Kazakhstan must choose: be Eurasia’s tech broker or become a pawn in the new global space race

Kazakhstan is approaching a moment of strategic truth. It can either become Eurasia’s indispensable broker of space, AI and advanced technology solutions or risk being used as a pawn in a geopolitical power competition it does not control. To be sure, Kazakhstan’s position has complex dependencies: Its historical ties with Russia’s cultural, education and science communities must be respected. Its proximity to China with its fast and frugal scaling strength and position in global supply chains is important for Kazakhstan’s trade balance and its position as a transit hub. Europe is another indispensable science, education and trade partner, as well as governance anchor for Kazakhstan’s young democracy. And the United States has the greatest legacy asset base as a frontier innovator and space explorer, as well as the most transparent and sizable capital markets.

So, it is clear that Kazakhstan’s role in a global space and deeptech economy includes a bridging function that is marked by multi-directional respect. But, that is not the same as merely balancing the bigger powers. What is required instead is confident agency and savvy orchestration that focuses on what is right for Kazakhstan.

There is no alternative. In a world where space infrastructure, data corridors and deeptech supply chains are becoming the nervous system of geopolitical power, neutrality without agency no longer provides stability; it provides vulnerability.

For decades, Kazakhstan has balanced legacy ties with future ambitions. Few countries inherit a space asset as consequential as Baikonur and its STEM legacy, and fewer still combine it with a record of global trust. The nation’s voluntary nuclear disarmament, accession to all major UN space treaties and consistent adherence to nonproliferation norms are not symbolic relics of a bygone era. They constitute strategic capital for an innovation-centric growth paradigm that is guided by transparent governance. The question is whether Kazakhstan will spend that capital to shape the rules of the emerging space economy or allow others to do so on its territory.

The global space economy is projected to nearly triple to $1.8 trillion by 2035. This growth will not be driven by rockets alone, but by AI-enabled earth observation, satellite-enabled logistics, robotics and collaborative autonomy, advanced materials and secure data infrastructure. Space is becoming an industrial platform, and moving away from its past as a prestige domain. Countries that broker cooperation, standards, and talent flows will capture durable value. Those that merely host infrastructure will not.

That distinction defines Kazakhstan’s fork in the road:

Path 1: Eurasia’s trusted broker — power through orchestration

In the broker scenario, Kazakhstan does not choose sides. It chooses agency. It becomes the neutral, trusted node through which Eurasian space and deeptech cooperation flows; partner to many, subordinate to none.

This is economic strategy beyond abstract diplomacy. By anchoring multilateral partnerships across space robotics, AI and collaborative autonomy, data processing, microgravity materials and regional weather and climate services, etc., Kazakhstan can move from launch host to system integrator. Its launch and propulsion engineers, data and materials scientists, AI scientists and roboticists are not peripheral contractors but core contributors and co-design partners for global missions and supply chains.

Brokerage means shaping agendas and standards, not just following them. Kazakhstan’s long-standing compliance with space law, export controls and nonproliferation norms positions it to convene, not merely attend, forums on dual-use technology governance, satellite data security and responsible AI in space systems. In a fractured world, trusted and value-adding orchestrators accumulate quiet power. And trust, as the most valuable currency of them all, requires proactive and transparent governance in all directions, including its self-governance.

Crucially, this path builds on, not against, existing cooperation frameworks. Kazakhstan’s partnership with Russia at Baikonur is not a constraint but a foundation, provided it is complemented by intensified collaboration with Western, Middle Eastern and Asian space ecosystems. The objective is balance with depth, multiple partners, transparent rules and reciprocal value creation.

Economically, brokerage accelerates diversification. Space-enabled climate analytics, smart logistics and secure data corridors reinforce Kazakhstan’s role as a Eurasian connector, while deeptech hubs linked to Baikonur and Astana attract global capital and talent. In this way, space becomes not just another economic vertical but an innovation horizon that unifies innovators across borders. Politically, brokerage enhances sovereignty by reducing dependence on any single power.

Brokerage, however, is not automatic. It requires institutional maturity. Professionalized national agencies, an entrepreneur- and experimentation-friendly technocracy, rule of law, credible IP protection, reliable enforcement and sustained investment in human capital are non-negotiable. Without these, neutrality becomes hollow.

Path 2: Pawn in a new great space game — infrastructure without power

The alternative is more comfortable and far more dangerous.

In the pawn scenario, Kazakhstan remains operationally relevant but strategically passive. Its space and AI assets are used by others, segmented across competing blocs, while high-value R&D, intellectual property and decision-making migrate elsewhere. Launches happen. Data flows. But value leaks.

This is how strategic assets decay: not through neglect, but through underuse of agency. When reforms lag and long-term planning yields to short-term arrangements, innovation infrastructure becomes contested ground. Confidence erodes. Global firms hedge by relocating advanced work to jurisdictions with clearer governance and stronger innovation ecosystems.

The result is a familiar pattern. Kazakhstan becomes a transit zone rather than a co-creator, a testing site rather than a standard-setter. Its propulsion engineers execute, but do not design. Its institutions administer, but do not orchestrate. Over time, even neutrality is questioned, not because Kazakhstan chooses sides, but because it lacks the capacity to shape outcomes.

Being a pawn does not require coercion. It emerges naturally when a country mistakes stability for strategy. Tactics to appease tensions are not the same as a strategic and transparent long term vision that serves as a true north to Kazakhstan and its interlocutors.

Why the window is closing

The urgency is real. Space entrepreneurship now operates on fast cycles driven by digital-native firms and venture ecosystems. Once standards, partnerships and data architectures consolidate elsewhere, late entry becomes prohibitively expensive. Brokerage is path-dependent. Credibility compounds early, or it evaporates.

Kazakhstan’s advantage — Baikonur’s legacy, its mineral wealth, engineering know-how, transit position and global trust — will not wait. Other hubs are moving quickly. If Kazakhstan does not define itself as a broker now, others will define it as a venue.

This is not a choice between ambition and caution. It is a choice between relevance and dependence.

Kazakhstan has already demonstrated that principled decisions, from nuclear disarmament to treaty compliance and multilateral engagement, can generate long-term strategic dividends. The same logic applies to space and its deeptech. Brokerage is the modern expression of sovereignty in a networked world.

The launchpad is ready. The question is whether Kazakhstan will command the mission or simply host it.

⁠H.E. Zhaslan Madiyev is Deputy Prime Minister – Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Zhaslan Madiev is a public official engaged in the development of digital technologies and innovation policy in Kazakhstan. His work focuses on strategic coordination of high-technology sectors, including space-related capabilities, with an emphasis on data, infrastructure and international cooperation.

Olaf J Groth, PhD is a practice and adjunct professor at UC Berkeley Haas and UT Malaysia and CEO of Cambrian Futures and Cambrian Labs. Groth serves on the AI Council of President Tokayev in Kazakhstan, and on the expert panel of the AI Office for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. He’s the author of two books: “Solomon’s Code: Humanity in a World of Thinking Machines” and “The Great Remobilization: Strategies and Designs for a Smarter Global Future.”

Askar Sinchev is a consultant to the Executive Office of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. He contributes to national policy initiatives and engages in international discussions on the role of advanced technologies in economic development and global cooperation.

SpaceNews is committed to publishing our community’s diverse perspectives. Whether you’re an academic, executive, engineer or even just a concerned citizen of the cosmos, send your arguments and viewpoints to opinion (at) spacenews.com to be considered for publication online or in our next magazine. If you have something to submit, read some of our recent opinion articles and our submission guidelines to get a sense of what we’re looking for. The perspectives shared in these opinion articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent their employers or professional affiliations.