Uzbekistan proposes China links as C5+1 talks set priorities

By James Calloway

Six countries sent aviation authorities and industry organizations to Tashkent on November 3-5 for the third Central Asia–China Civil Aviation Cooperation Working Group Conference. Uzbekistan proposed new international routes, higher flight frequencies, cargo expansion and closer safety and air-navigation cooperation.

The gathering formed part of the C5+1 format joining five Central Asian states with China. Participants represented Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and China. Their agenda covered regional air connectivity, implementation of earlier agreements and possible new areas of cooperation.

Uzbekistan’s Ministry of Transport presented the proposals at the third working-group conference. Takhir Nazarov, director of the Civil Aviation Agency under the ministry, opened the event. According to the ministry, Nazarov emphasized “strengthening partnerships between Central Asian countries and China, expanding air services and improving regional transport connectivity.”

The statement sets an objective rather than an operating result. The announcement named no new route, flight frequency, aircraft type or launch date, and it identified no participating airline, lessor, MRO or any aircraft manufacturer.

The announcement did not say any proposal had received regulatory approval or entered service. That absence matters commercially. Until operators, schedules and traffic commitments emerge, passengers cannot judge added capacity, journey options or price effects.

What does this change for passengers and cargo?

For now, it changes the negotiating agenda rather than the timetable. Uzbekistan called for new international routes and more frequent service on existing links. It also proposed expanding passenger and cargo transportation while developing commercial relationships among airlines.

Those proposals could add passenger and freight capacity between Central Asia and China. The announcement gave no route pairs, seasonal schedules, demand forecasts, fares or cargo volumes, so it supports no conclusion about Chinese demand, connecting travel times or cargo costs. Those measures require specific commitments later.

The commercial package sits alongside regulatory work. Uzbekistan proposed exchanging experience in government oversight, implementing ICAO standards and safety management, and sharing oversight practice among aviation inspectors. It also proposed joint training and professional development for inspectors.

Better-coordinated oversight could produce more consistent regulatory practice across the participating countries. The announcement did not specify an audit timetable, a common standard, participating inspectors or a target date. Safety improvement remains a program objective, not a demonstrated outcome.

Uzbekistan also proposed closer coordination among air navigation service providers. Its stated objectives were to optimize international routes, improve airspace use, introduce modern technologies and train qualified specialists. Such coordination could ease operational constraints on regional services, but no route design, navigation investment, cost estimate or implementation schedule appeared.

The ministry named no air-navigation provider. Nor did it identify the technologies or routes covered by the proposal, leaving both the capital requirement and operational benefit unresolved.

Personnel and digitalization formed a third workstream. Uzbekistan proposed specialist exchanges, internships, joint training and wider adoption of digital solutions by aviation organizations. That focus suggests an attempt to build regulatory and technical capacity. The ministry announced no budget, participant count, software platform or delivery date.

Officials also expected the conference to advance civil aviation cooperation, improve safety and efficiency, and strengthen transport connectivity between Central Asia and China. Without published work programs, those outcomes remain stated goals rather than measured gains.

Takhir Nazarov proposed consolidating the initiatives under the C5+1 format into one list of priority areas. He then called for further implementation steps. The Uzbek side said it was ready to develop joint initiatives, exchange expertise and continue dialogue with regional and Chinese partners.

The immediate test is whether that priority list produces named routes, agreed schedules, funded safety programs and measurable traffic growth. Until then, Uzbekistan has set out a coordinated negotiating position, not new aviation capacity. Any credible follow-up should publish those commitments and a reporting date, giving operators and passengers something they can measure.