132 International Relations Theory of War
the region was of high geostrategic importance for the other polar powers
that constituted the system at that time.
The assessment of these wars attempts to prove at a high level of cer-
tainty that the explanation of their results lies in the system level rather
than at lower levels.
“THE GREAT GAME” IN CENTRAL ASIA AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF AFGHANISTAN
The central Asia region was and is of great importance to the global
powers: in the 19th century, the region was perceived by Great Britain as
an important buffer zone vital for prevention of Russian aggression and
ensuring continued British dominance in India. Toward the end of this
century, the region became a key source of raw materials, particularly oil,
and as such, it was no longer perceived as a buffer zone but as having
intrinsic value by itself.^160 The Great Game in Asia, the struggle of forces
between the great powers in central Asia, was separated from Europe
despite it being connected to the continent. This was an Anglo-Russian
competition over the entire region, from the Bosporus Straits to India,
including Turkey, Egypt, and other Arab territories, and also Persia and
the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, central Asia, and northwest India. The scale
of the competition expanded and included commerce, military relations,
and high diplomacy, and it also presented a clear model or constant sub-
ject. However, in 1833–1841, Persia and Afghanistan formed their central
positions. Although a number of British officials in India started to warn
of the Russian threat back at the beginning of the 19th century, the idea
started to be common in Britain only after Turkey was defeated by Russia
in 1829.^161
The rise of Russia along with the weakness of Persia posed a number
of possible dangers for Britain, from the least possible and immediate—
additional Russian expansion in Persia and central Asia—to the worse
scenarios—that Persia, encouraged by Russia, might expand its own ter-
ritorial aspirations eastward toward Herat in Afghanistan, or that Persia,
which would dissolve because of domestic conflicts and economic bank-
ruptcy, would fall in Russia’s hands. Through cooperation with Russia,
Britain was able to prevent both dangers. However, Persia and Afghani-
stan remained a cause of concern for it.^162
Something similar happened to Britain in India itself in which London
contended mainly with the question on how to maintain its supremacy
over a large area, at low costs, or with no costs at all, and without any
foreign or domestic challenge. While the East Indian Company then con-
trolled vast territories directly, most of India remained under the direct
control of local princes. Britain’s key problem in India was not maintain-
ing the security of maritime transport lines with Britain but maintaining