You seem to have convinced yourself that all the countries that you name think that Pakistan is an indispensable and positive force wrt to Afghanistan. That is not so.
First of all some of the countries notably Russia have not forgotten the previous role essayed by Pakistan. But the most important reality is that Pakistan today has neither the Military or Economic clout that it did in Afghanistan in the past. Add to this the fact that Taliban is a much more nebulous quantity and much is less controllable by Pakistan than ever before. Add to that, the new Shia Sunni upheaval in the ME. That will suddenly bring Iran to center-stage in the region than ever before. The rapprochemont between USA and Iran will get accelerated, just as Iran has always had reasonably good influence in the Kremlin.
So your inference that these countries have a greater confidence in Pakistan to stabilise Afghanistan is fallacious. In fact there is now a greater concern; that will Pakistan be able to withstand the 'blow-back' from an unstable Afghanistan, or implode under the strain.
Now all these countries see Pakistan as the "buffer" that should absorb the shock-waves that will emanate out of Afghanistan. That has been the point that has been discussed repeatedly at the numerous Trilaterals and Multilaterals that have been discussing Afghanistan in the last few years.
In fact you will now see Iran being invested with a greater regional role by these very same countries. While in respect to Pakistan the greater mood is of concern rather than of confidence.
Uh, no. That's completely wrong, and nothing more than your own personal narrative, that doesn't fit reality. Don't connect dots that have nothing to do with each other.
Russia isn't dumb, of course they remember what Pakistan did in Afghanistan against the Soviets, which is precisely why Russia is looking towards Pakistan. The Russians realize that Pakistan is the only country with any sort of clout in Afghanistan, no other country comes even close to the level of influence that Pakistan has in Afghanistan, not even the US.
The Pakistani establishment never really had much control over the Taliban, ever, what Pakistan had was influence, that's not the same thing as control. That influence still exists within the Afghan Taliban senior leadership, that is why the Afghans and the Americans have used Pakistan to kick start negotiations with the Taliban. Do you even know why the last Bonn conference was considered such a failure? It's because Pakistan boycotted the event.
The so-called Shia-Sunni upheaval in the ME is only centered around Syria and Iraq, in fact, it's mostly contained there. Lebanon has been surprisingly resilient against this, otherwise, it would be the third country. No one expects any other country to go through this, so your so called upheaval in the middle east, is not as big as you make it out to be. It also have very little to do with Pakistan, don't try and connect these two dots, when they have nothing to do with each other. ISIS has nothing to do with the conflict in Afghanistan, and north-west Pakistan.
The rapprochement with Iran isn't going to change much, there is no evidence to suggest that the US and Iran are going to reverse their hostility completely. Remember, this isn't the first time they've held diplomatic and military talks; when 9/11 occurred, it was the Iranians that helped the Americans talk to the Northern Alliance, and it was the Iranians that helped set up the first Bonn conference. Where did that go? Nowhere. The relationship, over all, didn't change. It was a simple matter of overlapping interests, just like currently with Iraq. Your idea that the US will use Iran to replace Pakistan in Afghanistan is nothing more than a dream.
All this is especially true, considering that with the US leaving Afghanistan, the northern exit routes have become less reliable for the US, considering that the Russians have a renewed hostility with the US. This means that Pakistan is the only safe route out of Afghanistan available to NATO and US troops in Afghanistan, the Americans are certainly not going to use Iran as an exit route.
Your idea that Pakistan is not important, when there is increasing evidence that Pakistan has regained renewed importance in the region, shows that what you said is a fallacy. While there are worries that Pakistan may end up having to deal with a spill over of violence, when the US leaves, all parties have agreed that this must be contained in Afghanistan. Why do you think the US has pressed for Pakistan to deal with the NWA militants? It's not just because the Americans want militant sanctuaries in NWA to disappear, it's also because the US is afraid that their exit may embolden the militants in Pakistan, which may lead to destabilization in Pakistan; That's being taken care of though. The US's main concern is to make sure that Afghanistan remains stable, and there is literally no other country that can have such a stabilizing effect on Afghanistan, that Pakistan can have. This is why the US is trying to get both Pakistan and Afghanistan to end their hostilities.
Your entire argument is a misrepresentation of the reality on the ground and geopolitical situation going on.
You need to ponder why US, China and now Russia want to arm Pakistan - if you figure out why you have the reason why Pakistan exists or why it's crucial for the region (Af Pak and as an extension Central Asia).
A whole lot of crap (taliban, chechens, uzbeks, tajiks) passes through that region now and in history - they need someone to funnel that crap to acceptable limits so that someone can end it in its final destination.
So, in other words, Pakistan is indispensable, which is exactly what I've been saying. I'm glad we agree on something, no matter how rare it is.
