The Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB), formed between 1000 and 250 Ma, is the result of accretion of various geological features such as island arcs, ophiolites, oceanic islands, seamounts, accretionary wedges, oceanic plateaux, and microcontinents. This process is comparable to that of the circum-Pacific Mesozoic–Cenozoic accretionary orogens. Palaeomagnetic and palaeofloral data suggest that early accretion occurred when Baltica and Siberia were separated by a wide ocean. Island arcs and Precambrian microcontinents accreted to the active margins of the two continents or amalgamated in an oceanic setting, forming a huge accretionary collage. The Palaeo-Asian Ocean closed in the Permian with the formation of the Solonker suture. The paper evaluates contrasting tectonic models for the evolution of the orogenic belt. Current data suggest that an archipelago-type (Indonesian) model is more viable than the one- or three-arc Kipchak model. Diagnostic features of ridge–trench interaction are present in the Central Asian orogen, offering a promising perspective for future investigations. Accretionary orogens have been forming throughout the geological record, with the best-known modern examples being in Japan, Alaska, Indonesia, and the Caribbean. The CAOB extends from the Urals to the Pacific and from the Siberian and East European (Baltica) cratons to the North China (Sino-Korean) and Tarim cratons. It began its growth at c. 1.0 Ga and continued to c. 250 Ma. Contrasting models include the Kipchak model, which suggests a single main island arc, and the archipelago-type model, which emphasizes collision and metallogenesis. Petrochemical and isotopic data support the archipelago-type model. The paper presents a review of the geology of the CAOB, evaluates published tectonic models, and suggests new ideas for the accretionary development. The Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean is excluded as it is closed in the Jurassic-Cretaceous. The paper discusses the tectonic evolution of the CAOB, including the rifting of the Siberian margin, the formation of the Tuva-Mongolian microcontinent, early subduction-accretion, and the collision of Siberia and Baltica. The paper also discusses the palaeo-positions of Siberia and Baltica in the late Vendian and Cambrian, the tectonic evolution from 542 to 250 Ma, and the collision of the Kazakhstan and Tarim continents. The paper concludes that the CAOB is a complex geological structure formed by the accretion of various geological features over a long period ofThe Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB), formed between 1000 and 250 Ma, is the result of accretion of various geological features such as island arcs, ophiolites, oceanic islands, seamounts, accretionary wedges, oceanic plateaux, and microcontinents. This process is comparable to that of the circum-Pacific Mesozoic–Cenozoic accretionary orogens. Palaeomagnetic and palaeofloral data suggest that early accretion occurred when Baltica and Siberia were separated by a wide ocean. Island arcs and Precambrian microcontinents accreted to the active margins of the two continents or amalgamated in an oceanic setting, forming a huge accretionary collage. The Palaeo-Asian Ocean closed in the Permian with the formation of the Solonker suture. The paper evaluates contrasting tectonic models for the evolution of the orogenic belt. Current data suggest that an archipelago-type (Indonesian) model is more viable than the one- or three-arc Kipchak model. Diagnostic features of ridge–trench interaction are present in the Central Asian orogen, offering a promising perspective for future investigations. Accretionary orogens have been forming throughout the geological record, with the best-known modern examples being in Japan, Alaska, Indonesia, and the Caribbean. The CAOB extends from the Urals to the Pacific and from the Siberian and East European (Baltica) cratons to the North China (Sino-Korean) and Tarim cratons. It began its growth at c. 1.0 Ga and continued to c. 250 Ma. Contrasting models include the Kipchak model, which suggests a single main island arc, and the archipelago-type model, which emphasizes collision and metallogenesis. Petrochemical and isotopic data support the archipelago-type model. The paper presents a review of the geology of the CAOB, evaluates published tectonic models, and suggests new ideas for the accretionary development. The Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean is excluded as it is closed in the Jurassic-Cretaceous. The paper discusses the tectonic evolution of the CAOB, including the rifting of the Siberian margin, the formation of the Tuva-Mongolian microcontinent, early subduction-accretion, and the collision of Siberia and Baltica. The paper also discusses the palaeo-positions of Siberia and Baltica in the late Vendian and Cambrian, the tectonic evolution from 542 to 250 Ma, and the collision of the Kazakhstan and Tarim continents. The paper concludes that the CAOB is a complex geological structure formed by the accretion of various geological features over a long period of