A wonderful piece of reporting—vivid, entertaining, and politically perceptive. The wrestling, horseback archery, and American cowboys make the World Nomad Games fascinating in their own right, while the article reveals something deeper: how shared ancient traditions can create genuine cultural connection even as governments use them to soften profound political differences. It captures both the promise and the tension of sports diplomacy beautifully.
The KPI framing is the sharpest insight in the whole piece — a country that has genuinely poured billions into hard infrastructure across Central Asia can still lose the soft-power game entirely if the bureaucracy managing it is optimized to avoid any risk of an unscripted quote rather than to build a compelling story. It's a broader lesson about state communication generally: systems built to minimize downside risk almost always end up forfeiting the upside too, because the two usually require the same thing, letting people speak for themselves.
The detail about the airport remodel via China Road and Bridge landing you straight in a Games volunteer hugger made me smile. How much of that airport upgrade was actually tied to the SCO summit timing versus the Nomad Games?
I went to the World Nomads Games in Kazakhstan in 2024, it was so much fun. These are some great pictures and a great narrative of life in Central Asia!
Lily went to Kyrgyzstan looking for the failure of Chinese soft power—and kept running into the success of Chinese hard economic power.
China may be bad at telling Central Asians why they should like China. But it is becoming remarkably good at giving Central Asian governments reasons to need China: railways, power plants, infrastructure, trade, and capital.
That distinction may matter far more than whether Beijing is good at public diplomacy.
Welcoming Chinese investment while resisting Chinese workers isn’t necessarily a contradiction.
Roads, factories, and goods can increase local resources and opportunities. Chinese workers can be seen as competing for local jobs. The same “China” enters different parts of people’s lives, and produces different judgments.
People may not decide first whether they like or dislike a country. Often, something concrete enters their lives first. What does it bring? What does it take away? Does it change their position?
A wonderful piece of reporting—vivid, entertaining, and politically perceptive. The wrestling, horseback archery, and American cowboys make the World Nomad Games fascinating in their own right, while the article reveals something deeper: how shared ancient traditions can create genuine cultural connection even as governments use them to soften profound political differences. It captures both the promise and the tension of sports diplomacy beautifully.
The KPI framing is the sharpest insight in the whole piece — a country that has genuinely poured billions into hard infrastructure across Central Asia can still lose the soft-power game entirely if the bureaucracy managing it is optimized to avoid any risk of an unscripted quote rather than to build a compelling story. It's a broader lesson about state communication generally: systems built to minimize downside risk almost always end up forfeiting the upside too, because the two usually require the same thing, letting people speak for themselves.
This is a fantastic piece, thanks much.
The detail about the airport remodel via China Road and Bridge landing you straight in a Games volunteer hugger made me smile. How much of that airport upgrade was actually tied to the SCO summit timing versus the Nomad Games?
The airport staff said it was for both! I think a lot of SCO reps flew into the Russian airbase also
I went to the World Nomads Games in Kazakhstan in 2024, it was so much fun. These are some great pictures and a great narrative of life in Central Asia!
Great piece of reportage, thanks much!
So great Lily! How many languages do you speak?
Glad you liked it! My best foreign languages are Mandarin and Russian, but I dabble in some others
Lily went to Kyrgyzstan looking for the failure of Chinese soft power—and kept running into the success of Chinese hard economic power.
China may be bad at telling Central Asians why they should like China. But it is becoming remarkably good at giving Central Asian governments reasons to need China: railways, power plants, infrastructure, trade, and capital.
That distinction may matter far more than whether Beijing is good at public diplomacy.
Welcoming Chinese investment while resisting Chinese workers isn’t necessarily a contradiction.
Roads, factories, and goods can increase local resources and opportunities. Chinese workers can be seen as competing for local jobs. The same “China” enters different parts of people’s lives, and produces different judgments.
People may not decide first whether they like or dislike a country. Often, something concrete enters their lives first. What does it bring? What does it take away? Does it change their position?
Attitudes grow from there.