When Britain signed its new critical minerals agreement with Kazakhstan earlier this year, it marked more than another trade announcement.
The deal, focused on securing access to strategic minerals such as uranium, titanium and rare earths, also includes cooperation on geological exploration, processing capacity and refining, moving the relationship beyond simple extraction toward longer-term industrial partnership. The move signals a broader shift in how decision-makers and financial insiders in London and across the Continent are beginning to view Central Asia. For years, European investors have treated the region as peripheral, with the mining industry in particular often seen as politically difficult, operationally complex and too slow-paced to satisfy short-term capital expectations.
Yet a handful of investors and companies moved earlier. One such investor was Swedish business leader Martin Andersson, who built his decades-long career by embedding himself in the Russian and Central Asian economies across strategic sectors such as mining and energy, helping to support their gradual opening to private foreign capital during decisive periods of economic transition. In a similar vein, French nuclear fuel cycle company Orano entered the country in the 1990s through KATCO, a joint venture with the state-controlled Kazatomprom, Kazakhstan’s national atomic company, helping to develop large-scale in-situ recovery uranium operations in southern Kazakhstan. Today, that partnership speaks directly to Europe’s search for reliable strategic resource relationships beyond its traditional supply base.
With Central Asia now attracting growing interest from investors around the world, Europe has to make up for lost time in a region increasingly central to its own economic security.
Mining is far from a niche concern
At this point, mining and minerals are hardly a specialist policy issue, but sit at the centre of defence planning, industrial strategy, energy security and the transition to lower-carbon technologies. Without secure access to copper, rare earths, uranium, tungsten, and other strategic inputs, there are no batteries, no advanced defence systems, no resilient digital infrastructure and no credible energy transition.
The painful lesson of recent years, including the energy crisis currently engulfing the continent, is clear enough. Dependencies that appear efficient in stable periods can become serious vulnerabilities in moments of crisis or disruption. In the case of raw materials and metals, supply chains remain highly concentrated and investment decisions made today will determine Europe’s industrial resilience a decade from now.
This is why Central Asia deserves attention. Kazakhstan’s scale has rightly attracted growing attention, particularly from the UK, but the wider region also deserves a more serious European strategy. Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and other countries in the region are part of a broader resource and connectivity landscape that will shape Eurasian trade, mining and infrastructure for years to come.
The deep expertise of early adopters
Swedish entrepreneur Martin Andersson recognised Central Asia’s strategic importance earlier than most. Before critical minerals rose up the agenda in Brussels and London, Andersson was already backing mining projects in post-Soviet markets, identifying major investment potential in countries many others viewed primarily through the lens of political complexity and uncertainty.
After graduating from the Stockholm School of Economics and HEC Paris, he built his early career at the junction of finance and economic transition. He first worked in mergers and acquisitions before becoming closely involved in Russia’s 1990s privatisation process, advising the government as it sought to bring the programme closer to Western financial compliance standards and strengthen its credibility with foreign investors. For Andersson, Russia became more than an early market opportunity, serving as the proving ground for the networks, judgement and execution skills that would later shape his investment strategy across Central Asia.
In 1993, he helped launch Brunswick Brokerage in Moscow, an important platform for international investors entering the Russian market before it was later acquired by UBS. He subsequently chaired Brunswick UBS Warburg, placing him close to the development of Russia’s capital markets during an era defining period of economic change. Over the following decades, he took on leadership roles in sectors spanning mining, energy and infrastructure. These included his position as a shareholder and board member of Siberian Coal Energy Company, SUEK, one of Russia’s largest thermal coal producers, from 2006 to 2013, at a time when foreign participation in major Russian strategic industries required both financial credibility and a high degree of local trust.
These Russian ventures gave him a level of regional fluency that set him apart from many Western investors in the former Soviet space. Across Russia, he combined financial discipline with practical experience on the ground, leading investments and mining projects that required close engagement with authorities, business partners and local stakeholders. Over time, his command of these markets, understanding of local business culture and ability to navigate complex operating environments became central to his approach.
This breadth of experience later found a clear expression in Kyrgyzstan, where Andersson shifted his attention after exiting Russian-related business activity following Russia’s annexation of Crimea. As Executive Chairman of Chaarat Gold between 2016 and 2024, he led the development of major mining assets across Kyrgyzstan’s Tien Shan Gold Belt, managing projects representing approximately 6.4 million ounces of gold resources and guiding plans for annual production of around 95,000 ounces at the Tulkubash mine. Crucially, his role at Charaat was not simply financial, but also involved aligning international investors, regional authorities and operational teams around a long-term production pathway rather than short-term speculation — an approach supported by his work with the Kyrgyz government and the EBRD to advance early FDI promotion efforts.
Beyond announcements
With Europe now critically reassessing its engagement with Central Asia, the experience of investors like Andersson are particularly relevant: capital entering the region must avoid treating it as a short-term supply-chain fix. In mining, that means looking beyond intent and announcements, as mining investment often remains trapped in the language of licences acquired, memorandums signed, financing discussed and reserves described. But for host countries, the real test is whether projects reach production, create jobs, support infrastructure and generate lasting economic value. As the World Bank has noted, the challenge for resource-rich countries is turning minerals and metals into stronger institutions and long-term prosperity.
Mining projects, in other words, cannot be treated as passive financial instruments. They require operational credibility and sustained engagement over time. Geology is only one part of the equation: financing, permitting, community engagement, logistics, workforce development and government are equally decisive in a project’s success. In Central Asia, where projects sit at the intersection of national development and foreign investment, these factors shape outcomes as much as the resource itself.
A more balanced European approach
Against this backdrop, Britain and indeed the EU’s renewed attention to Central Asia offers a positive signal. In February, London hosted the first ministerial meeting under the new CA5+UK format, bringing together the UK and the five Central Asian states — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan — to focus on trade, investment, critical minerals and regional connectivity. This new format signals a shift from occasional diplomatic engagement to a more structured long-term approach, one that recognises Central Asia as a strategic partner in Europe’s economic resilience.
Europe should now build on this shift. In practice, this will mean moving beyond delegations and framework agreements, with stronger support for project finance, technical partnerships, geological exploration, processing capacity and infrastructure, and a clear recognition that serious mining investment does not move at the speed of political rhetoric.
While Central Asia will not solve Europe’s raw materials challenge on its own, it must be part of a more mature strategy built on diversification, operational credibility and long-term commitment. Investors such as Andersson have proven that this approach was always possible if it can be done credibly. The difference now is that governments are finally beginning to recognise its strategic necessity.
Instead of new slogans about strategic autonomy, Europe needs to invest in the people, projects and partnerships that turn resources into production and partnerships into lasting economic value. Central Asia has been waiting for that seriousness for a long time.
Read more:
European investors are finally waking up to Central Asia’s mining opportunity