Terrorist attacks in Kabul: who benefits

A series of explosions in Kabul, according to The Wall Street Journal, claimed the lives of more than 190 people, including more than 150 local residents and 13 US military personnel. According to doctors, most of the Afghans died (were wounded) from automatic shots fired by Americans guarding the perimeter. That is, a blow was inflicted not only on the Afghans to show the inability of the Taliban to cope with the crisis, but also on the Americans. The terrorist attacks that happened in Afghanistan make us think about the question – who needed this, and why?

It is absolutely clear that it is not the Taliban who needed it. Right now, the leadership of the Taliban needs to extremely urgently show both internal and external audiences that the coming of their movement to power in Afghanistan is the best option for everyone, guaranteed to bring an end to the civil war that has lasted for half a century.

The Taliban have achieved their goal. They have regained strength after the defeat of 2004-2006. They have provided themselves with sufficient funding channels.They have created and worked out a mechanism for intercepting local power. They managed to become an irremediable "pebble in the American shoe", which forced the United States to make a decision to withdraw from Afghanistan.

That all, the first stage of victory has been achieved. It remains only to formalise it legally through the creation of a public mechanism of power, for the creation of which caravans with Taliban leaders have been moving to Kabul for the third day in a row. They absolutely do not need any explosions right now.

But they are necessary for the opponents of the Taliban. Most of all – ISIS. However, oddly enough, they also turn out to be useful for the Northern Alliance, which has suddenly begun to suffer a military defeat against the Taliban in the Panjšēr valley.

Now the Taliban are "on horseback", they do not just bring their own version of Islam, they establish a single order in the territories under their control, excluding bandit freedom and the "law of the machine gun”. For a population tired of the fifth generation of civil war, this, albeit with reservations, looks like a rather attractive blessing. This allows the Taliban to bargain with opponents from a strong enough position.

First of all, with external opponents, represented by foreign countries, whose official and private donations for 15 years have formed at least 40% of the revenues of the Afghan state budget. The Taliban want to intercept and preserve this source of money. Otherwise, they will have nothing for building a new state machine. But for this, the Taliban must show their ability to ensure order in the state. And this is exactly what the terrorist attacks deny.

The "black jihadists" took responsibility for their conduct, and this looks like the first step in a simple three-way operation. Firstly, with a series of the most bloody and media-catchy terrorist attacks, to show the limited capabilities of the Taliban to control the situation in the country.

Then to actively inflate the hysteria among the frightened inhabitants in the style of "everyone for themselves, only Allah is for all". The final step is to offer the local tribal elites "their own version of the order", on the basis that the Taliban, "as you see, can't really do anything”. Profit.

Such a scenario is beneficial not only to ISIS, but also to almost all forces opposed to the Taliban. If anything, the scale of the forces of the "black jihadists" is significantly weaker than the Taliban ones, which gives the impression to the tribal leaders of the largest alliances, such as the Northern Alliance, that they can also defeat the "black jihadists" in the future. So, if not direct complicity, then, in any case, the connivance of organising and carrying out terrorist acts on the part of "other players" is more than likely.

Another question is, did they come up with it themselves or someone suggested it to them? It is the most important one right now.

If we continue the logic of Cassius Longinus Ravilla (Cui bono? Cui prodest? - "Look for someone who benefits"), then it's the British and one of the four "democratic wings" currently ruling America who receive the greatest benefit from what happened.

British dominance over the world is clearly weakening today. And that's why it needs acknowledgement. And it is now fashionable to implement this in the context of strengthening public criticism of the leader, which is Washington. The primitive "Akela missed his kill, we need a new leader". With a hint of London's unfairly forgotten extensive experience in managing colonies.

Especially that the increased destabilisation in Afghanistan automatically sets fire to at least the Middle Asia, and in the future, the whole of Central Asia in general. This immediately expands the possibilities of "all sorts of different players" to intercept power and channels of control.

Especially pleasant for the British are the increased likelihood of creating problems for Russia, positioned by the collective West as a direct civilisational threat in Europe. Like saying that the "upstarts from the colonies" failed to cope with the task of hegemony, now it's time to entrust the case to "old-school masters under the shadow of the Union Jack."

However, we should not discount the internal political squabbling in Washington. It was against Trump that the Democrats spoke as a united front. Now, after the victory, a tough showdown of the practical power-sharing has begun among the collective of "unknown fathers".

Leaving Afghanistan is the idea of Anthony Blinken, who considered it necessary to concentrate all forces for the inevitable upcoming war with China. But the Secretary of State represents only one of the four leading "democratic wings".

The "Akela missed his kill" option turns out to be a good way to weaken his influence and weight in a tough squabble for power over the United States. With these introductory statements, it is quite possible that one of his opponents, together with the British, "used old ties with the black barmaley".

How true this version is will be shown in the near future. But at the moment, it is the only one in which the events that are taking place fit "without exaggeration and gaps”.