US Courts Neutral Turkmenistan as Iran Tensions Simmer



Washington is intensifying its diplomatic focus on Turkmenistan, a move underscored by a recent phone call between U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau and Turkmen Foreign Minister Rashid Meredov. The dialogue, initiated by the U.S., signals a growing American interest in the Central Asian nation’s strategic geographic position bordering Iran, particularly as tensions escalate across the Middle East. Turkmenistan’s proximity to Iran, coupled with its energy resources and potential role in regional stability, are key factors driving this renewed engagement.

In response to the American outreach, Turkmenistan has reiterated its long-standing policy of neutrality, a status recognized three times by the United Nations. The Turkmen Foreign Ministry stated that the country plays a constructive role in international affairs and, adhering to the principles of peaceful conflict resolution, is prepared to participate in resolving the current Middle East situation through diplomatic means.

Ashgabat is already indirectly involved in regional crises, notably by facilitating the evacuation of foreign nationals from Iran. According to its foreign ministry, approximately 50 countries have requested assistance, and Turkmenistan’s land and air checkpoints have already processed over 2,000 people from Central Asia, Russia, Europe, and the Gulf states. The government has assured that it is taking all necessary measures to ensure the smooth transit and return of these foreign citizens using its land corridors and Ashgabat’s International Airport.

For Turkmenistan, relations with Iran are not just about a shared border; they are deeply rooted in economic cooperation. Iran is a major importer of Turkmen natural gas and a vital transit country for swap-based gas deliveries to third markets. The two nations collaborate on electricity projects, transportation corridors like the Gumdag-Etrek highway, and the development of cross-border trade zones. This intricate relationship underscores the delicate diplomatic balancing act Ashgabat must perform.

From Washington’s perspective, Turkmenistan’s strategic value mirrors these same areas of interest. The U.S. has repeatedly voiced support for the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline, a project designed to bring Turkmen gas to European markets via Azerbaijan, with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterating this support in May 2025. This highlights the overlapping energy and geopolitical interests that could form the basis of a strengthened partnership.

The history of U.S.-Turkmenistan relations includes a significant, if complex, military dimension. For years, a U.S. Army logistics center operated out of Ashgabat’s airport to support the coalition’s mission in Afghanistan. While officially framed as part of a UN-backed operation to align with Turkmenistan’s neutrality, experts note the U.S. military used Turkmen facilities for more than just humanitarian purposes. This past cooperation provides a precedent for potential future security arrangements.

Recent developments have fueled speculation about renewed security collaboration. In May, a new international airport was inaugurated in Jebel, a small town on a former Soviet military airfield site in western Turkmenistan. Funded by a $100 million loan from the UAE’s Abu Dhabi Development Fund, the airport’s strategic location and its 3,200-meter runway have led experts to suggest it could serve as a dual-use facility for military operations in a nearby country, a theory bolstered when the airport was opened with a demonstration flight by then-leader Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov.

However, the path to closer ties is not without obstacles. A significant point of friction is the restrictive U.S. visa policy. Following an executive order by former President Donald Trump, Turkmenistan became the only CIS country whose citizens are largely barred from receiving U.S. business, tourist, student, and exchange visas. The Turkmen Foreign Ministry has called the decision hasty, and it remains a major impediment to improving bilateral relations, even as strategic interests appear to be aligning.