Kazakhstan is reshaping the Abraham Accords
As Israeli President Isaac Herzog landed in Astana this week for the highest-level Israeli trip to Kazakhstan in a decade, and his first since Kazakhstan formally announced its intention to join the Abraham Accords, the warm welcome from the Muslim-majority nation carried weight that has been too quick to be dismissed.
When Trump announced the news that Kazakhstan would join the Abraham Accords during a White House summit with Central Asian leaders at the end of 2025, the commentary ranged from tepid to dismissive, with “largely symbolic,” being the overriding assessment.
It is not hard to see why. The two countries have had full diplomatic relations since 1992, so no formal normalisation was needed, but this move said less about the relations between Israel and Kazakhstan, and more about the evolution of the Abraham Accords.
As President Tokayev stated: “I made a decision to bring my country into the Abraham Accords, and we believe that the Abraham Accords have fundamentally reconfigured the Middle East’s geopolitical architecture, creating a strategic framework for regional stability, shared prosperity, and collaborative efforts to address common challenges.”
The term strategic framework is what stands out. The Abraham Accords are evolving, from a single moment on the lawn of the White House in 2020, to a framework of regional stability. As President Herzog stated that during his visit, “Our activity has been strengthened by an alliance of moderates, a coalition of nations driven by a desire to cultivate cooperation and offer an alternative to the family of nations, all through the channels of the Abraham Accords. This new and emerging coalition holds great promise.” This reflects both this new vision for the Abraham Accords, and what the decision to join means for the Kazakhstan leadership.
It isn’t surprising that Central Asia has become a new theatre for this expansion. The Trump administration has explicitly spoken about furthering relations with post-Soviet Muslim-majority states, which could see countries like Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan following Astana’s lead. With new US partnerships and business deals in the region, the Abraham Accords can be seen as a vehicle for constructing a broader, US-aligned, pro-Israel bloc that spans from the Gulf to the Caspian.
This matters for Iran. Tehran’s strategic posture in recent years has depended on cultivating the position that Israel and the United States are colonial aggressors, while organising resistance through proxies. To be sure though, Astana is not choosing sides in a simplistic sense.
Kazakhstan has long pursued a “multi-vector” foreign policy, balancing relations with major powers. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian visited Astana just weeks after the Accords announcement, signing fourteen bilateral agreements with Tokayev. These moves underscore Kazakhstan’s continued engagement with Tehran.
Yet the direction of travel is increasingly clear. When Kazakhstan expressed solidarity with Gulf states following Iranian missile strikes, it signalled its strategic sympathies. Astana is not severing ties with Iran, but it is making its broader alignment legible, and that clarity carries significant geopolitical weight.
There is a domestic dimension to Kazakhstan’s calculus too. They have mineral wealth, a modernization agenda, and a pressing desire to attract American capital and technology. The $17 billion in deals signed alongside the Accords announcement was a signal: this was as much an economic declaration as a diplomatic one. By joining the Abraham Accords, Tokayev bought goodwill in Washington and positioned Kazakhstan as a partner in Trump’s signature foreign policy project.
In that sense, Kazakhstan’s move reflects a broader truth about the Abraham Accords second phase. What began in 2020 as a set of normalization agreements is evolving into a flexible geopolitical instrument. One that countries can join not to resolve bilateral disputes with Israel, but to position themselves within an emerging network of cooperation tied to Washington.
The implications are significant. If the Accords continue to expand along these lines, they could reshape not only Middle Eastern diplomacy but the wider geopolitical map linking Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. The question is no longer whether countries recognize Israel, it is whether they see value in joining such a framework.
Kazakhstan has answered that question. Others may soon follow.