The Middle Corridor at the Crossroads of Interests: Tariffs, Infrastructure, and Port Competition

In recent years, a new logistical reality has gradually been taking shape across Eurasia, with the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route—better known as the Middle Corridor—at its center. This route connects China and other East Asian countries with European markets through Central Asia, the Caspian Sea, and the South Caucasus. In essence, it represents a complex chain of land and maritime segments passing through Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey, together forming a key transit bridge between two of the world’s largest economic regions.
Interest in this route has grown noticeably since 2022. Geopolitical changes and sanctions affecting traditional northern transport routes through Russia have forced many states and logistics companies to seek more diversified and resilient options for transporting goods between Asia and Europe. As a result, attention to the Middle Corridor has increased significantly, and its infrastructure is increasingly viewed not merely as a regional project but as a potential element of a new Eurasian transport architecture.

The growing interest in the route has also quickly been reflected in transport statistics. Traffic dynamics have become far more visible, and although these figures remain significantly lower than cargo volumes transported along traditional Eurasian routes, they demonstrate a steady expansion of transport flows and the gradual strengthening of the Middle Corridor’s role within the system of transcontinental logistics.

Against this backdrop, cooperation among the countries through whose territories the route passes has acquired particular importance. Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey form the backbone of the transport chain connecting Central Asia with the Black Sea and Mediterranean regions. The corridor’s competitiveness largely depends on coordinated infrastructure development, alignment of transport policies, and the simplification of transit procedures. For this reason, the participating states have gradually begun establishing mechanisms for ongoing cooperation. Without coordinated decisions in the fields of infrastructure development, tariff policy, and administrative procedures, cargo movement across several countries inevitably faces delays and additional costs.

One of the key instruments of coordination has been the International Association of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, established in 2017, with its secretariat located in Astana. The association brings together railway administrations, ports, and logistics companies from the countries along the route, serving as a platform for coordinating tariffs, transport schedules, and organizational aspects of transit.

The association operates through regular meetings and consultations among representatives of national transport systems. These forums address tariff policy, transport scheduling, cargo handling at ports and railway hubs, and measures aimed at reducing administrative procedures at borders. Over time, the association has evolved into a permanent mechanism for dialogue between national transport systems that historically developed independently and operated under different regulatory frameworks. As a result, a more coordinated model of transit cooperation within the Middle Corridor is gradually emerging.

A new stage of coordination among the countries of the Middle Corridor began in 2022, when Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey agreed on a joint development roadmap for the route until 2027. Prepared at the level of transport ministries, the document aimed to give cooperation a more systematic character. By that time it had become evident that further expansion of the corridor’s transit potential would be impossible without coordinated action, since the route passes through several national transport systems, each with its own regulatory framework, infrastructure limitations, and administrative procedures.

The roadmap established a shared understanding that the development of the Middle Corridor requires synchronization of infrastructure projects and the elimination of bottlenecks along different sections of the route. Particular attention is being paid to the development of Caspian Sea ports, modernization of railway infrastructure, expansion of the capacity of transport hubs, and the introduction of digital solutions, including electronic document management. These measures are intended to accelerate information exchange between customs and transport authorities and reduce the time required to process transit cargo. Thus, cooperation among the countries of the route is gradually evolving from isolated infrastructure projects into a more comprehensive model aimed at creating a unified transport environment, in which different elements of the logistics chain operate in coordination and enhance the resilience of the corridor as an alternative route between Asia and Europe.

Political interaction among the countries along the Middle Corridor has also become an important factor in its development. In addition to technical coordination of transport systems, states maintain regular intergovernmental dialogue, primarily at the level of transport ministries. These meetings address infrastructure projects, transit procedures, and investment initiatives, allowing decisions to be coordinated more quickly and enabling more effective planning of the corridor’s development. At the same time, interparliamentary dialogue among countries in the region is also developing. Members of parliamentary committees in Turkey, Georgia, and Azerbaijan periodically discuss issues related to transport cooperation and the improvement of regulatory frameworks. Such contacts are important because many decisions in the transit sector require legislative adjustments and the alignment of national rules with international practices.

Within the framework of interstate cooperation, practical economic issues are also discussed, including the development of logistics infrastructure and the attraction of investment for the modernization of key transport hubs. Caspian Sea ports are of particular importance, as they represent one of the most sensitive sections of the route. Consequently, the expansion of port capacity and the coordination of infrastructure projects are gradually strengthening the resilience of the Middle Corridor.

A crucial element of the land segment of the route is the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars railway, which, after its opening in 2017, provided a direct rail connection between the South Caucasus and Turkey’s transport system and further with the European rail network. This made it possible to organize cargo transport from Central Asia and the Caspian region toward European markets. Following the launch of the railway line, participating countries began coordinating tariff policies and introducing more flexible transport conditions, including discounted tariffs for transit cargo. In the future, modernization of the line is being considered, which could increase its capacity to approximately 17 million tons per year, thereby strengthening the role of the South Caucasus within Eurasian logistics.

Despite the development of infrastructure and coordination among the countries along the route, one of the most challenging issues remains the harmonization of tariff policies. The transport systems of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey evolved under different economic conditions, and therefore the principles for calculating transport costs across various sections of the route differ significantly. This complicates the formation of a unified and transparent transit pricing structure.

In Kazakhstan, the railway sector plays a central role in transit logistics, and tariffs are largely regulated by the state through special tariff regimes and support measures for transportation. Azerbaijan applies a more flexible pricing model, particularly in port complexes and logistics terminals, where service costs may depend on cargo volume, type of goods, and contractual arrangements. Georgia maintains a more liberalized transport market model; however, port fees in the Black Sea ports of Poti and Batumi remain relatively high, which affects the overall cost of transportation. Turkey’s transport system is largely oriented toward European regulatory standards, but differences in taxation, transit fees, and administrative procedures also complicate the formation of a unified tariff framework.

As a result, the cost of transportation along the Middle Corridor is composed of several national tariff systems, making the harmonization of tariff policy one of the key challenges for the route’s development. Under these conditions, the final cost of transportation along the Middle Corridor can vary significantly depending on numerous factors. These include the type of cargo, the chosen logistics scheme, the specific transshipment ports on the Caspian and Black Seas, and the range of additional services included in the transport contract. Because different sections of the route operate under different tariff principles, the overall cost of transportation is effectively the sum of several national tariff systems, making the final price less predictable for shippers.

The absence of a unified tariff calculation system means that even under similar conditions, transportation costs may vary depending on the operator or the specific section of the route. This complicates supply-chain planning for logistics companies and increases the risk of budget deviations. Additional uncertainty arises from currency differences. The route involves the use of several national currencies—including the tenge, manat, lari, and Turkish lira—while most international settlements are conducted in US dollars. Exchange-rate fluctuations can therefore alter the final cost of transportation and create additional financial risks for operators and clients.

The situation is further complicated by differences in customs procedures and documentation systems. Although the countries of the corridor have begun implementing elements of digital transit systems, full integration of electronic platforms has not yet been achieved. As a result, cargo shipments in some sections of the route are still accompanied by paper documents or require repeated processing when crossing borders. This inevitably increases transit time. When information about cargo must be processed multiple times in different national systems, additional administrative procedures arise, increasing the likelihood of delays. Particularly sensitive are those segments of the route where not only the transport operator changes, but also the legal jurisdiction.

Differences in national customs regulations also play a role. Each country applies its own customs control standards, documentation requirements, and certification rules. Even when dealing with transit goods, these differences can lead to additional inspections or the need to provide supplementary documentation. Consequently, delivery times may increase, and logistics companies must account for these administrative specifics when planning routes and delivery schedules.

From an economic perspective, the countries of the Middle Corridor face a complex situation. On the one hand, they are interested in increasing transit flows, which bring employment opportunities, infrastructure development, and additional revenue. On the other hand, each country seeks to maximize its own income from transport services, railway tariffs, and port fees.
As a result, balancing national interests with the overall competitiveness of the route often complicates the coordination of unified tariff conditions. The situation is further influenced by competition among Caspian ports such as Aktau, Baku, and Turkmenbashi. Each of them aims to attract more transit cargo by offering more favorable conditions to carriers and logistics companies. While such competition stimulates infrastructure development and improves operational efficiency, it can sometimes weaken incentives for deeper tariff coordination among the corridor’s participants.

External factors also influence the development of the Middle Corridor. Both the European Union and China have shown considerable interest in Eurasian transport routes, proposing infrastructure financing projects and initiatives to develop logistics standards. These initiatives create opportunities for the modernization of the corridor but simultaneously introduce competition among different development models. Additional uncertainty arises from geopolitical developments and sanctions regimes, which may complicate the attraction of international financing. The Middle Corridor has also gained particular importance within the framework of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. For Beijing, the development of stable transport links between East Asia and Europe forms part of a long-term strategy of Eurasian economic connectivity. In this context, the Trans-Caspian route is seen as one of the additional overland routes capable of enhancing the resilience of trade chains.

Infrastructure development in Central Asia and the South Caucasus, modernization of Caspian ports, and improvements to railway connections are therefore integrated into a broader system of Eurasian transport corridors. In recent years, examples of practical cooperation among the countries of the region have also emerged. Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey have simplified several customs procedures, reducing border-crossing times for transit cargo. Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are also introducing elements of electronic transit systems. Within the framework of the Trans-Caspian Route Association, special tariff conditions have been agreed for consolidated cargo shipments, increasing the attractiveness of the route and contributing to the growth of cargo volumes.

In the long term, the development of the Middle Corridor will depend on deeper integration of the transport systems of the participating countries. One possible direction could be the creation of a unified digital platform for tariff calculation and transport planning, which would make transit costs more transparent. An equally important step would be the implementation of electronic document management systems based on international standards. Such systems could significantly accelerate border procedures and reduce administrative costs.

Cooperation among Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey already demonstrates considerable political potential and is shaping a new transport linkage between Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and European markets. However, the future effectiveness of the Middle Corridor will depend on overcoming the fragmentation of tariff and regulatory systems. The harmonization of transport regulations and tariff policies could significantly reduce logistical costs and strengthen the position of the route as one of the alternative Eurasian transport corridors, while simultaneously enhancing the strategic role of the South Caucasus and the Caspian region.
Elbrus Mamedov

SR-CENTER.INFO