Notwithstanding, any analysis in English focusing on Central Eurasia encounters a predominant problem of transliteration. In the presentation of names I have endeavored to be consistent with principles where necessary. Linguistic and orthographic forms have been caught up in the assertion of new identities in the former Soviet Union, and this compounds the problem of transliteration. I have tried to be as sensitive as possible with regard to forms of names themselves. As a basis for transliterating, in some cases I have used the indigenous forms, and in some cases I have used the Russianized version.
Names of countries are symbolically important.
In Central Asia, Kazakhstan became Kazakstan, replacing the kh with k . Somewhat later the US government followed Kazakstan s practice in dropping the kh sound. I spell the name Uzbekiston with an initial u, instead of following the Allworth system which uses the spelling zbekiston, and by doing so keep it in the same place in alphabetical order, yet also spelling it with a final o , in order to defer to the native Uzbek pronunciation of the word. My approach, in short, seeks communication over aesthetics of symbol and style. Second, words in Islamic use stemming in large part from Arabic or Iranian sources are italicized in a standard transliteration from the Arabic.