Why aren't Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan just one country? You could possibly even throw in Azerbaijan

>the US never interfered with Iranian/Afghan government at all
im done with these propaganda eating shills

Persians and Afghans haven't leaved under a single polity for centuries. The countries are big mixes of various ethnic groups. The countries do have ethnic groups that share some linguistic and cultural similarities but the social and cultural lives are a far distance apart from each-other in terms of modernity. Not to mention the religious difference and the geographic obstacles.

Basically its like saying why aren't Poles and Russians one country or Spaniards and Walloons.

Nah not really an excuse. For example even in Safavid and Afrashid eras, even the Georgians were seen as being as intrinsically part of the Iranian sphere as much as Shiraz or Tabriz were.

Afghanistan's largest ethnic groups are all Iranian, speak Persian (Dari dialect), and are culturally and historically linked for thousands of years. If there's a union Afghanistan, Iran, and Tajikistan, it'd work out. And as far as the last union, that was under the Afrashids with Nader Shah's rule. Relatively speaking, 200 years or so recent.

And Poles and Russians are nowhere as closely related as Iranians are with each other.

>Nah not really an excuse. For example even in Safavid and Afrashid eras, even the Georgians were seen as being as intrinsically part of the Iranian sphere as much as Shiraz or Tabriz were.

And then their empire declined. So the modern Iranian borders were set later. States don't just unite because they figure their cultures are similar. That doesn't happen.

They do unite however when they come from the same ethnic groups. I'm not saying it'll will happen any time soon but I'm saying the possibility is certainly likely compared to other balkanized shit being thrown in to wrench the concept of the idea in the first place.

fuccboi?

Stop talking like a retard. I bet you say goobergate as well you pseudo-rebellious hipster twat

Why isn't the whole world one country? We are all humans.

No

>Iran, Afghanistan
Cockblocked by Britain and Russia back in the day.

>and Russia
Nope.

pan-Islamic nationalism isn't a thing.

Shit, the turks don't WANT to be part of a pan-islamic state. Neither do the Jordanians, Kurds or Afghanis. And the Iranians are Persian, not Arabs.

Pan-Arabism is a concept that lived and died in the 70's and ultimately got nowhere because instead we got despots passing power down through their kids. For instance; Bashar Al-Asad & Nasser both inherited their 'democracies'; and wanted nothing to do with the other.

I mean, who the fuck could even THINK this is right
>Sunni Kingdoms that fund Al-Qaeda
>Shi'ite Republic that funds Hezbolah
>All fucking with eachother's internal affairs

Forget the west. Forget colonialism altogether. The Ottoman empire (and their predecessor Calpihs) and the Persian empire were completely at odds for the time they were both present.

It would be like saying that; as everyone in Europe is of a Latin or Germanic culture and we're mostly christians, that we should aspire to reform the Roman Empire.

No. You are a dumpass :-DDD

>t. triggered Middle-Eastern studies major

Afghan here.

First of all, Afghanistan biggest ethnic group are the Pashtuns. They are the ones who've been running the country for most of its history (since the Hotaki dynasty, pretty much) and they have pretty much nothing in common with Iranians.

First of all, Pashtuns are Sunni and Iranians are Shia, don't underestimate the importance of this. It's a major point. Secondly, a Pashtun wouldn't feel a linguistic connection with an Iranian at all as Persian and Pashto (the Pashtun language) aren't even remotely mutually intelligible. Yes, most of the country is able to speak Persian as it's the lingua franca, but that doesn't mean much I think.

The second largest and most important ethnic group are the Tajik people, who are Afghans whose native language is Persian. They are still Sunni, but at least the linguistic connection makes them closer to Iranians. They make up just a quarter of the Afghan population though.

The third largest ethnic group are the Hazara people, basically Turco-Mongol people who speak Persian now and took up Shia Islam. Mostly marginalized in their history.

Other than that you have a mixture of various types of Turks (Uzbeks, Turkmens) and the Baluch.

There's not enough common ground with Iran. The religious difference is too big. And the vast majority of Afghans have a negative opinion about Iranians, and vice versa even more.

Khuzestan is largely shia

Persians are Iranians, not all Iranians are Persians though.

>Afghan here.
>Pashtuns are Sunn and Iranians are Shia.
You are Iranian too.

>And the vast majority of Afghans have a negative about Iranians, and vice versa even more.
That's because my Afghan cousin, your country has largely allowed the Taliban historically to bomb and assassinate Iranian officials and act as a proxy state for Pakistan who endorses Kurdish terrorists and Balouchi as well as Khuzestani Arab separtists. And even then during the Soviet invasion and civil war afterwards, Afghans kept migrating and sending refugees into Iran.

>The independence of Iran and Afghanistan were never interfered with by colonial powers.
>what is the Great Game

Are you seriously this clueless?

To a certain extent with Iran, he's not completely wrong there. It managed to retained its authority and sovereignty in a similar way Japan did when it was forced to open its doors to the rest of the world.

I don't really care for nationalism, I'd rather side with Iran than with Pakistan, and a stable non-theocratic Iran would be great for Afghanistan.

We were the same people for centuries and many great Persians were born in current Afghanistan

>implying Afghanistan sizing with Pakistan
Nigga they fucking hate Pakistan

I know, I'm Afghan, but Pakistan has an insane amount of influence over Afghanistan to be fair, which is very negative.

India is Afghanistan's greatest ally tBH

>Oman
>Sunni

Pick one

Pashtun? Can you speaking any of the languages?

په دواړو پښتو او درۍ خبري کولای سم
میتونم به هردو فارسی و پشتو حرف بزنم

Terrible idea. All three countries are way too different. Anyway no one wants to be lumped together with the least developed country outside of Africa

Iran is the heir of Qajar Empire and Afghanistan the heir of the Durrani Empire. Ultimately, of course, since both have evolved and suffered a lot since then.

Those two empires were both result of the fall of the brief empire of Nadir Shah (in turn result of the fall of the Safavids) but they were formed by very different dynasties from very different origins that wielded very different political and religious ideologies. Considering nationalism became very strong in the 19th century, even in those parts of the world, the two empires that ruled this two countries are very important (not necessarily in a good way) to undertsand iranian and afghan identities.

Tajikistan is just an arbitrary state result of Russian occupation, and it's a meme country like his turkic cousins. Samarkand is a tajik city but it's in Uzbekistan, enough said.

Thanks doc

It has nothing to do so much with nationalism then I simply have a fervent belief that for all Iranians to truly prosper and grow, all Iranian nations should be united together into a single stable nation-state.

And Pakistan is garbage tier.

Qajars are shit. Rather have the Pahlavis then fucks who win wars and still concede territory, money, and manpower to perfidious Russians. And the Tajiks are basically colonial Persians, nigger.

>Qajars are shit.

They do. This doesn't contradict anything I said, though. In fact I implied they're shit, if you read carefully.

>And the Tajiks are basically colonial Persians, nigger.
>colonial
Iranians have been in the area for longer than anybody else in the area. They're not colonial at all, they just don't speak sogdian for the same reason nobody talks median in Hamedan. If there's someone "colonial" in ex-soviet central asia is everybody else, uzbeks, turkmens, etc.

I wasn't referring to Tajikis as "colonials" in the sense they are recent. I was referring to the sense that Tajiks are Persians who settled outside of the traditional Persian homeland in Greater Iran/Khorasan. They are the same as ethnic Persians.

>Medians
Not really relevant to what I was saying.