From rule-based to deal-based order: Where do Kazakhstan and middle powers stand

The conventional structure, normally revolving around a West-non-West dichotomy, is beginning to fade, largely due to Donald Trump’s second term as president of the United States. Whereas the international system previously assumed relatively clear and predictable alliance structures, today’s geopolitical boundaries appear increasingly fluid. Until recently, many international relations theorists described the global order as revolving around an intensifying U.S.-China rivalry that had not crystallized into a stable bipolar system. Other great powers, such as Russia and Iran, were seen as gravitating toward one of these poles while continuing to pursue their own strategic interests.

The United States under Trump has been gradually dismantling this familiar structure. There is no longer a coherent notion of a “united West” led by Washington. Trump’s claims regarding Greenland, repeated public denigration of NATO and EU allies, and controversial remarks about allied troops during the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos signal that the current U.S. administration increasingly treats alliances as conditional transactions rather than strategic commitments. At the same time, the United States has not abandoned the perception of strategic competition. What has changed, however, is Washington’s geographic and political orientation: the United States appears increasingly focused on the Western Hemisphere while reducing its willingness to underwrite security arrangements in the Eastern Hemisphere.

As a result, the global order long defined by stable alliances anchored to a U.S.-led system is eroding. The world is gravitating from a rule-based to a deal-based order, where ad hoc bargaining increasingly replaces institutionalized predictability. This shift creates uncertainty not only for traditional allies but also for countries that do not belong to either great-power pole. Yet it simultaneously creates both risks and unprecedented openings for a different category of actors: middle powers.

Middle powers normally refer to states whose economic scale, demographic weight, and institutional maturity exceed those of small states but fall short of global hegemony. Unlike great powers, they do not seek systemic dominance. Yet, unlike small states, they possess sufficient administrative, economic, and diplomatic depth to shape outcomes beyond their borders. Contemporary middle powers tend to produce public goods rather than military blocs: mediation platforms, regulatory models, connectivity corridors, talent pipelines, and technological ecosystems. Notable examples include Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Norway, the Netherlands, Singapore, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. Kazakhstan, as a state with significant influence across Eurasia, is recognized as a middle power.

The idea that middle powers should assume a more active global role has gained momentum. During the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney called on middle powers to work together to counter the rise of hard-power politics and great-power rivalry and to help build a more cooperative and resilient international system. Similar arguments were voiced earlier at the UN General Assembly by UN General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock, Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, and Secretary for Relations with States of the Holy See Paul Richard Gallagher.

This vision closely aligns with the long-standing position of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, a consistent advocate of United Nations reform and of a greater role for middle powers in global governance. Kazakhstan, as a state with significant influence in Eurasia, is well-positioned to engage with this emerging agenda. The tectonic shifts currently underway in the international system may therefore provide Kazakhstan with a timely opportunity to move from being primarily a rule-taker to becoming an active agenda-setter. In an international environment shifting toward transactional and fragmented arrangements, the decisive criterion for middle-power status is functional relevance, particularly the ability to supply solutions that other states find useful. It is within this functional understanding of middle powerhood that Kazakhstan’s trajectory becomes analytically significant.

While the spectrum of middle powers is diverse, Kazakhstan has already achieved notable success in several strategically important domains of modern power. These achievements position the country not merely to participate in this emerging middle-power landscape but to shape its agenda. One of the most visible examples is artificial intelligence. Kazakhstan has begun consolidating a credible AI leadership profile by building a rapidly expanding ecosystem of more than 100 AI startups, producing its first AI unicorn, and recording a fivefold rise in AI venture investment, making AI the country’s leading destination for venture capital. The establishment of a dedicated Ministry of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development, alongside a national AI strategy, sovereign computing infrastructure, and large-scale skills training programs, has enabled widespread AI adoption across finance, telecommunications, e-government, and information technology. Artificial intelligence is thus being positioned not as a symbolic innovation agenda, but as a core driver of productivity and future economic growth.

Educational diplomacy represents a second pillar of Kazakhstan’s emerging middle-power profile. Historically a recipient of global soft power, Kazakhstan is increasingly becoming a provider of it. Long-standing programs such as the Bolashak Scholarship, the rapid expansion to around 30 foreign university campuses, and the hosting of more than 35,000 international students have embedded Kazakhstan into global academic networks while attracting international talent. Combined with growing cultural visibility and a state-backed effort to position the country as a regional education hub, these initiatives generate long-term influence, credibility, and goodwill. Educational diplomacy, therefore, functions not only as human-capital development, but as a strategic instrument of soft power.

Beyond artificial intelligence and educational diplomacy, Kazakhstan is also carving out middle-power relevance through mediation, logistics, and energy-transition brokerage. The country has established itself as a neutral diplomatic platform by hosting initiatives such as the Astana Process on Syria, the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions, and regular multilateral forums, thereby demonstrating a preference for facilitation and process management rather than bloc alignment. In parallel, Kazakhstan is emerging as a critical connectivity manager across Eurasia by expanding rail corridors, dry ports, and logistics hubs that anchor the Middle Corridor and provide alternative supply-chain routes amid geopolitical fragmentation. At the same time, as a major oil, gas, and uranium producer investing in renewables, green hydrogen, and nuclear energy, Kazakhstan is positioning itself as a pragmatic energy-transition broker capable of bridging fossil-fuel economies with decarbonization agendas.

As conventional alliances break down and the structure of international relations shifts from a rule-based to a deal-based order that favors great powers, middle powers risk being sidelined within emerging arrangements. Amid this uncertainty, voices calling for an increased role for middle powers and for stronger cooperation among them are growing louder. For Kazakhstan, as one of the middle powers, its strategic future does not lie in choosing sides within great-power competition, but in assembling a portfolio of functional niches that collectively constitute middle-power influence. In an era where alliances fragment and predictability erodes, states that can supply platforms, connectivity, talent, and problem-solving capacity become indispensable. Kazakhstan is increasingly one of them. The central question is no longer whether Kazakhstan qualifies as a middle power, but whether it chooses to consciously lead within this emerging middle-power constellation.

Earlier, Qazinform News Agency reported on efforts to reform the United Nations, the growing role of middle powers, and the ineffectiveness of the current global governance architecture.