Specifying the instigator
Asking what conditions mark an insulator’s transition to an instigator, and whether post-2014 Afghanistan meets all of them.
Seeking PhD supervision · 2027 entry
Proposed PhD research
From insulator to instigator.
I’m seeking PhD supervision in International Relations, Security Studies or Politics, for full-time study from 2027. My project asks whether Afghanistan should be reclassified from an “insulator” to an “instigator” in Regional Security Complex Theory.
Central question
Has Afghanistan moved from an insulator to an instigator: a state whose security governance failure generates, amplifies and exports non-traditional security threats, such as terrorism, narcotics and refugee movements, into the neighbouring regional security complexes?
Sub-questions
A nascent security complex?
Asking whether shared threats from Afghanistan are drawing Pakistan, Iran, China, Russia and the Central Asian republics into a nascent regional security complex, whether it could mature into a full one, and what might stand in the way.
Great powers and inter-regional cooperation
Examining whether China and Russia act as socialising agents, and whether cooperation through the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure, the Moscow Format, the QCCM and the CSTO indicates a new security complex.
Beyond Afghanistan
Testing whether the same criteria distinguish Afghanistan from other insulator states, such as Turkey and Myanmar, and under what circumstances an insulator crosses that threshold.
Approach
This is a qualitative, theory-testing study using document analysis, process tracing and structured, focused comparison. I first specify four criteria that separate an instigator from an insulator: outward threats that stem from structural security governance failure rather than state policy; conflicts absorbed from surrounding regions and re-exported at greater scale; threats that cross two or more regional security complexes at once; and new inter-regional coordination built in direct response.
Post-2014 Afghanistan is the primary case, examined across three threat vectors: transnational militancy, narcotics and forced displacement. Turkey (2013 to 2016) and Myanmar (since 2021) serve as contrast cases that show where the criteria draw the line.
The second strand traces securitising moves in the declarations of the SCO, CSTO, Moscow Format and QCCM, and assesses them against Amable’s criteria for a nascent regional security complex. Evidence comes from official documents, UNODC, UNHCR and Global Terrorism Index data, and the secondary literature.
Why it matters
How Afghanistan is classified shapes how its neighbours, and the analysts who study them, understand risk.
If Afghanistan is a buffer
Instability there looks containable.
If Afghanistan is a driver
Regional security cannot be analysed without it.
Since 2014, and sharply since 2021, the buffer reading has become harder to defend.
Preparation
- MA International Relations, University of Northampton. Dissertation on this question
- MPhil International Relations, National Defence University, Islamabad
- Conference paper, Istanbul International Social Science Conference, 2020
- Taught undergraduate Research Methodology, University of Gujrat
- 10+ years teaching in Pakistan and England
- Research ethics training (NIH, Protecting Human Research Participants)
- English, Urdu, Punjabi
What I’m looking for
A supervisor for full-time doctoral study from 2027 in International Relations, Security Studies, Politics, or South and Central Asian studies. I’m applying for funded places, and I’m happy to work with a joint supervisory team.
Could you supervise this project?
I’d value a conversation about fit, funding routes and timelines.