Finally getting around to reading this excellent paper from @a_a_jackson @ODIdev. Big takeaway: insurgent governance doesn't stem from the capture of territory. It precedes it. odi.org/sites/odi.org.…
This has implications for how we understand the ways in which groups gain control of institutions and populations not only in Afghanistan, but also in Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc.
We know that groups co-opt pre-existing governance structures rather than razing them. This work suggests we should further re-conceptualize what control looks like in civil war. Just b/c formal gov't structures are still present in an area doesn't mean the gov't's in control.
Straightforward and complete "territorial control" may have little relationship to how groups like the Taliban operate on the ground & may not be *needed* for control of institutions, etc. Suggests we over-emphasize territory in academic work.
(Also, on institutional control: the Taliban and the Afghan government *work together* in multiple sectors, including education. Institutions are often not either/or.)
