The Mansour Killing Raises as Many Questions as Answers in Afghanistan

The Mansour Killing Raises as Many Questions as Answers in Afghanistan
This photo purports to show volunteers standing near the wreckage of the destroyed vehicle in which Mullah Akhtar Mansour was allegedly traveling, Baluchistan, Pakistan, May 21, 2016 (AP photo by Abdul Malik).

Last weekend, a U.S. military drone killed Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, the leader of the Afghan Taliban, as he drove home from Iran to Pakistan’s Baluchistan province. This was a bold action, marking the first time an American drone strike had been ordered in the Taliban’s home base, rather than in Pakistan’s tribal areas that border Afghanistan. It may not signal yet another new U.S. strategy for the war in Afghanistan, but it is a significant tactical and political shift, recognition that as the Obama administration winds down, trends in the country are not good. As Dan De Luce and John Hudson wrote in Foreign Policy, a frustrated President Barack Obama “rolled the dice.”

No one thinks that killing Mansour will defeat the Taliban, but it might alter the trajectory of the conflict at least a bit. The peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government, which the Obama administration considered vital for American extrication from the conflict, were going nowhere. While Mansour seems to have supported negotiations at one point, he had become, as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry put it, a “threat to that effort.” Killing him won’t automatically resuscitate the negotiations, but it might degrade the Taliban’s cohesion and exacerbate its internal struggles. If the group won’t negotiate, it can be weakened and punished more than it already is.

In the broad sense, killing Mansour was a good way to send a message. To the extremists themselves, the drone strike showed that even while the United States continues to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and avoid direct combat, it has an escalation capability. The leaders of both the Taliban and the other violent extremists that Pakistan hosts now know that they cannot count on living, traveling and meeting in safety. This won’t make them give up, but it might make it harder for them to plan attacks, communicate with their followers, and recruit new members.

Keep reading for free!

Get instant access to the rest of this article by submitting your email address below. You'll also get access to three articles of your choice each month and our free newsletter:

Or, Subscribe now to get full access.

Already a subscriber? Log in here .

What you’ll get with an All-Access subscription to World Politics Review:

A WPR subscription is like no other resource — it’s like having a personal curator and expert analyst of global affairs news. Subscribe now, and you’ll get:

  • Immediate and instant access to the full searchable library of tens of thousands of articles.
  • Daily articles with original analysis, written by leading topic experts, delivered to you every weekday.
  • Regular in-depth articles with deep dives into important issues and countries.
  • The Daily Review email, with our take on the day’s most important news, the latest WPR analysis, what’s on our radar, and more.
  • The Weekly Review email, with quick summaries of the week’s most important coverage, and what’s to come.
  • Completely ad-free reading.

And all of this is available to you when you subscribe today.