Tourism in Words and Isolation in Practice: Why Turkmenistan Is Preparing for a Forum Without Tourists Again
Turkmenistan is preparing for the international tourism forum “Turkmen Travel,” which will be held in Ashgabat from April 14 to 16. On the eve of the event, President Serdar Berdimuhamedov once again emphasized the “importance” and “potential” of the tourism industry, instructing that the country be represented with dignity on the international stage, Turkmen.News reported. However, behind the loud statements about tourism development lies an obvious paradox: despite massive investments in infrastructure and image projects, the real flow of foreign tourists into the country remains extremely low.
A Showcase Exists, but Tourists Do Not Over the years of independence, Turkmenistan has invested significant funds in creating tourism infrastructure: luxury hotels have been built in Ashgabat and Avaza, modern airports have been erected, international forums are regularly held, and books are published about the country’s rich historical heritage. But foreign guests rarely manage to see all this with their own eyes. Even before the pandemic, in 2019, only 14,438 foreign citizens visited Turkmenistan. For comparison: neighboring Uzbekistan in 2025 received more than 10 million tourists, Kazakhstan — 15.7 million, Kyrgyzstan — about 10 million, and Tajikistan — 1.8 million. Even considering the growing interest in Central Asia, Turkmenistan continues to remain on the periphery of tourist flows. At the same time, the country’s potential is obvious. Participants in the tourism market note that the demand for trips to Turkmenistan is growing. Combined tours of Central Asia are especially popular among tourists from the USA, Europe, China, and other regions. According to expert estimates, by 2024, interest in such trips grew by approximately one and a half times compared to previous years. However, the key obstacle remains unchanged — a strict visa regime.
Unlike its neighbors, who are actively liberalizing entry, Turkmenistan maintains a complex system for obtaining visas, including mandatory invitations and lengthy approvals. This deters not only tourists but also businesses. The problem of visa restrictions goes far beyond tourism. As shown by documents obtained by independent sources, even representatives of major international companies face serious difficulties when entering the country. For example, specialists from the South Korean company Hyundai Engineering were unable to enter Turkmenistan on time for the restoration of the polymer plant in Kiyanly. Their visas were processed only after the company’s management appealed directly to high-ranking officials. A similar situation arose with the general director of the Turkmen branch of the French company Bouygues, who was forced to personally request an extension of his own visa to continue work on a state project.
Such cases demonstrate a systemic problem: the state itself invites foreign partners but is incapable of providing them with basic conditions for work. Against the backdrop of these facts, it becomes obvious that the main reason for the failure of tourism policy lies not in the lack of resources or interest from foreigners, but in a deliberate policy of restricting access to the country. Neighboring states long ago banked on openness: simplified visa regimes, electronic visas, visa-free entry for dozens of countries. This is precisely what allowed them to turn tourism into one of their key sources of income. Turkmenistan, meanwhile, continues to move in the opposite direction, effectively blocking its own potential. Against this background, holding another tourism forum looks more like an imitation of activity than a real step toward industry development. Without a revision of visa policy, simplification of entry procedures, and an abandonment of excessive control, any talk of “tourism potential” remains mere rhetoric.
The situation with tourism is just one specific example of a broader problem. A system built on total control and bureaucracy is increasingly coming into conflict with the country’s economic interests. While the authorities continue to speak of development, reality demonstrates the opposite: isolation, administrative barriers, and inefficient management deter both tourists and investors. In these conditions, a logical question arises: is the government ready to abandon the illusion of control for the sake of real development, or will Turkmenistan continue to hold forums for a world that will never arrive there?
