{"id":48041,"date":"2025-11-07T18:55:12","date_gmt":"2025-11-07T17:55:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/?p=48041"},"modified":"2025-11-11T14:39:45","modified_gmt":"2025-11-11T13:39:45","slug":"dead-in-the-water-has-the-common-turkic-alphabet-failed-to-boost-turkish-influence-in-central-asia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/politics\/dead-in-the-water-has-the-common-turkic-alphabet-failed-to-boost-turkish-influence-in-central-asia\/","title":{"rendered":"Dead in the Water: Has the Common Turkic Alphabet Failed to Boost Turkish Influence in Central Asia?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

It has been one year since the Organization of Turkic States approved the implementation of a common Turkic alphabet, designed for uniform use in all member states. Under the guise of bolstering Turkic unity, Ankara has spearheaded the initiative with the aim to draw the Central Asian states into its political orbit. However, due to limited funds, lack of political incentives, and preexisting linguistic policy, the Central Asian states have largely chosen to ignore the common alphabet entirely. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In September 2024, the Organization of Turkic States<\/a> (OTS) announced to the world the creation of a 34-letter common Turkic alphabet<\/a> based on the Latin script, approved on paper by all member states. The initiative, spearheaded by T\u00fcrkiye, has been in the works since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Now one year since the common alphabet\u2019s announcement, the manoeuvre has yet to make the large waves in the Central Asian information space that T\u00fcrkiye had initially hoped for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The proposed common alphabet exists within the larger regional debate surrounding the political futures of the Central Asian languages. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many of the newly independent republics began the process of transitioning their languages from a Cyrillic to a Latin-based script. However, in Central Asia, the decision of switching to a Latin script remains a fierce debate across the region even three decades later. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

T\u00fcrkiye, under President Recep Tayyip Erdo\u011fan<\/a>\u2019s expansionist foreign policy, has offered a guiding hand by leading the OTS initiative to create a common Turkic alphabet. T\u00fcrkiye first adopted<\/a> the Latin script in 1928 as a part of its early independence-era modernisation reforms. By encouraging the Central Asian states to undergo a similar process, T\u00fcrkiye also aims to cement its position as the dominant centre of the Turkic world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So far, Erdo\u011fan\u2019s plan has not cultivated many strong allies in Central Asia\u2019s political elite. Most states in the region remain embroiled within national debates over the post-Soviet future of their titular languages, making Central Asian governments particularly resistant to carry out such a monumental linguistic shift at the international level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Competition for \u201cMiddle Power\u201d Status<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the year since the OTS announcement, regional heavyweights Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan remain resistant in adopting the common Turkic alphabet within their borders. According to Nargiza Muratalieva, a Bishkek-based political scientist, \u201cKazakhstan is not ready to share its leadership in Central Asia, given its attempts to promote itself as a middle power.\u201d<\/em> Kazakhstan has spent the post-Soviet decades centralizing Central Asian political power within its own borders, with the goal to secure a respected \u201cmiddle power\u201d status<\/a> to both the region and the international community at large. Uzbekistan, the largest Central Asian country by population and second largest in terms of GDP, shares similar ambitions<\/a>. Both countries view the Turkish-led OTS alphabet as an attempt by T\u00fcrkiye to cement itself as the dominant power in the region, and thus, a threat to their respective national directives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read more on Novastan: The Lexicon of Kazakh Decolonisation<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While both nations have yet to consider the implementation of the common Turkic alphabet, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have independently embarked on national<\/a> plans<\/a> to switch the script of their titular languages from Cyrillic to Latin. In both cases, the political leadership has underestimated the difficulty of this task, leading to much longer timelines for the initiative than initially expected. Currently, both states are stuck in a transitional state where both scripts are used interchangeably. Critics complain that the current linguistic paralysis in the countries is both confusing for citizens and financially taxing for administrations. The Diplomat reports<\/a> that the 2018 budgetary estimate for Kazakhstan\u2019s Latinization program sat at US$664 million, equivalent to roughly 39% of Kazakhstan\u2019s GDP for that year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The challenges Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have faced implementing a Latin script have meant that neither government seems willing to invest in the OTS alphabet as a third system for their citizens to learn and their country to switch to. Even Turkmenistan \u2014 a state which successfully phased out<\/a> Cyrillic usage in the 1990s \u2014 remains resistant to the OTS plan to change their national standard. Largely closed off from the outside world and averse to foreign influence, the common Turkic alphabet offers few advantages to Ashgabat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kyrgyzstan: The Cyrillic Exception<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

At the unveiling ceremony of the common Turkic alphabet, all eyes were on Kyrgyzstan. To mark the alphabet\u2019s adoption, Erdo\u011fan gifted<\/a> each represented nation a copy of two books translated into the new alphabet. One of the books was a novel written by Chinghiz Aitmatov<\/a>, a regionally renowned author hailing from Kyrgyzstan. Erdo\u011fan\u2019s choice was hardly coincidental. Kyrgyzstan today is the only Turkic state<\/a> to not even attempt to switch the national script away from Cyrillic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Western analysts attribute Kyrgyzstan\u2019s continued use of Cyrillic to the close relationship<\/a> with Russia the country has maintained through its post-Soviet independence. Russia largely views increased Turkish influence in Central Asia as a threat to its foothold in the region, and acts to mitigate the country\u2019s power in states like Kyrgyzstan where it still holds considerable influence. However, in the case of Kyrgyzstan\u2019s refusal to adopt the OTS Latin-based alphabet, Muratalieva believes the reasons are more pragmatic than political. \u201cThe simplest explanation is the lack of financial resources to accept and to introduce this alphabet on a national level,\u201d<\/em> Muratalieva explains. While T\u00fcrkiye has spearheaded the alphabet initiative on paper, the country has remained resistant to supplying funds to OTS member states interested in making the national switch. The lack of available funds severely limits the capacity of financially-limited states like Kyrgyzstan, the smallest economy of the OTS bloc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Sadyr Japarov<\/a>, the president of Kyrgyzstan, was asked about his opinion on the linguistic future of the Kyrgyz language, he stated that \u201cit is too early to talk about transitioning the Kyrgyz language to the Latin alphabet\u201d, <\/em>RFE\/RL<\/a> reports. Muratalieva believes Japarov\u2019s strategy is to watch and wait how its larger regional neighbours Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan fare in their respective transitions to a Latin-based script. \u201cIf one of them succeeds, Kyrgyzstan will follow,\u201d<\/em> she theorizes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Azerbaijan as a Potential Model<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Not all hope is lost for Turkish power in Central Asia. Azerbaijan, while outside the region, provides a model for the post-Soviet Turkic states open to cooperation with T\u00fcrkiye, showing how partnership with the state can lead to successful development. T\u00fcrkiye and Azerbaijan have been close allies<\/a> ever since the country gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. This strategic partnership has allowed for Azerbaijan to largely chart its own path, both economically and politically distant from Russia<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the first directives Azerbaijan embarked on after independence was the complete transition<\/a> of its national language from Cyrillic to Latin, a goal it achieved by the turn of the century. The Azerbaijani Latin-based script in its modern form is now very closely related to both the Turkish standard script and the newly proposed OTS alphabet. Such linguistic integration between the two nations has opened many new doors for transnational partnership<\/a>, successes closely monitored by the Central Asian states.<\/p>\n\n\n

Want more Central Asia in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter here.<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine War, Central Asian states have become increasingly hesitant<\/a> of close partnership with Russia. Regional leadership fears Russia\u2019s close geographic proximity to their borders may lead to future military conflict. T\u00fcrkiye, attempting to offer an alternative to Russian partnership in the region, markets its distance from Central Asia as a compelling security guarantee. While maintaining territorial distance from potential Central Asian partners, T\u00fcrkiye benefits from cultural and religious closeness<\/a> to the region\u2019s common Turkic heritage. The common Turkic alphabet is only one of many pathways the country is intent to forge with Central Asia through the leverage of common Turkic traditions. Turkish soft power in Central Asia, while currently marginal, is steadily increasing with time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

T\u00fcrkiye has made it clear that it is willing to take on administrative and economic sacrifices to implement the new alphabet within its own borders<\/a>, but has maintained its reluctance to take on the financial burdens necessary to implement the script in the Central Asian Turkic states. Combined with T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s unwillingness to meddle in preexisting linguistic turmoil in Central Asia or directly confront Russia\u2019s lingering cultural influence over the region, has enough time passed to call the OTS common alphabet project a failure? Likely so. <\/p>\n\n\n

For more news and analysis from Central Asia, follow us on Twitter<\/a>, Facebook<\/a>, Telegram<\/a>, Linkedin<\/a> or Instagram<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Joseph Fisher for Novastan<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It has been one year since the Organization of Turkic States approved the implementation of a common Turkic alphabet, designed for uniform use in all member states. Under the guise of bolstering Turkic unity, Ankara has spearheaded the initiative with the aim to draw the Central Asian states into its political orbit. However, due to limited funds, lack of political incentives, and preexisting linguistic policy, the Central Asian states have largely chosen to ignore the common alphabet entirely.\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2184,"featured_media":47149,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,3,4665,7,5],"tags":[4804,4885,3984,4755,4884],"coauthors":[4883],"class_list":["post-48041","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-kazakhstan","category-kyrgyzstan","category-politics","category-turkmenistan","category-uzbekistan","tag-language","tag-ots","tag-politics","tag-regional-politics","tag-turkiye"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48041","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2184"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48041"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48041\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48051,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48041\/revisions\/48051"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47149"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48041"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48041"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48041"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novastan.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=48041"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}