Uzbek speakers under pressure in Afghanistan and Russia

This commentary first appeared in the Briefing Section of Central Asia Concise issue of 22nd January 2026.

Reports of Uzbek language and culture suppression in Afghanistan

Local reports coming out of northern Afghanistan detail the disappearance of public signs in Uzbek and Persian. While sporadic at first, the removals have begun causing a stir on social media, with locals complaining about increasing numbers of Uzbek signs disappearing from public streets and buildings. Further causes of concern that the Taliban government may be looking to suppress or at least limit the use of the Uzbek language are reports that the university in Samangan province may have also removed Uzbek signs in its facilities. Concrete information on this phenomenon remains limited, and the Uzbek government has been carefully monitoring the situation. Recently, Uzbek Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Akhror Burkhanov publicly stated that the Taliban government denied any attempts to undermine the use of the Uzbek language within their borders after discussions between the two governments.

Unfortunately for Uzbek-speaking Afghans, this recent development is only the latest out of a series of actions that point towards the Taliban government taking steps to suppress Uzbek, as well as other Central Asian languages and cultures within its borders. In late 2025, it became apparent that the Taliban government was dismissing thousands of its ethnic Tajik and Uzbek security forces, particularly in the northern Tajik and Uzbek ethnic majority provinces of Badakhshan, Kapisa, Parwan, and Takhar. The removal of these forces is obviously problematic for the representation of Tajik and Uzbek minorities in Afghanistan’s security apparatus, but perhaps more importantly for the security situation in general, as the Taliban government justified the action as an overall personnel reduction to save costs, and so far, it seems not to have compensated for these cuts in any way. The presence of the Islamic State – Khorasan Province (ISKP), as well as the militant groups responsible for recent killings along the Tajik border, makes an overall reduction of security forces, especially targeting those with local knowledge, a dangerous proposition. In fact, last week has seen further bloodshed on the Afghan-Tajik border as a firefight resulted in the deaths of four suspected Islamic militants, marking the latest occurrence in a series of incidents that have been escalating since last year. The cuts to security personnel continue to alarm ethnic Uzbeks as they follow previous tensions between Uzbek and Pashtun communities, occasionally spilling over into open protests, as well as the removal of a monument to the Uzbek scholar and poet Mir Alisher Navoi in Mazar-e-Sharif.

This issue of potential Uzbek language and culture repression would stand in stark contrast to relations between the two neighboring countries in the last year. Uzbekistan has been eagerly demonstrating its desire to pursue a cooperative relationship with Afghanistan, capping off 2025 by sending 20 food and medical supply trucks to the northern and directly bordering Afghan province of Balkh. As detailed in previous newsletters, Uzbekistan remains the most involved Central Asian state in driving Afghan integration into the region, repeatedly pushing for closer relations with the Taliban government, underpinned by deeper trade and connectivity across the border. The Afghan government has made sure to publicly explain the disappearing signs as ongoing work to standardize signage throughout Afghan higher education institutions, and that the Uzbek language is under no threat under its government. To further underscore this point, Afghan authorities also announced the launch of a new Uzbek Language and Literature faculty at Jowzjan State University for master’s level students. Clearly, both governments are eager to prevent the topic from becoming a wider issue, but in an information space as controlled as the one in Afghanistan, the sudden spike in social media complaints about the sign issues is certainly something to consider.

Violence against labor migrants in Russia

Central Asian labor migrants to Russia face intensifying peril as security forces escalate raids on migrant communities. Notably, a raid on a café in Khabarovsk known as a gathering spot for Central Asian migrants, resulted in mass beatings as well as a death at the hands of Russian security services. Uzbekistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that it had sent a diplomatic note to Russia, calling for an impartial investigation into the death and repatriation of the body. The raid is not new or unexpected, as conditions for Central Asian migrants have drastically deteriorated since the Crocus City Hall attack in 2024 by Tajik terrorists for which ISKP publicly claimed responsibility.

The death of an Uzbek labor migrant as a direct result of the beatings suffered by Russian security forces marks a dark milestone for Central Asian migrants in the country. The raid has sparked outrage on Uzbek social media and an active discussion on the increasing risks for Uzbeks to venture to Russia in search of better job opportunities. Politician Alisher Qodirov of the National Revival Democratic Party called for all Uzbeks to leave Russia as soon as possible, echoing much of the indignation on social media. However, things are not that simple, as many Uzbeks are still very much dependent on Russian employment. Russia remains the main destination for all Central Asian labor migrants, even after the increasing hostility, with massive amounts of remittances transferred to Uzbekistan as a result. It is estimated that in the first half of 2025 alone, Uzbekistan received 8.2 billion USD in cross-border transfers from Russia, with total remittances for 2025 expected to be around 20 billion USD. Uzbek economic scientist Abdulla Abdukadirov and deputy director of the Uzbek President’s Agency for Strategic Reforms highlighted the significance of these remittances by comparing the 20 billion sum to the annual state budget of 28 billion USD. If this latest escalation will lead to sharp decreases in Uzbek migrants seeking work in Russia remains to be seen.

Unfortunately, this trend of violence so far shows no signs of slowing down. Raids are now often accompanied by violent ultra-nationalist groups such as the ‘Russkaya Obshchina’ (Russian Community, RO), which preaches ethno-nationalism through a violent ‘reconquest’ of Russia on its popular social media pages. Many members of these groups are veterans of Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine and contribute to the militarized nature of these groups. Even more worryingly, there have been reports of raids by RO without the involvement of law enforcement, causing further concern that the Russian state is allowing these groups to operate with impunity.

source: This commentary first appeared in the Briefing Section of Central Asia Concise issue of 22nd January 2026.

photo: The Uzbek-Afghan border

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)