Chaos in Soviet Union Leaves Afghan Regime in the Lurch : Conflict: U.S. officials and private analysts predict trouble if U.N. peace plan is not enacted before winter.

After 12 years of surrogate warfare with the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, the United States intends to press for new cooperation from Moscow to end the bloodshed that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and sapped billions of dollars from both countries for weapons.

The determination to resolve one of the world’s bloodiest civil wars has been fueled by the dramatic political upheaval in the Soviet Union after the failed coup. The Soviet hard-liners who were the biggest supporters of the Afghan regime have been swept from power, and Russian Federation President Boris N. Yeltsin is a vigorous opponent of Soviet aid to Kabul.

But U.S. experts warn that it will be a race against time to prevent the collapse of Afghanistan. If there is no progress on a pending five-point U.N. peace plan before the harsh Afghan winter, when food and fuel shortages are expected to be severe, U.S. government officials and private analysts predict the disintegration of the strategic nation.

Since the 1979 Soviet invasion, Kabul has depended on Moscow for foodstuffs, fuel and other necessities in quantities that the Soviet Union is no longer able or willing to supply. Reports from Kabul this week suggested that Moscow has begun curtailing food and fuel shipments since the failed putsch, although a U.S. official called the reports “premature.”

Domestic food production in Afghanistan is down to less than half the prewar levels. And the capital of Kabul--where the population has soared from 600,000 before the war to more than 2 million today--has limited access to agriculture because of the war and poor transportation, according to U.S. estimates.

Several U.S. analysts predict fighting over food and serious civil disorder by the end of the winter.

Ironically, the coup plot by the Soviet hard-liners who supported Afghan President Najibullah may be worse for his government than the more than $2 billion in covert U.S. funds channeled to the moujahedeen resistance over a decade.

“With the conservatives in the military and the KGB and even the Foreign Ministry kicked out, and with Moscow’s preoccupation with internal affairs, it seems that chances of Soviet rethinking of their policy is high,” said one Bush Administration official.

Despite this week’s pledge by the Congress of People’s Deputies to continue the Soviet Union’s foreign commitments, the official predicted that, after a policy review, Moscow will “try to get rid of those that are a burden, and Afghanistan is a burden.”

Several reasons have been cited for the Administration’s cautious optimism that Soviet officials will be willing to help break the logjam on the U.N. plan when Secretary of State James A. Baker III visits the Soviet Union next week. At a news conference Wednesday, Baker confirmed that he would be discussing both Afghanistan and Cuba during his trip to Moscow.

For one thing, Yeltsin has been urging the Soviets to end all aid to Afghanistan for more than a year. He even proposed that his giant republic prevent the flow of any weapons from or through Russia to Afghanistan. A month ago, his clout was limited. Now he is the Soviet Union’s most powerful politician.

For another, the southern Soviet republics of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tadzhikistan want a peaceful international settlement in the country on their borders to prevent the spread of Muslim extremism if the government of President Najibullah collapses. A month ago, the republics’ clout also was limited. Now they are on the verge of becoming full partners in a reshaped union.

As a result of the hard-liners’ ouster, “the situation is fraught with opportunities,” said Barnett Rubin, an Afghan expert at Columbia University’s South Asia Institute. “But it’s also fraught with dangers.”

Although the Afghan regime controls little more than the capital and a few isolated cities, the country’s further disintegration could have a destabilizing spillover effect throughout Central Asia.

“Asia is a body of water and dust, and the Afghan nation is in its middle like a heart. From its good fortune comes the fortune of Asia; from its misfortune comes the misfortune of Asia,” said Rubin, quoting the late Pakistani poet Mohammed Iqbal.

The collapse of the Najibullah government would leave a political vacuum and open the way for Lebanon-style anarchy.

“There is no alternative government emerging among the opposition groups. In fact, they’re more divided than ever,” said Selig S. Harrison of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Afghanistan could be carved up into fiefdoms, many of them rivals, by diverse moujahedeen factions and more than 200 warlords and tribal chieftains, several U.S. analysts predicted.

The four countries that have contributed most to the moujahedeen rebels over the last decade--the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran--repeatedly have failed to get the factions together.

“The danger is that, after the changes in the Soviet Union, Kabul will disintegrate before there is something to replace it,” said Rubin. “Recent events in the Soviet Union might do more to get rid of Najibullah than anything the United States has done, but they won’t do any more to create a viable political system for Afghanistan.”

With the Soviet-backed central government unable to extend its control beyond Kabul and the U.S.-backed opposition unable to provide an alternative, the former rivals now share an interest in preventing Afghanistan from descending into chaos, analysts said.

As a result, they anticipate new joint action by Moscow and Washington to get the U.N. plan back on track. “The Soviets would rather see an orderly process of liquidation (of the Najibullah regime) rather than a cutoff and chaos,” the U.S. official said.

The U.N. plan seeks an orderly return of refugees, a transitional government and democratic elections. To win the backing of the diverse foreign powers involved in Afghanistan, it provides a general set of principles rather than logistics or a detailed timetable.

The biggest obstacle involves Najibullah. He insists on staying in power until after elections to determine a new government, but the resistance demands his resignation before elections. Other specifics of the U.N. plan still to be worked out include whether the transitional government would simply oversee the elections or rule until a new government takes over.

U.S. specialists predict that Moscow and Washington have three to six months to get the U.N. plan implemented before Afghanistan faces serious trouble.

“It will be much easier to move effectively if the parties move quickly,” Harrison said. “The longer they wait, the greater the danger of a collapse.”