Very quick stream of consciousness (again), apologies in advance for all the typos, mistakes, inaccuracies etc. Among Islamist militants there have been (generally) two models:
The Caliphate model calls for the establishment of a global empire (although they'll resent the word "empire"). The Emirate model calls for the establishment of local rule (a state with limited borders) and a governance model, sometimes as the goal, sometimes as a start.
ISIS generally represents the first model. The Taliban represents the second model. ISIS refers to itself as Dawlat al-Khilafa (the Caliphate state). The Taliban's official name for Afghanistan is "the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan".
Alqaeda is an interesting case, early literature seemed to be talking about a Caliphate model, but truth is, early literature talked mostly about the fight but not about governance or statehood. Many Alqaeda affiliates have for years been moving towards the Emirate model.
The fight between ISIS vs other Islamist militants in Syria, and ISIS-K vs Taliban in Afghanistan etc, are about a lot of things, including local grievances, but one of these things is a conflict of visions/models between a Caliphate and an Emirate
Those supporting an Emirate model point to what happened with ISIS as evidence that ISIS is wrong and that the Caliphate model is wrong. Even those who actually support an eventual Caliphate say that the Emirate model is a necessary first step that cannot be skipped.
Now you see two broad Islamist militant experiments - ISIS/Caliphate model ended in failure. Taliban/Emirate model ended in success. What do Alqaeda members in Taliban believe? I find it far more likely that they adopt Taliban's model.
Those who are invested in an Emirate know that it comes at the cost of some compromises, and that if their Emirate is used to attack powerful countries then that could rain destruction upon the Emirate and disrupt/destroy their Islamic governance model.
Don't want this to be a long thread. But the idea that Taliban will knowingly allow Islamist militants to regroup and then use the country to attack the West is unconvincing. The Taliban represent another model. And they now have something to lose and don't want to lose it.
That said, this does not preclude that Taliban-controlled Afghanistan could become a safe haven for other kinds of Islamist militants who aren't hell bent on attacking the West but rather hell bent on attacking their own, much weaker governments, such as in the MENA, Africa, etc
So when Taliban say they won't allow attacks on the West emanating from their territory, I tend to believe it. This does not mean they'll cut off Alqaeda (and others), it just means they'll say "you can stay but no attacks on the West from here".
Now whether they *can* control Afghanistan tightly enough to prevent other militant groups from using it as a safe haven/base of operation, that's an entirely different question. I'm just not optimistic that the Taliban will be able to stabilize the country. But let's see.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
