---

US Defeat in Iran will lead to the unification of the Persian-Sphere

by Richard Steinhardt

Let us set aside, now and forever, the ridiculous idea of a Greater Israel. The United States and Europe are not powerful enough to colonise more of North Africa and West Asia or eliminate its inhabitants through their Israeli proxy. They did manage this in the Americas and Australia, but Europe was never powerful enough to permanently colonise the Middle East or North Africa. Millions of French and Spaniards were expelled at great cost of life from Algeria and Morocco. The story of Europe in North Africa, the Middle East, and the Gulf is one of exploitation, disruption, destruction, and manipulation—but never of true conquest, despite how close these regions are to Europe.

However, Iran’s defeat of the United States and its proxies could indeed lead to the regional integration within the Persian-sphere. This is a realistic possibility. Certainly, the overheated minds of military and geopolitical strategists in the U.S. and Israeli governments are deeply concerned with this prospect and try to prevent it. Just as they have long struggled against Pan-American, Pan-Arab, Pan-Asian, and Pan-African unity. The defeat of the USA in the region could also lead to the resurgence of pan-Arabism.

It makes strategic sense for Iran and other central Asian countries to unite. Together they could secure vital routes free from disruptions (such as sanctions on Chabahar) and transform the region into a self-sufficient hub comparable to India in scale. Benefits would include energy security for all and reduced dependency on unreliable neighbours like Pakistan or Russia.

The idea of establishing or reunifying a “Greater Khorasan” (خراسان بزرگ in Persian/Dari, Хуросони Бузург in Tajik, لوی خراسان in Pashto) has been discussed in various Iranian-language contexts. These conversations include historical analyses, political discourse, expressions of nationalist sentiment, and ideas from pan-Islamism.

The discussions draw on the region’s shared Persianate and Muslim heritage, a shared cultural unity, and lament the historical fragmentation following the opportunistic invasion by Alexander the Great and colonial divisions imposed by the Russian Empire and Britain.

Proposals for this future Persian-Sphere could see, in particular, a revived unified nation or federation encompassing modern Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan.

Under a reunified Greater Khorasan, with a population of around 200 million people, the region could reacquire a strong cohesive cultural identity and transcend current authoritarian or tribal governance structures in Turkmenistan (a hereditary dictatorship), Uzbekistan (authoritarian), Tajikistan (a presidential dictatorship), and Afghanistan (tribal absolutism).

The countries share deep Persian cultural imprints. Persian and its variants, Dari and Tajik, remains the prestige language and lingua franca in Afghanistan and Tajikistan, with significant influence in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan through literature, poetry, and historical administration.

Historically, Greater Khorasan refers to a vast region that even extended into Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan at various times. This area was a core part of ancient Persian empires, including the Achaemenid (6th–4th centuries BCE) and Sasanian (3rd–7th centuries CE) periods, serving as a cultural and administrative hub.

Leave aside the responses of Türkiye, Pakistan, India, and the Russian Federation, none of whom would welcome this development. When (not if) Iran defeats the United States and overthrows its aggressive proxies in the region, as increasingly seems likely, we may witness the natural creation of a new safe space for Iran: a new Greater Khorasan. This region would be larger than India, though with only a fraction of its population.

The subject of a safe space for Iran is vital, with the US use of proxies like the Kurds to try and destabilise and control Iran a symptom of the underlying problem of a lack of regional strength and cohesiveness.

The political systems in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan function as corrupt family or authoritarian regimes, where ruling elites act in their own interests rather than in those of their people. The populations have no say in the alliances their dictatorships form with the United States.

The United States recently hosted the leaders of all five Central Asian states, including Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, at a “C5+1” summit. The stated goals were (here one should laugh up one’s sleeve) according to US representatives, to “strengthen our economic partnerships, improve our security cooperation, and expand our overall bonds.” This high-level engagement with countries that share borders with or are near Iran signals Washington’s intent to build influence in this strategically vital neighbourhood. The U.S. has shown particular interest in the region’s critical minerals and in integrating these states into its network of aggressive proxies.

Despite its official UN-recognised status of “permanent neutrality,” the dictatorship in Turkmenistan was the first Central Asian government to join NATO’s so-called ‘Partnership for Peace’ program. Recent visits by high-level U.S. military officials, including the Secretary of the Army, suggest that this cooperation is linked to pressure on Iran. Turkmenistan shares a roughly 1,150-kilometre border with Iran, and there is significant military cooperation between the Turkmenistan and the USA.

The Prospect of a Greater Khorasan

Overall, the concept of Greater Khorasan is actively discussed online across all Iranian communities—secular, royalist, and Islamic— even in the Iranian media, with a view to overcoming external aggression for regional benefit. This discussion is not limited to Iran.

Pooled resources in a unified Khorasan could create powerful synergies: Iran’s oil and gas expertise could help Turkmenistan extract and process and use vast gas reserves, Uzbekistan’s cotton and uranium, Tajikistan’s hydropower potential, and Afghanistan’s untapped minerals such as lithium and rare earths. The combined GDP would be healthy. Assuming the USA or Israel doesn’t deop nuclear bombs on Iran.

There will be many future benefits, just as there will be with BRICS on a broader more international scale. Economically, the countries of the Persian-Sphere already have ties with Iran that could be amplified under integration. Iran ranks as a key trading partner: it is Turkmenistan’s 8th-largest partner, with trade reaching $340 million in 2024, focused on gas and transit; Tajikistan’s 7th-largest, with $121 million in trade—doubled since 2020 through energy and goods; and has agreements with Uzbekistan to reach $1 billion (up from $860 million), emphasising agriculture, technology, and counterterrorism cooperation. Afghanistan’s trade with Iran is substantial—over $500 million in energy and goods—while Central Asian exports to Iran include minerals and cotton, with Iran providing manufactured items and oil products. Ports like Chabahar provide landlocked states access to the Indian Ocean.

The combined GDP of this region would exceed $600 billion, forming a market larger than many emerging economies. Reduced trade barriers would foster intra-regional commerce and attract investment from allied powers like China and Russia. This new central Asian bloc would bypass Western financial systems, and form a strong BRICS pillar, enhancing resilience against external pressure, and benefit all by redistributing wealth from energy exports to infrastructure and social programs, potentially alleviating poverty in Afghanistan and Tajikistan.

Future infrastructure ties offer the strongest case for integration. Iran is the gateway for Central Asia. Rail, road, and sea routes through or via Iran reduce transit times by 7 to 8 days and distances by around 900 kilometres, compared to northern routes that bypass Iran. Here we are assuming the USA and it’s unmitigatedly evil and genocidal proxy, Israel, leave enough of Iran’s infrastructure intact after they are themselves defeated.

In a unified Greater Khorasan, seamless infrastructure could eliminate borders and enable mega-projects such as extended gas pipelines, unified power grids, and high-speed rail lines connecting Tehran to Tashkent or Kabul. This would cut costs, boost trade volumes. A larger regional country or federation could also negotiate more effectively with China on Belt and Road extensions or with Russia on Eurasian links.

The defeat of the United States and its allies and proxies in Western and Central Asia and North Africa suggest that, in addition to many other consequences, one of the most important is that we are heading toward the creation of a Khorasan Federation or a Greater Khorasan and we should welcome this. At the same time, we should hope fervently that Iran continues to reform, and that it advances toward becoming a more tolerant, inclusive, and representative society in the process.

Certainly, at the moment, with a secular socially liberal mindset, although we can still feel great solidarity with the Iranians under attack from US/Western neo-imperialism and want the best for Iran and the region, we still cavil at the murderous social conservatism of the regime, its persecution of minorities and disrespect for basic freedoms.

---

Richard Steinhardt is a committed socialist and a radical humanist and has published in the Morning Star and a variety of other communist and socialist publications. He believes that human conscience and understanding should always precede dogma and deterministic formulas posturing as ‘social science’.