If the reason to divide the AFC into two replacement confederations - East Asia and West Asia - is logistical, then it would be difficult to argue that Oceania should join a new East Asia Confederation because the distance is too far.
I am not opposed to splitting the AFC into two separate confederations, but I think Pakistan, India, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh should join the West with Bhutan and Nepal joining the East, so the balance would be:
West: 23 members East: 24 members
Keeping the three largest South Asian countries together is important for the commercial viability of a West Asian Confederation.
Comments
I am not opposed to splitting the AFC into two separate confederations, but I think Pakistan, India, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh should join the West with Bhutan and Nepal joining the East, so the balance would be:
West: 23 members
East: 24 members
Keeping the three largest South Asian countries together is important for the commercial viability of a West Asian Confederation.