Abu Dhabi: As traditional security guarantees come under pressure and geopolitical rivalries intensify, middle powers are increasingly turning to strategic autonomy, diversified partnerships and regional cooperation to navigate a rapidly changing global order.The role of these countries in strengthening regional security and reducing the risks created by competition between major powers was discussed during the closing session of the third edition of Hili Forum 2026, titled 'Role of Middle Powers in a Ruptured'.Speakers highlighted the importance of diplomacy, cross-border economic integration and technological resilience as countries seek to protect themselves from geopolitical shocks while avoiding becoming drawn into conflicts between larger powers.Avoiding other countries’ warsVuk Jeremić, former foreign minister of Serbia, said developments over the past few months of 2026 had demonstrated that some partners could be relied upon more than others and that security guarantees previously taken for granted did not necessarily function in the same way under new geopolitical and technological conditions.“I think it is vital for any region in the world, including this region, to make achieving peace an absolute and top priority,” Jeremić said.Vuk Jeremić, former foreign minister of SerbiaHe acknowledged that this was particularly difficult when peace was challenged by a unilateral war in which a country was not a participant but ultimately found itself becoming a victim.As countries seek to build strategic autonomy while remaining part of an interconnected global system, Jeremić said one of their first priorities should be to avoid becoming involved in other countries’ wars.“Do not be part of other people’s wars,” he said, adding that countries, particularly those that are not major powers, should seek to maintain neutrality towards unilateral actions during what he described as the coming decades of geopolitical stagnation.Building resilience also requires countries to address domestic vulnerabilities, expand their networks of friendships and cooperation, and develop their technological capabilities, he said.Jeremić stressed the importance of maintaining good relations with neighbouring countries, acknowledging that this could be particularly challenging in regions such as the Balkans and the Middle East.He said improving and repairing relations with neighbours, ideally all of them but “one at a time”, should be part of efforts to prepare for future challenges.Can middle powers build their own partnerships?Discussing whether middle powers can establish sustainable smaller-scale partnerships without the involvement of major powers, Jeremić said periods of geopolitical stagnation often put both peace and multilateral international organisations under pressure.Institutions built over decades may struggle when their structures no longer reflect the changing distribution of global power, he said.Jeremić outlined three possible approaches.The first is to reform existing international organisations so they better reflect current realities and are better equipped to address contemporary challenges.The second is to build new organisations or deepen engagement with alternative groupings that may not be global in scope but bring together countries with similar interests.The third, if other avenues fail, is unilateral action. However, he cautioned that unilateral moves do not always go according to plan, even for the world’s most powerful countries.Jeremić said all three approaches were already taking place simultaneously. Smaller countries and middle powers should continue efforts to reform international institutions and should not abandon organisations such as the United Nations simply because they currently appear ineffective, he said.At the same time, countries are building new organisations and strengthening alternative arrangements, including new security structures in the region.Technology and strategic autonomyJeremić, who previously served at the United Nations and ran for UN secretary-general in 2016, also highlighted technology as an increasingly important component of strategic autonomy.Referring to the concept discussed by Dr Anwar Gargash at the forum a day earlier, he said middle and smaller powers should avoid becoming locked into exclusive technological relationships, particularly in technologies linked to the future of sustainable energy.Avoiding dependence on a single side or partner, he said, should form part of how countries build strategic autonomy, particularly in the technology sector.‘Responsible middle power’Zhandos Shaimardanov, Director of the Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, said his country’s approach was centred on the concept of being a “responsible middle power”.Kazakhstan President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has described the country as a responsible middle power, arguing that such states can serve as important bridges, help build trust and act as honest brokers during periods of deep polarisation and division among major powers.Zhandos Shaimardanov, Director, Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (2)Shaimardanov said that responsibility was closely connected to strategic autonomy.For Kazakhstan, he said, the first pillar of strategic autonomy was strong domestic institutions.He pointed to Kazakhstan’s adoption of a new constitution in March this year, which he said established modern institutions aimed at making the political system more resilient. These included a unicameral parliament, the newly established office of vice-president and a People’s Council serving as the highest consultative body to ensure civic participation.The second pillar was deeper regional integration within Central Asia.While greater integration might initially appear to contradict the idea of strategic autonomy, Shaimardanov argued that closer regional cooperation actually gave countries more options and reduced their exposure to risk.He pointed to regular consultative meetings between Central Asian leaders, which this year expanded with Azerbaijan joining the five member states.Such coordination, he said, helped amplify the region’s voice in its dealings with major powers.Acting alone was not the preferred approach for Kazakhstan or for responsible middle powers, he said. Instead, they needed to create new options that strengthened both resilience and responsibility.Connectivity creates strategic optionsThe third pillar, Shaimardanov said, was connectivity, extending beyond diplomacy to physical infrastructure and logistics.Kazakhstan’s geography places it alongside two major global powers, China and Russia, making strong partnerships important. But the country was also working to ensure it did not depend on a single physical transport route.He cited efforts to develop the International North-South Transport Corridor as well as the Middle Corridor, or Trans-Caspian route, saying multiple routes gave Kazakhstan greater strategic options and strengthened its autonomy.“Geography has imposed a reality that we have, and we must turn it from a constraint into a strategic asset,” he said.Gulf-Central Asia cooperationShaimardanov said geopolitical tensions were also accelerating technological competition between major powers, a development middle powers could not ignore.At the domestic level, countries could invest heavily in research and development and human capital. Internationally, however, they could jointly push for global governance of technologies including artificial intelligence, drones and robotics to ensure they were safe and served the wider public interest.He said Gulf countries possessed capital and energy diplomacy, and the most effective approach was not to deploy those strengths separately but to integrate them into a broader policy.Cooperation between Central Asia and the Gulf should therefore go beyond individual investment opportunities and be viewed through a wider geoeconomic lens, he said.That could involve combining Gulf capital, Central Asian resources, Eurasian economic connectivity, diplomacy and technology.Such a combination could also help create safer platforms for dialogue.Shaimardanov said Kazakhstan’s traditional multi-vector foreign policy could now be viewed as “multi-dimensional engagement with strategic autonomy”, giving the country considerable experience in providing platforms for dialogue.He cited Kazakhstan’s role in providing a platform for talks between the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia in 2024. Kazakhstan did not seek to dictate a settlement, he said, but instead provided the political space required for dialogue.He said the same philosophy had been applied through the Astana Process on Syria and other initiatives.This political space for dialogue, he argued, was one of the contributions middle powers could make to major powers and other parties in conflict.“When dialogue stops, conflict can escalate further,” he said.‘We need to be at the table’Shaimardanov said middle powers were unlikely to compete directly with major powers in the technological race, but they could ensure that they adapted rapidly to emerging technologies.Countries across the world were seeking to advance their artificial intelligence capabilities, making technological sovereignty an increasingly important priority.But Shaimardanov called for global regulation and governance of critical technologies, drawing a parallel with the international regulation of nuclear weapons that emerged in the middle of the 20th centuryCiting Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s remarks at Davos — “Either you are at the table or you are on the menu” — Shaimardanov said middle powers needed to ensure they had a place in discussions over the future regulation, adoption and safe use of emerging technologies.
