Toward a Regional Grid: Challenges and Opportunities The electricity systems of Central Asia have long been physically interconnected but remain institutionally frag­mented and underutilized as a regional resource. During the Soviet period, the Central Asia Unified Power System (CAPS) functioned as a coordinated network. In the 1960s–1970s, large-scale hydropower plants in upstream Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan were linked with thermal power plants in downstream Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Ka­zakhstan. Power flows were centrally managed through the Integrated Dispatch Center in Tashkent, enabling sea­sonal balancing. After independence, this system frag­mented as countries prioritized energy sovereignty. Turk­menistan exited CAPS in 2003 and now operates its grid in islanded mode. Tajikistan disconnected in 2009 but is gradually reintegrating with support from the Asian Devel­opment Bank. 64 Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan continue to operate synchronously within CAPS, coordi­nated by the Electric Power Council and technically over­seen by the Coordination Dispatch Center“Energia.” However, actual trade remains modest—averaging just 2.5 % of regional demand and using only 40 % of available interconnection capacity. 65 Several factors constrain deep­er exchanges: outdated grid infrastructure, bottlenecks at interconnection nodes and metering systems, and the ab­sence of a regional electricity trading platform. These limit the region’s ability to accommodate rising power flows and integrate variable renewable energy. That said, the synchronized operation among Kazakh­stan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan provides the founda­tions of a regional“grid community.” Unlike ad hoc inter­connectors, this arrangement already enables shared fre­quency control and seasonal load balancing. While it falls short of an EU-like electricity market, it offers potential for collective resilience. Recent reforms, such as upgrades to SCADA systems and early-stage dialogue on shared trading platforms, signal gradual progress. To consolidate this emerging grid community, a pragmatic two-track strategy is needed: strengthening national grid resil ­ience while deepening cross-border interoperability. This includes deployment of interoperable metering (ASKUE), harmonized dispatch protocols, and standard­ized interconnection requirements, technical alignment that falls short of full market harmonization. Developing common investment frameworks and cost-sharing mech­anisms for cross-border projects could further attract cap­ital without requiring unified tariff regimes. If trade vol­umes increase, countries could benefit from efficiency gains such as reserve sharing and reduced dependence on costly gas peakers. The geopolitical implications of enhanced connectivity are rather nuanced. A more interconnected grid increases sys­tem flexibility and can attract investment, particularly for smaller countries that benefit from proximity to larger bal­ancing hubs such as Kazakhstan. But interdependence also introduces exposure: frequency disturbances, cyberat­tacks, or supply shocks in one country can ripple across borders. While grid linkages may encourage cooperation, they do not eliminate asymmetries and could reinforce them without careful institutional design. Three scenarios illustrate the trade-offs between inter ­dependence, sovereignty, and efficiency. In an“unlimit­ed transmission” scenario, envisioned by UNECE, where interconnections within Central Asia and with global mar­kets face no constraints, the region could theoretically save up to$1.4 billion annually in electricity production costs. 66 However, such integration would require converged market structures, harmonized regulations, and ceding ele­ments of national control, which are neither feasible in the short to medium term nor desirable given the risks for in­dividual countries. Conversely, if coordination stagnates amidst rising shares of renewables, countries risk over­building redundant capacity, facing higher balancing costs, and locking in inefficiencies. Between these ex ­tremes lies a path of pragmatic regionalism: strengthen ­ing domestic grid resilience first, while incrementally en ­hancing cross-border interoperability. Under this scenar ­io, digital trading platform, interoperable metering, and common investment frameworks could unlock efficiency gains without forcing market unification or undermining policy autonomy. 64 Asian Development Bank.“Tajikistan: Reconnection to the Central Asian Power System Project – Additional Financing.” https://www.adb.org/projects/52122-002/main. ­Accessed July 30, 2025. 65  The World Bank. Regional Electricity Market Interconnectivity and Trade – Central Asia(P181214): Project Information Document(PID – Concept Stage). Report No: PID186. October 5, 2023. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099100523132539287/pdf/P1812140c755ef090b30f0c40a9dc5720c.pdf. Accessed July 23, 2025. 66  United Nations Economic Commission for Europe(UNECE). Modeling a Resilient and Integrated Energy System for Central Asia: A Roadmap for Regional Interconnectivity. March 2025. https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2025-03/Report.pdf. Accessed July 23, 2025. Toward a Regional Grid: Challenges and Opportunities 13