Keywords

Introduction

The political landscape of Central Asia underwent a complete and irreversible transformation in December 1991 with the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The region, located between Russia and Afghanistan and which shares borders with China and Iran, is home to more than 72 million people living in five independent countries: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan (CIA Factbook, 2023). During the 1990s, the newly independent Central Asian states faced a multitude of pressing issues that required action. These included questions revolving around state formation, national identity, economic transformation, political institutions, institutionalism, the role of religion in society, territorial and border disputes, and ethnic minorities, particularly involving ethnic Russians. Such challenges posed significant obstacles to the development and stability of the region and required careful attention and thoughtful solutions (Menon, 2015). Political, economic, and legal transition began in the Central Asian states under these circumstances.

According to Wooden and Stefes (2009, p. 5), scholars who study the changes happening in Central Asia remain cautious when using the term ‘transition’ in a closed-ended way. Whilst still in transition since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Central Asian states have not moved in a linear fashion from Communism to a pre-determined endpoint, presumably towards a Western-style political and economic regime. Despite specific common trends, such as the shift from planned to market economies or attempts toward some degree of democratisation, the unique context of each Central Asian state has played a vital role in shaping their transitions. These states have been rebuilding their disintegrated state, legal, and market structures in a peculiar combination of pre-Soviet, Soviet, and entirely new institutions and norms (Luong, 2004; Morozova, 2004) within a political and legal landscape where Soviet, Islamic, and Western systems coexist and occasionally clash. This complex interplay of different systems further contributes to the nuanced nature of the ongoing transitions in the region (Cooley, 2023).

Whilst several political, economic, and legal systems operate together, the adoption of international law and standards has quickened pace since the early 2000s as various actors—states, multinational companies, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), and international organisations—have entered the region, increased their activities, and expanded their influence on politics, economics, law, culture, and security (Kavalski, 2010; Menon, 2003; Morozova, 2004). As in other post-Socialist states (Grabbe, 2006; Schimmelfennig & Sedelmeier, 2005), the generation, reproduction, and diffusion of norms have become a powerful force impacting policies, laws, and institutions, prompting political, legal, and economic changes in the region. As noted in the literature, international organisations have acted as norm entrepreneurs and played significant roles in norm diffusion processes in Central Asia, with a keen focus on democratisation, economic liberalisation, environmental protection, security, and, more recently, migration (Kluczewska, 2019; Korneev, 2017, 2018; Tskhay, 2021; Genç forthcoming). As a part of their activities, Western countries and international organisations have actively encouraged Central Asian states to embrace international liberal norms, providing both financial and institutional support to do so (Tskhay, 2021). Conversely, regional organisations such as the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) have been instrumental in promoting norms that reinforce authoritarian regimes in the region (Ambrosio, 2008; Cooley, 2015; Karabayeva, 2021). Thus, different actors, Western countries, regional organisations founded by China and Russia, and international organisations all strive to promote various norms in the region (Korneev, 2018; Lewis, 2012).

In relation to the activities of regional and international organisations, most studies focus on the actions of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the European Union (EU), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), the World Bank, and the SCO (Kluczewska, 2019; Korneev, 2017, 2018; Omelicheva, 2015). As I lay out in the sections to follow, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has also engaged with Central Asian states actively since the early 1990s. Its activities and interactions have provided venues for socialisation and diffusion of norms, standards, and shared understandings on issue areas within its mandate. Although it has been actively involved in the region, UNODC’s specific activities, projects, and the mechanisms by which it disseminates norms in Central Asia remain unexplored. To address this knowledge gap and enhance the existing literature on norm diffusion and the role of international organisations both globally and in Central Asia, this study attempts to explore and answer the following questions: How does the UNODC promote international norms and standards in response to transnational challenges? And why is its involvement significant in facilitating norm diffusion in the Central Asian region? Furthermore, this study delves into the question of whether the norm diffusion process of UNODC encounters contestation from the SCO in the region. With a focused examination of UNODC’s work, the first question seeks to unveil the mechanisms through which the organisation diffuses norms and standards in tackling transnational issues within its mandate. Conversely, the second question aims to explore the importance of UNODC’s proactive involvement in promoting international norms and standards, particularly within the context of Central Asia. Lastly, with a focused examination of the interactions between UNODC and the SCO, this study aims to reflect upon the changing dynamics of global governance and the limits of norm diffusion processes in Central Asia.

Understanding Norm Diffusion and the Role of International Organisations

International norms are ‘the shared expectations or standards of appropriate behaviour accepted by states and intergovernmental organisations that can be applied to states, intergovernmental organisations, and/or non-state actors’ (Khagram et al., 2002, p. 14). They act as a powerful force that impacts the policies, laws, and institutions of states. According to the literature, states are influenced by and adopt certain norms and behaviours common in the international system through socialisation and norm diffusion processes. Barnes et al., (1980, p. 35) define socialisation as ‘the induction of new members […] into the ways of behaviour that are preferred in a society.’ Alderson (2001, p. 417) explains socialisation as ‘the process by which states adopt norms that originate elsewhere in the international system.’ The concept plays a crucial role in comprehending how norms are transmitted within international society. Through socialisation, actors internalise collective understandings of appropriate behaviours, adopting the norms and values of the community as their own. As a result, these norms bring about changes in their identities, interests, and behaviour (Risse & Sikkink, 1999, p. 11). When a state aligns itself with the accepted norms and values of the international community, it actively seeks to comply with and promote these norms in its interactions with other states and international actors, whereby a shift in the state’s behaviour and identity, leading to changes in its policies, practices, and attitudes, occurs. States undergo socialisation through diplomatic relations, membership in international organisations, and participation in international regimes and institutions.

Norm diffusion, on the other hand, refers to ‘the transfer of objects, processes, ideas, and information from one population or region to another’ (Checkel, 1999, p. 85). This transfer happens voluntarily or unintentionally when an attractive innovation is noticed and transferred to another country, resulting in a noticeable effect (Lauth and Pickel 2009 [quoted in Rother, 2019, p. 1260]). Norm diffusion has been extensively studied in various fields, such as human rights, democratisation, and Europeanisation studies (Gilardi, 2012; Radaelli, 2000, 2003; Risse, 2016; Risse & Sikkink, 1999; Risse et al., 2001; Zimmermann, 2016; Zwingel, 2012). The literature questions various aspects of the process, such as ‘how norms emerge on the international level, how they become meaningful in domestic contexts, and which actors promote and translate them (Zwingel, 2012, p. 118). Whilst some studies focus on a top–down approach where state actors, regional and international organisations, or transnational actors act as norm entrepreneurs promoting norm diffusion processes, others refer to a process of norm localisation, highlighting the role of local actors such as activists and civil society groups in actively constructing foreign ideas (Acharya, 2004, pp. 243–245; Zimmermann, 2016).

With this in mind, scholars who study the process of socialisation and norm diffusion have proposed several models to understand how states adopt existing norms and socialise into international communities. ‘The norm life-cycle’, outlined by Finnemore and Sikkink (1998), continues to significantly impact research in this field. Their model proposes three stages of a norm’s life-cycle, consisting of norm emergence, norm cascade, and norm internalisation (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). In the norm emergence stage, norm entrepreneurs play a critical role; they actively build norms by ‘drawing attention to’, ‘interpreting’, and ‘framing’ issues. Norm entrepreneurs can be individuals, international organisations, or NGOs who seek to change social or legal norms or call attention to a new issue or norm. This stage is essential for the initial development of a norm (Loen & Gloppen, 2021, pp. 3–4). During this first stage, the primary mechanism is persuasion. As such, norm entrepreneurs persuade a critical mass of states to adopt new norms, leading to a tipping point. This tipping point is followed by the second stage, norm cascades, wherein more and more countries follow the norm leaders and quickly adopt the norms, even without domestic pressure for such changes (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998, p. 902).

According to the model, norm diffusion occurs during the norm cascade stage through an active process of international socialisation. Many states are influenced and become norm followers through this process. Networks of norm entrepreneurs, international organisations, and NGOs act as agents of socialisation, exerting pressure on state actors to become parties to international conventions, adopt new policies and laws, and monitor their compliance performance. Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) suggest that states’ responses to international socialisation and norm cascades result from material sanctions and incentives, as well as states’ identities, which can shape their decisions. The influence of norm adoption by multiple states within a region may lead to ‘peer pressure’ on those who have not yet adopted the norm, motivated by a desire for legitimacy, conformity, and esteem. The institutionalisation of the norm, through clear definitions of its parameters and associated procedures for sanctions against norm violations, also contributes to the likelihood of a norm cascade (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). This is achieved through the use of international conventions. At some point during the norm cascade, norms may become so widely accepted that they are internalised by actors who take the norms for granted and habitualise them to behave in conformity with them. Finnemore and Sikkink (1998, p. 905) underline the importance of professional training at this stage. Training does more than simply transfer technical or legal knowledge, serving to socialise professionals to value certain things above others.

Prominent models of norm diffusion, including ‘the norm life-cycle’, have traditionally placed primary focus on states. However, norm diffusion scholars have expanded their analysis beyond states and their governments, examining the involvement of various other actors such as voters, cities, local governments, NGOs, transnational networks, and international organisations (Sommerer, 2020; Sommerer & Tallberg, 2019). The literature has specifically emphasised the role played by international organisations, which employ various strategies and mechanisms to diffuse norms and promote their adoption.

Finnemore (1993) portrays international organisations as ‘teachers of norms’, which persuade states to adopt changes. Through advocacy and promotion, they actively advocate for specific norms by highlighting their importance, benefits, and relevance. International organisations achieve this through various means, including public awareness campaigns, the dissemination of information via reports, publications, and media outlets, as well as organising conferences, workshops, and events aimed at promoting norm adoption (Finnemore, 1993; Keck & Sikkink, 1998; Risse et al., 1999). Others have noted that international organisations, along with international law, play a crucial role in the institutionalisation of emerging norms (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). They participate in the development of legal instruments such as standards, guidelines, conventions, and treaties embodying these norms. In turn, these instruments serve as reference points and frameworks for states to adopt and implement those norms in their national policies, laws, and practices (Keck & Sikkink, 1998; Risse et al., 1999).

International organisations are also referred to as ‘norm entrepreneurs,’ ‘facilitators’ of knowledge exchange between governments, or promoters of norms in different issue areas (Finnemore, 2017; Goodman & Jinks, 2004; Holzinger et al., 2008; Khagram et al., 2002; Zimmermann, 2016). They create platforms in which states can interact, exchange experiences, and learn from one another. Through peer pressure and networking, international organisations foster a sense of collective responsibility and encourage states to align their policies and practices with prevailing norms. Moreover, they provide technical assistance, training programmes, and capacity-building initiatives to support states in implementing and complying with norms. In addition, they offer expertise, knowledge transfer, and resources to enhance institutional capacities and facilitate the adoption of best practices. Monitoring and reporting represent other essential mechanisms. International organisations monitor the implementation of norms by states and produce periodic reports on their progress and compliance. Such reports can exert pressure on states to conform to norms and encourage states to take corrective measures if necessary (OECD, 2019).

In cases where they are delegated authority, international organisations can induce changes in domestic policies and rules through conditions for financial assistance or accession to regional bodies such as the EU (Radaelli, 2003; Schimmelfennig & Sedelmeier, 2005; Sommerer, 2020). In other words, financial incentives and conditionality may also be used by international organisations to promote states’ compliance with specific norms. Lastly, international organisations may collaborate with civil society organisations, advocacy groups, and individuals who act as norm entrepreneurs. This collaboration helps promote and advance specific norms, influencing state behaviour and societal attitudes. All in all, as presented in the literature, international organisations act as agents of socialisation, as well facilitators and catalysts in the norm diffusion process. However, it is important to underscore that the diffusion of norms is a complex and gradual process influenced by multiple factors, including political will, cultural context, power dynamics, and the agency of local actors. Ultimately, the adoption and internalisation of norms depend upon the willingness and commitment of states to change their policies and practices.

A growing body of literature delves into the norm generation, diffusion, and contestation processes to examine the intricate relationship between Central Asian governments and norms (Kluczewska, 2019; Korneev, 2017, 2018; Tskhay, 2021). Whilst norm contestation and the promotion of authoritarian counter-norms have also been reported (Ambrosio, 2008; Cooley, 2015; Isaacs, 2018; Karabayeva, 2021; Lewis, 2012; Sharshenova & Crawford, 2017), norm diffusion processes contribute to the transition in Central Asia (Crawford, 2008; Insebayeva, 2020; Isaacs, 2018; Karabayeva, 2021; Kluczewska, 2019; Tskhay, 2021). Research findings show that international organisations have acted as norm entrepreneurs and promoted norm diffusion processes, with a particular focus on democratisation, economic liberalisation, environmental protection, security, and, more recently, migration (Kluczewska, 2019; Korneev, 2017, 2018; Tskhay, 2021; Genç, forthcoming).

UNODC, Its Mandate, and Activities

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) was established in 1997Footnote 1 as a response to the growing threat of transnational challenges. A few international agreements and protocols already existed, and the creation of UNODC was followed by the adoption of new universal instruments such as the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) in 2000 and the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) in 2003, along with various protocols and many other international legal instruments on terrorism and drug trafficking. These documents serve as the legal framework that underpins UNODC’s operational work in more than 80 countries, facilitated through an extensive network of 115 field offices and supported by a dedicated team of 2400 staff members (UNODC, 2019). Through its various programmes and initiatives, UNODC supports member-states in implementing the provisions of these universal legal instruments and in strengthening their capacity to combat transnational challenges. Its work focuses on the following five areas: strengthening member-states’ capacities to confront threats from transnational organised crime,Footnote 2 tackling corruption,Footnote 3 supporting member-states to implement a comprehensive approach to the global drugs problem,Footnote 4 countering terrorism,Footnote 5 and strengthening crime prevention and effective criminal justice systemsFootnote 6 (UNODC, 2023b).

In each of these areas, UNODC facilitates the development of international standards, guidelines, and best practices. To do so, it collaborates closely with governments, law enforcement agencies, and other stakeholders to assist in the effective implementation of the relevant conventions and UN resolutions (UNODC, 2023a). Through its programmes, initiatives, technical assistance, trainings, and capacity-building efforts, it raises awareness about these phenomena, and it actively promotes and disseminates standards and norms related to their governance. The assistance provided to member-states in their endeavours to ratify and implement relevant UN conventions, protocols, and legal instruments includes support in formulating and implementing effective crime prevention strategies, relevant policies and legislation, and criminal justice systems, as well as enhancing law enforcement practices. The agency collects and disseminates data, which are crucial in promoting evidence-based policies in member-states to counter these phenomena.

UNODC bolsters the rule of law, safeguarding human rights and reinforcing key institutions such as the police, judiciary, and correctional services. Notably, it prioritises capacity-building initiatives for criminal justice officers, enabling them to effectively investigate and prosecute serious crimes such as money laundering, trafficking in persons, and drug-related offences. To foster a culture of lawfulness and prevent crime, the agency also engages in educational efforts and awareness-raising campaigns. Finally, it is important to highlight that the UNODC plays a crucial role in facilitating international cooperation and collaboration amongst member-states. By promoting the exchange of best practices, facilitating information sharing, and supporting joint operations, UNODC actively contributes to the global prevention of and combating crime. Whilst enhancing states’ anti-crime capacities through these mechanisms, UNODC actively promotes the standards and norms outlined in relevant UN conventions, protocols, and legal instruments, encouraging member-states to adopt and adhere to them (UNODC, 2023a, 2023b).

UNODC’s work centres around crime prevention and the enhancement of criminal justice systems, given that they are essential for combating transnational organised crime, drugs trafficking, corruption, and terrorism. Thus, in recent decades, in addition to the conventions, protocols, and legal instruments, member-states have agreed to standards and norms in crime prevention and criminal justice covering a range of issues, including access to justice, the treatment of offenders, justice for children, victim protection, and preventing violence against women. The agency is the guardian of these UN standards and norms, which represent benchmarks for achieving crime prevention and criminal justice policies and strategies, whilst also providing a solid basis for programming in these areas (UNODC, 2016, p. 3).

UNODC and the Diffusion of Norms and Standards in Central Asia

UNODC has been present in Central Asia since 1993, with the establishment of its Regional Office for Central Asia (ROCA) in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. ROCA’s support extends to all Central Asian states. Its work in the region moves beyond traditional crime-related outcomes to encompass a broader range of activities in support of UNTOC and its protocols, UNCAC, and various UN legal instruments against drugs and terrorism. These instruments serve as reference points and frameworks for Central Asian states to adopt and implement international standards and norms in their national policies, laws, and practices (Keck & Sikkink, 1998; Risse et al., 1999). In line with the norm diffusion literature, UNODC acts as ‘a teacher of norms’, and, by using various instruments and strategies, it plays a significant role in the facilitation of norm diffusion processes in these fields (Finnemore, 1993). As I outline in what follows, UNODC disseminates information and promotes norm adoption in the Central Asian states via different instruments under technical assistance, including the review of national legislations, recommendations for judicial reform, trainings, reports, gaps analyses, and organising conferences, workshops, and networks (Keck & Sikkink, 1998; Risse et al., 1999). Mirroring the literature (Zwingel, 2012), its technical assistance makes international norms and standards meaningful, comprehensible, and applicable within the domestic contexts of the Central Asian states, thereby facilitating the seamless transfer and adoption of norms and standards (Checkel, 1999).

The agency’s presence in Central Asia primarily focuses on providing technical assistance to law enforcement agencies, healthcare services, and the criminal justice system in the region. Technical assistance to the region is provided through comprehensive multiyear programmes,Footnote 7 encompassing a wide range of activities aimed at fostering the development, implementation, and improvement of certain processes, systems, and legislation. Such programmes involve sharing expertise, transferring knowledge, offering practical support, providing advice, allocating resources, and implementing capacity-building initiatives. These efforts are directed at enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement agencies, legal systems, criminal justice institutions, and other relevant entities. Additionally, UNODC conducts training programmes, offers advisory services, contributes to policy development, and shares best practices, actively facilitating the transfer of skills and knowledge. Furthermore, UNODC has made considerable efforts to promote adherence to UN conventions and protocols on transnational organised crime, corruption, drugs, and terrorism, whilst assisting states in aligning their domestic laws with these international frameworks. Table 4.1 provides an overview of the status of relevant UN conventions and protocols in Central Asia.

Table 4.1 UN conventions and protocols underpinning the operational work of UNODC and their status in Central Asia
Full size table

UNODC’s role in encouraging compliance with these UN conventions and protocols has been crucial, providing support to Central Asian states toward harmonising their national legislation with global frameworks. ROCA’s annual reports from 2015 to 2021 provide comprehensive information on these endeavours. UNODC’s guidance, a thorough review of national legislation, and recommendations for legal reform have shaped Central Asian states’ legislation on transnational organised crime, terrorism, corruption, and drugs prevention. To illustrate this, the 2018 annual report highlights that, in Uzbekistan, expert assistance was extended to assess the legislation on the trafficking of persons, leading to the development of comprehensive recommendations aimed at aligning Uzbekistan’s laws with international standards and norms (ROCA, 2018, p. 37). Similarly, the 2020 annual report underscores that UNODC provided legal advisory services to Kazakhstan concerning the regulations governing the rehabilitation and reintegration of children repatriated from conflict zones. That report emphasises that, as a result of UNODC’s legal advisory services, a new policy document was adopted, ‘successfully incorporating 50 percent of the recommendations provided by UNODC’ (ROCA, 2020, pp. 53–54). Another example is highlighted in the 2021 annual report, which documents the development of national legislative analysis reports with gap analyses and policy and/or legislative recommendations for action to each member-state in Central Asia. In addition to national legislative analysis reports, three legislative workshops were organised in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, respectively. The report continues, noting that:

Individuals who benefited from this work included representatives from national ministries of foreign affairs, general prosecutors’ offices, supreme courts, ministries of finance, customs offices, ministries of defence, ministries of internal affairs, and academia. During these workshops, national experts had an opportunity to discuss findings of national consultations, as well as conclusions and recommendations of legislative analysis. Participants received advice on how to update their national legislation and procedures in line with international frameworks on firearms and terrorism. National representatives had the opportunity to meet with representatives of the project implementation team, discuss success stories of similar legislative changes in other countries, and explore various possibilities of updating national legislation, especially in ways identified in legislative analysis reports. Overall, the experts agreed with recommendations and amendments discussed in several cases, to ensure proposals are adapted to the national context. Participants welcomed the contributions of UNODC and [the] UN Office on Counter Terrorism to the project and expressed their willingness to continue this collaboration in the future. (ROCA, 2021, pp. 63–64)

Another significant role played by UNODC toward strengthening criminal justice institutions in Central Asia is the provision of training and resources to national governments for effective law enforcement and adjudication. As part of these efforts, various regional and national training programmes have been implemented for investigators, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges. ROCA annual reports from 2015 through 2021 reveal that thousands of experts in different fields received training in the region, including crime intelligence analysts, customs service officers, drugs law enforcement agencies, forensic experts, investigators from cyber and/or organised crime units, officers in risk analysis, specialists from law enforcement analytical departments in data collection, analysis, and statistics, and judges and prosecutors (ROCA, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021). The UNODC training ‘Challenges and Threats of DARKNET: Use of Analytical Software in Law Enforcement Practice’ from 2018 serves as a good example, demonstrating that participants improved their understanding of the Darknet and enhanced their knowledge and skills in using analytical tools for the analysis of the drugs crime situation. Similarly, UNODC signed a memorandum of understanding with the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Uzbekistan to create a cooperative framework to combat transnational organised crime, drugs trafficking, human trafficking, cybercrime, and corruption through the training of prosecutors, as well as providing expert advice and technical support (ROCA, 2018). Another example involves training programmes, both online and offline, which focus on enhancing knowledge and skills related to border control. Throughout 2021, a series of four regional trainings took place, utilising a combination of online, offline, and hybrid formats. Furthermore, 25 national and regional training courses were organised addressing a range of subjects related to cross-border operations and search techniques. These courses benefited a total of 271 law enforcement officers from Central Asian countries (ROCA, 2021).

Consistent with Sustainable Development Goal 5, gender equality and the empowerment of women have been integral parts of all UNODC ROCA initiatives (ROCA, 2018, 2021). To ensure that ‘the gender equality perspective is mainstreamed into the legislation and policies of the governments in the region, and special measures to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women are adopted, UNODC provided advisory services and capacity development on a range of issues’ (ROCA, 2018, p. 13). In this respect, law enforcement officers were trained on the gender dimensions of organised crime, and UNODC supported the training of police officers, along with municipal, social protection, health, and education workers, and community activists on the implementation of legislation to prevent violence against women in the region (ROCA, 2018, 2019).

UNODC has not only organised, provided, and funded these trainings, but also developed train-the-trainer programmes (training of trainers) and training materials (training manuals). In this way, UNODC has contributed to developing a pool of competent trainers with a deeper knowledge of subject matters, international norms, and standards arising out of relevant UN conventions and protocols, as well as operations. Training of trainers (TOT) programmes bring together trainers and create a network of professionals who share experiences, resources, and best practices. This network also promotes collaboration, continuous learning, and support amongst trainers. In line with these, the 2016 annual report notes that ToTs were organised for analysts from the relevant law enforcement agencies of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan aimed at introducing a new training methodology and enhancing the instructors’ teaching capacity to pass the knowledge they gained on to their colleagues as a self-sustainability and self-efficiency approach (ROCA, 2016, p. 45). Similarly, the 2017 annual report explains that ‘a training of trainers (ToT) was conducted at the Drug Control Agency raining Centre for over 20 senior officers of the agency. Future instructors improved their skills in effective and interactive teaching methods aimed at an adult audience, identifying and/or planning training needs, group facilitation, brainstorming, training evaluation, reporting, etc.’ (ROCA, 2017, p. 36).

Notably, the content of UNODC’s training programmes has been incorporated into the curricula of law enforcement academies across the region. The reports indicate that ROCA has played a significant role in assisting Central Asian law enforcement academies, such as police academies and prosecutors’ academies, in developing their curricula. Working in collaboration with national experts, UNODC experts actively contribute to and shape the content of courses. As such, the 2018 annual report explains that UNODC facilitated the introduction of an educational course on crime prevention into the curriculum of the Management Academy under the President of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Police Academy, and ‘this will ensure that municipal workers and frontline police officers are equipped with [the] relevant knowledge and skills to work on crime prevention in line with the UN Guidelines on Crime Prevention (ROCA, 2018).’

Consistent with the norm diffusion literature (Finnemore, 2017; Goodman & Jinks, 2004; Holzinger et al., 2008; Khagram et al., 2002; Zimmermann, 2016), UNODC’s initiatives demonstrate its role as a facilitator of knowledge exchange between governments and norm promoters in its field of expertise. As evidenced by the ROCA annual reports, UNODC establishes platforms that enable experts from Central Asian states to interact, exchange experiences, and mutually benefit from one another’s expertise. This includes organising workshops and mentorship programmes, study visits, and regional meetings, all aimed at fostering collaboration and facilitating knowledge exchange amongst participants (ROCA, 2017, 2018). Examples of activities include regional and national workshops focused on the production, collection, and reporting of data related to drugs, crime, and terrorism in Central Asia (ROCA, 2018, 2019). The objective of these workshops was to enhance the knowledge and capabilities of government officials regarding international standards for crime and drugs statistics and to improve their ability to report on these issues effectively. The regional workshop ‘Good Practices for the Prosecution and Judiciary in Cases Involving Terrorism Offences’ in Tashkent in 2018 serves as another example where participants representing the general prosecutor’s offices, supreme courts, ministries of internal affairs, and security services, as well as legal practitioners from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, representatives from the embassies of Germany, Sweden, the US, and the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure of SCO met and shared best practices on the management of cases involving terrorism offences (ROCA, 2018). Another UNODC-organised workshop held in Kyrgyzstan brought together officials representing the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Tajik, and Uzbek national parliaments, ministries of interior, ministries of religious affairs, ministries of finance, ministries of foreign affairs, the general prosecutor’s offices, and national security agencies as well as local NGOs and experts to discuss evolving terrorist threats (ROCA, 2019).

International conferences hosted or co-hosted by UNODC again enhance knowledge and provide platforms for the dissemination of expertise, experience, and best practices, as well as norms and standards. UNODC is active in the region in organising or co-hosting international conferences together with Central Asian governments. One instance of such collaboration is the international conference on security and sustainable development, titled ‘Central Asia: Shared Past and Common Future, Cooperation for Sustainable Development and Mutual Prosperity.’ This conference, held in November 2017, was jointly organised by the government of Uzbekistan, UNODC, and the UN Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy for Central Asia. It served as an interactive platform bringing together high-level representatives from various international organisations, including the UN, EU, OSCE, SCO, and CIS, as well as Central Asian states, Afghanistan, the USA, Russia, China, Turkey, Iran, India, Pakistan, Japan, and South Korea amongst others, along with experts, public figures, and the media. With over 500 participants, the conference focused on exploring avenues to establish a robust regional cooperative mechanism to effectively combat terrorism, extremism, transnational organised crime, and drugs trafficking (ROCA, 2017). Another international conference was held in July 2022, titled ‘Strengthening National and International Partnerships in Combating Trafficking in Persons.’ This conference was co-organised in partnership with UNODC, Uzbekistan’s National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Persons and Forced Labour, and Winrock International. It contributed to the exchange and promotion of best practices in the field of combating human trafficking, to the development of referral mechanisms for victims of trafficking, and regional partnerships in the investigation and prosecution of trafficking in persons crimes (UNODC, 2023d).

Another such UNODC initiative aimed at promoting knowledge sharing between Central Asian governments, officials, and norm promoters in its field of expertise is facilitating the establishment, enhancement, and maintenance of networks in the region. These networks provide platforms for international cooperation, legal and operational coordination, and sharing knowledge, information, experience, practices, and expertise. One of these UNODC initiatives is the ‘Establishing/ Reinforcing the Network of Prosecutors and Central Authorities from Source, Transit, and Destination Countries in Response to Transnational Organised Crime in Central Asia and Southern Caucasus’ (the Judicial Cooperation Network for Central Asia and Southern Caucasus, or the CASC networking initiative). This network was launched in 2014, and its secretariat is situated within UNODC. CASC brings criminal justice practitioners together, and supports inter-regional cooperation by facilitating informal consultations through its contact points and by promoting more efficient international cooperation in criminal matters (ROCA, 2015). Another such initiative is the creation of the Regional Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism Network in 2016 with the aim of strengthening regional cooperation and capacities. This network facilitates communication, ensures networking, and shares information and best practices on a regional level in an effective and sustainable way (ROCA, 2016, 2018). These networks organise workshops, meetings, and trainings with guidance from UNODC. In addition to these single network initiatives, the agency has a ‘network of networks’ initiative that has provided a new paradigm for a regional and international cooperation architecture promoting links with other law enforcement international bodies and organisations (ROCA, 2017).

In addition to initiating several networks, UNODC has also facilitated the creation of and support to maintain the Central Asian Regional Information and Coordination Centre (CARICC), which serves as the information and coordination platform for combating illicit drugs trafficking at the regional level. CARICC was established within a memorandum of understanding on sub-regional drugs control cooperation dated 4 May 1996, between UNODC, Central Asian states, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and the Russian Federation (UNODC, 2023d). ROCA works with CARICC, compiling a comprehensive catalogue of the various methods by which narcotics are circulated within Central Asia. This compilation aims to provide law enforcement agencies with a broader understanding of preventive strategies to combat this serious issue.

UNODC is involved in many other activities, such as public awareness-raising campaigns, providing equipment, or conducting operational coordination meetings at different levels (ROCA, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021). Monitoring Central Asian states’ performances in adhering to the UN conventions and protocols and producing ROCA annual reports on their progress and compliance are additional UNODC endeavours that contribute to the diffusion of norms on combating transnational organised crime, drugs trafficking, corruption, and preventing terrorism in the region. Reporting progress documents the efforts of Central Asian governments, facilitates comparisons between them, and ultimately exerts pressure on them to conform to international norms and standards. It also serves to encourage countries to take steps toward compliance and internalisation.

As the above reveals, UNODC has a highly institutionalised programme and structure, along with mechanisms and instruments through which it facilitates socialisation and norm diffusion processes in Central Asia. Similar to the activities of other international organisations in the region, it diffuses norms, standards, and ways of doing things on the issue areas that fall under its mandate. Furthermore, UNODC facilitates Central Asian states’ compliance with international law in the fields under its responsibility, shapes the contents of relevant legislation, and develops a modus operandi of responses to translational challenges. However, as is discussed in the next section, UNODC is not alone in this race.

Is ‘the Shanghai Spirit’ Contesting UNODC Norm Diffusion?

As noted in the previous section, a significant number of regional and international organisations operate in Central Asia, all striving to promote various norms. Some regional organisations founded by China and Russia have been noted for promoting norms that often challenge or contradict the norms advocated by Western international organisations. In particular, SCO has been documented as spreading authoritarian regime-strengthening norms (Ambrosio, 2008; Cooley, 2015; Karabayeva, 2021). At first glance, this contestation may seem irrelevant to UNODC’s objectives, areas of responsibility, and activities. However, given the overlapping areas of work between the two organisations in the region, as well as geopolitical dynamics alongside global and regional tensions, a closer examination of their relationship provides food for thought in reflecting upon the norm diffusion process in the region.

Since its establishment, SCO has undergone significant development and expanded its horizons in terms of membership, tasks, and responsibilities. The organisation has evolved to address various regional and global challenges. Initially, it had a clear regional focus: Central Asia. However, as new members joined and other states became observers and/or dialogue partners, this regional focus has become somewhat blurred. Despite this blur, its core activities and initiatives are still centred on the specific issues and needs of its member-states in Central Asia. That said, its main objective is to address regional security issues, combat regional terrorism, ethnic separatism and religious extremism, organised crime, and irregular migration (MFA Turkey, 2023). Thus, UNODC and SCO have overlapping areas of work in the region.

As a UN organisation, UNODC has a global mandate, whereas SCO primarily operates at the regional level. To build closer ties, in 2011, they signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which would initially ‘look at several core areas including illicit trafficking, drugs use, organised crime, international terrorism, human trafficking, and other forms of transnational organised crime’ (UNODC, 2011, p. 1). ROCA annual reports only make a couple of rather insignificant references to SCO. Whilst the 2018 annual report notes that UNODC and ROCA ‘closely collaborated with different international organisations, NGOs, and other bilateral partner organisations, such as the OSCE, Regional Dialogue, SCO, and [Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO)] amongst others’ (ROCA, 2018, p. 47), the reports in 2019 and 2020 only briefly mentioned that UNODC and SCO collaborated on narcotic drugs use and trafficking prevention. The UNODC’s website, on the one hand, is full of news about side events, co-hosting, and practical cooperative activities on the prevention of drugs trafficking, countering terrorism, anticorruption, border management, and other areas falling within their mandate. Consistent with these joint endeavours, speeches given by the executives of both organisations emphasised the importance of collaboration. As such, UNODC executives spoke of a ‘strong partnership’ between the two organisations and how their joint efforts contributed to the SCO objectives (UNODC, 2017, p. 1). SCO Secretary General Zhang Ming, on the other hand, expressed the willingness of SCO members to enhance cooperation and consolidate their efforts, whilst also affirming their ‘commitment to combating drugs trafficking based on the norms and principles of international law’, which falls under the responsibility of UNODC (UNODC, 2023e, p. 1). These news items and positive interactions between organisations, with mutual recognition of expertise and an emphasis on collaboration and cooperation, provide the impression that there is no contestation or friction between them whilst they operate in Central Asia, act as norm entrepreneurs, and diffuse norms and shape the policies and legislations of Central Asian states. However, these two organisations are products of different normative frameworks, and contestation between them in terms of norm diffusion processes seems inevitable.

Through its operations and work focused on its mandate, UNODC promotes the UN’s norms and standards. As a product of the liberal international order, the norms recognised and committed by the UN for global governance are liberal norms, such as democracy, the rule of law, pluralism, gender equality, and human security (Tallberg et al., 2020). The UN, its agencies, their mandates, and operations have been highly institutionalised and shaped by these norms and standards. SCO, by contrast, is ‘a new set of values and norms governing the future development of Central Asia’—‘the Shanghai Spirit’—and ‘the content of these values and norms sets the contours of what is appropriate and legitimate within the region’ (Ambrosio, 2008, p. 1322). Studies argue that these norms promote authoritarianism since they strengthen conservatism and autocratic regimes in Central Asia (Ambrosio, 2016; Cooley, 2015; Lewis, 2012; Pantucci & Petersen, 2022). Thus, ‘the Shanghai Spirit’ represents a challenge to Western international organisations, their work, and their influence in the region. As Lewis (2012) observes, OSCE has already experienced this contestation with SCO. According to Lewis, a new set of norms promoted by the organisation has displaced the liberal-democratic principles promoted by OSCE.

When it comes to UNODC, however, the issue areas it focuses on, and its primary focus on technical assistance, capacity building, and promoting international cooperation to address drugs-related challenges and crime, may bring collaboration and cooperation to the fore and postpone a contestation between the two organisations. However, the combination of limited transparency, reduced accountability, centralised power, favouritism, and the stifling of criticism within authoritarian regimes renders them susceptible to corruption (UNODC, 2020). This environment also offers avenues for various transnational organised crime activities addressed by UNODC. As a result, whilst evident contestation or friction may not yet be visible between UNODC and SCO, there is reason to anticipate such issues emerging in future.

Conclusions

Since independence, the Central Asian states have undergone continuous processes of transition. The region’s unique context, featuring a blend of pre-Soviet, Soviet, and new institutions and norms, has influenced the transition trajectory in each Central Asian state. As such, each state has been significantly influenced by the diffusion of international norms, facilitated by a range of actors, including international organisations. International organisations have been operating in the region, and promoted norms and standards, advocating for specific regulatory measures, and disseminating information on best practices. Understanding state socialisation, norm diffusion processes, and the role of international organisations in these processes are crucial for comprehending the changes in policies, laws, and institutions within and across Central Asian states.

As a UN agency, UNODC has actively operated in Central Asia. Within its work, it engages with Central Asian states, provides socialisation venues for them, and supports their adherence and compliance to the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime, the UN Convention against Corruption, and various UN protocols, thus facilitating and shaping their transition in its areas of expertise. As I outlined here, UNODC’s work primarily focuses on providing technical assistance and capacity-building initiatives to law enforcement agencies and the criminal justice system. This includes supporting the development, implementation, and improvement of legislation and providing training, but also monitoring, reporting, raising awareness, and organising conferences, workshops, and study visits. UNODC has provided expert guidance, reviewed national legislation, and made valuable recommendations for legal reform, thereby shaping the legislation of Central Asian states to align with international frameworks. Through its well-structured multiyear programmes, strategies, and instruments, UNODC has acted as ‘a teacher of norms’, ‘an agent of socialisation’, and a ‘facilitator of norm diffusion’ in Central Asia in combating transnational organised crime, drugs trafficking, addressing corruption, and preventing terrorism. By influencing compliance with international law, shaping legislation, and forming responses to transnational challenges, UNODC plays a vital role in the Central Asian context.

However, this analysis also underlines the fact that UNODC does not operate in isolation. SCO’s presence and activities introduce an additional layer of complexity. Whilst UNODC and SCO appear to harmoniously co-exist, their differing normative frameworks, geopolitical dynamics, and overlapping operational domains necessitate a closer examination of their relationship. As UNODC promotes the liberal norms underpinned by the UN’s values, SCO advances ‘the Shanghai Spirit’, which is notably aligned with authoritarian norms. Although no obvious or immediate conflict may currently exist, the potential for contestation and/or friction arises from the distinct normative frameworks of these organisations. This indicates that further examination is necessary in order to understand how these organisations’ interactions impact the norm diffusion process in the region.