Global Profile: Shavkat Mirziyoyev, President of Uzbekistan
A Central Asian strongman rebranded—modernizing without liberalizing
The US is in a classic democracy to authoritarianism change in which the would-be dictator uses laws, institutions, and loyalists to legally change the government and take over the nation. It’s “classic” because it’s a formula used for over a century.
But it’s a formula that can run in reverse. It’s rare, but it’s happening in Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan’s would-be liberal leader is using laws, institutions, and loyalists to legally change the government and liberalize the nation.
There is still a long way to go, but often, where you are going is more important than where you are.
For decades, Uzbekistan was a textbook dictatorship, secretive, brutal, and sealed off from the world. Shavkat Mirziyoyev is putting an end to that by reversing the formula.
Understanding Mirziyoyev
Mirziyoyev took power in 2016 after the death of Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan’s founding autocrat who ruled with fear, censorship, and Soviet-style paranoia. For over two decades, Uzbekistan was closed, repressive, and internationally isolated. Mirziyoyev inherited that system and began carefully dismantling it.
Mirziyoyev is a Soviet-era technocrat known for his management of economic development. Now he is described as a "reformer with autocratic tendencies" who has implemented significant changes while consolidating power.
Experts describe what's happening in Uzbekistan as "authoritarian upgrading" rather than democratization. Mirziyoyev is selectively adopting economic and political reforms while maintaining authoritarian control, including a constitutional change that could keep him in power for life.
His reforms "often served two purposes: a populist aim paired with an overriding interest in regime security" (The Making of Mirziyoyev’s Uzbekistan). His reform slogan was "It is high time the government serves the people, not vice versa" (The New Uzbekistan - Reforms of Shavkat Mirziyoyev).
This is not a move to democracy, but it is a move to freedom, and Mirziyoyev would not be the world’s first benevolent dictator. And if that’s what he becomes, he could turn Uzbekistan into the Singapore of Central Asia.
Key Accomplishments
Economic liberalization: Ending Soviet era economic planning by floating the Uzbek som (1 USD = ~ 12,505 som), eliminating black market currency trading, and reducing state control over agriculture.
Regional diplomacy: Mirziyoyev reversed decades of isolationism by repairing ties with neighboring countries, particularly Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. He became a stabilizing force in Central Asia, hosting summits and proposing water-sharing agreements.
Foreign investment and trade diversification: Under his leadership, Uzbekistan has joined the GSP+ (an EU program giving developing countries preferential access to its market), applied for WTO membership, and strengthened economic ties with China, Russia, and Turkey. The country is attracting billions in FDI, especially in textiles, mining, and energy.
Civil service reform and e-governance: He introduced competitive exams for bureaucratic appointments and digitized many government services to reduce corruption and improve efficiency.
Legal reforms: While still far from free, the judiciary has seen reforms aimed at curbing the worst abuses of the Karimov era, including forced labor in cotton harvesting and systemic torture, and he has released some political prisoners.
Controversies
Reform not moving fast enough: Significant reform has taken place, but the core structure of repression remains. Opposition parties and protests are still banned, the media is controlled, critics silenced, bloggers and journalists jailed who cross red lines, and criticism of the president can lead to arrest.
Constitutional manipulation: In 2023, Mirziyoyev pushed through constitutional changes extending term limits, allowing him to remain in power until 2040.
Foreign policy ambiguity: Though balancing Russia, China, and the West skillfully, Mirziyoyev has avoided condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine, reflecting the limits of Uzbekistan’s independence.
Cultural Profile
Uzbekistan is a hierarchical, collectivist society. Mirziyoyev's leadership style and reforms reflect this.
High Power Distance (Hofstede): Authority is centralized and unchallenged. Decisions come from the top, and respect for hierarchy remains culturally entrenched.
Collectivism (Hofstede, Schwartz): Mirziyoyev appeals to national unity and shared destiny, not individual rights. His reforms are framed as serving the “Uzbek people,” not individual empowerment.
Particularism (Trompenaars): While introducing rule-based procedures, the application remains selective. Favoritism, personal networks, and discretion still shape many state decisions.
Long-Term Orientation (Hofstede): Mirziyoyev’s modernization plan is decades-long, aiming to position Uzbekistan as a key regional economic hub by 2040. Patience and strategic vision are part of the culture.
Moderate Context (Hall): His communication blends direct administrative language with culturally embedded references to tradition, religion, and national pride. This hybrid style reflects Uzbekistan’s dual Soviet and Islamic legacies.
Power-Seeker Archetype (Hornby)
Mirziyoyev centralizes authority, sets strategic direction, and governs through command. His reforms are not collaborative but top-down, designed to build a legacy of transformation and authority.
Rule Imposer Archetype (Hornby). Like many post-Soviet leaders, he frames legitimacy through structure, order, and national duty. His public persona is serious, paternalistic, and morally anchored in stability and social cohesion.
Communicator Archetype (Hornby). This is an emerging archetype for Mirziyoyev. His frequent regional visits, town-hall meetings, and public speeches present him as a listening leader without yielding any real pluralism.
This blend, power-seeker ambition, rule-imposer order, and communicator creates an authoritarian reformer who is more responsive, more strategic, and far more future-oriented than many of his peers.
Learn more about Hornby’s archetypes here.
Global Implications
Uzbekistan under Mirziyoyev is not democratic, but it is reforming. His model prioritizes state control and economic modernization without political liberalization. As Western democracies face internal dysfunction, Mirziyoyev shows that authoritarian systems can move toward liberalism without the dysfunction and chaos.
And that may be the bigger question: can authoritarianism work? Does it have a place in the world if the brutal, exploitive aspects are removed?
This isn’t the future liberal democracies want, but it may be the future many countries choose.
And that may make Shavkat Mirziyoyev one of the most important leaders in the world today.