Why Attack Afghan Civilians? Creating Chaos Rewards Taliban
The government, Mr. Saleh said, often cannot even know whether a suicide bomber entered from outside the city "or whether he is brainwashed here; whether they build the vests
here or whether they import." The group’s internal dynamics have aligned with its shifting incentives, elevating officers who favor large-scale attacks on civilians.
Nuristani said that We never had any direct contacts with them, except for indirect and personal contacts.
As American-led forces have escalated in response to Taliban gains, they have unintentionally pushed the Taliban toward grislier violence.
Whether the week’s events will translate into a long-term gain for the Taliban or serve only as a terrible
but temporary show of force, the attacks embody the trends toward violence and disintegration that appear to be only worsening in Afghanistan.
"Only the government is differentiating between them." Weakening the Taliban’s ability to act as a traditional insurgency
that holds territory, though logical, also compels them to prioritize their role as terrorist group, as this week’s attacks show.
Asked whether victory was still possible, he gave the same answer American generals have given for over 16 years: "Absolutely, absolutely." The Interpreter is a column by Max Fisher
and Amanda Taub exploring the ideas and context behind major world events.
While this week’s attacks may be unrelated to American efforts to pressure Pakistan, the country
has typically reacted to perceived threats by ramping up violence in Afghanistan.