It's really hard for me to see basmachestvo succeeding, in part because of the divisions within the movement. Enver Pasha thought he could unite it, but in fact he divided it further.
Enver Pasha was a, well, difficult man. He was supposed to be aligned with the Emir of Bukhara and the Emir's chief lieutenant Ibrahim Bek. But he got carried away with his own importance, issuing decrees affecting the civil life of Eastern Bukhara without the Emir's consent, modestly signing himself "Commander in Chief of all the Islamic troops, son-in-law of the Caliph, [a reference to the fact that he had married the daughter of the Sultan prior to World War I] and representative of the Prophet." This raised the suspicions of the Emir, who was already displeased with the association between Enver and the "jadidists." (Jadidism was a "modernist" movement to which the Emir and other conservative Muslims were bitterly opposed.) The division between the jadidists and conservatives was only one of many divisions among the Basmachis. And this is one reason I am skeptical of the Basmachis' chances of success, even with foreign assistance.
See
https://books.google.com/books?id=YQHaAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA61 for an evaluation of Enver:
"Enver's venture to Central Asia exhibited a number of problems from the beginning. First of all, Enver had very little knowledge about the realities of the situation in Turkestan. His idealistic motives and apprehensions about his uneasy relations with the Russians, combined with the boldness of his entire career, gave way to his hasty involvement in an indigenous movement with very little insight and planning.120 This lack of information and understanding was clearly revealed when Enver tried to juxtapose his pan-Islamic and Turanian ideals to a resistance movement which had nothing to do with them. Even though religion played a very important role for the Basmachis, they were merely fighting against the oppressive policies of the Russians and had neither the power nor the intention of uniting the Islamic world. As for pan-Turkic ideals, 'The people knew little, and cared less, about Osmanli dreams of Central Asian hegemony, if such exist; certainly Pan-Turanism did not figure on the Basmachi programme, whether inspired by Enver or not'...
"Throughout his struggle in Central Asia, he was unable to arouse the support of the masses to his pan-Islamic and pan-- Turkic ideals. Nevertheless, he tried to co-ordinate and lead an indigenous struggle against the Russians with very limited means and even less insight. This would be Enver's last battle, concluded by his death on the battlefield."
Ironically, the British were reluctant to aid the Basmachi movement partly because thery shared the same delusion as Enver: that it was "pro-Turkish." It was in fact simply based on grievances against Soviet policy in Turkestan, and the Soviets could therefore defeat it by a combination of temporary concessions and repression. As I once wrote in soc.history.what-if: "by 1922 the New Economic Policy had begun, and that meant a resumption of private trade and an end to the forcible requisitioning of food and cotton that had done so much to arouse popular discontent. Temporary concessions on religious matters were also having a pacifying effect. Basmachestvo as a popular movement (as opposed to mere banditry) was a desperate reaction to bad policies by first the Tsarist government (the 1916 conscription decree) and then the Bolsheviks. Once those policies were abandoned, it had no hope of success, especially given the divisions among the Basmachis."
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/DYDvLGxj6DM/ib637tL8DdUJ
It's also hard to see other sources of foreign support for the Basmachis. Turkey? Attaturk repudiated pan-Turkic ambitions and tried to maintain good relations with the USSR. Persia? I doubt very much that Reza Khan (later Reza Shah) would help the Basmachis. Once the Soviets abandoned Kuchak Khan to his fate
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=339145 the future Shah wanted fairly good relations with the Soviets to counterbalance the British. Afghanistan? "The last several years of Amanullah's rule were the apex of Soviet influence in Afghanistan until the 1950s. The Soviet Union had the largest foreign colony in Kabul and initiated various small aid projects throughout the country during this period. The Soviet government also gave Amanullah thirteen military aircraft along with the necessary pilots and technicians..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=6pbIziLpG7cC&pg=PA47
Incidentally, the Russian General Staff officially claims that the USSR lost only 626 soldiers in eight years of struggle against basmachestvo.
https://www.facebook.com/CWIHP/posts/10150450616482612 The figure seemed suspiciously low to me until I noted that they *started* it in 1923. (Apparently all losses through 1922 are considered part of the Civil War--including the Soviet-Polish war of 1920.)