Population, millitary, etc etc - so like Iran can't be the sole, unchallenged, monopolized leader, there'll be a competitionHard to materialize. Iran is hesitant to recognize Taliban, just like most countries in the world.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, it seems that there are only two options: 1- Taliban (who pretends they have changed but we are not sure of that yet and we are seeing how things will develop in future), 2- A US-installed puppet regime that cannot get close to Iran and will be brainwashed to hate Iran. Both options are bad for Iran at the moment.
As for Pakistan, that's not likely either. For example, the Iran-Pakistan pipeline never materialized even though it was in the interest of Pakistan as well. Iran can actually bring that case to the UN court of arbitration but it is not doing so for geopolitical reasons at the moment. I honestly do not think this barter thing would work either. If history is any indication for predicting future, we have a better chance at developing our economic ties with Taliban than Pakistan in my opinion.
Why? What other country besides Iran can be the most dominant one among Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc.?
Even a heavily sanctioned Iran is still in a better form that all those countries in the list with more regional influence.
Ironically, a Persian nationalist would prefer to add countries like Republic of Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq to the list. It's ironic, but true. Historically, we have more often wanted to increase our influence towards our western borders than our eastern borders.
It was a weird concept that made little sense to me in practical terms like I stopped in the end so honestly I would rather not even waste time discussing it now...
When you can talk about more important, practical stuff
Why waste time discussing fictitious things? Am I right?