Border politics and economic logic: Why did Uzbekistan move its capital from Samarkand to Tashkent 95 years ago?

Why Tashkent?

Before the creation of the Uzbek SSR, Tashkent had already been the seat of the Turkestan Governor-Generalship under the Russian Empire. For that reason, major Soviet institutions were based there: the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union for Central Asia, the Central Asian Economic Council, the Turkestan Front, and the Central Asian Military District, among others. A number of additional factors also influenced the choice.

Economic factors. By the late 1920s, Tashkent had clearly overtaken Samarkand in economic development. During the imperial period, as the administrative capital of Turkestan, it had acquired railways, an electricity station, industrial enterprises, and modern communications. Under the first Soviet five-year plan in the 1930s, new industrial facilities were planned around Tashkent, giving the city a clear advantage in economic potential and skilled workforce.

Transport and communications infrastructure played a major role as well. At the start of the 20th century Tashkent became the principal rail hub linking Central Asia with Russia and Siberia. The Orenburg–Tashkent railway, opened in 1906, connected the city both to the Russian Empire and to the interior of Central Asia. The Turkestan–Siberia railway built between 1926 and 1931 further enhanced Tashkent’s transport significance, enabling rapid freight movement from Novosibirsk in the north to Tashkent and onward to the Fergana Valley in the south. As a result, Tashkent emerged not only as Uzbekistan’s but as the entire region’s major transport crossroads.

Political factors. Hidden territorial ambitions are also said to lie behind the move. According to some accounts, after the 1924 delimitation the Kazakh leadership decided to make Tashkent its own capital and even wrote to Stalin about it. Upon learning this, the Uzbek government hurriedly relocated the capital to Tashkent, thereby removing any prospect of the city being transferred to Kazakhstan.

Some historians note that the Soviet leadership in Moscow opposed proposals to hand Tashkent to Kazakhstan from the outset. Stalin himself is reported to have declared: “Tashkent to the Uzbeks, Alma-Ata to the Kazakhs.”

Moving the capital to Tashkent also served Moscow’s interests. The central authorities preferred republican capitals to be located not in the geographic heart of each republic but closer to the borders – so that, in the event of any secessionist moves, a border-adjacent capital could be seized without difficulty. A glance at the map shows Tashkent sitting right on the frontiers with Kazakhstan to the north, Kyrgyzstan to the east, and Tajikistan to the south.

When Mustafa Kemal Atatürk moved Turkey’s capital from Istanbul to Ankara, he explained his reasoning as follows: “Positioning the national capital on the periphery is akin to placing the heart at the extremity of the body.”

At the time, Kazakhs did live in villages around Tashkent, yet the city itself – its language, culture, and way of life – was unmistakably Uzbek, an argument even Moscow could not deny. In exchange, parts of Syrdarya Province, including the areas around present-day Turkestan and Shymkent, were ceded to Kazakhstan.

Proximity to cotton and industrial zones. Official documents cited the need to optimize governance, particularly by being closer to the main agricultural and industrial regions. Given the slow communications of the era, this was a logical consideration.

Geographically, Tashkent brought the capital much nearer to the Fergana Valley – the country’s primary cotton-producing region. In the 1920s and 1930s cotton was the cornerstone of the Uzbek economy, and the valley’s cities such as Andijan, Namangan, and Kokand were developing light industry. Unlike Samarkand, Tashkent had direct rail and road links to the valley in several directions, making administration easier for the Soviet authorities. The 1930 decree of the Central Executive Committee explicitly highlighted “proximity to the main cotton-growing and industrial region – the Fergana Valley” as the principal justification.

Security. In the 1920s national liberation movements against Soviet rule continued in various parts of Uzbekistan, especially in the mountainous areas around Samarkand and Bukhara and in the Fergana Valley. Tashkent was geographically more distant from these hotspots and therefore safer for the regime. The city hosted the headquarters of the Red Army’s Central Asian Military District, giving the authorities better control over surrounding provinces and the ability to suppress uprisings more effectively. Thus, political stability and the concentration of security forces also played a role in the decision.