#Geopolitics#Energy#CentralAsia#Iran#Logistics#GoldenBridge #Turkey#Eurasia

Analysis of the realities on the global political stage at the conclusion of the first quarter of the 21st century indicates that the modern system of international relations stands on the threshold of fundamental reforms and drastic shifts. Specifically, the ongoing armed conflicts driven by the clash of interests of Great Powers (Russia-Ukraine) and the subsequent sanctions have exerted a profound negative impact on the energy map of the Eurasian continent.

As a primary example, the infrastructure of the northern routes connecting various regions to Europe through Russian territory has entered a zone of extremely high risk. In particular, military operations in Ukraine and the Black Sea maritime zone have effectively destabilized both land and sea transit infrastructure.

Simultaneously, these processes have undermined the stability of regional communications, placing the vast energy resources and transit potential of Central Asia into a state of “geopolitical blockade.” While active warfare may cease in the near future, the collision of interests between hegemonic powers ensures that high-risk levels for this transport infrastructure will persist.

Based on these circumstances and supported by geopolitical analysis, it is imperative to address the existence of alternative routes on the world map that are safer and mutually beneficial for all participants.

The most promising solution to bypass this complex geostrategic blockade and ensure the stability of regional transport infrastructure is to consider multimodal (land and sea) transport corridors passing through the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Specifically, the “Golden Bridge” concept proposed by the author represents a strategic model for integrating regional resources into the global market. In this scenario, Washington’s role as the global architect and Ankara’s (Türkiye) role as the primary regional partner carry fundamental geopolitical significance.

This route, functioning as a Southern Corridor, necessitates the formal development of the “Golden Bridge” concept (Iranian direction).

Strategic Architecture: Four Pillars of the Transit Chain

• A) The Iran–Türkiye Artery: The core segment of the “Golden Bridge,” linking Central Asian resources to the European Union through Türkiye’s transport corridor.

• B) The Eastern Iranian Branch (Kazakhstan–Turkmenistan–Iran): This railway line connects Central Asia to the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. It is the shortest and most cost-effective land route for China and Central Asia. Russia can also be viewed as an interested party here. The route further extends through Iran and Türkiye to the EU.

• C) The Caspian–Iran–Türkiye Multimodal Artery (Integration of Sea and Land): This is the most flexible and secure branch of the “Golden Bridge,” encompassing the following strategic stages:

o Maritime Stage (Caspian Transit): Transporting goods via ferries and containers from the ports of Central Asian states (Kazakhstan: Aktau/Kuryk; Turkmenistan: Turkmenbashi) to Iran’s northern ports (Anzali, Amirabad, Nowshahr). This bypasses the land-based bottlenecks and political obstacles of the Northern Route.

o Land Stage (Iranian Internal Transit): Rapidly moving goods from northern Iranian ports via modern rail and road networks to the country’s western borders, specifically the Tabriz/Razi and Bazargan crossing points into Türkiye.

o Türkiye and European Integration: Upon entering Turkish territory, goods are swiftly delivered to European Union markets through Türkiye's advanced transport infrastructure.

• D) The Trans-Afghan Corridor: Accessing Iran’s Port of Chabahar via Uzbekistan (Termez) and Afghanistan. This direction opens a direct gateway to South Asian markets and connects via land through Iran and Türkiye to the EU.

The primary advantage of this project is that it does not require building logistics from scratch, but rather integrating existing infrastructure that is already 50-60% complete. Consequently, this represents a “Low CAPEX” (low capital expenditure) solution. Furthermore, the “Syria Factor” adds a critical dimension. Integrating Syria’s 800-km border with Türkiye and its energy reserves into this chain represents a geopolitical revolution. In this context, Syria’s Mediterranean ports (Tartus, Latakia) serve as an alternative gateway to the Suez Canal for Iran and Central Asia, guaranteeing both energy and rapid commodity delivery to the EU.

The implementation of the “Golden Bridge” will inevitably shift the existing balance of power. Russia may attempt to exert military and political pressure to protect its monopoly. China, in turn, may view this US-monitored alternative to its “Belt and Road Initiative” with apprehension.

In conclusion, the most vital aspect of this strategy is its low geopolitical risk and mutual benefit for participating states. This transit project does not interfere with the domestic policies of any nation; it relies solely on economic interest and security guarantees. The “Golden Bridge” is a historic opportunity to break the economic blockade of the entire region and transform the global energy system. This strategy is destined to redefine the map of Eurasia in the near future.

Furthermore, Washington’s primary interest would be to provide Iran with “Economic Security Guarantees” in exchange for a departure from its nuclear program. In essence, the “Golden Bridge” is the only viable path to resolving all regional conflicts (nuclear risks, sanctions) by integrating Iran into the global economy.

Author: Bahromjon Хursandovich Suvanov

Strategic Analyst, former officer with extensive

experience in regional security and counter-narcotics