At one time, Henry Kissinger asked the question: «Who should I call to talk to Europe?» The lack of an answer to this question indicated the absence of a decision-making center in the European Union.
If today someone asks the same question about Central Asia, he will not receive an answer either. There is no one to speak on behalf of the region today.
À un moment donné, Henry Kissinger a posé la question: «Qui dois-je appeler pour parler à l'Europe?» L'absence de réponse à cette question indique l'absence de centre de décision dans l'Union européenne.
Si aujourd'hui quelqu'un pose la même question sur l'Asie centrale, il ne recevra pas non plus de réponse. Il n'y a personne pour parler au nom de la région aujourd'hui.
Afghanistan has long been a modern backbone for international politics. There is no other country around which (more precisely, around which problems) such a developed system of global, regional, two-, three — and quadripartite dialogues are built. Dozens of intelligent people around the world are working on ways to resolve the «Afghan issue», and dissertations are being defended. Monographs on Afghan topics can be filled in several rooms of the library. Before the era of self-isolation, the fast and frequently used international conferences about Afghanistan were one of the drivers of the hotel, restaurant, catering, air travel industries, and everything related to the event business.
L'Afghanistan est depuis plusieurs années l’épine dorsale de la politique internationale. Il n'existe aucun autre pays autour duquel est construit un système aussi développé de dialogues mondiaux, régionaux, à deux, trois et quatre parties. Des dizaines de personnes brillantes dans le monde entier travaillent sur les moyens de résoudre la «question afghane», et des thèses sont défendues. Des monographies entières sur des sujets traitant de l’Afghanistan remplissent les bibliothèques.
长期以来，对国际政治来说，阿富汗一直是一个建立整个系统的国家。世界上没有别的像阿富汗一样的地方，围绕着这个国家（更确切地说，围绕其问题的解决）被建立一个由各种全球、地区、双方、三方及四方对话构成的发达系统。全世界的数十个智囊团和数百篇论文正在研究解决«阿富汗问题»的方法。以阿富汗问题为专题的专著可以充满图书馆的几个阅览室。在自我隔离时代之前，定期及经常举行的讨论阿富汗问题的国际会议是旅馆、餐饮业，航空旅行以及与举办活动行业相关一切的驱动力之一。对于某些国际安全组织来说，«阿富汗问题»是其活动的主要理由。同时，非常重要的是，阿富汗及其所有问题都已成为了国际关系中团结的一个因素。在联合国，关于阿富汗的决议一般都获得目前很难得的一致通过。在世界政治观点上保持截然相反态度的国家，对解决阿富汗问题的方法保持一致的看法。
Afghanistan has long been a modern backbone for international politics. There is no other country around which (more precisely, around which problems) such a developed system of global, regional, two-, three — and quadripartite dialogues are built. Dozens of intelligent people around the world are working on ways to resolve the «Afghan issue», and dissertations are being defended. Monographs on Afghan topics can be filled in several rooms of the library. Before the era of self-isolation, the fast and frequently used international conferences about Afghanistan were one of the drivers of the hotel, restaurant, catering, air travel industries, and everything related to the event business. For some international organizations specializing in security, the «Afghan problem» served as the main justification for their activities. At the same time, which is very important, Afghanistan with its problems brought out international unity. At the UN, resolutions on Afghanistan are adopted with unanimity that is rare these days. The countries, whose views on the world are diametrically opposed, coincide in their approaches to solving the Afghan issue.
亨利·基辛格（Henry Kissinger）曾經問過一個問題：«我應該打電話給誰與歐洲交談？»對這個問題沒有答案表明歐洲聯盟沒有決策中心。
如果今天有人對中亞提出同樣的問題，他也不會得到答复。沒有人可以代表該地區發言。
但是，中亞與歐洲不同，不會建立任何超國家結構。主權問題對於該地區所有州都非常重要，此外，它們有機會確保僅整合結構就無法確保真正的合作。在上個世紀90年代發起的，由哈薩克斯坦，吉爾吉斯斯坦，塔吉克斯坦和烏茲別克斯坦參與的區域一體化項目以失敗告終。中亞經濟共同體旨在逐步形成一個單一的經濟空間，它擁有堅實的法律框架（超過250個不同的協議），總統級別的州際理事會，總理理事會，外交部長和國防委員會以及作為永久性工作的執行委員會州際理事會的機構。但是，正如參與者自己最終認可的那樣，這些結構的有效性實際上為零。在2002年阿拉木圖的一次會議上，四個州的領導人承認整合項目失敗了。宣布中立政策的土庫曼斯坦原則上不參加此類項目。