue not only provides deeper
insight into the internal logic of transformations in Asia
but also allows us to anticipate potential future
scenarios of the world order, in which the Asian model
of development could become one of the leading
frameworks. This issue reflects not only scholarly
interest but also practical significance in the context of
shaping a global strategy for sustainable development
and ensuring international stability.
METHODOLOGY
The study of the prospects for the development of
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
11
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
Asian civilization in contemporary conditions is
grounded in a broad spectrum of scholarly sources,
encompassing both theoretical approaches to
civilizational analysis and empirical data on political
and economic transformations across Asia.
A significant contribution to the understanding of
civilizational paradigms has been made by scholars
such as Samuel Huntington, who introduced the
concept of the “clash of civilizations” [2], and Arnold
Toynbee, who viewed civilizations as dynamic historical
organisms [3]. Contemporary authors seek to
reconceptualize Asia’s role in the global context,
emphasizing the region’s cultural di
stinctiveness and its
capacity for independent geopolitical agency. For
instance, Mohammed Ayoob, in his book Identity and
Politics in Central Asia and the Caucasus [4], examines
how post-Soviet Central Asian states construct their
national identities and how these identities influence
their foreign policies and security strategies. Ayoob
treats identity as a multidimensional factor that
informs state behavior, highlighting the interplay
between domestic, regional, and international forces in
shaping these identities. His work also explores how
Russia, with its unique position in the region, influences
the evolution of post-Soviet states through the prism of
its own identity.
Another influential scholar, Pierre Chabal, in the
collective monograph “Evolving R
egional Values and
Mobilities in Global Contexts” [5], analyzes the gradual
convergence of Europe and Asia into a Eurasian
dynamic that integrates both institutional and identity-
related dimensions. Chabal and his co-authors argue
that regional processes can no longer be understood in
isolation, and must instead be viewed as part of a
broader Eurasian subsystem.
Research by scholars such as V.I. Maslov [6], V.V.
Islamov [7], and D.S. Ermakov [8] reflects a growing
interest in the civilizational paradigm of Central Asia.
Maslov investigates regional security challenges within
the context of post-Soviet transformations in newly
independent states; Islamov focuses on the socio-
ontological and methodological aspects of Eurasian
civilization while Ermakov provides a philosophical
foundation for constructing a Eurasian civilizational
model, revealing its potential as an alternative
developmental paradigm for the region.
Particular attention is given to works analyzing the
strategic behavior of key regional powers
—
including
China, India, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and others
—
in
the face of emerging challenges such as multipolarity,
economic competition, climate change and digital
transformation. Researchers are also actively engaging
with concepts such as “Asian values,” the interplay
between
Eastern
and
Western
models
of
modernization and regional integration processes (e.g.,
within the frameworks of the SCO and ASEAN).
This interdisciplinary approach, integrating political
science, international relations, cultural studies, and
philosophy, enables a comprehensive and nuanced
understanding of the shifting landscape of Asian
civilization.
The methodological foundation of this article is based
on the civilizational approach, which enables the
analysis of Asia not merely as a collection of states and
economic systems, but as a cultural-historical unity
with deep-rooted structural characteristics. Within this
framework, particular attention is given to the mental,
value-based, and institutional features of Asian
civilization,
allowing
for
a
more
profound
understanding of its unique developmental trajectory.
The study also employs the comparative method to
identify both the differences and commonalities
between Western and Eastern paradigms of
development highlighting the distinctiveness of Asian
socio-political and cultural models in contrast to
Western modernization theories.
In addition, geopolitical analysis is utilized to determine
the position and role of the Asian region in the
emerging world order. This approach helps to
contextualize Asia’s rising influence within global
power shifts, multipolarity and strategic competition.
Lastly, elements of systems analysis are applied for a
comprehensive examination of the interactions
between political, economic, and cultural factors that
shape the region’s development. This integrative
perspective ensures a holistic view of the processes
driving the transformation of Asia within the global
context.
RESULTS
In the context of rapidly changing geopolitical realities
of the modern world, the question of the future
development of Asian civilizational paradigms is
becoming increasingly relevant. Asian countries,
endowed with unique cultural and historical traditions,
are entering a new phase of development that is closely
tied to the transformation of the global political and
economic environment. An onto-epistemological
analysis of this process necessitates a focus on the
essential changes occurring within the structures of
social and cultural interaction, as well as on new forms
of worldview reflection emerging in response to the
challenges of globalization. This approach enables a
deeper understanding of the ways of knowing and
interpreting these transformations, including the
emerging paradigms in the study and conceptualization
of phenomena associated with Asian states.
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
12
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
In this light, it becomes evident that the Asian
civilizational paradigm, under new geopolitical
conditions, represents not merely a set of political and
economic changes, but rather a complex process of
searching for new forms of knowledge and identity,
which will define its future place in the global context.
With their substantial economic potential, cultural
diversity, and strategic location, Asian countries are
increasingly becoming centers of new geopolitical
processes.
Understanding
their
development
trajectories and modes of interaction with other global
actors is therefore critical for ensuring both global
stability and long-term resilience.
In his work A.A. Kazantsev offers a set of forecasts
concerning the geopolitical future of Central Asia in
both medium- and long-
term perspectives [9]. His
article can be evaluated as a conceptually rich and
analytically rigorous attempt to describe the possible
trajectories of geopolitical transformation in the
region. However, as with any scenario-based forecast,
the analysis is built upon a number of assumptions and
limitations that require critical reassessment in the
light of evolving global and regional trends, particularly
with respect to key regional actors such as Kazakhstan
and Uzbekistan.
It is important to highlight several strong aspects of
Kazantsev’s approach. Firstly, he employs a multi
-
scenario methodology, skillfully applying scenario
analysis to present five divergent models of the future
—
from integratio
n to disintegration: “Sinocentric
World”, “Reintegration of the Post
-
Soviet Space”,
“Central Asian Integration”, “Caliphate” and “Complete
Collapse” [9]. This reflects a methodologically
grounded effort to navigate the complexities of
unstable regions.
Secondly, Kazantsev successfully links external and
internal factors of development. He examines both
global dynamics (e.g., the geopolitical “Great Game”)
and internal structural issues within Central Asian
states, such as identity politics and ethnic
fragmentation.
Thirdly, he realistically acknowledges the complexity of
regional integration. Kazantsev expresses justified
skepticism toward efforts to create a robust regional
architecture modeled on the European Union,
suggesting that such an outcome remains unlikely
under current conditions.
This analysis demonstrates that while Kazantsev’s
scenarios offer valuable insights into the possible
futures of the Central Asian region, they must also be
balanced with a deeper consideration of regional
resilience, institutional consolidation, and the growing
strategic agency of key states such as Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan.
However, in our view, there are a number of debatable
assumptions in Kazantsev’s analysis —
most notably, an
overestimation of the likelihood of the collapse of the
Central Asian paradigm. It is important to consider key
aspects of the region’s historical resilience. Despite
internal tensions, not a single state in the region has
disintegrated since 1991. On the contrary, the
institutional consolidation of statehood in countries
like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan has significantly
strengthened over the past three decades.
Another questionable assumption lies in the scenarios
of “Caliphate” and “Complete Collapse” which
presuppose the weakness of national states and rely
heavily on the Afghan model. These scenarios overlook
the growth in administrative and infrastructural
capacity, advancements in digital governance, and the
emergence of stable political elites within the
republics.
A further critical point that requires adjustment is the
oversimplified interpretation of Chinese influence.
Kazantsev views China’s growing presence as a linearly
increasing process, without adequately considering the
rising anti-Chinese sentiment among local elites and
societies
—
particularly in Kazakhstan. The analysis also
underestimates the role of competing powers,
including Turkey’s renewed interest in the region and
the strategic pivot of Central Asian countries toward
diversification, with increasing engagement from India,
South Korea, and the Gulf States.
We are also convinced that Kazantsev overstates the
fragility of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. While these
countries undeniably face serious challenges, both
continue to function as internationally recognized
states, actively participating in regional integration
frameworks such as the SCO, CSTO and EAEU and
demonstrating adaptive mechanisms in response to
ongoing crises.
In the current era, special attention should be paid to
the integration of Asian states into the global economy,
as well as to overcoming internal contradictions and
challenges they face in the realms of social justice,
environmental
sustainability,
technological
development, and security. Geopolitical developments
—
such as the rise of China, India, Japan, and other
regional powers, shifts in global trade routes, and the
formation of new alliances
—
require a deeper analysis
within the context of Asia’s cultural and philosophical
traditions, which are beginning to exert a growing
influence on contemporary global politics.
On the political stage of Asia, new alliances and
strategies of interaction are emerging. First and
foremost, this concerns the increasingly competitive
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
13
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
and strategic relationship between China and the
United States. China is striving to strengthen its
position as a global leader and promoter of an
alternative model of political and economic stability,
which, in turn, raises concerns among Western
countries and contributes to growing geopolitical
tensions.
In addition, the Asia-Pacific region is witnessing the
strengthening of the military and political positions of
countries such as Japan, South Korea, India, and
Australia, leading to the formation of new alliances
such as QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue
—
India,
Japan, Australia and the U.S.). Conflicts such as
territorial disputes in the South China Sea, instability on
the Korean Peninsula, and the continuing influence of
external powers in South Asia demand new approaches
to regional security management.
The Asian civilization, with its centuries-old history and
rich cultural heritage, is now facing the challenge of
adapting traditional values to the realities of
globalization. Many Asian countries are actively
reviving and reinterpreting their cultural traditions
while seeking ways to integrate their unique
philosophical, religious, and socio-economic models
into the global context. In this regard, a new
phenomenon has emerged
—
the so-
called “Asian
Renaissance” where ideas and concepts previously
confined to the region are now becoming significant in
global discourse. Examples include increasing cultural
and educational exchanges, the growing interest in
Eastern philosophies, and the development of new
cultural paradigms such as China’s model of social
harmony, India’s concept of “Vedic democracy” and
Japan’s “wabi
-
sabi” aesthetic in design and lifestyle.
Technological progress, especially in countries like
China, Japan, and South Korea, has become a key factor
in the development of Asia as a civilization. Asian
nations are emerging as leaders in artificial intelligence,
robotics, advanced technologies, and the digital
economy. This positions Asia as a global hub of
innovation, with countries in the region playing a
crucial role in the transformation of global production
processes. The advancement of technologies such as
5G, renewable energy, biotechnology, and the Internet
of Things is likely to reshape the structure of the global
economy and create new challenges for states seeking
to strike a balance between technological development
and the protection of privacy and human rights.
However, alongside its economic and political
achievements, Asia also faces a number of significant
challenges. Serious problems persist in the form of
environmental threats, such as climate change,
environmental pollution, water scarcity, and the loss of
biodiversity. To ensure the sustainable development of
the region, a transition to green technologies and an
inclusive economy is essential.
Internal social issues, such as inequality, poverty,
urbanization, and migration, also demand attention.
The uneven distribution of wealth across different
social groups and regions can lead to social instability
and negatively affect long-term development.
DISCUSSION
Examining Central Asia’s Paradigm Shifts and
Development Prospects (focus on Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan). The increasing competition among major
powers is unlikely to lead to direct military conflict in
the Central Asian region. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan
are expected to maintain their sovereignty and stability
through institutional strengthening and prudent
foreign
policies.
The
region’s
geo
-economic
significance will grow amid logistics restructuring,
including new land corridors, energy initiatives, and
green technologies.
Scenario 1 «Regional Stability and Pragmatic
Multivectorism» envisions the preservation of relative
political neutrality while engaging in multiple
integration projects (China, EAEU, OIC). The aim is to
establish a stable regional macro-system attractor
where Central Asia, particularly Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan, functions as a nonlinear, dissipative system
capable
of
self-organization
amidst
external
fluctuations. Political neutrality serves as a stabilizing
mechanism in a multifactorial geopolitical field,
preventing abrupt shifts into chaos. Simultaneous
participation in various integration projects reflects a
polycentric interaction configuration where multiple
external linkages provide sources of energy flows and
information, aiding in maintaining system order.
Diversifying foreign economic ties (Turkey, India, Saudi
Arabia, Japan, etc.) enhances systemic resilience,
reducing dependence on a single center of gravity and
thereby increasing adaptability, determining growth
parameters, redistributing internal resources to growth
points, and reducing entropy from external
dependencies.
Infrastructure connectivity, especially through the
Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor, creates new
synergistic
effects
via
spatial
and
logistical
reorganization of the region, fostering stable
connections between economic subsystems.
Digitalization, development of green technologies, and
the introduction of hydrogen energy create bifurcation
points where a transition to a new development phase
is possible
—
from raw material dependence to an
innovative, sustainable economy. These elements act
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
14
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
as initiators of emergent structures capable of radically
altering the internal architecture of the socio-economic
system.
“Regional
Stability
and
Pragmatic
Multive
ctorism” is not a static equilibrium but a
dynamically stable state in a nonlinear and fluctuating
global environment, where adaptive mechanisms and
strategic multipolarity are key parameters of order.
Within Scenario 1, Kazakhstan’s status as a regional
technological and logistical hub reflects the formation
of a stable attractor in the trans-Eurasian space,
positioning the country as a concentration point for
resource flows, information, and innovations that
ensure a stable configuration of the regional macro-
system. The development of civic identity and political
pluralism functions as an internal mechanism of
autopoiesis, enhancing internal coherence and
reducing political system entropy. Expanding export
directions to the European Union and Southeast Asian
countries via the Caspian transport corridor manifests
as a manifestation of synergistic nonlinear diffusion,
ensuring multidirectional dissemination of economic
ties and enhancing the overall resilience of the foreign
economic system through multiple stable interaction
channels.
Kazakhstan’s continued course of open economic
reforms reflects a phase transition of the system to a
new state with a higher degree of openness and
nonlinear interaction with the global economic
environment
—
essentially a departure from the
previous local attractor and movement toward a more
flexible, self-organizing model.
Kazakhstan’s leadership in regional integration
initiatives, particularly in water-energy cooperation,
serves as a process of cooperative resonance formation
between Central Asian subsystems. This can lead to the
emergence of stable structures of interstate interaction
based on the synergistic effect of coordinated
management of transboundary resources
—
both in
terms of energy exchange and redistribution of
managerial impulses.
Strategic orientation toward industrial localization and
strengthening food security can be interpreted as the
formation of local centers of attraction (attractors) that
increase the system’s autonomy, its resilience to
external shocks and its ability to adaptively self-
organize in the face of global fluctuations such as price
instability or geopolitical turbulence.
The Central Bank notes that ongoing global geopolitical
crises may lead to further price increases for raw
materials and foodstuffs. Specifically, rising global food
prices will intensify pressure on prices in Uzbekistan. In
the energy sector, planned increases in electricity and
natural gas tariffs for legal entities in April 2025 may
subsequently lead to higher production costs and
accelerate inflation expectations.
From the perspective of Central Asian development
prospects amid a transforming geopolitical landscape,
the risks highlighted by the Central Bank of Uzbekistan
represent not only current challenges but also
indicators of deep structural changes affecting the
region's economic stability.
Firstly, ongoing volatility in global commodity and food
markets
—
due to prolonged geopolitical conflicts, trade
restrictions, and the restructuring of global logistics
chains
—
heightens the vulnerability of Central Asian
economies, including Uzbekistan, to external price
shocks. This is particularly critical in the context of high
import dependence for certain food items and energy
equipment. Increased price pressure from abroad
potentially limits the capabilities of regional central
banks to conduct soft monetary policy and requires a
flexible, adaptive macroeconomic strategy.
Secondly, the identified internal factors, especially in
the energy sector, indicate a transition to a phase of
structural correction in tariff policy aimed at reducing
the state's fiscal burden and stimulating energy
efficiency. However, in the short term, tariff increases
for legal entities may transform into higher production
costs,
intensify
inflation
expectations,
and,
consequently, exert pressure on consumer prices. This
presents an economic policy challenge of balancing the
need for reforms with social stability.
From a regional development perspective, Uzbekistan
and other Central Asian countries find themselves in a
situation requiring a comprehensive response:
-
diversification
of
supply
sources
and
localization of production chains become priorities in
the context of global fragmentation;
-
development of renewable energy and
sustainable infrastructure can reduce dependence on
external energy pricing and create incentives for
investment inflows;
-
deepening regional economic cooperation,
including within the frameworks of the SCO, CSTO, and
the “Middle Corridor” initiative can strengthen
collective resilience to geo-economic shocks.
Thus, in the new geopolitical conditions, the resilience
of Uzbekistan and the region as a whole will depend on
the ability to adapt to post-liberal multipolarity by
implementing pragmatic reforms in energy, industry,
and agriculture while simultaneously strengthening
institutional and infrastructural foundations of regional
integration.
Scenario 2 “Fragmented Integration” describes the
formation of cluster-based self-organization in a
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
15
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
context where the region is unable to develop a unified
integration attractor. Instead of a coherent macro-
system, a structure of partial cooperative frameworks
emerges
—
local subsystems interacting with one
another based on the principle of selective resonance.
Coalitions such as Kazakhstan
–
Uzbekistan
–
Azerbaijan
–
Georgia represent stable autopoietic units capable of
internally reproducing managerial and economic
functions, while more fragile states in the region
remain on the periphery of this process, forming zones
of high entropy and weak structural coherence.
The strengthening role of sub-regional alliances, built
on shared interests in transport, energy, and security,
reflects a movement toward dissipative adaptation,
where resilience is achieved not through centralized
unity but through a multitude of connections between
functionally compatible elements. Such formations
possess increased resilience due to their flexibility and
ability to locally reproduce order amid global and
regional fluctuations.
Scenario 3 “Hybrid Dependency” is less desirable b
ut
plausible scenario represents a paradoxical synergetic
configuration in which the regional system loses its
capacity for coherent self-organization and falls into
the orbit of externally imposed attractors driven by
various centers of power. Economic dependence on
China, technological dependence on the West, and raw
material dependence on Russia form a multifaceted
heteronomous governance structure, whereby the
region loses its functional integrity as an autopoietic
system and becomes subject to dissipative control from
the outside. In this state, Central Asia operates more as
an open subsystem embedded in external cycles of
capital, resource and technology reproduction.
Financial, investment, and cultural expansion by
external powers contributes to the erosion of internal
sovereignty, undermining mechanisms of internal
coherence and shifting the center of self-
identification
—
from
endogenous to
exogenous
orientations. Against the backdrop of weakening
political institutions and the inability to achieve
systemic stabilization, the region experiences growing
fluctuations in the form of social and political conflict,
potentially pushing the entire system into a zone of
chaos.
In this context, the region loses its capacity for self-
reflection and reorganization, becoming a reactive
system governed by the vector of external impulses.
CONCLUSION
In the context of growing global turbulence, Central
Asia finds itself at the intersection of major geopolitical,
economic, and civilizational vectors. The scenarios
presented
—from “Regional Resilience and Pragmatic
Multi-
Vectorism” to “Hybrid Dependency” are not only
outline possible development trajectories but also
reveal the underlying dynamics of regional macro-
system transformation through the lens of synergetic
and autopoietic analysis.
Scenario 1 illustrates the most stable and desirable
configuration, in which Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan,
acting as nonlinear and self-organizing systems, form a
stable attractor of development and stability. Political
multi-vectorism,
economic
diversification,
and
technological modernization act here as key
parameters of order, strengthening the region’s
resilience and its capacity to adapt to external
fluctuations.
Scenario 2 represents a shift toward a more
fragmented yet adaptive structure, where local
cooperation clusters become the primary units of
stability. This model is potentially sustainable but lacks
the necessary synergetic coherence to produce a
unified regional identity and strategic direction.
Scenario 3, by contrast, highlights the risks of losing
regional agency and becoming an externally governed
zone, devoid of autopoiesis and internal reflection. It
represents a critical trajectory in which Central Asia
becomes the object of multi-layered dependency,
vulnerable to exogenous shocks and internal
destabilization.
Systemic analysis shows that the key factor for regional
resilience lies in the capacity for self-tuning and
reproduction of internal coherence within a polycentric
world. With developing institutions, strategic
geographic positioning, and economic potential,
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have the capacity to
become centers of gravity for regional self-
organization. However, this requires a systemic
approach to development
—
one that includes not only
economic and political modernization, but also
intellectual and cultural reflection on their own
civilizational trajectory.
The future of Central Asia will be shaped not only by
the actions of external actors but also by the maturity
of its internal adaptation mechanisms and its capacity
to generate knowledge, strategies, and models for
sustainable existence within a multidimensional global
system.
REFERENCES
Международные отношения в Южной Азии:
взгляды России и Шри
-
Ланки.
-
Электронный ресурс:
https://russiancouncil.ru/activity/policybriefs/mezhdu
narodnye-otnosheniya-v-yuzhnoy-azii-vzglyady-rossii-
i-shri-lanki/.
–Дата обращения: 02.06.2025.
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
16
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
Хантингтон С.
Столкновение цивилизаций. –М.: АСТ,
2014.
–
571с.
Тойнби А. Постижение истории. –М.: Прогресс,
1991. -
730с.
Ayoob М., Ismayilov М. Identity and Politics in Central
Asia and the Caucasus.
–
London: Routledge, 2015. -
224р.
Chabal P., Alix Y., Baizakova K. Evolving regional values
and mobilities in global contexts.
–
Bruxelles: 2020. -372
pp.
Маслов В.И. Региональная безопасность: История и
проблемы
Новых
Независимых
Государств
Центральной Азии. –Диссертация на соискание
ученой степени кандидата политических наук.
-
2001.
Исламов В.В. Евразийская цивилизация: социально
-
онтологический и методологический аспекты
исследования. –диссертация на соискание ученой
степени кандидата философских наук. –Уфа, 2002.
Ермаков Д.С. Социально
-
философские основания
евразийской цивилизационной парадигмы. –
Владивосток, 2005.
Казанцев А.А. Центральная Азия: комплексный
кризис и сценарии будущего // Ежегодник ИМИ
МГИМО МИД России.
-
М., 2015.
-
Выпуск 3 (13).
-
С.34
-55.
Подорожание газа для метановых заправок в
апреле повысит себестоимость товаров —
ЦБ –
Spot.
–Электронный
ресурс:
https://www.spot.uz/ru/2025/02/11/energytariffs/#:~
:text=%D0%A6%D0%91%C2%A0%D0%BE%D1%82%D0
%BC%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D0%B5%D1%82%2C%
20%D1%87%D1%82%D0%BE,%D1%83%D1%81%D0%B
A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8E
%20%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1
%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1
%85%20%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B0%
D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B9.
–Дата
обращения:
03.06.2025.
