Confirmed: The Minnesota Timberwolves are Stuck with Tim Connelly
Marc Lore and Alex Rodriguez lured Tim Connelly to the Minnesota Timberwolves, with hopes he could constructed the organization's first-ever championship team, just like he had built with the Denver Nuggets, who refused to pay him like the big time president of basketball operations that he was.
Nonetheless, with the ownership situation less than certain, Tim has found himself in somewhat of a limbo with the Wolves too. That uncertainty led to a one-year band-aid extension last offseason, which allowed Connelly to delay his long-term decision to this summer.
Advertisement
But now that the Lore + A-Rod group is set to take over control at the end of this month, it appears Tim Connelly knows his future now as well, even if it is not yet official.
Tim Connelly sticking around as Minnesota Timberwolves PoBO
With the dust now settled from the Minnesota Timberwolves' Western Conference Finals defeat at the hands of the Oklahoma City Thunder, local reporters have been meeting with players, coaches and team officials.
On Monday, they met with Connelly, who made it clear when asked by Dane Moore about his future, that he is here to stay.
'Super happy here, it's been great. Not just as working with the team, but this whole community, so it really feels like home. Think you guys are stuck with me.'
Tim Connelly – Timberwolves president
Connelly joined the Minnesota Timberwolves prior to the 2022-23 season. Three years (seasons) later, the Wolves are 246-147 (.568 winning percentage) under his management. Across nine seasons in Denver, Connelly's Nuggets never won 56 games, like the Wolves did in 2023-24.
Advertisement
This season's 49-win Timberwolves team was outdone In fact, the 2018-19 Nuggets — which won 54 games — were the only Connelly-run Denver team to win more than this year's 49-win Wolves. In other words, I think the move has worked out okay for Tim, too.
Related: Marc Lore, A-Rod Expected to Take Over Timberwolves Soon, New Arena Plans Coming…
Obviously Rodriguez and Lore are both fans of Connelly, having brought him to Minnesota. From the sounds of it, his decision to stay would not have been as cut and dry, had Glen Taylor remained in control of the organization. Instead, we'll likely see a long-term extension come in short order.
Roster decisions loom for Connelly's Timberwolves
Tim Connelly has swung a couple of the biggest trades in Minnesota Timberwolves history. He started during his first offseason at the control panel, when he traded away most of the Wolves' future draft picks for Rudy Gobert.
Advertisement
Then last offseason, he outdid the Gobert blockbuster by trading Karl-Anthony Towns to the New York Knicks, mostly due to financial implications, with his massive super-max contract looming. Can we expect another blockbuster this offseason? Here's what Connelly had to say about that…
'The relatively new CBA we were, like all of the teams, kind of learning on the fly. Some of those deals that were on the books were done prior to the new ratification of the CBA. Last year was the first year we kind of tried to transact in that second apron and it was really challenging. You try to win, and also try to allow yourself to build sustainable winners. I think all of those things were done in unison. Fingers crossed, our ability to be a little bit more flexible financially could serve us well this offseason.'
Tim Connelly – Timberwolves president
The Minnesota Timberwolves have a few key players that need to make decisions for their future, this offseason. Naz Reid has a player option and he is in line for a payday. Julius Randle also has a player option of his own. Meanwhile, Nickeil Alexander-Walker is due for unrestricted free agency.
Related: Karl Anthony Towns' New Teammates Turn on Him After Playoff Exit
Related Headlines
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
6 hours ago
- USA Today
Panthers vs. Oilers live updates: Score, highlights from Stanley Cup Final Game 2
Panthers vs. Oilers live updates: Score, highlights from Stanley Cup Final Game 2 Show Caption Hide Caption Are Edmonton Oilers Stanley Cup bound? Former NHLer weighs in Former NHL winger Riley Cote explains what he loves about this Edmonton Oilers team ahead of the Western Conference Finals. Sports Seriously The Edmonton Oilers have two things they didn't have in last year's Stanley Cup Final: home-ice advantage and a lead in the series. The Oilers' 4-3 overtime win in Game 1 means the Florida Panthers will need to come back if they're going to repeat as Stanley Cup champions. Game 2 is Friday night. "We learn more from adversity than we do from winning," Panthers forward Carter Verhaeghe told reporters on Thursday. The Panthers blew a second intermission lead for the first time in the playoffs in three years under coach Paul Maurice. They were outshot 14-2 in the third period as Edmonton tied the game and won in overtime on Leon Draisaitl's power-play goal. "They dictated more of the game than we did," forward Matthew Tkachuk said. "It is what it is. Back to the drawing board. Just try to play better than them (Friday)." Florida has lost two in a row only once this postseason but rallied to beat the Toronto Maple Leafs in seven games in the second round. "We just need to be ready for it, that they are going to be better," Oilers coach Kris Knoblauch said. Here's what to know about Game 2 of the Stanley Cup Final between the Edmonton Oilers and Florida Panthers, including how to watch: Brad Marchand scores on a short-handed breakaway after a feed from Anton Lundell. Florida kills off the rest of the penalty. Niko Mikkola is called for holding. The Panthers need to stay out of the penalty box. Let's see if it costs them. Note: It doesn't. Florida has been getting a lot of zone time in this period and it connects to tie the game on a wrist shot from point by Dmitry Kulikov at 8:23. Matthew Tkachuk was setting the screen in front. Panthers have two goals tonight from defensemen. Evander Kane, Connor McDavid and Evan Bouchard are dangerous on the rush, but Bobrovsky stops Bouchard's shot. Panthers start on power play, and it's killed. Evan Bouchard gets a chance as he comes out of the penalty box. McDavid's assist on Leon Draisaitl's goal is worth watching. He makes moves around Aleksander Barkov and Aaron Ekblad, sending Ekblad tumbling, before he feeds Draisaitl. That was the highest-scoring first period since the 2016 Stanley Cup Final, per TNT. The Oilers have the lead because of a big game by their stars. Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl and Evan Bouchard have combined for seven points. McDavid's play on the Draisaitl goal is highlight reel-worthy. But the Panthers kill a 5-on-3 late in the period to stop the damage and will start the second with a power play. Shots are 15-10 Edmonton and the Oilers are also leading 15-8 in hits. Evan Bouchard is called for cross-checking. Panthers get a couple shots and 41 seconds of the power play will carry into the second period. Niko Mikkola goes off for roughing. Then a Seth Jones penalty makes it 5-on-3. First part is killed off and now the second part. Panthers needed that. The Oilers need just 24 seconds to connect as Leon Draisaitl scores after a great play by Connor McDavid. Two points each for McDavid and Draisaitl and three points for Evan Bouchard. Looks like Mattias Ekholm pushes Sam Bennett into Stuart Skinner, who's down for a while. Oilers going on power play. The Panthers like to have their defense to get up in the play and it pays off again. Seth Jones sneaks in from the point and is wide open for an Eetu Luostarinen pass. Defenseman Nate Schmidt gets his second point of the game. Evan Bouchard's initial shot is blocked by Aleksander Barkov and then he rips a shot past a screened Sergei Bobrovsky. That's goals on back-to-back shots for Edmonton. Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl get the assists. Small scrum breaks out after Sam Bennett goes for a rebound. Edmonton's Darnell Nurse and Florida's Matthew Tkachuk head to the penalty box. Evander Kane ties the game with a shot to Sergei Bobrovsky's glove side at 7:39. That's six playoff goals for Kane, who missed the entire regular season after multiple surgeries. Aaron Ekblad is called for holding the stick. But the power play doesn't last long as Ryan Nugent-Hopkins is called for tripping. It's 4-on-4. Everyone out of the penalty box now. Sam Bennett gets a good shot off but Stuart Skinner makes the save. Red-hot Sam Bennett scores on the power play after a Nate Schmidt pass. That's 13 goals for Bennett in the playoffs, including a record 12 on the road. The goal ends Edmonton's nine-game streak of scoring first. Oilers are upset that Bennett kicked Mattias Ekholm's stick away from him. Evander Kane called for high-sticking Carter Verhaeghe 37 seconds into the game. Florida's Aleksander Barkov line vs. Edmonton's Leon Draisaitl line. Edmonton fans are starting early with the "Sergei, Sergei" chants - before the national anthems. When is Stanley Cup Final Game 2? Panthers vs. Oilers game time The Florida Panthers and Edmonton Oilers will face off at 8 p.m. ET (6 p.m. local) at Rogers Place in Edmonton, Alberta, on Friday. What TV channel is Panthers vs. Oilers Game 2 on? TNT and truTV are broadcasting Game 2 of the NHL Stanley Cup Final. Kenny Albert will provide play-by-play, while Eddie Olczyk, Brian Boucher, Darren Pang and Jackie Redmond will provide analysis and reporting. Stream the 2025 Stanley Cup Final on Sling How to watch Panthers vs. Oilers Game 2 Date: Friday, June 6 Friday, June 6 Location: Rogers Place in Edmonton, Alberta Rogers Place in Edmonton, Alberta Time: 8 p.m. ET (6 p.m. MT) 8 p.m. ET (6 p.m. MT) TV: TNT, truTV TNT, truTV Streaming: Max, Sling TV Panthers coach Paul Maurice is starting the Aleksander Barkov line and Oilers coach Kris Knoblauch is countering with the Leon Draisaitl line. Maurice has moved Carter Verhaeghe to the top line and Evan Rodrigues to the second line. In Game 1, it was the Barkov line vs. the Connor McDavid line to start. Draisaitl scored 66 seconds into the series opener. Maurice moved Carter Verhaeghe to the top line and Evan Rodrigues to the second lline. Oilers' Stuart Skinner (7-4, 2.49 goals-against average, .904 save percentage) vs. Panthers' Sergei Bobrovsky (12-6, 2.17, .912). Skinner has a five-game winning streak. The Oilers have four of the top five scorers in the series: McDavid has a league-best 28 points, followed by Leon Draisaitl (27) and Evan Bouchard and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins with 18 each. Draisaitl has a team-high nine goals. The Panthers have 10 players with double-digit points, led by Sam Bennett (18) and Aleksander Barkov and Matthew Tkachuk (17 each). Bennett is the playoffs' leading goal scorer with 12. No Canadian team has won since 1993, when the Montreal Canadiens beat the Los Angeles Kings in five games. A Canadian team has reached the Final eight times since then, including the Oilers three times. They're the second team with home-ice advantage, joining the 2011 Vancouver Canucks. They hold the first series lead since the Canucks led 3-2 that year. Oilers coach Kris Knoblauch will put Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl together later in games if Edmonton needs an offensive boost. 'It's nice to know when those two get together mid-game that the results are pretty good," he said. But Knoblauch doesn't do it all game long so he can spread the offense out. The two used to go out together on the shift after a penalty kill, but McDavid has started killing penalties. The Panthers forward is tracking toward a return but will sit out a second consecutive game on Friday. "We think if he tracks out, he'll be available for Game 3," coach Paul Maurice said. Jesper Boqvist has taken Greer's place on the fourth line. Panthers forward Tomas Nosek said it was "tough" after the Oilers scored in overtime on the power play after his delay of game penalty. "You don't want to be the one guy who cost us the game, but obviously everybody can make a mistake," he said, adding, "It's in the past and now looking forward to just keep doing my job and focusing on tonight's game." He said his teammates were "very helpful" and supportive of him. "Most of the guys came to me and said, 'Don't worry about it.' " he said, according to TSN. Panthers coach Paul Maurice was asked Friday about the Dallas Stars' firing of coach Peter DeBoer. Maurice and DeBoer are friends. "He'll be all right. He's a good coach. I think elite teams, you've got to push them real hard to get them where they get to, then at some point," he said, trailing off. "You get a summer off, pick your spot, he's going to be OK." All times Eastern; (x-if necessary) Game 1: Oilers 4, Panthers 3 (OT) | Story Oilers 4, Panthers 3 (OT) | Story Game 2: Friday, June 6 | Florida at Edmonton | 8 p.m | TNT, truTV Friday, June 6 | Florida at Edmonton | 8 p.m | TNT, truTV Game 3: Monday, June 9, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV Monday, June 9, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV Game 4: Thursday, June 12, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV Thursday, June 12, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV x-Game 5: Saturday, June 14, Florida at Edmonton | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV Saturday, June 14, Florida at Edmonton | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV x-Game 6: Tuesday, June 17, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV Tuesday, June 17, Edmonton at Florida | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV x-Game 7: Friday, June 20, Florida at Edmonton | 8 p.m. | TNT, truTV All odds via BetMGM (as of Friday, June 6) Spread: Oilers (-1.5) Oilers (-1.5) Moneyline: Oilers (-110); Panthers (-110) Oilers (-110); Panthers (-110) Over/Under: 6.5
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
NCAA's House settlement approved, ushering in new era where schools can directly pay athletes
College athletics is officially entering a new world. A California judge on Friday granted approval to the NCAA's landmark settlement of three antitrust cases, often referred to as the 'House settlement,' ushering in an era where schools are permitted to share revenue with athletes within a new enforcement structure led by the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC. Advertisement Claudia Wilken, the 75-year-old presiding judge in California's Northern District, granted approval of an agreement between the named defendants (the NCAA and power conferences) and the plaintiffs (dozens of suing athletes) to settle three consolidated cases, all of them seeking more compensation for athletes. Unsuccessful in so many legal battles recently — most notably a 9-0 loss in a 2021 Supreme Court decision — the NCAA and its richest, most influential conferences decided last spring to strike a revolutionary agreement by settling these cases instead of risking a court defeat that might cost them as much as $10 billion. The House settlement will pay thousands of former athletes — playing from 2016-2024 — a whopping $2.8 billion in backpay from lost name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation. Even more groundbreaking, the settlement paves the way for schools, for the first time ever, to directly compensate athletes in a system that features an annual cap and a new enforcement entity that is expected to more heavily scrutinize booster-backed payments. While paychecks can begin to be distributed from schools to athletes on July 1 — the official start date of settlement implementation — the new enforcement entity, the College Sports Commission, an LLC operated mostly by the power leagues, immediately takes effect with Wilken's approval of the agreement. Advertisement It means that any new contract struck between an athlete and a third-party entity, such a business, brand, booster or collective, is now subject to the new Deloitte-run NIL clearinghouse. The clearinghouse, dubbed "NIL Go," is charged with evaluating NIL deals between athletes and third parties to determine their legitimacy. It puts an end, perhaps, to schools hurriedly signing current players and transfers to new contracts before the approval of the settlement in deals that frontload a majority of the compensation. Contracts signed before the settlement approval and paid out before July 1 were not subject to the clearinghouse or cap, leading to a 'mad dash' in the basketball and football portal. Power conference leaders are targeting a Major League Baseball executive to manage the College Sports Commission as CEO, multiple sources tell Yahoo Sports. Bryan Seeley, a former assistant U.S. attorney who has served for more than a decade as MLB's vice president of investigations and deputy general counsel, is believed to be the preferred candidate for the CEO role of college sports' new enforcement entity. Despite plenty of hurdles in the settlement's years-long approval process, those who negotiated the deal have long expected it to be approved because of the sheer numbers involved. More than 85,000 athletes have filed claims for the backpay and just 600 have opted out or objected to the agreement — a paltry number that did not phase the judge. Advertisement Wliken's decision, coming XX days after the final hearing in Oakland, California, puts an end to what was thought to be one of the last looming hurdles of a deal: roster limits. In a concept authored by the power conferences, the settlement imposes new limits on sports rosters, many of which had not previously existed. In a recent filing, the NCAA and power leagues agreed to revise settlement language to permit schools to grandfather-in athletes on existing teams or those who have been cut this year, as well as recruits who enrolled on the promise of a roster spot. College sports is about to enter a whole new era. (Taylor Wilhelm/Yahoo Sports) With its approval, the settlement ushers into college sports a more professionalized framework but one, many believe, that is ripe for more legal scrutiny. Already, attorneys are gearing up for future legal challenges over, at the very least, the new NIL clearinghouse, Title IX and the capped compensation system — much of which can be resolved, legal experts contend, with a collective bargaining and/or employment model that college executives have so far avoided. Advertisement The settlement's approval is only the first in what many college leaders describe as a two-step process to usher in stability in the college sports landscape. Step 2 may be even more difficult: lawmakers producing a congressional bill to codify the settlement terms and protect the NCAA and power conferences from legal challenges over enforcement of their rules. Five U.S. senators have been meeting regularly in serious negotiations over legislation, but no agreement has been reached. Here's an explainer of college sports' new world delivered by the settlement's approval: Revenue-share pool Each school is permitted — not required — to share up to a certain amount of revenue annually with their athletes (the cap). Per the settlement agreement, the cap is calculated by taking 22% of the average of certain power school revenues, most notably ticket sales, television dollars and sponsorships. Advertisement In Year 1 — July 2025 through June 2026 — the cap amount is projected to be $20.5 million. While each school is charged with determining how to distribute those funds, most power conference programs are planning to distribute 90% to football and men's basketball, as those are, for the most part, the only revenue-generating sports for an athletic department. In Year 1, that's about $13-16 million for a football roster and $2-4 million for men's basketball, with the remaining amount shared with women's basketball, baseball, volleyball and other Olympic sports. While the 22% cap will remain the same through the 10-year settlement agreement, the cap money figure will rise based on built-in escalators (4% increase in Year 2 and Year 3), scheduled recalculations (after each third year) and additional cash flows into athletic departments, such as when conferences enter into new, more lucrative television deals or/and begin receiving new College Football Playoff monies. Advertisement Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork told Yahoo Sports this summer that he expects the cap to break $25 million by the time the Year 4 recalculation happens. There are exceptions, though, that can artificially lower the annual cap, most notably up to $2.5 million in additional scholarships that a school offers. Enforcement entity A new non-NCAA enforcement entity — an LLC predominantly managed by the power conferences — will oversee and enforce rules related to the revenue-share concept. The company, College Sports Commission, is expected to be headed by a CEO as well as a head investigator for enforcement matters. The entity is charged with assuring that schools remain under the cap and that third-party NIL deals with athletes are not the phony booster-backed deals so prevalent over the last four years. Advertisement An enforcement staff is expected to be hired to investigate and enforce rules related to cap circumvention, tampering, etc., and are charged with levying stiff penalties. Violators may be subject to multi-game coach suspensions, reductions in a school's rev-share pool as well as reductions in allowed transfers, and significant schools fines. However, the biggest looming uncertainty of the settlement agreement involves a Deloitte-run NIL clearinghouse that must approve all third-party NIL deals of at least $600 in value. The "NIL Go" clearinghouse is using a fair market value algorithm to create 'compensation ranges' for third-party deals. Deloitte is expected to approve or disapprove deals in as little as one day, and athletes can resubmit rejected deals at least once with alterations suggested by the clearinghouse. For example, Deloitte deems a submitted $100,000 deal between an athlete and third party to actually be valued at $50,000. The player can alter the deal to align with the clearinghouse's suggested figure or the school can cover the difference by accepting a reduction against their revenue-pool cap. Deals rejected for a second time are referred to the CEO and enforcement staff and are then processed through an appeals system via court-overseen arbitration. Arbitration rulings are expected within 45 days, according to the settlement. Advertisement Athletes who lose arbitration cases and still accept compensation in the rejected deal are deemed ineligible. Rev-share contracts Starting with the fall basketball and football signing periods, schools began readying for this new era. Some even signed players to revenue-sharing agreements that begin to make payments on July 1 or later, contingent on the settlement's approval. Other players signed contracts with school booster collectives that featured a clause assigning the contract to the school on July 1. For the most part, the contracts grant schools permission to use a player's NIL rights — a reason for the compensation — but these agreements feature language often found in employment contracts, including buyouts, athlete requirements and prohibitions as well as the freedom for schools to reduce the players' compensation based on their academic standing and performance. Advertisement Already, the agreements are a subject of legal scrutiny. In January, Wisconsin defensive back Xavier Lucas left the university to enroll at Miami despite signing a revenue-share contract with UW. In public statements, Wisconsin has suggested it will pursue legal action against Lucas and/or Miami, which, it suggested, tampered with an athlete under contract. Lucas' representatives believe the contract is not enforceable as it was contingent on settlement approval when signed. The situation is a potential landmark case on settlement-contingent revenue-sharing agreements.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Uzbekistan Builds Where the West Withdrew
Uzbekistan's interest in connectivity with Afghanistan is driven by economic opportunity, energy cooperation, security needs, and geopolitical strategy - factors that will help Uzbekistan access new markets and stabilize the region. Ambassador Javlon Vakhabov of the International Institute for Central Asia in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, calls it 'Stability Through Connectivity.' That is, Uzbekistan favors pragmatism over trying to isolate Afghanistan, and a policy that balances humanitarian support and regional security. The Central Asia republics (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Turkmenistan) were on the border of the wars in Afghanistan, i.e., the Afghan civil war (1992-1996, 1996-2001) and the U.S.-led NATO occupation (2001 – 2021), which they consider 'lost decades' of economic growth and social development. The republics' leaders know they and Afghanistan are 'neighbors forever' and do not have the luxury of retreating to North America if things go wrong, so policy must acknowledge geography. Uzbekistan's engagement with the Taliban began long before NATO evacuated Afghanistan in August 2021. In 1997, then-Uzbek president Islam Karimov proposed the Six plus Two Group on Afghanistan,which grew from an understanding that dialogue and a political settlement, nor armed force, was the path to peace. The group was unable to persuade the warring sides – the Taliban and the United Front (formerly the Northern Alliance) – to pursue a March 2018, Uzbekistan hosted the Tashkent Conference that urged direct peace talks without preconditions between the Taliban and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the Taliban said it would only negotiate with the United States, the "foreign occupying force,' and demanded the departure of foreign troops before the start of negotiations. In July 2022, Tashkent hosted a conference on Afghanistan, attended by representatives of 30 countries. It was an opportunity for the international community to take the measure of Taliban officials and for the Taliban to encourage investment in Afghanistan and seek the release of Afghan assets seized by the West after the fall of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The tone of the event was forward-looking, but Uzbek president Shavkat Mirziyoyev, '…reiterated the international community's conditions for formal diplomatic recognition, namely 'forming a broad representation of all layers of the Afghan society in state governance, ensuring basic human rights and freedoms, especially of women and all ethnic and confessional groups.'' Tashkent has consistently called for engaging with Taliban-run Afghanistan, including unfreezing the $9 billion in state assets that were seized by American and European authorities after the ouster of the Kabul government in August 2021 Central Asia is a water-stressed region and Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are in the 'severe water stress' category. The construction of the Qosh Tepa canal in Afghanistan threatened to increase tensions between the Taliban-led Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan by reducing the water flow of the Amu Darya River by 15-20% - a disaster for Central Asia agriculture. (In Uzbekistan, agriculture accounts for 25% of GDP and about 26% of the labor force.) In April 2025, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan agreed to cooperate in sharing the water resources in the Amu Darya River Basin. The republics are concerned as 'a significant reduction in the Amu Darya's flow could lead to ecosystem degradation, increased soil salinity, and deteriorating living conditions for populations downstream…[and] could hinder efforts to restore the Aral Sea and further exacerbate the region's environmental challenges.' Though Uzbekistan has not recognized the government of Taliban-run Afghanistan, the agreement on transboundary water resources demonstrates bilateral relations are becoming 'increasingly institutionalized.' Tashkent prioritizes its interests to address not just water resources but the threat of terrorist groups, 20 of which may be sheltering in Afghanistan. This effort will require serious diplomacy by all parties and is an opportunity for Uzbekistan (and the U.S.) to provide technical assistance to ensure the canal is built to minimize excessive water loss and soil salinization. Uzbekistan should take the opportunity to substitute crops less thirsty than cotton for the country's growing textile sector which plans to grow textile exports to $10 billion, and continue to import cotton from Turkey, China, and Bangladesh. (Uzbekistan also imports cotton from Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan but should take the opportunity to lead the region away from crops that deplete its water supply.) One step to peacefully resolve the water problem is to make Afghanistan a party to the 1992 Almaty Agreement which regulates water allocations based on the Soviet-era shares of water among the then-Soviet Central Asia republics. The agreement is implemented by the Interstate Commission for Water Coordination of Central Asia (ICWC) and making Afghanistan a member of the ICWC is a way to make it part of the solution and not the problem. It will teach the Taliban the 'rules of the road' in Central Asia and ensure the republics' officials have a clear understanding of Taliban personalities, motivations, and priorities. Other connectivity initiatives are: The Termez free economic zone which offers a 2-week visa for Afghan visitors and features a customs office, a hotel, storage facilities, and capacity to handle 100,000 trucks and 900,000 tons of goods a year. Trans-Afghan railway, a $7 billion, 765-kilometer link to Pakistan's ports that is expected to cut transport costs by 30–40%. And Uzbekistan may soon conduct preliminary studies on extending the railway from Hairatan to Herat, a jumping-off point for trade with Iran and Turkmenistan. Surkhan–Puli-Khumri Power Line, a 1,000 MW line to support electrification of Afghan transport, and that may potentially link to the CASA-1000 power project, a joint venture between Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. (Uzbekistan is already the leading exporter of electricity to Afghanistan, supplying nearly 60% of Afghanistan's electricity imports.) Once operational, the line will increase Uzbekistan's electricity exports to Afghanistan by 70%, delivering up to 24 million kWh daily or 6 billion kWh annually. The project spans 245.6 kilometers, with 45 kilometers on Uzbek territory—already completed—and 200.6 kilometers in Afghanistan. The capacity of this line will not only enhance power availability but also facilitate the electrification of the Hairatan–Mazar-i-Sharif railroad, reducing transportation costs by replacing diesel-powered trains with cleaner electric locomotives. Uzbekistan sees many opportunities in Afghanistan and in 2024 trade climbed to $1.1 billion, most of that exports from Uzbekistan. There are commercial opportunities to be sure, but Tashkent does not want to contain Afghanistan, but to use it as a regional bridge, and not just for trade. There are concerns Afghanistan is a potential source of future transnational terrorism, though that may be stymied by intelligence sharing between the Taliban and the U.S., who share concerns about the Al-Qaeda (AQ) and the Islamic State – Khorasan Province (IS-K) presence in Afghanistan. More trade will not necessarily make Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State change their policies but more economic opportunity may make it harder for them to find recruits, and efforts like funding madrassas in Afghanistan may help detoxify the educational system. And the Taliban can build legitimacy if they are seen to be putting the peoples' welfare first by encouraging trade and business. That won't be favored by the U.S., but after two decades of mayhem in the Hindu Kush, much instigated by America, Washington should encourage action – by anyone - that allows Afghanistan to build infrastructure and make money by means other than poppy cultivation. Outside meddling in Afghanistan usually leads to tears, but if Tashkent can work with the moderate, outward-looking Taliban based in Kabul that want to improve the economy, it may subtly tip the balance against the hard-liners in Kandahar. (Yes, Siraj Haqqani and Mullah Omar are the 'moderates' but that is where we are right now.) Uzbekistan may have a role in the future exploitation of critical minerals in Central Asia and can help the U.S. build a secure critical mineral supply chain. According to Visual Capitalist, 'Out of the 50 minerals deemed critical by the U.S. government, the U.S. is 100% reliant on imports for 12 of them, and over 50% reliant for another 321 critical minerals.' Central Asia and Afghanistan are endowed with critical minerals but their isolated location presents a difficult transport problem. Also, mining and processing rare earths requires a lot of water which is in short supply in the region, though a new Chinese technology may triple production speed and reduce pollution, but will put China in a key position, something the U.S. will probably oppose. Andrew Korybko notes that partial completion of the Trans-Afghan railway may still benefit the republics if they can backhaul Afghanistan's minerals for processing in the republics or in Russia or China. The republics will need to secure investment for local, sustainable processing of the minerals (with off-take agreements), but Washington and Brussels must make serious offers to keep the stuff out of Russian and Chinese hands. (Exhortations by Washington to 'do the right thing' and not sell to China and Russia, backed by the hint of sanctions, are a tax on Central Asia and only diminish America's standing in the region.) Uzbekistan, a double-landlocked country, faces hurdles accessing global markets. Connectivity with Afghanistan offers a pathway to South Asia, particularly through Pakistan's seaports Karachi and Gwadar, though Uzbekistan is improving trade relations with Iran as its ports Bandar Abbas and Chabahar, and access to the North-South Transport Corridor, are 'Plan B' if the trans-Afghan route is untenable. Over the past decade, Tashkent has sought to make Central Asia a 'safe neighborhood,' and many of Uzbekistan's priorities, such as peacefully settling border disputes with the neighboring republics and encouraging a broad-based government in Kabul, are shared by Washington, but the Central Asia republics have a broader definition of the regional security, one that is grounded in diplomacy human development, and trade, and that includes trade and normal political relations with Russia, China, Iran, and Afghanistan. Central Asian is no longer a platform for the NATO campaign against the Taliban, but will it become a platform to engage the Taliban, who probably aren't going anywhere despite Washington's ongoing economic warfare. In April, Uzbek president Shavkat Mirziyoyev announced he is ready to work with the European Union (EU) and other international partners to support Afghanistan's development 'to overcome the current crises,' a policy that was welcomed by the Taliban. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and António Costa, President of the European Council, visited Uzbekistan in April with the intent, in von der Leyen's words, 'to take our partnership with Central Asia to the next level.' Aside from the standard fare of promoting European foreign direct investment to the region, securing access to critical minerals, and promoting educational exchanges, Central Asia's putative European partners should move smartly to work with the republics to ensure Afghanistan a productive member of the region and no longer a source of terrorism and narcotics. The failed NATO mission in Afghanistan, though it included European troops, is seen as an American loss, giving Europe more post-war maneuver room in Central Asia. And Europe will rely more than America on East-West trade from Asia via the Belt and Road and the Middle Corridor, so it may be the right partner right now for Central Asia. But the Central Asian republics aren't waiting for the EU and international partners to get to work. In May 2025, shortly after Mirziyoyev's announcement, Tashkent commissioned the Termez Dialogue on Connectivity Between Central and South Asia as a permanent platform for regional connectivity. Uzbekistan and Afghanistan both favor an 'economy first' policy with their neighbors, which the republics call "acceptance of reality" in the wake of the West's failed nation-building project in Afghanistan. The same week the republics' delegates convened in Termez, Uzbekistan to plan to boost Central and South Asian connectivity, Pakistan, China and Afghanistan agreed to expand the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Afghanistan. CPEC has fallen short of the partners' expectations, so it remains to be seen if including Afghanistan is a smart move or will just burn more of China's money. And on the heels of the Termez meeting, Iran and China launched a railway route from Xian in western China to the Aprin dry port near Iran's capital, Tehran. The route will reportedly cut travel time from 30 days via sea to 15 days and will avoid the Strait of Malacca and the Hormuz Strait, chokepoints the U.S. Navy hoped to exploit in future conflicts. The route will not pass through Afghanistan but is Beijing's vote of confidence in the region as a connectivity space. Uzbekistan and the other Central Asia republics helped NATO in Afghanistan but it was all for naught, so now it's time for get back to basics - economic and social development - via initiatives like the Uzbekistan 2030 Strategy, and promoting good governance and increasing civic engagement through initiatives like the Center for Progressive Reforms. Washington should focus on how it can assist these sorts of efforts by the republics and not be distracted and agitated by their commonsense wish to not isolate neighboring Afghanistan. By James Durso for More Top Reads From this article on
