August 11, 2022

Futurology of Afghanistan disintegration models

The disintegration of the country upon the armed competition of the conflicting forces that vie to form a central government is a likely scenario for the future of Afghanistan if futurology is anything to go by. Boosted by foreign intervention, the centrifugal force created by these forces can gain such a momentum that that the partition of Afghanistan in different geographical types could be imagined as the possible future of Afghanistan. It is this much certain that the disintegration of Afghanistan (if occurred) would be along ethnic-geographical lines. However, it seems that migrations will occur in order to fully adapt these lines to some types of disintegration.

Futurology introduces three types of futures: "possible futures", which examines the major forms of futures ahead, "probable futures", which introduce futures with stronger possibility of occurrence, and “desirable futures" "which introduces advantageous versions from the pool of possible futures. Given that the partition of Afghanistan would by no means serve the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran, there is no favorable future in this report for this country. Instead, it identifies five likely scenarios as possible futures.

1. Panjshir Enclave Model:

Enclave is one of the geopolitical concepts to define the status of an independent political entity in another independent political unit. Panjshir Valley boasts geographical features which render its military takeover punishing bordering on impossible. In the event of a political disagreement between Ahmad Massoud and the Taliban, the Panjshir enclave model could be an option for dividing Afghanistan into two independent regions under the political centrality of the Panjshir Valley and Kabul.

In case of formation of Panjshir enclave, painful access to Panjshir coupled with supplies challenges for Massoud forces could drive farther Afghanistan partition to the Northern provinces including Badakhshan with the pressure of Massoud forces to connect to Tajikistan and secure a procurement route from the latter.

This model would have the support of the United States and the European Union thanks to Ahmad Massoud's warm relations with France and the green light of this country. In contrast, this plan will face a stern opposition by China and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Should Panjshir enclave model be realized, China will lose the strategic option of the Kashgar-Wakhan-Kabul corridor, helping Pakistan re-gain its previous strategic position in Beijing's foreign policy. This puts Pakistan in a good strategic position; in addition to the Taliban rule in Afghanistan and the massive sway of Islamabad over Kabul, the "One Way One Belt" project will be revived. Russia's view of the Panjshir internal model is highly dependent on the Moscow-Dushanbe agreement on developments in Afghanistan. Certainly, this model brings Tajikistan a much heavier strategic weight in the region, giving this country a policy opportunity between the West and Russia.

2. Bernard Levy model:

For Frenchman Bernard Levy, democracy should be imposed by war on South and West Asia and thus he is on the same page with the Strauss Neo-cons of the United States. Levy has a plan to break up the region, which has been around since 2003, securing the United States’ backing in the process. He is a supporter of Ahmad Massoud and recently said about him that the resistance campaign of Ahmad Massoud could be bolstered with the help of France to protect our territory from barbarism and attack on Europe, especially attack on major cities in France.

In this model, Sistan and Baluchestan Province of Iran, Balochistan Province of Pakistan and Nimroz, Helmand and Kandahar Provinces form the political entity of "Balochistan". The other provinces of Afghanistan are also divided into three political units: "Pakistan", "Afghanistan" and "Pashtunistan".

None of Afghanistan's neighbors agree on Bernard Levy's model, and the United States does not seem to be keen on implementing the plan; because the division of the region at the moment, given Islamabad's services to the United States, is not in Washington's short- and medium-term interests.

3. Greater Khorasan Model

In this model, the eastern border line of Iran will be completely divided into northeastern regions and will join the political entity of "Greater Khorasan" and the southeastern regions will join the political unit of "Baluchistan". Pakistan is completely disintegrated and divided into the political units of "Pashtunistan" (parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan), "Sindh", and the state of Punjab will probably form the political unit of "Punjab" or "Khalestan" by annexing Punjab to India. The "Balochistan" political unit will be formed by connecting the province of Balochistan and the province of Sistan and Baluchestan of Iran. The political unit of Greater Khorasan will also be created by annexing parts of Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran. Part of the consequences of the disintegration of the Greater Khorasan model will probably be the inception of an independent "Kashmir" political unit consisting of Gilgit-Baltistan, Skardu and the Free Kashmir of Pakistan as well as Jammu and Kashmir of India.

At the outbreak of the clashes between Panjshir and Kabul, the political forces supporting Ahmad Massoud, who have archaic tendencies to the concept of Greater Khorasan, tried to raise the issue of the division of Afghanistan in accordance with the Greater Khorasan model. This issue was met with the public opinion backlash. It will also not be politically welcomed as it poses a serious problem to the territorial integrity of northern Afghanistan. As a result, the Greater Khorasan model is practically not viable.

4. Pakistani model

In this model, which is called the Pakistani model due to its high popularity for Islamabad, the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan are fully annexed to Pakistan and the country will maintain its territorial integrity. The Hazarastan political unit will be formed inside Afghanistan, and the northern regions of Afghanistan will be divided between Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.


The Pakistani model could be valid, at least on paper in view od the extensive consultations between Islamabad-Dushanbe and Islamabad-Tashkent on Afghanistan and the two northern neighbors benefiting from the plan. It appears that should the three countries proceed to venture into the disintegration of Afghanistan, they will receive the United States support since the disintegration of Afghanistan according to this model will eventually lead to the disintegration of the whole region equal to the super-disintegration model that will be described below.

5. Super-disintegration model

The super-disintegration model extends beyond the subcontinent to include China's Xinjiang and Tibet provinces. Xinjiang would become independent as the "Turkestan" or "East Turkestan" political entity, and Tibet will form the "Tibetan" political entity by annexing the disputed state of Arunachal Pradesh of India. The complete disintegration of Pakistan and parts of Iran will take place in the same way as the Greater Khorasan model, except that the northeastern regions of Iran will form the political unit "Hazaristan" by connecting the northwestern and western parts of Afghanistan and the Kashmir regions under Chinese control such as the Depsang plains. Political "Kashmir" will be annexed. The northern regions of Afghanistan will also be divided between Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.

As noted about the Pakistani model, the United States considers its preferred disintegration plan to be a super-disintegration model and, given the region's capabilities, including ethnic-racial conflicts, religious differences, territorial claims, informal borders, and militarized tendencies of governmental and non-governmental actors. Washington will support any disintegration plan in the region, as these plans could eventually lead to a super-disintegration plan.


The strategy of disintegration is always pursued by the United States in different parts of Asia because the disintegration of the region into smaller units will make it easier to control them. On the other hand, any model of disintegration in the Indian subcontinent can spread to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran and can not only activate terrorist-ethnic groups, but also lead to civil challenges and ethnic social conflicts through hostile media.

Among the futures outlined in this report, the Panjshir enclave model and the Pakistani model are among the possible future priorities, respectively. In the first model, the Islamic Republic of Iran is practically in front of Ahmad Massoud and in the second model is in front of Islamabad. In the case of Pakistan, the formation of this Pakistani model can easily be prevented with the help of regional mechanisms as well as security warnings and a wider connection with the "illegal" Taliban in Kabul. However, regarding the confrontation with Ahmad Massoud, it should be noted that more than diplomatic and even field confrontation with this group, media confrontation is very important in order to control and guide public opinion; Because with the help of the Western media and some internal currents, the Panjshir-Kabul duality has become a democracy-reaction duality.


Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

magnifier linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram