Ramifications of a stable Afghanistan

[Mirza Khan]

So, lets say that either Muhammad Zahir Shah or Muhammad Daoud Khan escape being couped (Zahir Shah by Daoud, Daoud by the Communists), and the Soviet intervention is thus butterflied. Afghanistan remains a poor, but reasonably stable country that most Americans have never heard of. My question is, what would the effects of No Afghan War in the 1980's be? Specifically:

The "jihad" in Afghanistan during the 1980's was immensely important in crystalization of radical Sunni Islam. It became a cause celebre in much of the Arab world, and many Islamic terrorist groups got their start there, and were inspired by the defeat of the "infidel" Soviets. IHMO without the Afghan war serving to bring every fundamentalist crazy in the Muslim world together and give them military experience, radical Islam would be much less important than OTL, and primarily focused on Palestine (the rise of Hamas was mostly driven by local conditions which probably won't change in this TL). Palestine, while important to many Arabs, would nevertheless probably not have attracted all the international recruits that Afghanistan did, so again, its unlikely we'd see anything like al-Qaida (which got its start as an organization to funnel Arab recruits and American weapons into Afghanistan), and thus no 9/11 and War on Terror.

Also, many Pashtoons in Afghanistan want to break away Pashtoon-majority parts of Pakistan (specifically, the Northwest Frontier Province, the Federally Administered Tribal areas and the northern half of-or if you have a real loony, the entirety of-Baluchistan province*) and merge them into a "Greater Afghanistan". Even the government of Afghanistan used to beat this drum in the 1950's and 1960's, to the detrement of relations with Pakistan. Being on the rocks with Pakistan typically forced Afghanistan to make nice with India. Pakistan supported the Taliban in the 1990's (and many would argue, continues to support them now) to ensure that the regime in Kabul is not overly hostile to Pakistan like it was in the past (and even today-the relationship between Karzai and Pakistan hasn't always been smooth)
So my question-in light of the above, how would a stable Afghanistan affect the Indo-Pakistani confrontations of the late 1990's-early 2000's? Would a potential Indian ally on its northern border make Pakistan less belicose (or more belicose)?

Also, I've heard that the massive resource drain of the Afghan war contributed to the fall of the USSR-is there any truth to this? Would a USSR that didn't have to fight in Afghanistan last longer than OTL?

*Map. The Northwest Frontier province is 2, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas are 6, and Baluchistan is 1

[Kerblo]

No Afghan War? Maybe a longer lasting Soviet Union. It was already in bad shape coming into the war though. I can't imagine it surviving past the mid 90s.

9/11 would probably still happen. The attackers were mostly Saudi and none of them were Afghani. Al Qaeda may not be formed but there were plenty of Muslims who didn't like Israel or the US backed dictatorship in Saudi Arabia.

[Riain]

I'd think 9/11 in its OTL form would be butterflown away, which is crucial because it was such a shock in its uniqueness. If it had been any other sort of conventional, even if more devastating than usual, terror attack I can't see the GWOT arising from it, and that's some serious consequences for our time.

[Bearcat]

There would likely still be an AQ-type group based out of Saudi Arabia, perhaps even fronted by Osama bin-Laden. OBL's big gripe with America was the presence of US forces in SA during and after Iraq I. Assuming nothing about Iraq and Saddam's stupidity gets butterflied, Desert Storm still happens and we get blowback.

BUT - without Afghanistan, OBL doesn't have the network of old Jihadis or the experience to become the gravitational center of the Jihadi universe. Things are much more fragmented and non-cohesive, and any attacks are more modest. The US largely continues to ignore the problem (as it did the attacks on the Cole, WTC #1, wtc.). We live in a world with no Patriot Act and no WoT.

BUT - the meme of flying a jetliner into a building exists in fiction (Thank you, Tom Clancy) and sooner or later, some bright fellow is going to get someone to try it. Probably only one (OBL was a little ostentatious) on the first attack. Shocking but not quite like 9-11.

Moscow (Chechnya)? Tel Aviv? Still US? Europe? No way to predict.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Originally Posted by Mirza Khan

So, lets say that either Muhammad Zahir Shah or Muhammad Daoud Khan escape being couped (Zahir Shah by Daoud, Daoud by the Communists), and the Soviet intervention is thus butterflied. Afghanistan remains a poor, but reasonably stable country that most Americans have never heard of.

The problem is that Afghanistan was never 'stable', it's been a pot of feuding warlords for something like a millenium.

In fact, under the Taliban, it was probably more 'stable' than before or after.

I think 'stability' is less what you want than 'mediocrity' or something...

[yourworstnightmare]

Afghanistan wasn't stable before. Have pretty much never been stable.

[Mirza Khan]

Originally Posted by Dathi THorfinnsson

The problem is that Afghanistan was never 'stable', it's been a pot of feuding warlords for something like a millenium.

In fact, under the Taliban, it was probably more 'stable' than before or after.

I think 'stability' is less what you want than 'mediocrity' or something...

I don't know, most Middle Eastern countries can be said to have been "a pot of feuding warlords for a millenium", and most have "tribal" groups. IHMO, its certainly possible-if you eliminate the Soviet invasion* and the resulting warlordisation of the country-to have an Afghanistan at least on the level of Yemen, and quite possibly better off than that. It will still be poor, tribes will have a lot of power especially in rural areas (but then again, this is the case in a lot of Middle Eastern countries), but it won't spend the 1990's as a failed state ruled by utterly insane fundamentalists.

*Actually, I don't know if you even have to go that far. When the Soviets invaded, they decided the current Communist dictator, Hafizullah Amin, was too weak to deal with the insurgency, and thus stormed the presidential palace, killed him, and installed a puppet with no real power base. Its interesting to think how the 1980's would have gone had Amin been left in place.

[NothingNow]

Originally Posted by Dathi THorfinnsson

The problem is that Afghanistan was never 'stable', it's been a pot of feuding warlords for something like a millenium.

Well, the Barakzai Dynasty did a pretty good job of Keeping everyone in line, and IIRC the Soviet response to both coups was basically "Oh Crap."