Universities worldwide are increasingly shaped by geopolitical tensions, diplomatic shifts, and military conflicts. While much research has examined student mobility and research collaborations, fewer studies have explored how geopolitical conflict transforms entire higher education systems especially in Central Asia.

Kazakhstan presents a unique case. Positioned between Russia and China, while also maintaining partnerships with Europe and the United States, the country has long pursued a “multi-vector” foreign policy. Higher education has become one of the key arenas where these geopolitical interests intersect.

Using the SAIOS framework (Scales, Actors, Interests, Opportunity Structures), the study draws on 15 semi-structured interviews with university rectors, vice-rectors, and senior administrators across Kazakhstan.

The research asks:

• How are Kazakhstani universities adapting their internationalisation strategies in response to geopolitical conflict?

• What actors and interests shape these transformations?

• What new opportunity structures and constraints have emerged?

The Russia–Ukraine war accelerated Kazakhstan’s ambition to position itself as a regional education hub.

Government authorities moved quickly to:

• Invite international branch campuses (IBCs)

• Expand dual degree programmes

• Attract Western partnerships

• Reduce dependency on Russian higher education networks

This reflects Kazakhstan’s broader geopolitical balancing strategy between Russia, China, and Western partners.

At the national scale, the Ministry of Higher Education and Science operationalised reforms, while the President’s office defined strategic direction.

At the international scale, foreign universities particularly from the UK, US, and Europe, actively pursued partnerships in Kazakhstan following the conflict, reversing previous hesitations.

At the local scale, students and parents significantly shifted their preferences. Many who had planned to study in Russia chose to remain in Kazakhstan due to safety concerns.

The geopolitical crisis created new opportunities:

• Growth in inbound international students

• Increased global partnerships

• Opening of branch campuses (e.g., British, American, Korean institutions)

• Enhanced institutional prestige and competition

Kazakhstan’s relative political stability and government co-financing mechanisms made it attractive for foreign institutions seeking new markets.

Despite strong political will, the study identifies several challenges:

• Limited institutional autonomy

• Bureaucratic rigidity

• Outdated infrastructure in regional universities

• Faculty training gaps

• Linguistic inequalities linked to rapid expansion of English-medium programmes

The rapid push toward internationalisation risks reinforcing socio-economic inequalities, as students from privileged backgrounds are better positioned to benefit from English-language opportunities.

The study demonstrates that internationalisation is no longer merely an academic reform strategy it is a geopolitical instrument.

Kazakhstan’s case shows how higher education systems can become:

• Tools of soft power

• Sites of geopolitical contestation

• Instruments for regional repositioning

However, sustainable transformation requires institutional capacity-building, faculty development, and careful attention to equity and linguistic policy.

This research contributes to the emerging literature on the “new geopolitics of higher education” by:

• Applying the SAIOS framework to Central Asia

• Providing empirical evidence from a conflict-affected regional context

• Expanding understanding of how internationalisation strategies are reshaped by military conflict