Historically Afghanistan did have temporarily periods of "unity" under a strong man. In the 1700's they actually had significant power in their region under the Durrani Empire and there was a later dominant kingdom under the same family in the 20th century that ruled for 40-50 years before communist revolt happened because said kingdom kinda were against many things Afghani tribes stood up for and were seen as foreigners due to being basically pakistan people. Of which may make the nature of the fallen pakistan lead to a rather war filled, constantly shifting southern border due to the Pashtuns.
I also noticed these periods of unity never ever last [usually ending not long after the big man dies] which is not really a problem to me due to this RP's pace and I was going to have lots of problems for Afghanistan to begin with anyways.
Still I think that saying that Afghanistan will always be warlords and always was really over simplifies the situation. It's more like a oscillation of tribal warfare and lose unity from what I can tell. There's also the division between the major historical trade centers and the hill people. I don't see why a more stable Afghanistan in 2039 is impossible when it could just be a reactively more stable phase for the region.
Dinh AaronMk said
As well, foreign intervention and influence in the would likely upset conservatives, or lead to the nation not being as free from things as you'd like. And the Chinese love to pump money into things.
Thing is, I would be fine with that since China currently is like a massive NPC and the conditions I have in the stable regions would work just as well if China ran those corps. There'd still be ongoing insurrection problems and there still would be warlords. Only difference being there is more Chinese folk and military presence.
However, I find it a bit hard to see how they'd be able to have corps rule parts of Afghanistan when they can't even hold their own territories.
