    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             AFGHANISTAN 2001-2021:
                        EVALUATING THE WITHDRAWAL AND U.S.
                                  POLICIES PART 1

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                               SEPTEMBER 13, 2021

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 117-73

                                   __________

            Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available:  http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
                                docs.house.gov,
                           or http://www.govinfo.gov

                                    __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    45-496PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2023

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

                      GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York, Chairman

    BRAD SHERMAN, California              MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking
    ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey                  Member
    GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia	      CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
    THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida	      STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
    KAREN BASS, California		      SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
    WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts	      DARRELL ISSA, California
    DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island	      ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
    AMI BERA, California		      LEE ZELDIN, New York
    JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas	              ANN WAGNER, Missouri
    DINA TITUS, Nevada		      BRIAN MAST, Florida
    TED LIEU, California		      BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
    SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania	      KEN BUCK, Colorado
    DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota	      TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
    ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota		      MARK GREEN, Tennessee
    COLIN ALLRED, Texas		      ANDY BARR, Kentucky
    ANDY LEVIN, Michigan		      GREG STEUBE, Florida
    ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia	      DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
    CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania	      AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
    TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey	      PETER MEIJER, Michigan
    ANDY KIM, New Jersey	              NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
    SARA JACOBS, California		      RONNY JACKSON, Texas
    KATHY MANNING, North Carolina	      YOUNG KIM, California
    JIM COSTA, California		      MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
    JUAN VARGAS, California		      JOE WILSON, South Carolina
    VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
    BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois

                        Sophia LaFargue, Staff Director
                   Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                                   WITNESSES

    Blinken, Honorable Antony J., Secretary, U.S. Department of State    11

                                    APPENDIX

    Hearing Notice...................................................   105
    Hearing Minutes..................................................   106
    Hearing Attendance...............................................   107

                            STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD

    Statement for the record from Representative Connolly............   108

                RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record..................   110

    AFGHANISTAN 2001-2021: EVALUATING THE WITHDRAWAL AND U.S. POLICIES PART
                                       1

                           Monday, September 13, 2021

                              House of Representatives,
                          Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                                        Washington, DC.

        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:12 p.m., in
    room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Gregory W.
    Meeks(chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Chairman Meeks. The Committee on Foreign Affairs will come
    to order.
        Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
    recess of the committee at any point, and all members will have
    5 days to submit statements, extraneous material, and questions
    for the record subject to the limitation of the rules. To
    insert something into the record, please have your staff email
    the previously mentioned address or contact full committee
    staff.
        As a reminder to all members, please keep your video
    function on at all times, even when you are not recognized by
    the chair. Members are responsible for muting and unmuting
    themselves. Consistent with House rules, staff will only mute
    members, as appropriate, when they are not under recognition to
    eliminate background noise.
        Just a second. We are now waiting--we are putting up the
    Secretary. Let's see.
        Secretary Blinken. I am here, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Meeks. Great. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        Before I make my opening remarks, Mr. Secretary, thank you,
    No. 1, for being here. And this is--the importance--given this
    topic and the importance of this topic and this committee's
    constitutional responsibility of oversight, I wanted to ask you
    whether or not you would be willing to stay to answer all
    member questions.
        We want all members to have the opportunity knowing that it
    is--this is the first time that we are having some testimony in
    regards to pulling out since August 31 of this year. Can you--
    would you have the ability to stay to answer all members'
    questions?
        Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to stay
    until every member has had an opportunity to ask a question,
    yes.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We thank you for
    that.
        And I see that we have a quorum, and I now will recognize
    myself for opening remarks.
        Pursuant to notice, we meet today to evaluate the United
    States' withdrawal from Afghanistan and the series of policies
    from the past 20 years that led to the events of August 2021.
    Mr. Secretary, it is good to have you back here before our
    committee a third time since you have been Secretary, and thank
    you, and we appreciate your recognition of the important role
    this legislative body plays in conducting oversight on the
    executive.
        I want to start off today by citing some numbers. 800,000.
    That is the number of Americans who served with the U.S.
    military in Afghanistan since 2001; 2,461. That is the number
    of American military personnel who died in Afghanistan,
    including the 13 brave Americans who were killed facilitating
    the evacuation of 124,000 people over the course of 17 days;
    66,000. The number of Afghan national security forces killed in
    the conflict; 47,245. That is the number of Afghan civilians
    killed since 2001.
        Twenty. That is the number of years we have been fighting
    in Afghanistan.
        A war that has gone on for almost 20 years is a disaster.
    Disentangling ourselves from the war in Afghanistan was never
    going to be easy. And for my friends who presume a clean
    solution where the withdrawal existed, I would welcome hearing
    what exactly a smooth withdrawal from a messy, chaotic, 20-year
    war looks like. In fact, I have yet to hear the clean
    withdrawal option because I do not believe one exists.
        Now, are there things the administration could have done
    differently? Absolutely, yes, as always. Foremost for me is for
    the State Department to evaluate how it could better evacuate
    Americans when events unravel quickly.
        I look forward to hearing from the Secretary how the State
    Department intends to complete its evacuation of the 100 to 200
    Americans remaining in Afghanistan who want to come home as
    well as for evacuating those Afghans who worked alongside us
    during the past 20 years.
        However, it is important to separate fair criticism from
    criticism that isn't made in good faith and divorced from the
    realities on the ground in Afghanistan. We have heard some
    criticize the decision to close Bagram which they claim would
    have been better suited for evacuations, as though it would
    have been easier to evacuate hundreds of thousands of people
    from an airfield 40 miles outside of Kabul.
        Others criticize the decision to not keep a small
    counterterrorism force in the country. I ask, where was this
    protest when the Trump administration sidelined the Afghan
    government in order to cut a deal with the Taliban? Where were
    the protests when the Trump administration negotiated a deal
    with the Taliban just 1 month after the abduction of Navy
    veteran Mark Frerichs? And where was this protest when then
    President Trump and Secretary Pompeo agreed to withdraw all
    troops by May 21, 2020.
        And let me remind everyone that Trump's deal forced the
    Afghan government to release 5,000 prisoners and offered
    international legitimacy to the Taliban. It was a deal that
    failed to require the Taliban to separate from al-Qaeda
    terrorists and did not require the Taliban to stop attacking
    the Afghan government. The deal altered the political order of
    the country.
        Now, some may say Trump's agreement was conditions-based,
    but it was different, that it came with stronger conditions,
    but that is simply not true. The choice before President Biden
    was between a full withdrawal and the surging of thousands of
    Americans to Afghanistan for an undefined time.
        To argue that there was a third option, a limited troop
    presence where the safety of our personnel could be preserved,
    in my mind is a fantasy. Had we not removed American troops
    from Afghanistan, we would have left them in the middle of a
    rapidly deteriorating war zone with no assurances that they
    would be spared by the Taliban.
        And it strikes me that many of those critical of the
    administration's evacuation efforts are really just angry that
    the President made good on his pledge to end America's
    involvement in the war in Afghanistan. They are masking their
    displeasure with criticism but fail to offer feasible
    alternatives. Once again, we are seeing domestic politics
    injected into foreign policy.
        The Taliban's quick takeover of provinces, Afghan security
    forces laying down their arms, and President Ghani's abrupt
    departure from the country he led, watching 20 years of effort
    crumble in only a matter of days has made it all the more clear
    that we could no longer occupy Afghanistan and the President's
    decision to bring our troops home was the right one.
        And for me, as I close, closing this chapter of the U.S.
    Afghanistan book is a difficult one. I voted to authorize the
    war back in 2001 after the terrorist attacks on September 11.
    In the 20 years since, I have seen how this conflict cost the
    lives of countless Americans, Afghans, and our NATO partners.
    And what makes this all the more difficult is this is a war
    that should have ended 19 years ago with a different outcome.
    But our hubris, our own desire to remake Afghanistan, our own
    willingness to negotiate got in the way of that victory. These
    are hard truths, but only by examining these hard truths will
    we be able to understand what went wrong in Afghanistan.
        The task before us on this committee, one that I am
    committed to making, will explore the past 20 years. We will be
    talking to individuals from the Bush Administration, from the
    Obama Administration, from the Trump administration, as well as
    the Biden Administration,
        And I now recognize Mr. McCaul for his opening statements.
        Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
    Secretary also for agreeing to stay until every member has been
    heard. I believe every member has a right to ask questions on
    such an important topic.
        Over the last several weeks, we witnessed Afghanistan
    rapidly fall to the Taliban and the chaotic aftermath that
    followed. This did not have to happen, but the President
    refused to listen to his own generals and the intelligence
    community who warned him precisely what would happen when we
    withdrew. This was an unmitigated disaster of epic proportions.
    I never thought in my lifetime that I would see an
    unconditional surrender to the Taliban.
        For weeks, our offices were flooded with requests to help
    people get out of Afghanistan, requests that were coming to us
    because the State Department failed to provide help. And then
    the unimaginable happened.
        On August 26, 13 American servicemen and women were
    brutality murdered by ISIS-K trying to help American citizens
    and our Afghan partners escape from the Taliban.
        Two days ago, we commemorated the 20th anniversary of 9/11.
    And while we mourned the loss of almost 3,000 innocent people,
    the Taliban at the same time celebrated by raising their flag
    over the Presidential palace. Days before, they emblazoned
    their flag on the wall of our United States embassy,
    proclaiming the defeat of the United States of America.
        Shockingly, the White House has described this Taliban
    regime as businesslike and professional, so let's meet a few of
    these professionals of the so-called new and improved Taliban.
    The acting Prime Minister, Mullah Hasan Akhund, one of the
    Taliban's founding leaders. He is also sanctioned by the United
    Nations and sheltered Osama bin Laden for years.
        The infamous members of the Taliban five released from
    Guantanamo under the Obama Administration also all hold senior
    positions in the new government. And, finally, the worst,
    acting Interior Minister Haqqani. He is responsible for
    overseeing policing and counterterrorism. He is also wanted by
    the FBI. He is the head of the brutal Haqqani network with
    close ties to al-Qaeda and is currently sanctioned by the
    United States. Most of the new and improved Taliban leaders
    hold the same or similar positions they held prior to 9/11.
        And we are now at the mercy of the Taliban's reign of
    terror, all while a dark veil of Sharia law covers Afghanistan.
    The freedoms our troops helped secure for Afghan women and
    girls have been stripped away in a matter of weeks. This, in my
    judgment, is not only disgraceful, it also dishonors the men
    and women who served our Nation so bravely.
        Mr. Secretary, the American people do not like to lose,
    especially not to the terrorists, but that is exactly what has
    happened. This has emboldened the Taliban and our adversaries.
    The Taliban, a designated terrorist group, now equipped with
    American weapons than most countries in the world. Just a few
    weeks ago, thousands of terrorists, the worst of the worst,
    were all released from prisons as the Taliban overran the
    country.
        The situation we find ourselves in is far worse, in my
    judgment, as a former Chairman of Homeland Security Committee,
    far worse than pre-9/11. To make matters worse, we abandoned
    Americans behind enemy lines. We left behind the interpreters
    who you, Mr. Secretary, and the President both promised to
    protect.
        I can summarize this in one word: betrayal. The America I
    know keeps its promises. The most important promise in our
    military is no man left behind, no one left behind, but you
    broke this promise.
        Unfortunately, it wasn't the only promise this
    administration broke. In April, President Biden promised,
    quote, we will not conduct a hasty rush to the exit, and we
    will do it responsibly, deliberately, and safely. But that
    promise was broken. And then in July, the President said,
    quote, there is going to be no circumstance where you see
    people being lifted off the roof of the United States Embassy
    in Afghanistan. That promise was also broken.
        Our standing on the world stage has been greatly
    diminished. Our enemies no longer fear us, and our allies no
    longer trust us. And our Afghan veterans are questioning if
    their sacrifice was worth it.
        For those veterans who are watching this today, I have a
    message for you. Your service was not in vain. It is because of
    your heroism that we have not witnessed a large scale attack by
    the terrorists since 9/11 in the last 20 years. And for that, I
    say to all of you, thank you.
        And so we are here today to better understand how this
    administration got it so wrong, and I hope you will directly
    answer our questions, Mr. Secretary, succinctly because we have
    quite a few.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back.
        I now turn to the chair of the subcommittee on ASIA, the
    Pacific, Central Asia, and Nonproliferation, Ami Bera, for 1
    minute.
        Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
    Secretary, for coming before the subcommittee.
        Obviously, this is not going to be an easy hearing. There
    will be a lot of questions back and forth. And we certainly,
    over the course of the next few months at the subcommittee and
    full committee level, will do some more oversight on the
    information and so forth that decisions were made on.
        I want to focus, though, on the mission that is still at
    hand. You know, my district has the largest Afghan refugee
    population in the country. We have submitted over 10,000 names
    of U.S. citizens, visa holders, family members, et cetera. And,
    you know, that mission still remains.
        I have got close to 30 school age kids that are still in
    Afghanistan, U.S. citizens, visa holders along with their
    parents. We have got to do everything we can to get those folks
    to safety.
        And I look forward to working with you, your staff, and
    others to make sure we do not leave folks behind, and we get
    those folks out as reasonably as possible to safety, and I look
    forward to the testimony.
        And, with that, I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you, Chair Bera.
        I now turn to the ranking member, Mr. Chabot, for 1 minute.
        Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, this administration's bungled pullout from
    Afghanistan just may be the worst foreign affairs disaster in
    American history. You essentially surrendered that country and
    its people to the good graces of the Taliban, and the Taliban
    does not have good graces. Afghanistan is once again a haven
    for terrorists, and those terrorists now have our weapons and
    equipment to use against us.
        As Mr. McCaul directly stated, our allies may well not
    trust us as much, and our enemies may not fear us as much. Yes,
    the majority of the American people wanted to leave Afghanistan
    but not like this. Pulling our troops out before civilians,
    abandoning Americans behind enemy lines, as well as thousands
    of Afghans who worked with us and fought with us and their
    families, and leaving half the population, about 20 million
    women and girls, to be brutalized once again by the Taliban,
    this is a disgrace. And I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you. I will--thank you, Mr. Chabot.
        Now I will introduce our witness. Secretary of State Antony
    J. Blinken was sworn in as the United States Secretary of State
    on January 26, 2021. And as I mentioned in my opening
    statement, this will be the third time Secretary Blinken
    testified before this committee, and we are grateful for his
    appearance before us today.
        I now recognize the witness for his testimony which I
    understand will be a little longer than 5 minutes, but being
    that he is going to be here for all of our questions, I think
    it is important for his statement to be heard in its entirety.
        Secretary Blinken, I now recognize you.

     STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ANTONY J. BLINKEN, SECRETARY, U.S.
                          DEPARTMENT OF STATE

        Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And,
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member McCaul, thank you for today. I
    welcome this opportunity to discuss our policy on Afghanistan
    including where we are
        [inaudible] And where we are going in the weeks and months
    ahead.
        For 20 years, Congress has conducted oversight and provided
    funding for the mission in Afghanistan. I know from my own time
    as a staff member for then Senator Biden how invaluable a
    partner Congress is.
        As I said when I was nominated, I believe strongly in
    Congress' traditional role as a partner in foreign
    policymaking. I am committed to working with you on the path
    forward in Afghanistan and to advance the interests of the
    American people.
        On this 20th anniversary of 9/11, as we honor the nearly
    3,000 men, women, and children who lost their lives, we are
    reminded why we went to Afghanistan in the first place; to
    bring justice to those who attacked us and to ensure that it
    would not happen again. We achieved those objectives long ago.
        Osama bin Laden was killed in 2011, a decade ago. al-
    Qaeda's capabilities were degraded significantly, including its
    ability to plan and conduct external operations. After 20
    years, 2,641 American lives lost, 20,000 injuries,
        [inaudible] Dollars spent, it was time to end America's
    longest war.
        When President Biden took office in January, he inherited
    an agreement that his predecessor had reached with the Taliban
    to remove all remaining forces from Afghanistan by May 1 of
    this year. As part of that agreement, the previous
    administration pressed the Afghan government to release 5,000
    Taliban prisoners, including some top war commanders.
        Meanwhile, it reduced our own force presence to 2,500
    troops. In return, the Taliban agreed to stop attacking U.S.
    and partner forces and to refrain from threatening
    Afghanistan's major cities.
        But the Taliban continued a relentless march on remote
    outposts, on checkpoints, on villages and districts, as well as
    the major roads connecting them. By January 2021, the Taliban
    was in the strongest military position it had been in since 9/
    11, and we had the smallest number of troops on the ground
    since 2001.
        As a result, upon taking office, President Biden
    immediately faced a choice between ending the war or escalating
    it. Had he not followed through on his predecessor's
    commitment, attacks on our forces and those of our allies would
    have resumed, and the Taliban's nationwide assaults on
    Afghanistan's major cities would have commenced.
        That would have required sending substantially more U.S.
    forces into Afghanistan to defend themselves and prevent a
    Taliban takeover, taking casualties, and with, at best, the
    prospect of restoring a stalemate and remaining stuck in
    Afghanistan under fire indefinitely.
        There is no evidence that staying longer would have made
    the Afghan security forces or the Afghan government any more
    resilient or self-sustaining. If 20 years and hundreds of
    billions of dollars in support, equipment, and training did not
    suffice, why would another year, another 5, another 10?
        Conversely, there is nothing that our strategic competitors
    like China and Russia or adversaries like Iran and North Korea
    would have liked more than for the United States to reup a 20-
    year war and remain bogged down in Afghanistan for another
    decade.
        In advance of the President's decision, I was in constant
    contact with our allies and partners to hear their views and
    factor them into our thinking. When the President announced the
    withdrawal, NATO immediately and unanimously embraced it.
        We all sat together on the drawdown. Similarly, we were
    intensely focused on the safety of Americans in Afghanistan. In
    March, we began urging them to leave the country. In total,
    between March and August, we sent 19 specific messages with
    that warning and with offers to help, including financial
    assistance to pay for plane tickets.
        Despite this effort, at the time the evacuation began,
    there were still thousands of American citizens in Afghanistan,
    almost all of whom we evacuated by August 31. Many were dual
    citizens living in Afghanistan for years, decades, generations.
    Deciding whether or not to leave the place they know as home
    was an incredibly wrenching decision.
        In April, we began drawing down our embassy, ordering
    nonessential personnel to depart. We also used this time to
    significantly speed up the processing of the special immigrant
    visas for Afghans who had worked for us and by our side these
    past 20 years.
        When we took office, we inherited a program with a 14-step
    process based on a statutory framework enacted by Congress and
    involving multiple government agencies and a backlog of more
    than 17,000 SIV applicants. There had not been a single
    interview in the SIV program in Kabul for 9 months going back
    to March 2020.
        The program was basically in a stall. Within 2 weeks of
    taking office, we restarted the SIV interview process in Kabul.
    On February 4, one of the very first executive orders issued by
    President Biden directed us to immediately review the SIV
    program, to identify causes of undue delay, and to find ways to
    process SIV applications more quickly. This spring, I directed
    significant additional resources to the program, expanding the
    team in Washington of people processing applications from 10 to
    50 and doubling the number of SIV adjudicators at our embassy
    in Kabul.
        Even as many embassy personnel returned to the United
    States under ordered departure, we sent more consular officers
    to Kabul to process SIV applications.
        As a result of these and other steps, including working
    with Congress, by May, we had reduced the average processing
    time for special immigrant visas by more than a year. Even amid
    a COVID surge in Embassy Kabul in June, we continued to issue
    visas.
        And we went from issuing about 100 special immigrant visas
    per week in March to more than 1,000 per week in August when
    our evacuation and relocation efforts began.
        That emergency evacuation was sparked by the collapse of
    the Afghan security forces and government. Throughout the year,
    we were constantly assessing their staying power and
    considering multiple scenarios. Even the most pessimistic
    assessments did not predict that government forces in Kabul
    would collapse while U.S. forces remained.
        As General Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
    Staff has said, nothing I or anyone else saw indicated a
    collapse of this Army and this government in 11 days.
        Nonetheless, we planned and exercised a wide range of
    contingencies. Because of that plan, we were able to draw down
    our embassy and move our remaining personnel to the effort
    within 48 hours. And the military, placed on standby by
    President Biden, was able to secure the airport ask start the
    evacuations within 72 hours.
        The evacuation itself was an extraordinary effort under the
    most difficult conditions imaginable by our diplomats, by our
    military, by our intelligence professionals. They worked around
    the clock to get American citizens, Afghans who helped us,
    citizens of our allies and partners, and at-risk Afghans on
    planes out of the country and off to the United States or to
    transit locations that our diplomats had arranged and
    negotiated in multiple countries.
        Our consular team worked 24/7 to reach out to Americans who
    could still be in the country, making in those couple of weeks
    55,000 phone calls, sending 33,000 emails, and they are still
    at it.
        In the midst of this heroic effort, an ISIS-K attack killed
    13 servicemembers working the gates at HKIA, wounding 20
    others, and killing and wounding scores of Afghans. These
    American servicemembers gave their lives so that other lives
    could continue.
        In the end, we completed one of the biggest airlifts in
    history with 124,000 people evacuated to safety. And on August
    31 in Kabul, the military mission in Afghanistan officially
    ended and a new diplomatic mission began.
        I want to acknowledge the more than 2 dozen countries that
    have helped with the relocation effort. Some served as transit
    hubs, some welcoming Afghan evacuees for longer periods of
    time. And I want to recognize the extraordinary efforts by
    Congress as well. To name just a few examples, Congressman
    Fitzpatrick worked with the State Department to reunite an
    Afghan family in New Jersey.
        Congressman Keating worked with our folks on the ground to
    help a Voice of America reporter and his family get to the
    airport. Congresswoman Jacobs and Congressman Issa worked
    across party lines to draw attention to cases of legal
    permanent residents and Afghans at risk.
        Please know your emails, your calls made a real difference
    in getting people out, and we continue to use the list and
    information you are providing in the next phase of the mission.
        Let me now just briefly outline what the State Department
    has done over the next--over the last couple of weeks and where
    we are going in the days and weeks ahead. First. We moved our
    diplomatic operations from Kabul to Doha where our new Afghan
    affairs team is hard at work. Many of our key partners have
    joined us there.
        Second. We are continuing our relentless efforts to help
    any remaining Americans as well as Afghans and citizens of
    allied and partner countries leave Afghanistan if they so
    choose.
        This past Thursday, a Qatar Airways charter flight with
    U.S. citizens and others on board departed Kabul and landed in
    Doha. On Friday, a second flight carrying U.S. citizens and
    others departed Afghanistan. These flights were the results of
    a coordinated effort by the United States, Qatar, and Turkey to
    reopen the airport and intense diplomacy to start the flights.
        In addition to those flights, a half dozen American
    citizens and about a dozen permanent residents of the United
    States have also left Afghanistan via an overland route with
    our help.
        We are in constant contact with American citizens still in
    Afghanistan who have told us that they wish to leave. Each has
    been assigned a case management team to offer specific guidance
    and instruction. Some declined to be on the first flights on
    Thursday and Friday for reasons of needing more time to make
    arrangements, wanting to remain with extended family for now,
    or medical issues that precluded traveling last week.
        We will continue to help them, and we will continue to help
    any American who still wants to leave and Afghans to whom we
    have a special commitment, just as we have done in other
    countries where we have evacuated our embassy and hundreds or
    even thousands of Americans remained behind, for example, in
    Libya, in Syria, in Venezuela, in Yemen, in Somalia. There is
    no deadline for this mission.
        Third. We are focused on counterterrorism. The Taliban has
    committed to prevent terrorist groups from using Afghanistan as
    a base for external operations that could threaten the United
    States or our allies, including al-Qaeda and ISIS-K.
        We will hold them accountable for that. That does not mean
    we will rely on them. We will remain vigilant at monitoring
    threats. We will maintain robust counterterrorism capabilities
    in the region to neutralize those threats, if necessary, and we
    do that in places around the world where we do not have
    military forces on the ground.
        Fourth. We continue our intensive diplomacy with allies and
    partners. We initiated a statement joined by more than half the
    world's countries, over 100 countries, as well as a United
    Nations Security Council resolution setting out the
    international community's expectations of a Taliban-led
    government.
        We expect the Taliban to ensure freedom of travel, to make
    good on its commitments on counterterrorism, to uphold the
    basic rights of the Afghan people, including women, girls, and
    minorities, to name a broadly representative permanent
    government, to force
        [inaudible] Reprisals. The legitimacy and support the
    Taliban seeks from the international community will depend on
    its conduct.
        We have organized contact groups with key countries to
    ensure the international community continues to speak with one
    voice on Afghanistan and to leverage our combined influence.
    Last week, I led a ministerial meeting of 22 countries, NATO,
    the EU, the United Nations, to continue to align our efforts.
        And fifth. We will continue to support humanitarian aid to
    the Afghan people consistent with sanctions that they will not
    flow through the government but rather, through independent
    organizations like NGO's and U.N. agencies. Just today, we
    announced the United States is providing nearly $64 million in
    new humanitarian assistance to the people of Afghanistan to
    meet critical hands on nutrition needs, address the protection
    concerns of women, children, and minorities, to help more
    children, including girls, go back to school. This additional
    funding means the United States has provided nearly $330
    million in assistance to the Afghan people this fiscal year.
        In Doha and Ramstein, I toured the facilities where Afghans
    that we evacuated are being processed before moving on to their
    next destinations. Here at home, I spent some time at the
    Dulles Expo Center where more than 45,000 Afghans have been
    processed after arriving in the United States. It is
    remarkable, remarkable to see what our diplomats, our military,
    and employees from other civilian agencies across the U.S.
    Government have been able to achieve in a very short time. They
    have met an enormous human need.
        They have coordinated food, water, sanitation for
    thousands, tens of thousands of people. They are arranging
    medical care, including the delivery of babies. They are
    reuniting families who are separated and caring for
    unaccompanied minors. It is an extraordinary interagency effort
    and a powerful testament to the skill, the compassion, and the
    dedication of our people.
        We should all be proud of what they are doing. And as we
    have done throughout our history, Americans are now welcoming
    families from Afghanistan into our communities and helping them
    resettle as they start their new lives. That is something to be
    proud of as well.
        Thanks very much for listening. And, with that, Mr.
    Chairman, Ranking Member McCaul, I look forward to your
    questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Secretary Blinken follows:]

        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Meeks. Thank you, Secretary Blinken, for your
    testimony.
        I will now recognize members for 5 minutes. And pursuant to
    House rules, all time yielded is for the purposes of
    questioning our witness.
        I will recognize members by committee seniority,
    alternating between Democrats and Republicans. Please note that
    I will be strict in enforcing the 5-minute time limitation for
    questions. What do I mean? I do not want members to ask
    questions for 5 minutes and then not leave the Secretary time
    to respond. So when addressing your questions, please keep in
    mind that the 5 minutes is for questions and answers. I will
    start by recognizing myself.
        Mr. Secretary, you mentioned that an area of concern that I
    know is shared by all is the status of American citizens, green
    card holders, and our SIV heroes who are yet to be evacuated.
        Can you tell us how many of them remain in the country--in
    country, and what is our plan to facilitate their evacuation
    now?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So as of
    the end of last week, we had about 100 American citizens in
    Afghanistan who had told us that they wished to leave the
    country. And I want to emphasize that this is a snapshot in
    time. It is, more accurately, a moving picture.
        As you know, stepping back for a minute, to know precisely
    at any given moment in time exactly how many American citizens
    are in any country is something we cannot and do not know.
    Americans are not required to register when they go to a
    foreign country or if they reside there.
        And so from the start of this effort, we have been engaged
    in an intense effort to identify every American citizen that we
    could in Afghanistan, to be in touch with them, in contact with
    them, and to work with them if they wanted to leave.
        We have also benefited greatly from information provided by
    Congress to help us fill out this picture. But as of last week,
    there were about 100 who we were in contact with who continued
    to express an interest to leave. We offered seats on the planes
    that got out last week to about 60. Thirty came forward and
    used those seats.
        What happens in any--at any given moment is that people are
    making decisions hour by hour, if not day by day, about whether
    to leave or not. And as I said earlier, these are incredibly
    wrenching decisions because, for the most part, this is a
    community of people who have been living, residing in
    Afghanistan for all their lives.
        Afghanistan is their home. They have extended families. And
    it is very, very hard for them, understandably, to make that
    decision. But that is the group that we are working with.
        Now, what also happens is people will identify themselves,
    including since the end of the evacuation, as American citizens
    in Afghanistan who wish to leave, so they get added to the
    picture. We get information from you, from NGO's, from other
    groups, veterans' groups, about people purporting to be
    Americans in Afghanistan. We immediately seek to contact them,
    to engage with them, to find out if, in fact, they are in
    Afghanistan, and if, in fact, they want to leave.
        So this is a picture that will continue to change over
    time, but that is the rough population that we are working with
    right now.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you. Let me ask the next question. I
    know that the Trump administration's deal with the Taliban
    meant that there were 2,500 troops remaining with less than 5
    months to complete the withdrawal. At any time did the Biden
    Administration consider whether to renegotiate the deal with
    the Taliban?
        Secretary Blinken. The Taliban made abundantly clear in
    many public statements, private statements to us, to others
    around the world that it was going to hold us to the deadline
    that the previous administration negotiated in terms of
    withdrawing the remaining American forces. It made very clear
    that if we move past that deadline, it would resume the attacks
    that it had stopped on our forces and on our allies and
    partners as well as to commence the onslaught on the cities
    that we have seen in recent months.
        And so that was exactly choice that President Biden faced,
    whether to go forward with the agreement and the commitments
    that his predecessor had made in terms of withdrawing all
    forces by May 1 or return to war with the Taliban and escalate,
    not end the war.
        Now, Mr. Chairman, as you know, what the President did do
    was to take some risk in extending past May 1 the time we would
    use to actually withdraw our forces so that we could do it in
    the safest most orderly way possible, and so we extended that--
    --
        Chairman Meeks. One more question.
        Mr. Brown [continuing]. Deadline until September.
        Chairman Meeks. So, also, we know there was a point
    recently in the government hard liners and the new Taliban
    group, Taliban's commitment to share power with other Afghan
    political and social groups excludes women and minorities.
        How does this--does the appointment of this new government
    factor into the administration's strategy to engage with the
    Taliban or assumptions that the Taliban may have changed?
        Secretary Blinken. So the interim government named by the
    Taliban falls very short of the mark that was set by the
    international community for inclusivity, that is, to have a
    government that was broadly representative of the Afghan
    people, not just the Taliban and its constituency, to include
    women which this interim government does not. And as has been
    noted, it includes many key members who have very challenging
    track records.
        We have been very clear that when it comes to engaging with
    that government or any government to be named on a more
    permanent basis, we are going to do so on the basis of whether
    or not it advances our interests, and those interests are very
    clear.
        They are the expectations that we have set and the
    international community has set for the ongoing treatment of
    travel for a government that makes good on the Taliban's
    commitments to combat terrorism, not allow Afghanistan to be
    used as a haven for launching attacks directed against other
    countries, to support the basic rights of the Afghan people,
    including women and minorities, and to allow humanitarian
    assistance to get to people who so desperately need it.
        That will be the basis upon which we engage any Taliban-led
    government, whether it is the central government or one they
    may name in the days and weeks ahead.
        Chairman Meeks. I now yield for questions to Ranking Member
    McCaul.
        Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, in the weeks before the fall of Kabul, the
    surrender to the Taliban, I was on the phone with very high-
    ranking officials at State, DoD, White House, trying to save
    lives. We had Americans that couldn't get out. We had
    interpreters that couldn't get through the perimeter of the
    Taliban. They are left behind. They will be executed. They do
    have a bull's eye on their back.
        We had four buses of Afghan girls, orphans, at the American
    University School of Music that sat there for 17 hours when I
    was finally told the State Department would not lift the gate
    to let them in to safety even though they had an aircraft
    waiting. Will you guarantee to this committee--now we are at
    the mercy of the Taliban, though.
        Can you guarantee to this committee that we will get them
    out?
        Secretary Blinken. First, Ranking Member McCaul, thank you
    for every effort that you made, as well as other members of
    this committee made, to help people in need, to try to help
    them get out. Those are deeply appreciated, and going forward,
    we continue to look to you.
        Now, I have men and women in my Department, the State
    Department, who raised their hands from around the world and
    ran into the building. They went from posts around the world
    into that airport to help people get out. They were serving at
    the gates right alongside our brothers and sisters in uniform,
    including the 13 who gave their lives, literally trying to pull
    people in as necessary or to walk them in, to talk them in, to
    do everything they possibly could to bring American citizens,
    to bring Afghans at risk, to bring the nationals of our
    partners and others into the airport, taking extraordinary----
        Mr. McCaul. I am reclaiming my time at it is limited.
        Secretary Blinken. It is important, sir, for you to
    recognize what was----
        Mr. McCaul. We also thank the service--and we also thank
    the service of people like--that worked in Operation Pineapple
    and Dunkirk. I would ask that the State Department work with
    them. Those are heroes as well as the State Department
    officials you are talking about.
        My last question, very important. Bagram went down, the
    embassy went down, and we went dark. We have no eyes and ears
    on the ground. We have lost intelligence capability in the
    region, and that includes Russia, China, and Iran, as you know.
        This is a national security threat as China moves in. For
    all I know, they may take over Bagram Air Base. But this over
    the horizon capability I believe is exaggerated. It is not a
    viable option. It is too far away. Do you negotiate with
    countries like Uzbekistan or Tajikistan to put an ISR
    capability there?
        And my last question. Is it true that President Putin
    threatened the President of the United States, saying he could
    not build intelligence capabilities in the region?
        Secretary Blinken. This is an important question and one
    that in its detail and substance I think we need to take up in
    another setting for reasons that I know that you very much
    appreciate.
        Let me just say this very broadly, and you know this very
    well, given your focus and expertise on these issues. The
    terrorist threat has metastasized dramatically over the last 20
    years, and it is most acute in places like Yemen, like Libya,
    like Iraq, like Syria, like Somalia. And, of course, we have
    much greater and different capabilities than we had 20 years
    ago in terms of dealing with that threat.
        And in many countries around the world, we deal with it
    effectively with no U.S. boots on the ground. We lost some
    capacity for sure in not having those boots on the ground in
    Afghanistan, but we have ways, and we are very actively working
    on that to make up for that, to mitigate for that, to make sure
    that we have eyes on the problem, to see if it reemerges in
    Afghanistan, and to do something about it.
        But what I would propose is that we have this conversation
    in another setting----
        Mr. McCaul. I would like to work with you because if we
    cannot see what's happening on the ground, we cannot see the
    threat, we cannot be respond to it, the threatis only going to
    grow. It is going to get worse, not better, and we have to have
    that capability.
        You know, let me ask you one last question. We had these
    planes grounded at Mazar-e-Sharif, and the Taliban seems to be
    holding these planes up. Are you currently negotiating with the
    Taliban with respect to these Americans that are trying to get
    out on these planes?
        And, also, are you negotiating with the Taliban on the
    issue of legitimizing them as a real government?
        Secretary Blinken. Not only us, but virtually the entire
    international community, including the United Nations Security
    Council resolution, has made clear what we expect and will
    insist on from the Taliban if they want to seek any legitimacy
    or any support, and that includes--it starts with freedom of
    travel.
        So we have been intensely engaged with Turkey and Qatar to
    get the airport in Kabul up and running again which is now the
    case, and we started to get flights out last week with American
    citizens on board.
        And with regard to Mazar-e-Sharif, you are correct. There
    have been charter flights there that have been there for some
    time that have not been allowed to leave. We want to see those
    flights leave. We need to see a process put in place to allow
    those flights to start to move, and we are working on that
    every day.
        Mr. McCaul. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you.
        Mr. Secretary, we requested such a classified briefing not
    too long ago, and we welcome your assurance to schedule this
    briefing sometime in the immediate future.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Absolutely.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize representative Brad Sherman
    from California for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Sherman. Secretary Blinken, thank you for reminding us
    that Americans were not required to register if they were in
    Afghanistan, and I hope my colleagues will support my
    legislation to require Americans to register if they go to a
    war zone.
        The ranking member says that he never thought he would see
    an unconditional surrender of the United States to the Taliban.
    He saw it in 2020 when President Donald Trump announced that we
    would be out by May 1 of 2021, forced the release of 5,000 of
    the Taliban's best fighters, and most importantly, created a
    circumstance where there was not even a credible possibility
    that we would engage in force to support the Afghan government.
        There are those who say we should get out all of our Afghan
    allies and all those who face oppression or death from the
    Taliban. I would point out that the Afghan Army, together with
    all of its veterans over 20 years, together with all their
    families, you are talking about millions of people. And while
    the Taliban may be harsh to the girls who are music students,
    who are orphans, imagine how harsh they will be to a girl whose
    father was in the Afghan Army trying to kill the Taliban.
        When the administration took over, the American people made
    it clear we had to get out in 2021. The Afghan government, some
    thought, had some chance to fight to a stalemate. But by
    spring, those closest to us, those most in the know were
    demanding visas to get out, to flee as quickly as possible.
    They weren't asking for guns to build trenches around Kabul to
    fight the Taliban.
        They were asking for visas. They were demanding visas. They
    were making videos about how they were going to be killed. When
    they started to flee, that started a stampede, and there is
    simply no way the administration could have an orderly or
    successful stampede.
        And it seems absurd, at least in retrospect, to think that
    the average Afghan grunt would fight in the trenches while
    seeing those who are best connected desperate to flee in a
    matter of days.
        Secretary Blinken, when you came into office on January 20,
    we were committed to pulling everyone out of Afghanistan within
    3 months, by May 1. Did the Trump administration leave on your
    desk a pile of notebooks as to exactly how to carry out that
    plan? Did we have a list of which Afghans we were going to
    evacuate? Did we have a plan to get Americans from all over
    Afghanistan to Kabul and out in an orderly way? How meticulous
    was the planning for the Trump administration declared May 1
    withdrawal?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Congressman. We inherited a
    deadline. We did not inherit a plan.
        Mr. Sherman. So no plan at all. It is amazing that it
    wasn't much, much worse. It was controversial when we gave up
    five Taliban for Bergdahl, not the most meritorious of American
    fighting men, but the Trump administration gave 5,000 of the
    Taliban's top fighters back to the Taliban. What did we get for
    that other than empty promises that were broken?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, the deal that the previous
    administration struck involved, as you rightly said, committing
    to remove all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by May 1 of this
    year. And, in addition, as that deal was being negotiated and
    put into effect, pressing the Afghan government to release
    these 5,000 prisoners, many of whom went back to the
    battlefield, and at the same time, in return, getting from the
    Taliban two commitments. One, not to attack our forces or
    allied and partner forces during the time of the agreement,
    from the time it was reached until May 1 when we were supposed
    to pull out all of our forces as well as not to go at the major
    cities and to take steps to ensure that Afghanistan would not
    be used by al-Qaeda or any other
        [inaudible]
        Mr. Sherman. Mr. Secretary, I need to get one more
    question. You are criticized for not getting our weapons out.
    Our weapons were given to the Afghan military. They were all
    over the country. Was there a way to disarm the Afghan
    government without being seen by the world as betraying the
    Afghan government? And was there a way without casualties to go
    all over Afghanistan and grab the trucks and the tanks, et
    cetera?
        Secretary Blinken. Simply put, no. Of course, a lot of
    excess equipment was handed over to the Afghan security and
    defense forces, partners that we had worked with for 20 years,
    supported, financed, and equipped for 20 years to take on some
    of that equipment.
        And, of course, when those forces collapsed in the space of
    about 11 days, some of that equipment wound up in the hands of
    the successor forces, the Taliban. Our folks worked very hard
    to disable or dismantle equipment that we still controlled
    before we left Afghanistan.
        And what we see now is much of the equipment that was left
    behind, including in the hands of the Afghan forces that then
    fell to the Taliban, much of it, based on what I understand
    from my colleagues at DoD, is inoperable or soon will become
    inoperable because it has to be maintained.
        It is not of any great strategic value in terms of
    threatening us or threatening any of Afghanistan's neighbors,
    but it does give the Taliban, as we have seen in pictures, all
    of us, uniforms and guns and some other equipment that is now
    in their hands.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Chris Smith of New Jersey
    who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global
    Health, and Global Human Rights, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, you testified that you had encouraged
    Americans to leave the country, but you know, simultaneously
    with that was statements being made, including by President
    Biden, that Afghans' military capability was 300,000 men strong
    and that they had the best training imaginable.
        So at best, I would say they were misled. And you do not
    mention withdrawal conditions that were placed by President
    Trump on any exodus from Afghanistan.
        But I do have a couple of questions I would like to ask.
    Did you concur and support President Biden's July 23 phone call
    telling President Ghani to be untruthful about the Taliban's
    success? According to Reuters, which reviewed both the
    transcript and the audio, President Biden said, quote, and
    there is a need--whether it be true or not, there is a need to
    project a different picture. Was that an ad lib by President
    Biden, or was that lie scripted into the phone call? And if it
    was scripted, by who?
        Second. Have any Americans been arrested, beaten, abducted,
    or killed by the Taliban or ISIS-K since we left, and do we
    have the capacity or the capability to know that?
        Third. Were there any gaps or weaknesses in the vetting
    process of Afghan evacuees, especially in light of the fact
    that reliable information on some, perhaps many who got parole,
    wasn't available to conduct a meaningful background check? Are
    you concerned that the Taliban may have embedded its members as
    evacuees?
        I visited our base at Fort Dix recently with some other
    Members of Congress and our Governor and asked a number of
    questions, but I was very concerned about the vetting or lack
    thereof and the fact that parolees, about 70 percent strong at
    our base, at least, are going to go up to about 13,000, they
    could leave if they would like. They are free to leave. It is
    not clear whether or not they could return, but they are free
    to leave.
        And, finally, one of the profoundly negative consequences
    outside of Afghanistan has been China and Taiwan. The State-
    controlled Chinese Communist Party media, including CCP run
    Global Times, and I read it every day, are saturating the
    Taiwanese with messages to give up and surrender to Beijing
    because the United States will, just as it did in Afghanistan,
    abandon them too. That is what the Global Times is saying. But
    if you could start off with the first question, I would
    appreciate it. And go to----
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you very much, Congressman. Let me
    see if I can address all those questions.
        First. With regard to the phone call you cited, I am
    obviously not going to comment on leaked--purportedly leaked
    transcripts of phone calls. Here is what I can tell you. What
    the President said in that conversation with then President
    Ghani is exactly what he was saying in public, and it is this:
    That the issue was not the capacity at that point of the Afghan
    government and the Afghan security forces to hold the country
    and to hold Kabul. It was their will and whether they had a
    plan to do so, and we were concerned that they were not
    demonstrating that will or that plan.
        He pressed President Ghani on the need to consolidate his
    forces
        [inaudible] From military advice from our military leaders
    to make sure that he could defend the places that needed
    defending and not overstretch those forces, and he needed to
    bring people together, the different factions, to show a united
    front. That was what--that is what he said----
        Mr. Smith. I have only got a few minutes.
        Secretary Blinken. I will answer the rest of the questions
    if I can.
        Mr. Smith. Was it a real--I mean, is the transcript untrue?
        Secretary Blinken. Again, I am not commenting on any
    purportedly leaked transcripts. I am telling you what, based on
    my knowledge of the conversation the President said, and what
    he said is exactly what he said in public.
        Second. With regard to American citizens remaining behind.
    The ones we are in contact with, we have 500 people on a task
    force and teams dedicated to them to be in regular contact with
    them, and I have not heard from those people that concern
    raised.
        I cannot say whether there are any American citizens who we
    are not in contact with or do not know of who may have been
    mistreated in some fashion in Afghanistan.
        Third. With regard to the background checks, and this is
    very important, and you are right to focus on it. You know, as
    you know, before Afghans evacuated from Afghanistan reached the
    United States, they go to a transit country, and that is where
    the initial checks are done.
        We have surged Customs and Border Patrol. We have surged
    our intelligence and law enforcement capacity to do those
    initial checks. And then when they get to the United States,
    first at a military base, those checks are continued, using all
    of law enforcement intelligence, security agencies, to do that
    so that we can make sure that we are not letting anyone into
    the country who could pose a threat or a risk.
        It is exactly that balance that is so important as well in
    the SIV program. We all want to bring Afghans at risk in the
    United States. We also have an obligation, that you rightly
    point out, to the security of our fellow citizens.
        Finally, on China and Taiwan. As I said earlier, whatever
    protestations they may be making in newspapers or in their
    propaganda, there is nothing that China would have liked more
    than for us to have reupped the war in Afghanistan and to
    remain bogged down for another 5, 10, or 20 years.
        That would have been profoundly against our strategic
    interests and profoundly in China's strategic interests. Thank
    you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Albio Sires of New Jersey
    who is the chair of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere,
    Civilian Security Migration, and International Economic Policy
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us for
    the third time.
        And I want also to say thank you to the work done that the
    State Department has done in getting people, including 11
    members of one family that were all united and are here now in
    this country. So I--my hat is tipped off to those people who
    worked so hard.
        The question that I have is the Taliban seems to be having
    a complete hold in the country while I understand there are
    other groups in Afghanistan. How fragile or how strong or firm
    is the Taliban's hold on this country?
        And do you see that breaking apart as everybody wants their
    piece down the line because it seems that this country is made
    up of pieces--of people that control certain pieces of the
    country.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. It is a very good question
    and an important one. And it is very hard to predict with any
    certainty.
        The country is in so many ways, as you have pointed out,
    fractured among different groups, different ethnic groups--
    north, south, east, and west--different outside actors that may
    be supporting one group or another. And so for the Taliban to
    fully consolidate control, I think that remains an open
    question. It is also why, ironically, it would be profoundly in
    the Taliban's interest to actually put forward a genuinely
    inclusive and representative government.
        Because to the extent it does not, to the extent that
    everyone other than the Taliban is left out, that is only
    likely to--at some period in time, whether it is tomorrow, next
    week, next year, or thereafter, cause those who are left out to
    try to assert, one way or another, their rights and needs. So
    all of that, I think, is an open question at this point.
        One last thing I would mention. The country itself is in
    desperate straits. The U.N. estimates that fully half the
    population is in need to humanitarian assistance. We have
    severe malnutrition, health problems, COVID-19, droughts, et
    cetera, and so there too the Taliban has a big problem on its
    hands. And, of course, it is generating very, very little
    revenue in order to deal with that, all of which, I might add,
    gives the international community very significant leverage and
    influence going forward.
        Mr. Sires. I also read where they are running out of food
    in the next few months?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, that is correct. We have seen, you
    know, a terrible drought, growing nutrition problems. It is one
    of the reasons that we think it is so important to make sure
    that, regardless of anything else, we and other countries find
    ways to continue humanitarian assistance to the people of
    Afghanistan.
        We have committed additional funds to do that. There is a
    pledging conference called by the United Nations that is
    ongoing, and we can and will do that consistent with the
    sanctions, consistent with our laws, by directing assistance
    through NGO's, through the United Nations' agencies, not
    through the government.
        We need to do everything we can to make sure the people of
    Afghanistan do not suffer any more than is already the case.
        Mr. Sires. I would like to see, if we are going to help
    Afghanistan with food and aid, that we extract certain
    commitments from them before we just give them food.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Mr. Sires. And the last thing I want--and the last thing I
    want to say----
        Secretary Blinken. Please.
        Mr. Sires [continuing]. I want to commend the country of
    Colombia. I think they have taken thousands of Afghanistans and
    they are vetting them before they get here. Is that accurate?
        Secretary Blinken. There are a number of countries around
    the world that have made those commitments that are either
    serving as transit countries or serving as resettlement
    countries, taking in Afghans as refugees, and we deeply
    appreciate the countries that have stood up and agreed to do
    that.
        Mr. Sires. Thank you. I do not have any more questions,
    Chairman.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back.
        I now recognize Representative Joe Wilson of South
    Carolina, who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the
    Middle East, North Africa, and Global Counterterrorism, for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Chairman Greg Meeks. And I
    am glad to join with our dear colleague, Albio Sires, in
    thanking our great ally of Colombia, of helping the Afghan
    refugees.
        Sir, in my service on the Foreign Affairs Committee, the
    Global Terrorism Subcommittee, the Armed Services Committee,
    the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, and the Helsinki Commission, I
    have always been impressed by American Foreign Service
    diplomats worldwide. Their dedication to service is inspiring.
    That is why I am shocked at your actions superseding military
    advice, leading to the surrender in Afghanistan to be a safe
    haven for murderous terrorists.
        Biden and Harris have also opened the southern border,
    stopping the wall of President Donald Trump. This allows
    identified terrorists of the terror watch list to enter
    American neighborhoods as lone wolf suicide bombers to murder
    as many Americans as possible. In American history, American
    families have never been at a greater risk of attack at home
    than today, as the global war on terrorism is not over, it has
    been moved from abroad to Americans homes.
        As the grateful father of an Afghanistan veteran, I
    especially see your actions as indefensible. With 12 visits by
    me across Afghanistan to thank the South Carolina Army National
    Guard troops, the 218th Brigade, commanded by General Bob
    Livingston, I know firsthand they appreciated serving with
    their Afghan brothers.
        I saw the United States Agency for International
    Development success in building schools, agricultural projects,
    hospitals, and bridges and roads.
        My beliefs have been actually expressed by the New York
    Post Editorial Board on September 1, and that is, quote, ``6
    lies Joe Biden told about Afghanistan.'' How can any American
    believe anything Biden says after he has lied so blatantly?
        Lie: If there are American citizens left, we are going to
    stay until we get them out.
        Truth: Biden himself admits Americans remain stranded in
    Afghanistan.
        Lie: We are making the same commitment, Biden said, to
    Afghanistans who assisted America.
        Truth: A senior State Department official confessed to NBC
    News that the majority of Afghans did not make it out of Kabul.
        Lie: The United States stands by its commitment that we
    have made to vulnerable Afghans, such as women leaders and
    journalists.
        Truth: Team Biden did not even ensure American-employed
    journalists made it to safety.
        Lie: Asked by a reporter, do you see any parallels between
    what happened in Vietnam? None whatsoever. Zero.
        Truth: Not even a month later, pictures came from Kabul of
    a helicopter flying over the American Embassy.
        Lie: Biden vowed to continue to provide Afghan army with
    air support.
        Truth: In the wake of Biden's withdrawal decision, he
    pulled the air support, intelligence, and contractors. The
    Afghan militaries couldn't operate.
        Lie: July 8, Biden added that the likelihood there is going
    to be a Taliban overrunning everything is highly unlikely.
        Truth: In fact, Biden knew the Taliban were overtaking the
    Afghan Government and asked President Ghani to lie about it.
    Whether it is true or not.
        Sadly, the advance military equipment left to the
    terrorists--and I end the quote of that article--sadly, the
    advance military equipment left to the terrorists is comparable
    to all of the military equipment that we have provided to
    Israel since 1948.
        The countries who have suffered most from Islamic extremist
    terrorist attacks--India, Israel, and America--are in danger.
    They chant death to Israel, death to America.
        We must never forget the May 8 bombing in Kabul, where
    Islamic extremist terrorists slaughtered over 80 innocent young
    girls. You should have changed course then because of this
    gruesome revealing fact. The murderers of that attack now will
    have a safe haven to attack American families at home.
        Your bizarre abandoning of Bagram Airfield led directly to
    13 Marines murdered in Kabul. You should resign.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. Mr. Secretary, we only had 43 seconds left
    of the 5 minutes. So your response, I know you will not be able
    to answer many of the questions that was put forward by
    Representative Wilson, but if you choose, you have 43 seconds
    of which to respond for whichever questions were asked to you.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Let me simply thank the member for his support for the men
    and women of the State Department. I appreciated that part of
    his statement. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Gerry
    Connolly of Virginia, who is the president of the NATO
    Parliamentary Assembly, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Connolly. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
        I guess I would say to my friend from South Carolina, if I
    were the Member of Congress who committed one of the most
    grievous acts in the state of the Union Address when the
    President of the United States, Mr. Obama, was our guest, to
    shout out, ``You lie,'' I might take more care about
    enumerating other alleged lies in a hearing with the Secretary
    of State.
        Mr. Secretary, what we are listening to on the other side
    of the aisle, sadly, is sort of a salad mix of selective facts
    and a lot of amnesia in the salad dressing.
        The history of instability in Afghanistan did not begin on
    August 14 of this year, did it?
        Secretary Blinken. It did not.
        Mr. Connolly. Am I correct in remembering that, in fact,
    you could trace direct routes to 1977, 1978, when there was a
    communist coup and the President of Afghanistan was
    assassinated in the Presidential palace. Is that correct?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Connolly. And 1 year later, the Soviet Union, because
    of that instability, decided to invade Afghanistan. Is that
    correct?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Connolly. And 10 years later, the Soviets left
    Afghanistan because they had mounting and maybe really
    unsustainable military casualties and felt that they were
    engaged in a process that could not be won. Is that correct?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Connolly. And, meanwhile, because the United States
    decided once that happened, it would disengage primarily from
    Afghanistan, groups like the Taliban had 12 years in which to
    create political power. Is that correct?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Connolly. And in 2001, we reentered Afghanistan in
    response to the tragedy we just remembered--20-year remembrance
    this week--and we rolled up the Taliban by making alliances
    with various militia groups in the north and moved south until
    they lost control of the country in that year, in 2001. Is that
    correct?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, it is.
        Mr. Connolly. And the purpose of our involvement was to
    defeat al-Qaeda because the Taliban were harboring this
    virulent terrorist group that had attacked America. Is that
    correct?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Connolly. Would it be fair to say that we achieved that
    objective?
        Secretary Blinken. It would.
        Mr. Connolly. Would it be it fair to say that, in fact, 10
    years later, the leader of that group, who masterminded the
    attacks of 9/11, was, in fact, killed by a United States
    specially trained military unit?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Connolly. So what happened ultimately on August 14 has
    lots of history. I know it is convenient to pretend that did
    not happen. And I know that we want to give ourselves sort of
    the pleasure of attacking a political leader of the other
    party, and so let me engage in that too.
        I am going to assert that the events of August 14had their
    direct antecedent with a bad decision by President Trump and
    Secretary Pompeo, in 2018, to elevate and legitimize the
    Taliban in Doha, Qatar, by agreeing to have face-to-face
    negotiations.
        That tragedy was compounded exponentially by an
    unbelievable decision to exclude the Government of Afghanistan,
    ostensibly we were defending, from those very negotiations. Is
    that an accurate statement, Mr. Secretary?
        Secretary Blinken. Certainly that is what we inherited.
        Mr. Connolly. But the Afghan Government was, in fact,
    excluded from the negotiating table in Doha by the Trump
    administration. Is that not correct?
        Secretary Blinken. It is essentially correct, yes.
        Mr. Connolly. And when those 5,000 people were released
    from prison, since the ranking member is so concerned, and
    correctly so, about two Haqqani members in the current cabinet
    of Taliban, were there any known terrorists or declared
    terrorists by the United States among those 5,000 people
    released with the consent and negotiated agreement of the Trump
    administration?
        Secretary Blinken. Almost certainly, yes.
        Mr. Connolly. Ah, I guess our concern about terrorists is
    pretty selective and limited to partisanship.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back his time.
        I now recognize Representative Steve Chabot of Ohio, who is
    the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific,
    Central Asia, and Nonproliferation, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        On August 16, Mr. Secretary, President Biden said that the
    administration had considered every contingency and was
    executing the evacuation according to your plan.
        Was it part of your plan to rely on the Taliban to ensure
    the safety of Americans trying to flee the country? Because
    that is what happened.
        Secretary Blinken. We, through the course of the spring and
    summer, did indeed, as the President said, look at every
    contingency for dealing with our drawdown. And as part of
    that----
        Mr. Chabot. And we relied upon the Taliban to be our
    security. In essence, we ended up getting 13 of our military
    personnel and over 150 Afghan civilians killed by relying upon
    the Taliban. They did not provide very good security. We never
    should have relied upon them.
        But let me move on----
        Secretary Blinken. We were not relying upon the Taliban. As
    you know what happened, was the Afghan security forces and the
    government collapsed within the space of 11 days. We then
    executed the plans that we had in place to safely draw down our
    embassy, move it to the airport. The military came in, took
    over the airport, and started getting evacuation flights out
    within 72 hours. Those were the plans that were in place.
        Mr. Chabot. We certainly relied upon it at the airport. It
    did not work out so well.
        Mr. Secretary, President Biden has laid the blame for the
    evacuation debacle in Afghanistan on others rather than on
    itself, where it really belongs. He blamed President Trump, as
    we have discussed already to some degree here, basically
    claiming that he was just following Trump's policy.
        But he has not hesitated to disregard every other major
    Trump policy: our southern border, the Keystone Pipeline, the
    Paris climate accord, the Iran deal, Mexico City policy, and on
    and on.
        Yet this was the one Trump policy that he had to follow. Do
    you understand why this is pretty hard to fathom for a lot of
    people?
        Secretary Blinken. I think what is perhaps, Congressman,
    hard to fathom or people just do not understand, is that the
    agreement reached by the previous administration required all
    U.S. Forces to be out of Afghanistan by May 1. In return, the
    Taliban stopped attacking our forces, our partners, and it did
    not commence an onslaught of the Afghanistan cities.
        Had the President not followed through on the commitments
    that his predecessor made, those attacks would have resumed, we
    would have re-upped the war in Afghanistan after 20 years, for
    another 5, 10, or 20 years. We would have had to send more
    forces back in.
        And I recognize that a lot of people do not understand
    that, do not know the agreement that was reached, and the
    choice that President Biden faced for May 1.
        Mr. Chabot. Well, let me ask you this. When he wasn't
    blaming Trump, he was blaming the Afghan military forces for
    allegedly not being willing to fight.
        But whereas we hadn't suffered a single U.S. military death
    in a year and a half--and that is a wonderful thing--the Afghan
    military forces had lost about 3,000 of their military
    personnel during that same time.
        So wasn't the President being a little unfair to those
    3,000 Afghans who lost their lives fighting the Taliban during
    that period of time?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, many Afghan soldiers fought
    with incredible bravery and gave their lives, you are right.
    But as an institution, after 20 years of investment by the
    United States, by the international community, hundreds of
    billions of dollars, equipment, support, training, as an
    institution, it collapsed in 11 days.
        Mr. Chabot. Mr. Secretary, we went into Afghanistan in the
    first place because the Taliban had harbored al-Qaeda, correct,
    and they attacked us on September 11.
        Now, 20 years later, we have the Taliban back in charge
    there, and they have billions and billions of dollars worth of
    our equipment and our weaponry, and once again, they are a
    haven for terrorists. How is this not a debacle of monumental
    proportions?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, as we were discussing a
    little bit earlier, al-Qaeda, the group that attacked us on 9/
    11, long ago was vastly degraded to the point where it is
    currently not capable, in the assessment of our intelligence
    agencies, of conducting an externally directed attack against
    us or against others.
        The Taliban should remember as well what happened the last
    time it did, as you rightly said, harbor al-Qaeda, and it
    engaged in an outwardly directed attack against us. It knows
    the consequences of continuing to do that, and it has made
    commitments not to allow that to happen.
        But, of course, we are not relying on those commitments. As
    we discussed a little bit earlier, we are putting in place what
    we do in countries around the world where we do not have boots
    on the ground, which is an over-the-horizon capacity to detect
    the reemergence, should it happen, of any threat, including
    from al-Qaeda, and the means to do something about it.
        Mr. Chabot. This pullout was----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Ted Deutch of Florida, who
    is the chair of the Subcommittee on the Middle East, North
    Africa, and Global Counterterrorism, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, I appreciate you being here today. And we do
    need to look back--this is a really important hearing--but we
    also need to look forward.
        The reality is, we have a Taliban government, we have
    terrorist groups already surging, potential threats to U.S.
    interests remain. It is true that we are not the world's
    policeman, but we know that a strengthened ISIS-K or al-Qaeda
    pose a threat, not only to the U.S. homeland, but to Americans
    abroad, our interests abroad in the region.
        The Middle East and North Africa in particular were
    fundamentally changed in the aftermath of 9/11, with the rise
    of al-Qaeda and ISIS affiliates. We clearly cannot trust the
    Taliban to keep terrorists at bay.
        So, Mr. Secretary, you traveled to Doha to conduct
    diplomatic talks with partners and allies on our continued
    counterterrorism role. What do you assess to be the operational
    capacities of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan? And how is the
    administration planning to hold the Taliban to its commitment
    to ensure that al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups are unable
    to use Afghan soil to plan terrorist attacks on or threaten the
    security of the U.S. and our allies?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you very much. A few things on
    this. First, as we were discussing a little bit earlier, as you
    know from your focus on this, the terrorist threat has
    metastasized significantly from 9/11, and it is much more acute
    now in terms of potential threats to the homeland and threats
    beyond the countries in question, from Somalia, from Yemen,
    from Libya, Iraq, Syria, a number of other countries in Africa
    as well.
        And so we have to be able to make sure that we are focused
    everywhere that is a possibility and resourced appropriately.
    And we are. And in a number of those places, as you know very
    well, we do not have boots on the ground, but we find ways to
    deal with that threat, including with over-the-horizon
    capabilities.
        In the case of Afghanistan, a couple of things. The current
    assessment of the intelligence community is that long ago al-
    Qaeda was so significantly degraded, that it is not in a
    position to conduct externally faced--externally directed
    attacks. But we will remain hypervigilant about any reemergence
    of that threat, and we will be working closely with partners
    and other countries to be in a position to do that.
        I think the chairman referenced earlier that we hope and
    expect in the near future to be able to do some classified
    briefings on this because there are a number of things that it
    would not be appropriate to discuss in this setting.
        Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And we appreciate
    your commitment to ensuring that those classified briefings
    occur.
        Secretary Blinken, the war in Afghanistan was the first
    mission in the history of NATO arising out of the invitation of
    article 5, and over 50 NATO members and partner countries sent
    troops. Thirty-six, it has been reported, had troops there at
    the time of the drawdown.
        They invested political capital--our allies invested
    political capital and funds and certainly troops, and often
    those troops gave their lives as well.
        The criticism that we have heard from some of our allies is
    that there was not adequate consultation and coordination with
    our NATO allies. We heard the Secretary General of NATO say
    just this week that there was others doubting that. I would
    like you to speak to that.
        But finally this. We had an administration, Mr. Secretary,
    that wanted to go it alone, a President who failed to
    appreciate and often criticized the importance of NATO allies,
    while embracing Xi and Putin.
        If you could also, in your final time with me, speak to, at
    a time when democratic values are being threatened and at risk
    in so many places around the world, if you could also speak to
    the importance of that transatlantic relationship and how to
    reassure those allies of ours who have raised concerns about
    how we went about pulling out of Afghanistan and about failing
    to coordinate with them as we did.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. Couple of things. First, you
    are so right to point to our allies and partners who stood with
    us on 9/11 and in all the days and time thereafter. And you are
    exactly right that article 5 of NATO, an attack on one is an
    attack on all, in essence, was invoked for the very first time
    in its history in our defense by our allies and partners,
    something that I will never forget and I suspect no one on this
    video conference today will ever forget.
        And we determined that when it came to Afghanistan, we went
    in together and we would go out together. And that is exactly
    what we did. We engaged--I engaged, for the Secretary of
    Defense, in intense consultations with our NATO partners well
    before the President made his decision, going to Brussels for a
    special session of the North Atlantic Council and listening
    intently to every single partner, relaying what we heard
    directly to President Biden, to factor that into our thinking
    and into our planning.
        I have spent more time in Brussels, either in person or
    virtually, than in any other place since I have been on this
    job, working very closely with these allies and partners. On
    the day that the President's decision was announced, I was back
    in Brussels, again with the Secretary of Defense, and NATO
    immediately and unanimously endorsed that decision.
        Now, in the discussions and conversations that we had
    throughout this time, including individual conversations,
    people brought various perspectives to the table, but each
    recognized that given the deadline that existed, that is, that
    our forces had to depart Afghanistan by May 1, pursuant to the
    agreement negotiated by the previous administration, that the
    alternative, should we choose to stay, was for the Taliban to
    resume attacks, not just on us, but on our NATO partners and
    allies, as well as to engage in this countrywide offensive that
    we have seen to retake the major cities, in effect, to re-up
    the war. And all unanimously endorsed the proposition that we
    would leave together, and that is exactly what we worked on
    doing and what we have been doing.
        I know from talking to many allies and partners the
    tremendous solidarity we saw at the Kabul Airport, working to
    help each other, to make sure that we could get out our fellow
    nationals, Afghans who had helped each of us, and our embassy
    personnel.
        I heard a lot of gratitude from allies and partners about
    the work that our folks did in making sure that we could
    deliver on that commitment to them.
        So, from my perspective at least, there was tremendous and
    genuine consultation with allies and partners throughout this
    process. And going forward, right now, we are deeply engaged
    with them, at NATO and in other organizations, on working
    together on the way forward, to collectively hold the Taliban
    to the commitments that it has made to the international
    community.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you. The gentleman's time is expired.
        I now recognize Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Blinken, assuming it is not classified, can you tell us
    where you are today?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. I am at the State Department.
        Mr. Perry. Oh, couldn't be bothered to come down here and
    see Congress. All right. That is great.
        Secretary Blinken. My understanding--excuse me, sir. My
    understanding is that the House is not in session, and that is
    why the session has been convened----
        Mr. Perry. I am right here, Secretary, so----
        Secretary Blinken. If the chairman would like to correct
    me, I will stand corrected.
        Mr. Perry. Reclaiming my time. Did State at any point in
    the evacuation process block American citizens from leaving
    Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. No, we did not.
        Mr. Perry. None? Your testimony before Congress is that
    State did not block any American citizens leaving?
        Secretary Blinken. To the contrary, my officers, men and
    women, ran into the building from around the world to help
    Americans get out, and----
        Mr. Perry. You can do it with Mr. Connolly, you can do it
    with me. Yes or no? I just want to clarify, you did not block
    anybody?
        Secretary Blinken. No. They were there to help Americans
    get out, not to block----
        Mr. Perry. How many Afghans not meeting the qualifications
    of SIV have been brought to the United States, prior to--how
    many Afghan citizens came to the United States that had not met
    the qualifications for a special immigrant visa?
        Secretary Blinken. We are in the process of going through--
    --
        Mr. Perry. How many? How many? How many did you bring? You
    were just at Dulles. How many did you bring?
        Secretary Blinken. We have--we will have, by the end of the
    month, we will have brought a total of approximately 60,000 to
    the United States.
        Mr. Perry. That have met the SIV process.
        Secretary Blinken. Some of those will be--some of those
    will have been through the SIV process. All of them, regardless
    of SIV status, will have gone through rigorous security checks,
    first at the transit points outside of the United States and
    then the United States.
        Mr. Perry. [Inaudible] Before we brought these people to
    the United States of America.
        Mr. Secretary, are Afghan refugees required to be
    vaccinated for COVID before coming to the United States of
    America?
        Secretary Blinken. They are vaccinated in the United States
    before they are--before they are resettled into the United
    States.
        Mr. Perry. There are none of these Afghan citizens that are
    allowed to leave these resettlement communities--Fort Dix,
    Dulles, et cetera--that are allowed to leave at any time they
    want. None of them are leaving unless they are vaccinated for
    COVID. Is that your testimony?
        Secretary Blinken. They are tested for COVID and vaccinated
    for COVID.
        Mr. Perry. Vaccinated before they leave?
        Secretary Blinken. That is my understanding.
        Mr. Perry. All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        Is it the policy of the United States of America to take
    hard-earned tax dollars and pay terrorist organizations?
        Secretary Blinken. It is not.
        Mr. Perry. It is not. So your testimony earlier was, is
    that we are sending taxpayer dollars to Afghanistan right now
    for humanitarian relief. Who are we sending that to?
        Secretary Blinken. To NGO's and to United Nations' agencies
    who are using that assistance. Not to the Afghan Government.
        Mr. Perry. Not to the Afghan--the Taliban government. How
    are you accounting for that? How are you making sure that the
    Afghan--the Taliban government is not receiving that?
        Secretary Blinken. As we do around the world in places of
    conflict where we provide humanitarian assistance, working
    through United Nations, working through NGO's, with long-tested
    methods to make sure that the assistance provided goes to the
    people who need it, not to the government in question.
        Mr. Perry. All right. Let me ask you this. Is it your
    understanding that over the past 20 years, United States
    taxpayers have paid Pakistan, who has then used that money to
    support the Taliban, the Haqqani Network, ISIS-K, Khorasan
    group, et cetera, for the past 20 years? Is that not true?
        Secretary Blinken. There is a long history that we should
    all look at together about the involvement of Pakistan in the
    last 20 years.
        Mr. Perry. I would say that we should no longer pay
    Pakistan and we should pay India.
        Let me ask you this. I just have a couple more questions
    for you, a little off topic here, but I think it is
    interesting.
        How long was your recent interview with the FBI, and was it
    a deposition?
        Secretary Blinken. I am sorry. I do not know to what you
    are referring.
        Mr. Perry. Are you saying that you have not had a recent
    interview with the FBI since becoming Secretary of State?
        Secretary Blinken. I am not sure what you are referring to,
    and I am happy to take that up with you offline.
        Mr. Perry. Did the State Department turn over documents to
    the FBI related to Hunter Biden, Burisma, and/or the Blue State
    Strategies Corporation?
        Secretary Blinken. You will have to ask the----
        Mr. Perry. You have no knowledge of this. You have had no--
    are you saying you have not had an interview with----
        Secretary Blinken. It would not be appropriate for me to
    comment in a public forum on any legal proceedings that the
    Department or I may or may not have been involved in.
        Mr. Perry. I am not asking you to comment on the legal
    proceedings. I am just asking if you have been interviewed by
    the FBI since becoming Secretary of State.
        Secretary Blinken. Again, I am not going to comment one way
    or another on any legal proceedings or not that may or may not
    have happened.
        Chairman Meeks. Let me remind the gentleman that the topic
    of this hearing is Afghanistan. That is what we are----
        Mr. Perry. I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman, but the Secretary
    generally refuses to answer questions about Afghanistan, so I
    just figured we would talk about something he should be
    intimately familiar with.
        Have you sought to alter any of your testimony from last
    year's Senate investigation regarding this topic, Mr.
    Secretary?
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        And let me also for the record make clear that this is a
    hybrid hearing. Just as members had an option to come or to be
    other places, the Secretary also. It is a hybrid hearing
    because we are not in session.
        Mr. Issa. Mr. Chairman, point of inquiry, if I could?
        Chairman Meeks. Who seeks recognition?
        Mr. Issa. This is Congressman Issa. Just for my
    edification, was it expressed to the Secretary that he had a
    choice of either one, or was he invited to come here, or was he
    alerted to remain there?
        And I only ask because I think we all agree that if he
    could have been here in person, it would have been better, but
    if it was an option or for whatever reason--because I want to
    make sure that it is clear that the Secretary may have done no
    wrong, even though many of us would prefer him to be here.
        Chairman Meeks. The Secretary has done no wrong. It was an
    option, and I made it as an option as I have done with every
    member.
        Mr. Issa. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Karen Bass
    of California, who is the chair of the Subcommittee on Africa,
    Global Health, and Global Human Rights, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Bass. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
        And thank you, Secretary Blinken, for attending this
    hearing and for your patience with putting up with the
    theatrics of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I
    want to thank you, again, for spending the time and agreeing to
    take everyone's questions for 5 minutes.
        The departure from Afghanistan has provided really
    unprecedented insight into our foreign policy, in addition to
    demonstrating the bravery, dedication, and professionalism of
    our military, diplomats, and Afghan partners. It has also shown
    how a 20-year effort and billions of dollars have really raised
    questions about what the return of investment is that we
    desired in terms of sustaining peace and stability in
    Afghanistan.
        The assumption of power by the Taliban has secondary and
    tertiary effects on the most vulnerable segments of the
    population, especially women and children, and we are concerned
    that it will reverse any gains that were realized in the last
    two decades.
        So my first question, yes or no, Mr. Secretary, did the
    agreement from the last administration include any protections
    for girls and women?
        Secretary Blinken. Not to my knowledge.
        Ms. Bass. So many people are concerned about the status of
    women and girls in Afghanistan under the Taliban. The
    restrictions on education, movement, health, physical safety,
    under their regime paints a grim picture.
        I would like to know how the administration will work with
    partners to support Afghan women's rights and the rights of
    ethnic and religious minorities in Afghanistan. Go ahead.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Congresswoman. One of the
    truly great achievements of the last 20 years was the progress
    made by women and girls in particular in Afghanistan. And one
    of the things that we should be proud of is the support--the
    leading support that we gave to that when it comes to access to
    education, to healthcare, to the work force, entrepreneurship.
    Those gains were significant, and we were the leading
    contributor.
        I was in Kabul in April. I sat with a number of women who
    had benefited from our assistance, including women who had gone
    on to become leaders in their parliament, in the media, NGO's,
    et cetera, and, of course, heard their profound concerns about
    the future.
        Just recently when I was in Doha and at Ramstein talking to
    people who had been evacuated from Afghanistan, I spoke to a
    lot of women and girls and heard their deep concerns about the
    future, as well as people who were still in Afghanistan.
        And so we have an ongoing commitment to use every tool at
    our disposal through our diplomacy, through our economic
    assistance, humanitarian assistance, programmatic assistance,
    to do whatever we can to continue, in coordination with many
    other countries, to support women and girls and minorities in
    Afghanistan. The assistance that we announced today will go in
    that direction. The assistance we will provide going forward
    will do that.
        And with regard to women and girls in particular, given the
    incredible fragility of the situation that they are now in, I
    will be naming a senior official here at the State Department
    to focus entirely on the ongoing effort, both from the U.S.
    Government and in coordination with other countries, to support
    them.
        Ms. Bass. Well, thank you very much. And so will the
    administration expand the license to operate humanitarian
    programs in Afghanistan? And how will that take place? And
    which partners do you see us continuing to work with?
        Secretary Blinken. In short, yes, that is exactly what we
    are looking at. And you rightly point out, we have already
    issued a license to make sure that humanitarian assistance
    could go forward. We are looking at whether that needs to be
    expanded, consistent, of course, with our sanctions and
    consistent with our national security, to allow appropriate
    assistance to get to those who need it.
        Ms. Bass. Who approves that license? Who are we making that
    request to?
        Secretary Blinken. The Treasury Department is responsible
    for the licenses, but we do this in coordination or
    consultation with us and other agencies in the government, as
    well as, of course, the White House.
        Ms. Bass. And which partners on the ground are we
    continuing to work with?
        Secretary Blinken. We have--and we can get you the list. We
    have a number of NGO's that remain active in Afghanistan, as
    well as----
        Ms. Bass. Are these SGOs (ph) or NGO's?
        Secretary Blinken. Some are--there are, I believe, a couple
    of U.S. NGO's that are still active, international NGO's, and
    U.N. agencies. I met with the head of the U.N.'s Humanitarian
    Assistance Program just a few days ago when I was in Doha, and
    we spent a lot of time talking about how this assistance could
    continue to go forward and what some of the mechanisms were
    that could be put in place to make sure that it was getting to
    the right people and being used effectively.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Darrell Issa from California
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Issa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, before we get into the tougher part of this,
    I want to thank you for the effort that has gone on by the men
    and women of both the State Department and the Department of
    Defense, and a lot of independent actions that occurred to try
    to help get people out in the aftermath of the withdrawal.
        I would not be doing my job, though, if I did not ask some
    tough questions. One of them is up here on this board, and it
    is pretty straightforward. A response I received from the State
    Department said to my staff when we asked about continued work
    to get people out, it said, make contingency plans to leave
    when it is safe to do so that do not rely on U.S. Government
    assistance.
        How do we square the fact that in an official response that
    I waited weeks for, that we do not have any assurance for
    assistance but that when people get out, typically they are
    lauded by the State Department as success stories. That
    includes an 80-year-old couple that was announced to have
    gotten out when, in fact, we saw no real assistance by the
    State Department, had to find out it was a nongovernment flight
    and get these two American citizens onto that flight, and we
    still have a number of others.
        So, in a nutshell, how do I explain, do not rely on the
    United States? Do we or do we not rely on the United States of
    America for blue passport holder American citizens who want to
    get out?
        Secretary Blinken. The answer to that is, yes, absolutely.
    And could you tell me, because I am sorry, I cannot see it
    clearly from here, you know, when and to whom that statement
    was made?
        Mr. Issa. We will give it to your staff so that you get it
    without it being fully disclosed----
        Secretary Blinken. And, Congressman, I would really welcome
    following up with you, with your team, with your staff to make
    sure that we are following up on that particular request.
        I have got here--because I really want to express deep
    appreciation to Members of Congress, this committee--I have
    here a very lengthy document of all of the inquiries that we
    have received just from HFAC, from members of HFAC, on people
    who have come to you seeking assistance, all of which has been
    factored into our data bases, our information, our efforts. But
    if someone is not getting the response they need, please come
    back to us and let me know, and we would be very happy to work
    with you on that.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Issa. We will do that. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        Now, if I can quickly go through a few dates and a few
    statements. On July 8, President Biden was asked if he listened
    to the intelligence assessment that the Afghan Government was
    likely to collapse. He answered, that is not true. They are
    not--they did not reach that conclusion. In other words, the IC
    hadn't reached that conclusion.
        I believe that we will find that as of July 8, the
    President misspoke.
        The President also said the likelihood there is going to be
    the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country
    is highly unlikely. Two days later, on July 10, the Taliban was
    reported to have 85 percent of the country.
        Then on August 12, The Wall Street Journal reported that on
    July 13, you received an urgent dissent memo from 23 U.S.
    Embassy personnel in Kabul warning that the advances of the
    Taliban and the rapid collapse of Afghanistan. Your spokesman
    said you read every memo sent to you from the Dissent Channel.
    So if you do, then you knew that, in fact, a major portion of
    people in the embassy believed that they were going to quickly
    overrun.
        On August 18, President Biden said, the intelligence
    community did not say, back in June or July, that, in fact,
    this was going to collapse like it did. But the embassy told
    you, or at least a great many, in July, that it would.
        The question really is, how do we regain confidence in the
    State Department and its spokespeople, yourself included, and
    the President, if, in fact, we cannot square what we receive,
    Members of Congress, both publicly and privately, that indicate
    some of those statements that I just read, including ones by
    the President, are not supported by the facts?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. As you know from tracking
    this as well, throughout the year, assessments were made of the
    resilience of the Afghan Government, the Afghan security
    forces, and the possibility of the Taliban taking over the
    country.
        And this was typically done in a series of different
    scenarios: worst, mid case, best case scenarios. In the worst
    case scenarios throughout the spring, I think it is fair to say
    that the general assessment was that the government and
    security forces would be able to hold on to the country well
    into next year, 2022.
        At some point in July, there was an assessment that it was
    more likely than not that that timeframe was down to the end of
    the year. Then, of course, as things fully unraveled in August,
    that changed.
        To my knowledge, Congressman, no one predicted the
    unraveling before our forces and embassy left Afghanistan on
    August 31.
        The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Milley, has said,
    nothing I or anyone else saw indicated a collapse of the
    government and the security forces in 11 days.
        The Director of National Intelligence has said, in the days
    leading up to the Taliban takeover, intelligence agencies did
    not say collapse was imminent.
        This unfolded more quickly than we anticipated, including
    in the intelligence community. And there are a number of other
    conclusory statements of that kind that I can share with you.
        With regard to the so-called Dissent Channel cable, it is
    something I am immensely proud of, it is a tradition that we
    have. And you are right, I read every such cable, I respond to
    it, I factor it into my own thinking and actions. And that
    cable did not predict the collapse of the government or
    security forces before our departure. It was very focused, and
    rightly focused, on the work we were doing to try to get
    Afghans at risk out of the country and pressing to speed up
    that effort.
        As it happens, a number of the things that were suggested
    in that very important cable were things that we were in the
    process of doing. The very next day--I think the cable came in
    on the 13th of July--the 14th, we launched Operation Allies
    Refuge, which, of course, had been in training for some time,
    as well as the 24/7 task force to help those in the SIV program
    get out and even to relocate them, which is not part of the
    program.
        So that was a very important cable. I am grateful for it,
    and grateful that we have a process at the State Department
    where people can clearly express their views and differences on
    policy or recommendations on policy. That is hugely important.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Bill Keating of
    Massachusetts, who is the chair of the Subcommittee on Europe,
    Energy, the Environment, and Cyber, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your service, and as head
    of the Department of State for our country. I want to thank all
    of your people for the work they have done. They stood side by
    side with our military, risking their lives in helping people
    evacuate in the most dangerous situation. So my sincere
    appreciation to everyone----
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Mr. Keating [continuing]. At State who was part of that.
        I am also glad that you reinforced, as my conversations
    have, the renewed commitment, the strength that is there with
    our transatlantic allies going forward on our mission, not just
    in the region, but also worldwide through our counterterrorism
    efforts.
        I must say this, though. This is a period of reassessment,
    I think, as we go forward, where we have some lessons learned,
    where we go embarking on a new mission, where we are trying to
    do the best in that area and so many fronts. But there is one
    relationship that really has always troubled me a great deal,
    certainly over the last couple of decades, and that is our
    relationship with Pakistan. You know, from its--Pakistan has
    played an active and, by so many accounts, a negative role in
    Afghan affairs for decades, not just recently but for decades.
        From the very beginning, its inception, they helped in
    actually branding the name Taliban. And by 2005, when the
    Taliban was reconstituting in east and south Afghanistan and,
    importantly, across the border in Pakistan, and as Pakistan's
    ISI, their Inter-Services Intelligence agency, had such strong
    ties and cooperation with the Haqqani Network, responsible for
    so many things, including the deaths of some of our soldiers.
        And even recently when the Taliban took over, in the last
    month, Pakistan's Prime Minister Khan claimed that Afghanistan
    had, quote/unquote, broken the shackles of slavery.
        So we used to always hear diplomatically that we have a
    complicated relationship with Afghanistan--I mean with
    Pakistan. I would say it is often duplicitous.
        So as we go forward in the region, as we go forward dealing
    with our counterterrorism missions, how do we reassess that
    relationship? How have we learned from their actions? And when
    we go forward, what do we do? What are some of the big issues
    that we should have, stakes in the ground that we should have
    in dealing with Pakistan and the way they have acted over these
    decades?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Congressman. And I think you
    are very right to point at the role that Pakistan has played
    throughout the past 20 years and even before. And it is one
    that has involved hedging its bets constantly about the future
    of Afghanistan. It is one that is involved harboring members of
    the Taliban, including the Haqqanis. It is one that has also
    involved, at different points, cooperation with us on
    counterterrorism.
        And so there are a number of things that have come into
    play. It has a multiplicity of interests, some that are in
    clear conflict with ours when it comes to Afghanistan. It is
    focused, of course, as well on India and the role that India is
    playing in Afghanistan. It looks at it through that prism as
    well.
        All of these things, I think, have influenced what it has
    done on many occasions detrimental to our interests; on other
    occasions, in support of those interests.
        And so going forward, what we are looking at, what we have
    to look at is an insistence that every country, to include
    Pakistan, make good on the expectations that the international
    community has of what is required of a Taliban-led government,
    if it is to receive any legitimacy of any kind or any support
    going forward, to include ensuring freedom of travel, to
    include making good on its commitments on not allowing
    Afghanistan to be used as a haven for outward-directed
    terrorism, to include upholding the basic rights of the Afghan
    people, including women and girls and minorities, to include
    allowing humanitarian assistance in, to include having a more
    representative government.
        And so Pakistan needs to line up with the rest of the--with
    the broad majority of the international community in working
    toward those ends and in upholding those expectations.
        Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I would like to----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Keating [continuing]. Another time and thank for your
    work with the U.S. Agency for Global Media. We will continue to
    work on that front and many others.
        I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kinzinger. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here and spending this
    time. It is very important.
        You know, watching some of this debate, I think it is
    important to remind people, yes, the Trump administration
    failed in the setup, and I think the Biden Administration
    absolutely failed in the execution of this.
        I also want to make it clear, Mr. Secretary, we support the
    members of the State Department and their heroic action in the
    evacuation. I think the broader point is, they never should
    have been put in a place where they had to act heroically.
        We found ourselves--many times we talk about Bagram and
    leaving that, and I think that it is important to point out,
    but there was also moments where the U.S. military, with the
    6,000 people that we sent in, could have defended Kabul proper.
    It was clear that the Taliban were not intending to move into
    Kabul as early as they did. But we put them in a position where
    they had to act heroically, and we shouldn't ask that of our
    State Department employees, even though we appreciate that they
    did.
        I also think it is important to point out, you know, that
    there is a lot of blame of the Afghan military. And I
    certainly, as a military man myself, wish that the Afghan
    military would have helped. But keep in mind, prior to that,
    there were assessments coming out that it was only a matter of
    time, maybe it is 6 months, maybe it is a year, till the whole
    place collapsed.
        You know, we had pulled--we had built a military in our own
    image that relied on air power, that relied on logistics, and
    then we pulled our logistic and air power support from the
    Afghan military. And as they received night letters from the
    Taliban saying, we are going to kill your family because the
    United States is vacating, they are leaving you, it is--to me,
    as much as I would have loved for them to have stayed and taken
    a stand heroically, I do not know many even of our allies'
    militaries that, frankly, could have stood in those conditions
    in that kind of an onslaught.
        Let me ask you, though, Mr. Secretary, you know, you talk a
    little about the Taliban legitimacy, and we are going to see
    how they act. I want to ask you a question because I am not
    sure where that changed. At the beginning of all of this, we
    were talking about building a worldwide coalition to not
    recognize the Taliban, and all of a sudden this is on the
    table.
        Is the Taliban the legitimate government of Afghanistan;
    and if not, would you consider what the Taliban have done in
    Afghanistan to be a coup d'etat?
        Secretary Blinken. First, let me just start by thanking you
    for your strong words in support of the men and women of the
    State Department. I very much appreciate them and appreciate
    you saying them.
        Second, with regard to the Taliban and your question, it is
    the de facto government of Afghanistan. Those are just the
    facts and----
        Mr. Kinzinger. I do not mean to interrupt, but I need to.
    Has there been any discussion of an Afghan government in exile
    with the Vice-President? Even if the President had left, is
    there any discussion of that? Because this, to me, appears to
    be an armed military coup against the legitimate elected
    government of Afghanistan.
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, I will certainly look to
    see what the lawyers say. From where I sit, this is the product
    alas of one side getting the upper hand in a civil war.
        Mr. Kinzinger. Let me ask a couple of questions here on
    something too about that. So if we look at the list of new key
    players in the regime, we have the current Prime Minister, who
    was deputy during the 9/11 attacks, the current Deputy Prime
    Minister, who served as No. 2 defense official during the 9/11
    attacks. The current Foreign Minister, who is your counterpart,
    was the Minister of Culture and Information during the 9/11
    attacks. And we have designated terrorists in key positions,
    like those that are responsible for preventing Afghanistan from
    becoming a safe haven in terror once again.
        So we look at that list and we see those individuals who
    not only defended al-Qaeda but have committed crimes against
    women and vulnerable populations, and I think anybody would
    look at that and say this is the same regime that failed to
    hand over Osama bin Laden 20 years ago.
        But let me just ask you, have these individuals committed
    to denouncing al-Qaeda, to denouncing the Haqqani Network, and
    ensuring that they will execute any attacks against them should
    they try to organize in their territory?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, in the agreement that was secured
    by the previous administration, the Taliban, now represented by
    these individuals, made commitments not to allow Afghanistan to
    be used as a launching ground for externally directed
    terrorism, whether by al-Qaeda or by anyone else.
        The big question now--and you are right to point to it--is
    whether they will make good on that commitment. But, of course,
    we cannot and will not rely on them to do that even as we
    insist that they do.
        Mr. Kinzinger. Let me ask you too--thank you, and I am
    sorry to cut you off.
        Secretary Blinken. No, please, go ahead.
        Mr. Kinzinger. Just a couple of quick points. No. 1, we
    would need--we absolutely have to be executing any attack
    against al-Qaeda that we can, where we see them form.
        And secondarily, because I am running out of time, let me
    stress to you the importance of State Department working hand-
    in-hand in a public and private way with these NGO's, made up
    of former veterans, that are doing stuff that unfortunately the
    government can no longer do, and let me encourage you to give
    them top cover and work with them to provide the assets
    necessary to get these people out.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair and Mr. Secretary. I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Let me just say, I really appreciate you
    saying that and putting the spotlight on that, because veterans
    groups are doing remarkable work. We are in close contact with
    them. I met with about 75 veterans organizations and groups
    virtually about a week ago. We followed up with a number of
    other meetings, and we deeply appreciate the work that many
    veterans on this committee, as well as organizations are doing,
    and we are looking to work even more closely together on that.
    Thank you.
        Mr. Kinzinger. Good news.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative David
    Cicilline of Rhode Island for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You know, you
    explained that you inherited an agreement with a deadline but
    no plan, a backlog of 17,000 special immigrant visas, and a
    responsibility to evacuate safely both Americans and those who
    helped us in this effort.
        As a candidate, President Biden promised to end the war in
    Afghanistan, and he kept his word. I agree with him it was the
    right thing to do.
        And while today's hearing is focused on the U.S.
    withdrawal, I think it would be a mistake to lose sight of the
    misjudgments and lessons learned over the long arc of the past
    20 years. And I hope Congress will have an opportunity to do
    its own self-reflection.
        But I want to begin, Mr. Secretary, my question about the
    evacuation. You were cutoff when you were trying to explain the
    vetting process, and I wonder if you could quickly finish that
    answer about what the State Department did with respect to
    vetting people that were being evacuated out of Afghanistan.
        Secretary Blinken. Sure. And two things. And by the way, I
    very much agree with you, and I heard the chairman say at the
    outset that this committee, among other things, will be
    focusing on the 20-year history of our engagement in
    Afghanistan. And I think there are lots of lessons to be
    learned across the board, through every administration,
    including our own.
        With regard to the vetting, two things I would point out
    here. First, you know, we spent a lot of time talking about the
    special immigrant visa program and our commitment, and the
    commitment, I know, of so many members of this committee, to
    the Afghans who worked with us, who sit side by side with us,
    and the work that we did these first months of the
    administration to take a program that was in pretty much a dead
    stall and to put it into third, fourth----
        Mr. Cicilline. Okay. I do not want to be impolite, but if
    you could just quickly say what you did, because I know how
    thorough it was, I just----
        Secretary Blinken. Sure. Thank you. Simply put, when it
    comes to vetting people coming out of Afghanistan, they go to
    transit countries. We negotiated agreements with more than a
    dozen countries to transit Afghans at those countries, and we
    do security screenings there.
        We have sent Customs and Border Patrol agents to all of
    those countries. We have the law enforcement, intelligence, and
    security agencies all there doing vetting, biometrics,
    biographic information.
        Then they come to the United States. But before they are
    resettled anywhere, they are also at one of our military bases,
    and any vetting continues there.
        And under authorities that we have asked Congress for,
    including the ability for people who are resettled in a year's
    time to apply for a green card, the vetting and background
    authorities will continue so that if anything comes up, we can
    continue to do that.
        Mr. Cicilline. Great. Thank you. As you know, Mr.
    Secretary, the LGBTQI community in Afghanistan is extremely
    vulnerable to punitive actions from the Taliban. It is
    important, in my view, that we take steps to ensure that those
    who would be subjected to violence or worse because of their
    sexual orientation or gender identity are safe.
        The Council for Global Equality, the human rights campaign,
    and LGBTQI+ refugee support groups released a ten-point plan to
    protect Afghan LGBTQI refugees. My question is have you seen
    this plan? And if so, is the administration prepared to
    implement it, and is it consistent with the Presidential
    memorandum of early 2021 that speaks of the responsibility to
    help Afghan refugees that make it to neighboring States as
    outlined in that memorandum.
        Secretary Blinken. Well, thank you for rightly putting the
    spotlight on concerns about the LGBTQI+ community in
    Afghanistan and the particular threat they may find themselves
    under. This is something that we are focused on. I have not
    personally seen the report that you referred to. I am going to
    ask to see it. I am pretty sure that my team has, but I will
    take a look at that myself, and I thank you for sending it to
    us.
        Mr. Cicilline. Great. And I look forward to following up
    with you on that.
        And, finally, Mr. Secretary, the Brown University Cost of
    War Project has compiled a sobering list of figures as it
    relates to post 9/11 conflicts including Afghanistan, trillions
    of dollars spent, over 900,000 lives lost in Afghanistan, 2,641
    Americans, and 38 million people displaced around the world.
    And, Mr. Secretary, the war in Afghanistan went on, as you
    know, for 20 years, leading to extraordinary costs in terms of
    dollars spent, lives lost, and political capital expended.
        Taking stock of these costs, my question is, what do you
    think are the most important lessons after 20 years in
    Afghanistan and 20 years of post 9/11 conflict that we should
    learn?
        Secretary Blinken. I think all of us have to come together
    to do just that, to try to look at the lessons and then reflect
    those lessons in what we do together going forward. To my mind,
    at least, one of the lessons is while we are very effective at
    dealing with terrorist threats to our country and eliminating
    them, which we did very successfully in Afghanistan, the idea
    of using military force to try to remake a society is something
    that is beyond our means and beyond our capacity, and we need
    to think really hard about whether we want to engage in these
    enterprises going forward.
        You are right to point to the costs. Let me just say very
    quickly that I think that Brown study concluded that on the
    basis of about $2 trillion being spent on Afghanistan over the
    last 20 years when you include indirect costs, that averages
    out to $300 million a day for 20 years. And I know people will
    say, well, that wasn't the case the last year or so.
        But had we not ended the war and brought our people home,
    we would have had to have reupped it to deal with the renewed
    attacks by the Taliban, to deal with the onslaught nationwide.
    And those costs would have gone right back up again, and we
    have to ask ourselves very hard questions about whether that is
    the right way to spend our money.
        Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
    expired.
        I now recognize Representative Lee Zeldin of New York for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Zeldin. Mr. Secretary, one of my colleagues claimed
    earlier in this hearing that the last administration's
    agreement with the Taliban was unconditional. That was false.
    In fact, you, sir, actually started to outline some of those
    conditions, and you were stopped. To recap, Mr. Secretary, the
    last administration's agreement with the Taliban was
    conditions-based, correct?
        Secretary Blinken. The conditions that you referred to
    included a commitment not to allow Afghanistan to harbor
    outwardly directed terrorists. Let me just be clear, though, in
    response to your question.
        Mr. Zeldin. The question is, it was a conditions-based
    agreement, correct?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, except that those conditions were
    so loose, particularly with regard to commitments it made----
        Mr. Zeldin. You can criticize it all you want, Mr.
    Secretary. I just want you to answer the question.
        Next, are you aware that President Biden says in the
    transcript of his George Stephanopoulos interview that he would
    have withdrawn from Afghanistan regardless of that prior
    agreement?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, that is right, but not necessarily
    in the time, place, and manner that we did which was imposed on
    us by that agreement.
        Mr. Zeldin. On July 8, as Congressman Issa referred to
    earlier in this hearing, President Biden said, quote, the
    likelihood that there is going to be the Taliban overrunning
    everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.
    That is a very different prediction than what the U.S.
    intelligence community actually was saying.
        Mr. Secretary, where did the President get the highly
    unlikely intelligence estimate from?
        Secretary Blinken. As the intelligence community has
    actually said, including in the days leading up to the Taliban
    takeover, they were not and no one was predicting the rapid
    collapse of the government and the security forces. Throughout
    the year--throughout the year, the intelligence community
    looked at a range of scenarios, worst case to best case, about
    the durability, resiliency of the government security forces--
    --
        Mr. Zeldin. Reclaiming my time. The question is, where did
    the President get highly unlikely from?
        Secretary Blinken. Again, based on what the intelligence
    community was saying and the military. The Chairman of the
    Joint Chiefs has said that no one anticipated that the
    government or the security forces would collapse in 11 days.
        Mr. Zeldin. Mr. Secretary, it would be good, though, if you
    were giving answers that were consistent with the answers that
    we were getting behind a closed door briefing that we had with
    you and others.
        What is the number of Americans who are in Afghanistan as
    of the last update you received?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, going back to this weekend,
    we had about 100 American citizens in contact with us who
    were--who seek to leave Afghanistan. Those are the Americans we
    are working with.
        Mr. Zeldin. Do you have an exact number?
        Secretary Blinken. I cannot give you an exact number. We
    were talking about this a little bit earlier. It is really a
    snapshot at any given moment because what happens is----
        Mr. Zeldin. That is why I asked you as of the last update
    you received.
        Secretary Blinken. As of the last update, it was about--
    about 100.
        Mr. Zeldin. Okay. How many green card holders?
        Secretary Blinken. Green card holders is something that we
    do not track directly, so what we have done is we have
    solicited people, if they are green card holders, to let us
    know. I think the best estimates are that there are several
    thousand green card holders in Afghanistan.
        Mr. Zeldin. How many SIV applicants?
        Secretary Blinken. SIV applicants? Those are numbers that
    we are working on right now. As people come out of Afghanistan,
    some of them in the United States already, others at these
    transit points, we are collecting all of that information.
        The overwhelming majority of Afghans who have come out are
    Afghans who are at risk in one way or another. Some of them
    will be SIVs, applicants. Others will be people who are
    eligible for refugee visas. Still others will be at risk in
    some fashion. We are putting all those numbers together, and we
    should have that in the next couple of weeks.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes. I mean, this was fatally flawed, poorly
    executed. We had the lost of U.S. servicemembers as a result.
    We should not have been operating off of an arbitrary July 31
    deadline.
        Instead, what we should have done was tell the Taliban that
    we are going to leave Afghanistan when we are done bringing
    last every American home, not operating off of some arbitrary
    date. We shouldn't have collapsed Bagram when we did. We
    shouldn't have been relying on the Taliban to provide security
    at the airport. We shouldn't have been allowing billions of
    dollars worth of U.S. weapons and equipment to get turned over
    to Afghanistan.
        You, the administration, should not have been lying and
    misleading the American public like the White House press
    secretary is standing out there to the press and to the
    American public and saying that Americans aren't stranded even
    though we all know that they are.
        And I am concerned that this administration with
    incompetency is exposing a vulnerability that other countries
    like we see North Korea now testing long-range missiles. We see
    Iran enhancing uranium enrichment.
        What happens when China and Russia and Hamas and Hezbollah
    and al-Qaeda and the Taliban--they continue to press forward
    because we have an administration that does not know how to
    confront an adversary, understanding that they do not respect
    weakness. They only respect strength. And it is so greatly
    unfortunate, the consequences, and I believe that you, sir,
    should resign. That would be leadership.
        I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. To the contrary, Congressman, I believe
    that there is nothing that our strategic competitors like China
    or Russia or our adversaries like Iran, like North Korea would
    have liked more than for President Biden to have reupped the
    war in Afghanistan for another 5, 10, or 20 years, to be bogged
    down in that conflict, nothing they would have liked more.
        And we are now able as a result of the decision the
    President made that none of his predecessors made to end the
    war after 20 years, to ensure that a third generation of
    Americans did not have to go off and fight and die in
    Afghanistan while bringing 125,000 people out. We are now in a
    much better position to confront the challenges and threats
    that we actually face in 2021.
        Mr. Zeldin. This is the Democratic National Committee's----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Ami Bera of California, the
    chair of the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, Central Asia,
    and Nonproliferation for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Secretary, once
    again, I want to reiterate our thanks as a committee for your
    appearing before us, answering all the questions and giving
    every member a chance. That is nothing something your
    predecessor did very easily.
        Look. I agree with President Biden's decision to withdraw.
    I think most of the American public agrees with that decision.
    I have sat in many hearings, sat in many classified and open
    briefings as we were looking at various scenarios of what that
    withdrawal looks like, what the capabilities of the Afghan
    government were. And, you know, unfortunately, the worst case
    scenario played out. And the images that we saw coming out of
    Afghanistan were painful, frankly, in the last few weeks of
    August.
        And I do think the men and women in the military and State
    Department in difficult circumstances stepped up. I do think
    the logistics of that airlift and getting the numbers of
    American citizens, visa holders, SIVs, vulnerable Afghans out
    in such a short period of time was remarkable.
        I think we all mourn the loss of life of Afghan civilians
    but also the 13 men and women serving our country and leading
    the mission. And there will be time to go through and do the
    oversight and get a sense of where did our estimates go wrong,
    where were the flaws.
        But at this moment in time, knowing that we still have
    American citizens there, knowing that we still have vulnerable
    Afghans and so forth, I really do want our focus to be getting
    those folks to safety, the visa holders, the SIVs, and others.
        I will not ask you to guarantee a commitment that you will
    get everyone out. Nobody can make that promise. But what I will
    ask is working with my office, working with the various
    congressional offices, the men and women of the State
    Department, that we will use every resource that we can in a
    difficult situation, in a challenging security situation on the
    ground to do the best job possible to get every American
    citizen, visa holder, SIV, and vulnerable Afghan out to safety.
    Can I get that promise that we will do that?
        Secretary Blinken. Absolutely. You have that commitment,
    and I welcome working with every member of this committee to do
    just that.
        Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you. And your staff, and again, the
    men and women within the State Department and elsewhere, again,
    in trying circumstances have been very readily available to
    work with us. You know, again, we have submitted over 10,000
    names of folks just given the size of our population in the
    community.
        Second, and we haven't talked about this, is, as I
    mentioned earlier, we have the largest Afghan refugee
    population in the country, and we are proud of that, you know.
    We have welcomed these men and women. We have got great
    resettlement agencies that are working with folks, but we have
    also got real challenges just because of the rapidity of folks
    leaving country and arriving after being vetted in the United
    States.
        Many of these folks now are coming as humanitarian parolees
    under a visa status that does not necessarily have the
    resources that are available. I know we will be working on a
    budget supplement to help provide the resources to get medical
    resources, get visa resources, and ramp up your staffing of the
    State Department to process these refugees.
        I would hope that the men and women on this committee,
    Democrat, Republican, as well as everyone in the House and
    Senate overwhelmingly support the supplemental requests that
    will be coming hopefully within the next few weeks to provide
    those resources.
        It is the one thing when I talk to our veterans community,
    and, you know, many that have served in Afghanistan and are,
    you know, wondering about that service, the one thing we can to
    make them whole is to welcome these folks that, you know,
    served them, worked with them side by side and often saved
    their lives and really do everything we can to get those folks
    to safety. Those that are coming to the United States, to help
    them reassemble our lives.
        So, you know, Mr. Secretary, I would imagine that
    supplemental is coming. We have already heard some top line
    numbers the President has asked for. Are there specifics that,
    you know, from your vantage point that the men and women who
    work for you that you see on that horizon?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Thank you so much for flagging
    that. Let me just say very quickly yes. We are going to be
    looking for support from all of you on this and particularly a
    few things for Afghans who are paroled into the United States
    to receive the same benefits that refugees do so that they have
    some ongoing support, the ability to work in the United States,
    HHS benefits that they wouldn't otherwise get.
        We would also like them to be able to apply for a green
    card after 1 year of being in the United States. And there is
    some significant funds that will be requested to support both
    the efforts that we have already made at the different transit
    points where we have incurred significant expenses a well as to
    continue to relocate people, to bring them to transit points
    into the United States, process them, et cetera.
        So that is coming, and in fact, we need to get this done
    quickly in the CR, I think, so we have just a few weeks to do
    it, and I really welcome your support and everyone's support
    for that. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Ann Wagner
    of Missouri who is the Vice Ranking Member of the full
    committee for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Wagner. Secretary Blinken, I represent the people of
    Missouri's Second congressional District, and today I am also
    here on behalf of the family of Lance Corporal Jared Schmitz of
    our region. Let me tell you about this heroic and selfless
    young man.
        Lance Corporal Schmitz from Wentzville, Missouri, was 20
    years old when he lost his life at the terrorist attack at the
    airport in Kabul just days before Joe Biden's arbitrary
    deadline of August 31. He was passionate about his military
    service. He was totally committed to making a difference as a
    U.S. Marine and had gotten his parents' permission to enlist at
    just 17 years old.
        I do not believe that this hearing will allow us to truly
    understand why he and his fellow military servicemen and women
    were killed on August 26 of 2021. His family, their families,
    and all Americans deserve answers, sir.
        I am outraged to hear this administration claim its retreat
    from Afghanistan, its surrender was a success. How could anyone
    say that 13 precious young men and women lost their lives is a
    success? I am not asking for my own peace of mind. I am asking
    on behalf of the families that are burying their sons and their
    daughters this week, and they deserve accountability, and they
    deserve transparency, and they deserve answers.
        The Biden Administration outsourced the security of our
    military stationed at the Kabul airport to the Taliban. It was
    a total betrayal. He put the lives of our men and women in the
    hands of a brutal terrorist organization after you claimed that
    the Taliban would never even be in charge of the country. Then
    he said they would never be in charge of Kabul. He said we
    would never leave Americans and allies behind. It was lie after
    lie.
        President Biden wanted out at any cost, and that cost sir,
    was 13 American lives and $85 billion in equipment, our Bagram
    Air Base, our United States embassy, our credibility with the
    allies and the Afghans who stood and fought with us, and our
    national security and safety of our homeland. Make no mistake,
    Mr. Secretary. The Biden Administration's egregiously inept
    withdrawal has left America and the world a much less safe
    place 20 years after September 11.
        Secretary Blinken, will you honor these families and give
    the American people the answers they deserve in the wake of
    this ongoing disaster? Who will be held accountable?
        In your opening statement, you said the Taliban. You said
    several times the Taliban made it clear that we had to
    withdraw. The Taliban made it clear, or they would escalate.
    Now, we hear in testimony President Putin was dictating our
    counterintelligence. And you tell us NATO made us do it. Trump
    made us do it.
        The Taliban made it clear. Do you take any responsibility,
    Secretary Blinken, for this disastrous withdrawal, or do you
    still want to call it a success?
        Secretary Blinken. Congresswoman, I am responsible for the
    decisions that I make. I am responsible for the actions of the
    State Department. I am responsible for looking at any lessons
    to be taken from those decisions and those actions. I am also
    responsible for being accountable for those decisions and
    actions.
        Mrs. Wagner. I asked you a simple question.
        Secretary Blinken. If you will let me answer, please.
        Mrs. Wagner. Reclaiming my time.
        Secretary Blinken. The way that I am accountable is doing
    exactly what I am doing today which is to you and through you
    to the American people hold myself accountable for those
    decisions and we made the right decision in ending America's
    longest war.
        We made the right decision in not sending a third
    generation of Americans to fight and die in Afghanistan. We did
    the right thing by our citizens and working feverishly to get
    every one of them out. We did the right thing by 125,000
    Afghans to bring them to safety.
        And now we are working to do the right thing to hold the
    Taliban to the expectations of the international community to
    ensure people can continue to travel freely, to ensure that the
    rights of Afghans are upheld, to ensure that they make good on
    commitments they have made on counterterrorism. That is what we
    are doing.
        Mrs. Wagner. I hope you plan----
        Mr. Malinowski [presiding]. The gentlewoman's time has
    expired.
        I now recognize Representative Castro of Texas for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Secretary,
    for your testimony today. Thank you for your work and the work
    of the many very devoted employees at the State Department.
        And I want to talk to you for a second about a way that
    Congress can be helpful in that work. Secretary Blinken, the 9/
    11 Commission's report held that only 56 percent of the Bush
    Administration's senior National Security positions were filled
    at the beginning of September 2001, impeding its ability to
    respond to crises.
        Today, only 26 percent of the State Department's Senate
    confirmed positions are filled. This isn't because President
    Biden has not presented nominees. It is because a single
    Senator has thrown a tantrum and blocked these nominees from
    getting a vote and prevented national security positions from
    being filled. So I am going to ask you a few yes or no
    questions regarding very important staffing at the State
    Department.
        Do we have a Senate confirmed Assistant Secretary of State
    for Conflict and Stabilization Operations who would inform U.S.
    policy in war zones like Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. Do we have a Senate confirmed Assistant
    Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs who
    would cover Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. Do we have a Senate confirmed Assistant
    Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs who would
    guide U.S. policy toward China, a country deeply involved in
    south Asia?
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. For African affairs.
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. European and Eurasian affairs.
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. Western hemisphere affairs.
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. International organization affairs,
    international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, and
    educational and cultural affairs.
        Secretary Blinken. We do not.
        Mr. Castro. For each of these positions, President Biden
    has nominated a candidate. The candidate has testified in front
    of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, been vetted and
    recommended by that committee for a vote, only to be delayed by
    a hold by Senator Ted Cruz of my home state of Texas. This has
    delayed many other positions as well and is denying you the
    team you need to advance our Nation's interests abroad and
    protect our own national security.
        Despite this, the State Department rose to the occasion.
    Over 120,000 people were successfully evacuated from
    Afghanistan in a short period of time in one of the biggest
    humanitarian operations the United States has ever seen. But
    the work continues and having seen--having Senate confirmed
    people in these positions will be critical as we marshal our
    allies for what comes next in Afghanistan.
        And I want to ask you, Mr. Secretary, as you have done this
    very hard work, and your people at the department are stretched
    thin because the Senate has not confirmed these nominees, what
    would you say to Senator Cruz who is singlehandedly blocking
    key national security appointments and jeopardizing our
    national security?
        Secretary Blinken. Look. I would just simply ask the
    Senator and ask the Senate to move forward in confirming our
    nominees, virtually all of whom went through the Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee and were sent to the floor, and that is
    where they now lie.
        And to your point, we need all these people. We need them
    to do the business of the United States. We need them to
    advance the interests of the United States, especially at this
    critical time, so I hope very much that we can work through
    this very, very quickly, and I would hope that the Senate can
    get our nominees confirmed.
        Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I am going to ask
    another question on Pakistan, and you may have to take it, some
    of it for the record, but I want to get to the question real
    quick.
        Secretary Blinken. Sure.
        Mr. Castro. I want to followup on Rep Keating's line of
    questioning about Pakistan. As you just noted, over the years,
    Pakistan has harbored Taliban leaders and provided other forms
    of support to the group. As my colleague noted, Pakistan's
    leader cheered the Taliban taking over Afghanistan. You began
    discussing what we will be looking at with Pakistan moving
    forward.
        And on that note, Pakistan is currently a major non NATO
    ally of the United States, giving it a number of benefits,
    including privileged access to U.S. arms sales.
        And so based on their past actions, our conversation today,
    all of it, I want to ask you. Given its long-time support for
    the Taliban, is it time for the United States to reassess its
    relationship with Pakistan and reassess its status as a major
    non NATO ally?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. For the reasons you have
    cited, as well as others, this is one of the things that we are
    going to be looking at in the days and weeks ahead, the role
    that Pakistan has played over the last 20 years, but also the
    role that we would want to see it play in the coming years and
    what it will take for it to do that.
        Mr. Castro. Thank you.
        I yield back, chairman.
        Mr. Meeks [presiding]. The gentleman's time has expired. I
    now recognize Mr. Brian Mast of Florida for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Mast. Mr. Secretary, as the transcript, the leaked
    transcript, as you referred to it says, did President Biden
    work with the coward, exiled president of Afghanistan to
    manipulate the intelligence about the Taliban?
        Secretary Blinken. What the President said to president--
    then President Ghani in private is exactly what he said in
    public, that the issue was not whether Afghanistan had the
    capacity to withstand the Taliban. It is whether it had the
    will and the plan to do so. He urged him to have that plan----
        Mr. Mast. Is the transcript wrong? It is incorrect?
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. And to bring people
    together in unity.
        Mr. Mast. Are you saying it is false, it is a lie, it is
    incorrect? He did not work to tamp down the intelligence on the
    Taliban.
        Secretary Blinken. Absolutely not.
        Mr. Mast. So the transcript is incorrect. That is your
    testimony today.
        Secretary Blinken. The intelligence that we had, we have
    already discussed at some length about what the assessments
    were of the Taliban and its capacity to take over the country.
        Mr. Mast. I think that everybody looking for an explanation
    about what happened and how everybody got it so wrong, how your
    administration got it so wrong needs to look at that as the
    most likely explanation, asking the President to manipulate the
    intelligence of what was actually going on with the Taliban.
    And I am going to tell you. The 13 families that deserve most
    to really hear the honest answers on that, it is these
    families.
        Marine Lance Corporal Kareem Nakoui. His family deserves to
    truly know that. Marine Corporal Daegan Page. His family truly
    deserves to know if that is why they are missing their son
    because intelligence was manipulated. Marine Lance Corporal
    Rylee McCollum, 20, wife expecting their first child, sister
    said he was going to be the best dad ever. They deserve to know
    if that is what happened, and that is why everything went so
    wrong. Marine Sergeant Nicole Gee, 23 years old. You can see
    her there holding a young child. Her family deserves to know if
    that is why everything went so wrong because that intelligence
    was manipulated.
        Marine Lance Corporal David Espinoza, just 20 years old,
    family deserves to know if that is why everything went so wrong
    is because the intelligence was manipulated. Marine Corporal
    Humberto Sanchez, just 22 years old, mother said my kid was a
    hero. That is what was said. That is what his mother said.
    Deserves to know if that is why everything went so wrong
    because the intelligence got manipulated.
        Marine Lance Corporal Jared Schmitz, just 20 years old. His
    family deserves to know if that is why everything went so
    wrong. Marine Corporal Hunter Lopez, just 22, son of two
    sheriffs, planned to follow in their footsteps. Their family
    deserves to know if that is why everything went so wrong is
    because you all worked to manipulate the intelligence of what
    was going on on the ground there.
        Marine Corps Staff Sergeant Darin Hoover. His family said,
    I love you, son. Check in on us. We will try to make you proud.
    They deserve to know if that is what happened, if that is how
    everything went so wrong in Afghanistan. Marine Corps Sergeant
    Johanny Rosario-Pichardo. Her family deserves to know if that
    is why everything went so wrong because you all worked to
    manipulate the intelligence of what was going on with the
    Taliban.
        Marine Lance Corporal Dylan Merola, just 20. The family
    said he always had a smile on his face, was the kindest person.
    They deserve to know if that is why everything went so wrong
    because you all manipulated intelligence. Army Staff Sergeant
    Ryan Knauss. The ultimate honor he could give was to give back
    to his country. He would not be sorry. He would not regret it.
    That is what his family said. They deserve to know if you
    manipulated intelligence, if President Biden manipulated
    intelligence, and that is what led to everything going so
    wrong.
        Navy Corpsman Maxton Soviak, just 22. His family deserves
    to know if that is why everything went so wrong. We deserve
    hearings on what is going on with that leaked transcript. We
    deserve to know why there are others that remain in
    Afghanistan. Mark Frerichs, Navy veteran, disappeared in Coast
    Province January 30 of 2020. We deserve to know what is going
    on with his release.
        These are things that have to be answered for. I do not
    believe whatsoever what you are saying about the administration
    not working to manipulate that intelligence.
        To me, that is the most logical, the most logical
    explanation of how so many in the intelligence community got
    this so wrong about what was going to happen in Afghanistan.
    Why would it seem somehow logical for President Biden to leave
    the, quote, most advanced military weaponry, why some would not
    speak out against that. If they were getting the false
    intelligence because it was coming from the top down, to
    manipulate it, in my opinion, that is absolutely aid and
    comfort to the enemy.
        I absolutely wonder if you were complicit in this as well.
    I find it hard to believe that President Biden would do that
    without you being aware of this, and these are things that we
    deserve to know, better answers, have better hearings on this.
    I do not believe a word that you are saying on this.
        Secretary Blinken. Simply put----
        Mr. Mast. I do not wish to hear from you. I am----
        Secretary Blinken. Simply put, Congressman, what you have
    said is dead wrong.
        Mr. Mast. Reclaiming my time. I do not wish to hear--from
    you. You tell lies every time you are in front of the cameras--
    --
        Secretary Blinken. There was no manipulation of
    intelligence, period. You have all been regularly apprised of
    the intelligence assessments all the way through over these
    many months--this is not true.
        Mr. Mast. I am not looking to hear----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Mast. And so has the Secretary's.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Mast. And so has the Secretary's.
        Chairman Meeks. The Secretary can answer the question.
        Mr. Mast. I did not ask him a question.
        Chairman Meeks. You did ask a question.
        Mr. Mast. I do not want to hear from the Secretary.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Mast. He lies every time he steps in front of the
    camera. That is what he does----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr.
    Secretary--the gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Mast [continuing]. Least believable thing I have ever
    heard.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Mast. People need to use common sense in this area.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired. We are
    here to hear from the secretary.
        Mr. Mast. Not to Hear lies.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Secretary, if you wish, you may answer the question.
        Mr. Mast. We do not need to hear lies.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to respond
    briefly, what the Congressman said is simply wrong, period.
        Second. I think virtually every member of this committee
    has had access to or been apprised of the intelligence
    assessments throughout the year. And you know what they were;
    you know what they are. And we will continue to provide those
    assessments and those briefings in the weeks and months ahead.
        You have heard the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
    say that he has not seen anything that indicated to him or to
    anyone else that the Afghan government and military would
    collapse in 11 days. The Director of National Intelligence has
    said that even in the days leading up to the Taliban takeover,
    intelligence agencies did not say collapse was imminent.
        This unfolded more quickly than we anticipated including in
    the intelligence community, and I could go on. So what has been
    said and alleged is simply not true.
        Mr. Mast. And that would be----
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize the gentlewoman from
    Nevada.
        Mr. Mast. President Biden specifically----
        Chairman Meeks. The Representative from Nevada is now
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Mast. It makes sense. That is why it all adds up.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired----
        Mr. Mast. Mr. Chairman, he definitely proved the point.
        Chairman Meeks [continuing]. The gentleman will cease
    immediately.
        Mr. Mast. He definitely proved the point. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman will cease immediately.
        Mr. Mast. Well, he proved the point. Thank you for letting
    him prove it. I appreciate that.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize the gentlelady from Nevada,
    Ms.--Representative Dina Titus, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Mr.
    Secretary for being here. I would like to go back to a point
    made by Mr. Connolly on the Doha agreement.
        I wonder if you would discuss for us what impact you think
    that agreement may have had on the morale of the Afghan defense
    forces and on the unity of the Afghan government.
        Secretary Blinken. Well, that agreement committed the
    United States to leave Afghanistan by may 1 of this year, and
    so that certainly factored into the thinking and concerns of
    the Afghan government and of the Afghan security forces. The
    extent of that impact, hard to know for sure, but certainly
    that had to factor into their thinking as well as into their
    concerns.
        Ms. Titus. I believe so, and it let to that perhaps quicker
    than realized collapse that occurred that we did not
    anticipate.
        I have got just a couple of other questions. We have been
    hearing about domestic and foreign journalists being abused by
    the Taliban and also some of the NGO or healthcare workers or
    just nongovernment humanitarian workers.
        I wonder if there is anything going on, any talks between
    the U.S. and any of our international partners of how to defend
    them, to be assured that they are able to continue their work
    once we are gone.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Very much so. Two things. One, we
    have been working very hard to make sure that basic
    humanitarian assistance can still get into Afghanistan, working
    with and through NGO's, working with and through the United
    Nations agencies, and also putting in place mechanisms to make
    sure that that assistance is used in the way we intend it to be
    used, that is, to the benefit of the Afghan people, the
    recipients, not the Taliban-led government.
        Second. We have been working full time around the world to
    bring country after country on board with the expectations that
    we are setting of the conduct of a Taliban-led government to
    include upholding the basic rights of the Afghan people, to
    include women and minorities, and we have put in place a U.N.
    Security Council resolution setting those expectations.
        More than 100 countries around the world led by our efforts
    to sign onto that, and to the extent that the Taliban is
    looking for any kind of legitimacy or any kind of support from
    the international community, that will not be forthcoming in
    any fashion if it is not making good on those basic
    expectations and on commitments it itself has made.
        So going forward, its conduct will define its relationship
    with the rest of the world.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you. They seek to be legitimate, I know,
    but in the meantime, one of the challenges they are facing, of
    course, is the economy, and that is not new. That existed under
    the Ghani government. But we see Pakistan and China rapidly
    positioning themselves to kind of take advantage of this
    destabilized economy.
        I wonder how that is going to impact the U.S. and U.S.-
    international relations, especially in light of the World Bank
    and the International Monetary Fund freezing distributions of
    funds to Afghanistan. Could you maybe talk about that?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. You are certainly right to point to
    that, and the fact of the matter is, though, that there is a
    Security Council resolution that should also bind Russia and
    China in their conduct going forward.
        The international community over the last years was
    providing every year about 75 percent of the Afghan
    government's budget. Needless to say, that has been frozen.
        Virtually all of Afghanistan's foreign reserves are here in
    the United States. They are frozen. International financial
    institutions are not going forward with their own assistance or
    the ability for Afghanistan to engage in international
    financial transactions.
        And so all of that is on the ledger when it comes to what
    we can do to have the Taliban meet the expectations that have
    been set by the international community when it comes to how it
    conducts itself.
        Ms. Titus. Well, thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady yields back.
        I now recognize Representative Brian Fitzpatrick of
    Pennsylvania who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on
    Europe, Energy, and the Environment and Cyber for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Secretary, just to get to the core of
    what your philosophy is on national and international security,
    sir, do you believe in the maxim and the precept of the
    stronger that we exert ourselves overseas, the safer we are
    here in America, i.e., peace through strength?
        Secretary Blinken. I believe first the stronger we are at
    home, the stronger we are going to be overseas, and that
    requires unity. It requires coming together. It requires making
    investments in ourselves. And I hope we can see those forward
    together.
        Second. To your point around the world, it requires
    absolutely having the strongest military and defense in the
    world, but it also requires using all the tools at our disposal
    to include our diplomacy, to include our economic tools, to
    include political tools, cultural tools. All of that is in the
    mix, and all of that defines our strength in the world.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Secretary, do you believe that what
    the world witnessed over the past several weeks in Afghanistan
    was American strength?
        Secretary Blinken. I believe that what the world witnessed
    was the President ending a war that had gone on for 20 years,
    making sure----
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. But did they witness American strength in
    the past few weeks.
        Secretary Blinken. They witnessed an extraordinary effort
    that no other country could or would have made under the most
    extreme conditions in bringing 125,000 people out to safety, in
    making sure that we stood by our allies and partners and
    helping them to get out as well. And things we have heard from
    allies and partners around the world is no other country could
    or would have done what we did.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Secretary, I recently left Ukraine
    just a few days ago. I returned, and my next step----
        Chairman Meeks. Just hold off 1 second. We are having
    technical problems. I do not see the Secretary that is on. We
    should be able to see him visually. And I want to make sure you
    get all of the time to ask the questions that you are putting
    forward and his response.
        Secretary Blinken. Mr. Chairman, can you hear me?
        Chairman Meeks. We hear you, Mr. Secretary, but we do not
    see you.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. It looks like the image is frozen
    here, so let's see if we can----
        Chairman Meeks. Yes. Let's see if we can fix that. The
    technical staff is working on that. I want to make sure Mr.
    Fitzgerald gets the--all of the time. Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr.
    Fitzpatrick.
        Secretary Blinken. How is that, Mr. Chairman?
        Chairman Meeks. Okay. I do not have a visual of the
    Secretary. Now--Okay.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. I reclaim my time, sir.
        Chairman Meeks. Yes. Let's give Mr. Fitzpatrick--how much
    time when I stopped him?
        Voice. 4 minutes and 10 seconds.
        Chairman Meeks. No, when I stopped--continue the questions
    that you had asked. When I stopped, 4 minutes? Okay. We can
    resume.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Secretary, I just returned from
    Ukraine 2 days ago. My next stop would be Taiwan. Sir, these
    people are scared to death. They are scared to death.
        So can we get you on the record today, sir, to tell this
    committee, this Congress, and our Nation that we will
    unequivocally and unapologetically do whatever it takes,
    whatever it takes to have the backs of our friends in Ukraine
    and our friends in Taiwan?
        Our friends in Ukraine in the event of Russia aggression,
    our friends in Taiwan in the event of Chinese aggression.
        Secretary Blinken. Absolutely. We stand by our commitments
    to both countries.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. And we will do whatever it takes to defend
    them.
        Secretary Blinken. We will stand by our commitments. We
    will stand by our commitments to Taiwan under the Taiwan
    Relations Act. We will stand by the commitments we have to
    Ukraine, including, by the way, commitments that the President
    and President Zelensky discussed and put out just about a week,
    maybe 2 weeks ago, during----
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Sir, I can tell you. I just left there.
    They are scared to death, and they question the commitment of
    this country. So I will take you at your word that we will do
    whatever it takes to defend Taiwan and Ukraine.
        Next question. Not talking about the arms and munitions; I
    am talking about the heavy equipment, the tanks, the Humvees,
    the Blackhawk helicopters, the aircraft. Sir, all of this is
    GPS tracked. We can identify this, where it is at. Why did we
    not destroy it or do not we destroy it now?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. So let me say this: I know my
    colleagues from the Defense Department, the Joint Chiefs, et
    cetera, will have an opportunity to speak to you, to speak to
    Congress in the weeks ahead. They are the experts on this.
        Since 2004, roughly, something like $80 billion in defense
    articles was provided to Afghanistan, so that goes back over
    the last roughly 16 years.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Sir, I am only asking about the GPS
    tracking. We know the location of this equipment that we have
    now seen fall into the hands of terrorists. Are we going to
    destroy it or not?
        Secretary Blinken. So much of this--much of this equipment
    is either inoperable or will soon be inoperable because it
    cannot be maintained. As I've seen it, based on what I have
    heard from my colleagues, there is nothing of strategic value
    that would threaten us or threaten Afghanistan's neighbors.
    Having said that, I am not the expert on this, and I would
    really defer to my colleagues at the Pentagon.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Secretary, do you believe that America
    should ever in any way capitulate to terrorists?
        Secretary Blinken. Absolutely not.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Do you believe, sir, that allowing the
    Taliban to run perimeter HKIA with American troops on the
    inside of that perimeter relying on the Taliban to keep ISIS
    out and American citizens, passport holders on the outside the
    perimeter relying on the Taliban to get in, that that is
    capitulating to terrorists?
        Secretary Blinken. The reality is that the government and
    Afghan national security forces collapsed. The reality is that
    the Taliban took over Kabul as well as much of the country.
    That was the reality we were dealing with. And the judgment of
    all of us, starting with our military commanders, including the
    people on the ground, was that our job was to work to get as
    many people out as possible, American citizens, Afghans at
    risk.
        And because the Taliban controlled the city, that required
    some coordination with them to get people through and to the
    airport.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Sir, to an 18-year-old Afghani girl who
    may be watching this hearing today, who was born after 9/11,
    who knows nothing of what it is like to live under Taliban
    rule, who had hopes and dreams, who is in school, who wanted to
    be a female journalist, to help women and young girls rise up
    in Afghanistan, who now feels betrayed by the actions of this
    administration, what is your message to her?
        Secretary Blinken. I spoke to a number of young Afghan
    women including 18, 19, 21-year-olds just about a week ago in
    Doha. Actually in Ramstein, Germany----
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Do you believe their lives----
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Where many were relocated.
    And we talked about their futures. We talked about the futures
    of Afghan women and girls who were living in Afghanistan.
        Mr. Fitzpatrick. Under the Taliban.
        Secretary Blinken. And we talked about the ongoing
    commitment that the United States has and countries around the
    world have to do everything we can to support those women and
    girls going forward.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize representative Ted Lieu of California for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Lieu. Thank you, Chairman Meeks, and thank you,
    Secretary Blinken, for your public service.
        When I served on active duty in the United States Air
    Force, I participated in Operation Pacific Haven where we
    airlifted thousands and thousands of Kurds out of northern Iraq
    because Saddam Hussein was going to go in and kill them. We
    worked with the State Department, other U.S. agencies, and it
    was a very difficult mission.
        So I want to commend you and the State Department and all
    the U.S. personnel who executed an evacuation of over 120,000
    people under immense danger. That was a remarkable feat that
    all of you did, and I also want to honor the 13 Marines that
    gave their lives and service to our country.
        What I would like to ask you about is the document that
    started all of this, the February 29 document, 2020. That
    document was negotiated by the Trump administration with the
    Taliban, correct?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. The Trump administration signed that document,
    correct?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. And under that document, it had a very specific
    date for withdrawal of all U.S. forces. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. I am going to read you what the document says
    because I think my Republican colleagues need to hear this and
    the American people.
        On the very first page of the February 29, 2020, agreement
    that the Trump administration signed with the Taliban, it
    states, the United States is committed to withdraw from
    Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its
    allies and coalition partners, including all non diplomatic
    civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers and
    advisors, and supporting services personnel within 14 months
    following announcement of this agreement.
        That is a very specific timeline, isn't it?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Lieu. In fact, it gets even more specific. It says that
    in the first 135 days, the United States, its allies, and the
    coalition will withdraw all their forces from five military
    bases.
        Did Donald Trump do that?
        Secretary Blinken. He did.
        Mr. Lieu. In fact, when you read this document, let's just
    be clear. This is a surrender document. Donald Trump
    surrendered to the Taliban, and he said we are leaving
    Afghanistan. We are not coming back, and we are not going to
    fight you any more.
        Now, our Republican colleagues want to say that somehow it
    is conditions based, and did you notice that earlier, they did
    not want you to talk about the conditions because the main
    condition is that the Taliban was going to stop attacking U.S.
    forces. Isn't that correct.
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. Do you know how many U.S. forces died in the
    first year of the Trump presidency in 2017, Secretary Blinken?
    Approximately 14. Do you know how many died in 2018, the second
    year of the Trump presidency, how many U.S. forces died in
    Afghanistan? Approximately 14. In 2019, the third year of the
    Trump presidency, do you know many U.S. forces died in
    Afghanistan? Approximately 21. And the Republican colleagues
    say hey, for a whole year and a half, U.S. forces did not die.
    That is because the Taliban stopped attacking U.S. forces
    because of this agreement. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. And if the Biden Administration has somehow said,
    hey, just kidding, we are not leaving Afghanistan. We are going
    to renege on this agreement, the Taliban would have started
    attacking U.S. forces again. Isn't that correct?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. And, in fact, Donald Trump withdrew over 15,000
    U.S. troops at the height in Afghanistan during his presidency
    down to 2,500 by the time President Biden inherited office.
    Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, that is about right. I think he had
    about 13,500 when the administration started down to 2,500 when
    the administration ended.
        Mr. Lieu. So Donald Trump executed not only the surrender
    agreement but also 70 to 80 percent of the surrender of the
    withdrawal, and he left you all with merely 2,500 U.S. troops.
    And the Taliban was still meeting their condition of not
    attacking U.S. forces. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Lieu. They literally put in a box that you had to
    withdraw all U.S. forces, or else they essentially would start
    attacking our forces again. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. Attacking our forces and engaging in an
    offensive against Afghanistan cities which they had refrained
    from.
        Mr. Lieu. And the reason we know intelligence wasn't
    manipulated is because the Trump administration, in fact, would
    not have agreed to a specific date certain of the withdrawal of
    all U.S. forces if they knew the Afghan government would
    collapse in 11 days after that. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. That is certainly--it stands to reason.
        Mr. Lieu. In fact, it was a bipartisan, you can call it not
    understanding what is happening in Afghanistan, but it was
    happening over 20 years, isn't that right? That we were gets
    rosy assessments on a bipartisan basis that turned out not to
    be all that accurate.
        Secretary Blinken. I believe that is correct, and certainly
    I saw that from my previous service in government.
        Mr. Lieu. Right. So let's just be clear here. It was Donald
    Trump who signed and negotiated the surrender agreement that,
    by the way, released 5,000 Taliban prisoners. Isn't that right?
        Secretary Blinken. It did release 5,000 prisoners, yes.
        Mr. Lieu. But Donald Trump, the administration signed this
    agreement, negotiated it, executed it, and then President Biden
    completed the withdrawal. That is what happened.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired. The
    gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Tim Burchett of Tennessee
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a picture of
    Staff Sergeant Ryan Knauss in my local paper, the Knoxville
    Focus. I want to read you something that his mama said this
    weekend at the funeral. He was a God loving man. He died
    helping people. He died doing what he loved to do.
        My constituent, Staff Sergeant Ryan Knauss, he was one of
    the 13 souls lost while allowing over 100,000 people to escape
    the Taliban. Sadly, the death of Sergeant Knauss and his fellow
    heroes I feel like was entirely preventable. If your department
    and this administration had a plan and had not been caught flat
    footed in Afghanistan, there would have been no need to surge
    6,000 additional soldiers into the country to secure that
    airport.
        You have repeatedly stated that every contingency was
    planned for, but clearly, the rapid collapse of the Afghan
    government was something that you had not planned for. Their
    blood is on your hands and this administration, sir. I call on
    you to resign.
        And I yield the remainder of my time to Mark Green.
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman--may I respond, Mr.
    Chairman. May I respond, Mr. Chairman?
        Mr. Green. Mr. Chairman, he yielded to me. Can I go ahead?
        Mr. Burchett. I yielded to Mark Green, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman did yield his time back.
        I now recognize Representative Susan Wild of Pennsylvania.
        Mr. Burchett. No. I yielded----
        Mr. Green. He yielded to me, Mr. Chairman. He yielded his
    time to me.
        Chairman Meeks. Yes. You may proceed.
        Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, yes or no, and I do mean yes or no. Is the
    Taliban a terrorist organization?
        Secretary Blinken. The Taliban has been designated as a
    terrorist organization. That is correct.
        Mr. Green. And are you aware that the news reports last
    week show that the Taliban has already set up a school to teach
    suicide bombers? Are you aware of that reporting?
        Secretary Blinken. I have not seen that report, but I would
    be welcoming--if you would like it share it, please do.
        Mr. Green. I will absolutely do that. Thank you very much.
    You guys keep talking about, insinuating that you are going to
    make an agreement with the Taliban. If they are a terrorist
    organization, if they have people in their leadership that are
    on the FBI's terrorist watch list, if they have leadership that
    is known to be terrorists, and you here have said they are a
    terrorist organization, what makes it right to even negotiate
    with these people?
        Secretary Blinken. Anything we do, Congressman, will be for
    purposes of advancing the interests of the national security of
    the United States. And those interests, among other things,
    involve ensuring that people can continue to travel freely out
    of Afghanistan, including any remaining American citizens who
    want to leave----
        Mr. Green. And on that note, if I could----
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Counterterrorism
    commitment, engage the government, we will do so in a way that
    is fully consistent with our laws.
        Mr. Green. Mr. Secretary, I am reclaiming my time. On that
    note, you have said, and we have said, and your Department has
    said, and the DoD has said to people who are sitting over
    there, now that we are all gone, they should destroy their
    documents because the Taliban are searching them and killing
    them with those documents.
        Now, you say you have got a plan to get those people out of
    there, but they cannot get on an airplane without documents.
    You have nobody over there to print them documents. How are
    they going to get out of there? What is your plan if they have
    no documents? Your people told them to destroy the documents.
        DoD said destroy the documents. We have told them--because
    we are talking to hundreds of them on the phone, U.S. citizens,
    SIVs. What is the plan?
        Secretary Blinken. We did not tell people to destroy
    documents, although I understood--I understand that some people
    did for understandable reasons in many cases.
        Mr. Green. We can
        [inaudible] Bodies. I mean, I can show you the videos that
    friends of mine, former interpreters that I know are videoing
    and sending to me, I can send those to you. They are destroying
    those documents because they do not want to wind up on a dirt
    road bleeding to death.
        So what is the plan to get those individuals who have no
    documents now out of that country.
        Secretary Blinken. The plan is this: First, the Taliban-led
    government has made commitments to recognize documents to exit
    the country to include U.S. passports, to include green cards,
    to include visas. For those who have those documents, we are
    working with other partners, including Qatar and Turkey----
        Mr. Green. I mean for the people who do not have documents,
    Mr. Secretary, that we have--you just said it was
    understandable that they would destroy those documents. So what
    are we doing for the people who do not have documents?
        Secretary Blinken. And we are--we are putting in place
    exactly that, a mechanism to make sure that we can get people
    the documents they need in order to leave the country. And I am
    happy to take that up in a different--in a different setting to
    go into more detail, but the bottom line is that is exactly
    what we are doing.
        Mr. Green. You are insinuating they might be classified.
    Okay. Fine. We can do that.
        Considering that the agreement between the Taliban and
    Afghan governments that the President keeps talking about,
    everybody keeps talking about this, you know, agreement between
    the Taliban and the Afghan governments, and they are just
    following it, we are following the agreement. It looks like my
    time is about to expire. I will see you in a few minutes when
    it is my turn. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Susan Wild
    of Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Secretary Blinken, we just received word in my office this
    past weekend that one of my constituents here in Pennsylvania
    7, an American citizen, has been successfully evacuated from
    Afghanistan and is now safely in Qatar. She is a wife and
    mother, and I want to thank you and the State Department
    officials who worked so hard with my team to ensure the
    successful outcome, and I hope for----
        Secretary Blinken. Glad to hear that.
        Ms. Wild. I hope for many more.
        Mr. Secretary, like all of my colleagues here, I have been
    working with my team to assist vulnerable Afghan allies who
    work shoulder to shoulder with servicemembers from our
    communities. And I have to say that over the course of the
    evacuation, it was beyond heartbreaking to see that in the vast
    majority of cases, the Afghan allies we were trying to assist
    were simply not getting out or receiving any useful information
    even with Members of Congress getting involved.
        Although I will also say parenthetically there may have
    been situations where Members of Congress were not particularly
    helpful or were getting in the way, and I apologize for that on
    behalf of this body. But at the same time, I want to recognize
    the extraordinary efforts behind what was the largest airlift
    in American history. It is a testament to our servicemembers,
    first and foremost, as well as the administration.
        What I want to ask you is what concrete steps is the State
    Department taking now to accelerate processing time for SIV, P-
    2, and other applications for vulnerable Afghan allies? And
    what steps is the department taking to improve communication
    with offices here in Congress when it comes to time-sensitive
    cases involving our Afghan allies?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you. First, let me just again
    thank you personally but also thank so many members of this
    committee who have been working with us on SIVs and other
    Afghans at risk, getting information to us, working to
    followup. We are deeply, deeply grateful for that, and we want
    to make sure that we continue to do that and work on these
    cases.
        As, you know, we have discussed before, in the first
    instance, of course, we inherited a program that was in a deep
    freeze. We got it back up into second and third gear and well
    before the collapse of the government. We went from issuing
    about a hundred visas a week to a thousand. And we were working
    with Congress to try to streamline and make more efficient this
    program.
        As you know, there are 14 steps involving half a dozen
    agencies that are required by law or by the different
    implementing rules that came into place as a result of that
    law.
        However, having said all of that, going forward, a few
    things. We have about 20,000 people in the SIV pipeline. That
    has basically been the number for a long time. It has
    accumulated over many years, and it has stayed more or less in
    that area because more people, even today, continue to start
    the application process.
        But as you know, the most critical moment in the
    application process is what is called chief of mission
    approval. That is the point at which people are found to be, in
    fact, eligible for the program, they meet the requirements. And
    of all the people applying to the program, 40 percent do not
    make it through chief of mission approval because it turns out
    that they do not qualify. Now, some of that is because they do
    not have the necessary documentation required, again, by law,
    to demonstrate their eligibility.
        Much of that is because of the many people applying for
    SIVs, the majority, well over the majority, worked for DoD
    contractors primarily. These are not the interpreters and
    translators. These are folks who worked for contractors or
    subcontractors. Getting a letter demonstrating that they
    provided faithful service can be very, very difficult
    especially if the contractor or the sub went out of business.
        We need to find a way to deal with that and also to work
    with all the other agencies to make sure they have the
    appropriate records.
        But let me just quickly fast-forward to your question. We
    have about 4,000 or so people who are at the chief of mission
    approval stage right now, and we are going to work to get them
    through that in the coming weeks. And then we have another
    roughly 4,000 who already have chief of mission approval. There
    is still a number of other steps mandated by law that go into
    this, including interviews, fingerprinting, et cetera. We are
    looking to see with you how we can expedite all of that, while
    keeping security foremost in our minds, move people to third
    countries to finish whatever processing is necessary and then
    bring them to the United States.
        But we need to come to you, I think, to work on ways that
    we can make this program even more efficient and more
    streamlined beyond even what we were able to do over the last 9
    months.
        Ms. Wild. Thank you so much.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Mark Green of Tennessee, who
    is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Western
    Hemisphere, Civilian Security, Migration, and International
    Economic Policy, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Secretary Blinken, your credibility, I think, would be
    a lot greater if you would at least own something. Something.
    X, Y, Z. Something. Yet you follow the lead of your President
    and you blame everybody else. It is not your problem, it is
    Trump, it is somebody else.
        You would have credibility--let me give you an example.
    HKIA, you had no plan, or a horrible plan, to get people into
    the gate, just get them through the gate. My colleagues and I
    had hundreds of people on the phone that were U.S. citizens
    sitting at the gates and they couldn't get in. That is a
    failure on you, either to plan or--you had a horrible plan, but
    those U.S. citizens couldn't get through the gate. Just own it.
    Get some credibility. Own it.
        You keep telling us that the DoD and President Biden had no
    idea that the Taliban would be so successful, the collapse of
    the Afghan forces. And then you want us to believe you when you
    say the Russians and the Chinese aren't empowered by this. That
    kills your credibility by saying, hey, we failed to predict
    that this would happen. Nobody had an idea that they would
    collapse like that. And then you say, oh, but I assure you, the
    Russians and the Chinese aren't empowered by this, and we are
    supposed to believe you.
        I have already talked about the documents.
        The United Kingdom. I am sure you are familiar--it went
    viral--a member of Parliament in the United Kingdom on the
    floor of the House of Commons, Tom Tugendhat, basically called
    the withdrawal--President Biden's withdrawal shameful, and said
    that the U.K., our greatest ally, should reconsider how
    dependent they are on the United States.
        Yet you sit here today and tell us that NATO was completely
    fine with everything, you all coordinated everything with NATO,
    and it was all good. That is what you have communicated to me
    at least--or here today. And yet a member of Parliament is
    saying it was a shameful withdrawal on the floor of the House
    of Commons, our greatest ally.
        The headline of The Economist a few weeks ago, I do not
    know if you saw it, but it said, ``Biden's debacle.'' I am not
    so sure NATO will agree with you that they were all in on this
    together.
        Now, I will say this, it is against the law, the United
    States law, to give material aid to a terrorist organization.
    You said earlier when I asked you before if the Taliban was a
    terrorist organization, you said yes. $85 billion, I would
    consider that material aid to a terrorist organization, Mr.
    Secretary.
        And yet, here we are, oh, well, but wait, you admitted we
    had no idea that the Taliban would be so successful. We had no
    idea that, you know, the Afghans would fail like this. Well,
    that is your fault. That is your administration's fault. I
    guess maybe it is the intel community's fault. That is what you
    are really saying. Hey, CIA, and all you other guys, you failed
    to give us good intel here, we had no idea this was going to
    happen.
        But we are supposed to trust you when you tell us other
    things about the Chinese and the Russians.
        Considering rumors of ISIS' support for the--I am sorry--
    ISI's support for the Taliban, have you guys reached out to
    India as a possible staging area for the Over the Horizon
    Forces? And I am talking northwest India as a potential.
    Because we all know Qatar--or Doha, the other places, are just
    a little bit too far, Kuwait, all that.
        What about northwest India, and have you reached out? Have
    you thought about that?
        Secretary Blinken. Let me just say generally, Congressman,
    we are deeply engaged with India across the board. With regard,
    though, to any specifics about Over the Horizon capabilities
    and the plans that we have put in place and will continue to
    put in place, I would rather take that up in a different
    setting, and I think the chairman referenced that at the start
    of the hearing.
        Mr. Green. I think that is very fair, and I appreciate you
    saying that. And I am glad to at least know that there is an
    opportunity to talk about that, because I think that, from my
    standpoint, is an opportunity we should seize.
        I would like to go back to the documents and give you a few
    seconds to talk about that, because I do want to hear your plan
    for those individuals, if you can today. And if you cannot,
    then fine, we will talk about it behind closed doors. But I am
    very concerned about people who destroyed documents. Can you
    elaborate at all on that?
        Secretary Blinken. And I really appreciate that. And I just
    want to assure you, but I would rather have this conversation
    in a different setting, that we are putting in place plans to
    make sure that people can get documents that they need and
    documents that the Taliban says it will recognize to allow them
    to leave the country. I would be happy to pursue that
    conversation.
        Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Phillips. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, I am one of 20,000 Gold Star Children from
    the Vietnam war and now joined by 5,000 more Gold Star Children
    from both Iraq and Afghanistan. And I just want to acknowledge
    all of my brothers and sisters who have had to watch the events
    of the last month that so sadly look so strangely familiar as
    it relates to the fall of Saigon, of course, 50 years ago.
        And I also want to honor the service of many of my
    colleagues, many of whom serve on this very committee,
    including my friend Brian Mast, who just about gave his entire
    life to our country, and I honor all of you. I want to start
    with that.
        And let me assure you, it has been difficult,
    heartbreaking, and disappointing to watch the last number of
    years, and, of course, the last month, but I also have to say I
    am terribly disappointed in my colleagues, some of them, on
    this committee today.
        I think it is embarrassing, I think it is
    counterproductive, and I think it is shameful, frankly, because
    I do not hold Republicans accountable for my father's death,
    even though he died in a Republican administration. I hold John
    Kennedy, I hold Lyndon Johnson, I hold Richard Nixon, I hold
    Congress accountable as well and many other individuals. And I
    just ask that the spirit of this committee return to our core
    job.
        With that, Mr. Secretary, you have spoken about lessons
    learned for both our country, not terribly specifically. I
    would welcome you to cover that again. What specifically did we
    learn? What should we have learned collectively and also
    personally? What have you learned? What might you do
    differently as you look back over the last number of months in
    preparation for this exit?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you very much. Thank you for what
    you said, and thank you for the question.
        I think we all have to take stock of the last 9 months--and
    the last 20 years--because to reach the point that we have
    reached today, it is an accumulation of decisions, strategies,
    plans over 20 years, as well as over the last 9 months, and all
    of that has to factor in.
        Look, my biggest takeaway is that when it comes to using
    force, we are very good and very effective at doing that to
    deal with the terrorist threat to this country, as we have
    demonstrated time and again and as we demonstrated after 9/11.
    And we need to make sure that we always have the capacity to be
    the most effective country on Earth when it comes to that.
        At the same time, I think one of the hard lessons, at least
    to me, of Afghanistan is, even the best intentions--and these
    were really good intentions--to try to remake a society, remake
    a country in an image that looks a little bit more like what we
    believe is right, may be beyond our capacity. And inserting
    ourselves into the middle of a civil war and staying there,
    with no prospect of actually creating a decisive effect, also
    is something we need to think really, really hard about.
        I think we got to a point in Afghanistan not when it comes
    to counterterrorism, where, thanks to the extraordinary
    courage, bravery, and success of generations now of men and
    women in uniform, as well as the diplomats and intelligence
    officials who worked with them, they did a remarkable job in
    dealing with the people who attacked us on 9/11.
        But when it came to this much more expansive effort to
    defeat the Taliban and to remake Afghanistan, that was a
    different story. And I think we got to the point where,
    arguably, we knew how not to lose, but we were not capable, in
    that frame, of winning. And the reason was----
        Secretary Blinken. Mr. Secretary, I have got about a minute
    left. I just want to reclaim a little bit of time. I am sorry.
        Secretary Blinken. Please, go ahead. Thank you.
        Mr. Phillips. I also want to salute our staffers, staffers
    in Democratic offices, Republican offices, many of them very
    early career staffers who have done yeomen's work to help
    people evacuate from Afghanistan. I want to celebrate them.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes.
        Mr. Phillips. But what I have heard from many, Mr.
    Secretary, is that the coordination of this effort was very
    challenging.
        Very quickly, what grade would you give the United States
    of America for its whole-of-government planning and execution
    of the withdrawal plan, what grade?
        Secretary Blinken. I cannot give it a grade, but here is
    what I can say. I think that you are right. We, you know, in
    this extraordinary situation, had to do a tremendous amount of
    work to get to a better place, especially when it comes to
    coordination. And there is a lot of work yet to be done,
    learning from what we did and what we did not do, going forward
    to put us in a better place.
        And so I think--I think, from my perspective at least, it
    definitely improved, but it did not start from a great place,
    largely because of the exigency of the situation that we were
    in.
        But here is the question that I think--I hope we can work
    on together. Knowing that, how do we put ourselves in a better
    position going forward so that we can get that kind of
    coordination, cooperation, stood up much more quickly.
        Mr. Phillips. I appreciate your candor.
        And I yield back. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Andy Barr of Kentucky for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Barr. Mr. Secretary, let me return to the dissent
    cable. You said you read the July 13 dissent cable prepared by
    the career diplomats at the Kabul Embassy. You said you were
    very proud of that. Is that, again, correct?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct, yes.
        Mr. Barr. And that warning came over 1 month before the
    fall of Kabul, right?
        Secretary Blinken. The cable was, I believe----
        Mr. Barr. July 13.
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. On July 13, yes.
        Mr. Barr. July 13. So over a month. And the cable warned
    that the Afghan Government was at risk of collapse. And your
    response was, quote, the thoughts of the drafters reflected
    much of the thinking of the Department, unquote.
        And you still maintain that to be the case?
        Secretary Blinken. The cable did not predict that the
    government or security forces would collapse before we
    departed----
        Mr. Barr. But the cable did say the Afghan Government was
    at risk of collapse, and you said that the thoughts of the
    drafters reflected much of the thinking of the Department.
        By the way, at the exact same time, the Bureau of
    Intelligence and Research in the Department was briefing this
    committee that the Taliban was moving quickly toward a takeover
    of the country. You presumably had access to that same
    intelligence from I&R, which corroborated the dissent cable and
    was alarming to many members of this committee.
        Do you dispute that?
        Secretary Blinken. As we have had an opportunity to discuss
    throughout these many months, there were ongoing intelligence
    assessments about the durability and resilience of the Afghan
    Government----
        Mr. Barr. Well, look, I mean, let's just be honest, Mr.
    Secretary. These were alarming cables. They were warnings. They
    were warnings to you. You say they reflected the majority
    position of the Department.
        Did you share this intelligence with the President of the
    United States?
        Secretary Blinken. Two things on the cable, Congressman.
    First, the main focus of the cable was on taking steps to
    expedite the efforts we were making to bring out the SIV
    applicants and others from Afghanistan----
        Mr. Barr. [Inaudible] The collapse was imminent. Did you
    share that intelligence with the President?
        Secretary Blinken. It did not say that the collapse was
    imminent. It expressed----
        Mr. Barr. Well, why did you accelerate the process?
        Secretary Blinken. Because it expressed real concerns about
    two things.
        Mr. Barr. Because we got it too. We saw it too. We knew
    this was totally avoidable.
        Did you share that intelligence with the President? Did you
    advise him for a shift in strategy as a result of this
    intelligence?
        Secretary Blinken. Again, this is not--first of all, it is
    not intelligence. It is information analysis assessment that is
    very important----
        Mr. Barr. Okay.
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Coming from our embassy.
        Mr. Barr. I know it is intelligence. And the cable was
    analysis. Did you share it with the President?
        Secretary Blinken. The Dissent Channel, which is an
    important--very important tradition in the State Department,
    under its regulations, is shared only with the senior
    leadership of----
        Mr. Barr. You are not answering the question. You are not
    answering the question. But I want to know if you had a shift
    in policy; and if not, why not.
        I want to know if the President contemplated shifting any
    part of this strategy when it was very apparent that this
    strategy of unconditional retreat was failing. And it was
    failing over a month before the fall of Kabul.
        Let me move on to Bagram, real quick. In April, I warned
    you not to abandon Bagram. Little did I know the Biden
    Administration would abandon it even before evacuating all
    Americans, our allies, and advance military equipment, leaving
    the world's most dangerous airport, HKIA, as the exclusive
    point of extraction.
        Who made the decision to abandon Bagram at that time?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, as you know, the military
    was engaged in a drawdown from Afghanistan, and part of that
    drawdown was moving out of different positions, to include
    Bagram Airbase, which was given to the Afghan security and
    defense forces.
        Mr. Barr. You are telling me that the military--the
    military--advised evacuating Bagram before you extracted all
    Americans and the equipment, or was that a State Department
    decision?
        Secretary Blinken. We certainly did not make a decision
    about Bagram. The military is charged with doing the planning
    and the work in any drawdown, and they make decisions--they
    make decisions based on force protection and the security of
    our men and women in uniform
        [inaudible].
        Mr. Barr. Okay. You say that there is nothing the Chinese
    would have wanted us more than to stay in Afghanistan. Is it
    your testimony that the Chinese wanted the United States to
    remain in the only airbase in the country with a physical
    border with China? You think that that is the Chinese position,
    that they wanted us to keep Bagram?
        Secretary Blinken. I think the Chinese would have liked to
    have seen us remain in a re-upped war in which----
        Mr. Barr. Oh, so----
        Secretary Blinken [continuing]. Under attack in which we
    were putting more and more forces into Afghanistan and which
    were----
        Mr. Barr. You think the Chinese are celebrating us--you
    think the Chinese are celebrating us abandoning an airbase, the
    largest airbase on their border? Come on.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Barr. Just be honest. Just be honest.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who
    is the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health,
    and Global Human Rights, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Omar. Thank you, Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, I know it is harder to end a war than start
    one in this town, so I thank you and the President for ending
    our longest war.
        Over the weekend, both The New York Times and Washington
    Post reported the August 29 drone strike that supposedly
    prevented a car bomb attack at the airport in Kabul, instead
    killed Zemari Ahmadi, an aid worker, and his family.
        The strike happened when there was a lot of eyes on Kabul,
    but it is not unusual for U.S. drone strikes to kill civilians.
    It is not unusual for the U.S. Government to claim it killed
    terrorists instead.
        And this is coming on the heels of reporting that DoD
    failed to spend a single dollar of the redress payments that
    Congress has provided for civilian casualties.
        As Congress considers the continuing utility of the 2001
    AUMF, how can you possibly ensure us that our drone strikes and
    Over the Horizon capabilities will actually reach their
    targets?
        Secretary Blinken. First, when it comes to moving forward,
    I hope that we can, again, take this up in a different setting
    and different session.
        I know with regard to the drone strike that you are
    referring to, that is being looked at very, very, very
    carefully by others in the administration so that we understand
    exactly what happened or what did not happen.
        And no country on Earth, no government takes more effort,
    takes more precautions to try to ensure that anyone other than
    the intended terrorist target is struck using a drone or by any
    other means. But certainly we know that in the past, civilians
    have been hurt and have been killed in these strikes. And we
    have to make sure that we have in place every possible measure
    to allow us to continue to use the tool to defend and protect
    ourselves while avoiding anyone on the civilian side from being
    hit.
        And we also need to look, as you have rightly said, at the
    authorizations going back to 2001 and 2002. We strongly support
    that. Those need to be updated to reflect present realities,
    not reality as it was in 2001 or 2002.
        Ms. Omar. And, Mr. Secretary, from the State Department's
    point of view, what is the impact of the unaccountable--
    uncountable and accountable civilian harm on our
    counterterrorism goals?
        Secretary Blinken. It certainly runs counter to those
    goals, whenever there are civilian casualties, whenever there
    are unintended injuries or deaths. It does not advance what we
    are trying to do. And so that is besides the moral obligation
    we have to do everything we possibly can to make sure that
    civilians are not harmed or killed.
        It is also true that in terms of the mission itself, we
    want to make sure that that does not happen, because if people
    lose faith and confidence in it, if they--and particularly in
    the countries in question, if people see it as a tool to do
    harm to innocent civilians as opposed to terrorists who are a
    threat to everyone, that will undermine support for what we are
    doing.
        Ms. Omar. And in your role and previous roles in other
    administrations, how much of an analysis is being done to look
    at whether our counterterrorism efforts are actually being
    counter to the work that we are trying to do in ending
    terrorism around the world?
        Secretary Blinken. I would call it very, very significant.
    Certainly in the Obama Administration we spent a tremendous
    amount of time looking at, reviewing, and modifying all of
    these procedures, all of the safeguards, all of the criteria
    that went along with using these tools. And we have been in the
    midst of conducting just such a review in this administration,
    to make sure, to the best of our ability, that when we take a
    strike, we get the intended person and no one else.
        Ms. Omar. Thank you, and I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Greg Steube of Florida, who
    is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East,
    North Africa, and Global Counterterrorism, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Steube. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Blinken, even in your opening statement, you cannot be
    honest with the American people. You stated, and I quote, that
    by January 2021, the Taliban was in its strongest military
    position since 9/11.
        I am pretty sure their strongest military position has been
    during your entire administration, not prior to it.
        In fact, their strongest military position since the towers
    were hit in 2001 was this past September 11th, the 20th
    anniversary, all of which happened on your watch, not your
    predecessor's.
        In fact, on April 27 of this year, days before the original
    deadline negotiated by the Trump administration, that you and
    the Biden Administration violated, the Taliban controlled 77
    districts in Afghanistan, the Afghan Government controlled 129,
    and there were 194 contested districts.
        By August 15, while you and Biden were on vacation, the
    Taliban had taken and controlled 304 districts, and the
    government only controlled 37.
        From May to August of this year, while you, the Department
    of Defense, and the President did absolutely nothing, the
    Taliban gained 227 districts in Afghanistan in just 4 months.
        You cannot claim ignorance to what was going on there, and
    you cannot blame the Trump administration for your failure.
        I served in Iraq and I am well aware of our capabilities.
    Your administration and the White House was seeing in real time
    what was happening in Afghanistan, and you did absolutely
    nothing to stop it.
        In fact, you did what you could to conceal the facts.
    Biden, himself, tried to get President Ghani to lie about what
    was happening on the ground. Biden told Ghani that, quote, the
    perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan I
    believe, is that things aren't going well in terms of the fight
    against the Taliban, and there is a need, whether it is true or
    not, there is a need to project a different picture.
        That was on July 23, before all of you went on vacation. So
    you knew exactly what was going on there and did nothing to
    start moving our people out or our SIVs out until it was too
    late and the Taliban controlled the entire nation.
        You earlier stated under questioning today, and I quote, we
    inherited a deadline, not a plan. Yet you did not even follow
    the deadline that you cascade as something you couldn't do
    anything about. This whole blaming the Trump administration for
    everything that has happened in Afghanistan is a disgrace.
        You are the Secretary of State, and Biden has been the
    Commander in Chief since January. Not Trump. You and the
    administration saw what was happening in Afghanistan, and you
    had the ability to deal with it. Not Trump. You were
    responsible for the assets on the ground, and you were
    responsible for getting our people out.
        So I know how you, Biden, and other Democrats want nothing
    more than to blame Trump for all of the problems that you have
    created, but the responsibility for all of this lies squarely
    on your shoulders and in the lap of President Biden.
        Then after Kabul fell, your leadership completely and
    utterly failed, not only our citizens on the ground, but our
    allies that we have worked with for 20 years.
        First your direction was shelter in place. Then it was,
    make your way to the airport, but we cannot guarantee your
    safety on the way there. Then it was, shelter in place. Then it
    was, come to the gates. Then it was, leave the gates.
        While all of this was happening, you are handing our list
    of citizens and Afghan SIVs to the Taliban, a globally
    recognized terrorist organization because you were unwilling to
    go in and get the citizens and SIVs stuck behind enemy lines
    out.
        And as we sit here today, we still have citizens and SIVs
    stuck in Taliban hands, despite Biden promising to stay and get
    them all out. And thanks to you, our enemy knows exactly who
    they are and how to find them.
        And you describe this, and I quote, as an extraordinary
    effort. I would certainly not describe the deaths of 13 U.S.
    servicemembers, the deaths of hundreds of Afghans, and the fact
    that we still have citizens and SIVs stuck behind enemy lines
    while the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and ISIS-K go door to door hunting
    them down, as an extraordinary effort.
        And if all that wasn't bad enough, you spit in the eye of
    every single servicemember who served on the war on terror for
    the last 20 years, by even considering recognizing the Taliban
    who we have fought against for 20 years, as a legitimate
    government, and not only recognize them but do absolutely
    nothing while the Taliban takes control of $90 billion worth of
    military aircraft, Humvees, weapons, night vision goggles,
    uniforms, ammunitions, and Blackhawks.
        And after we have rolled over and handed all that to them,
    you announce today, with great fanfare and great pride, that
    you are providing $64 million in humanitarian assistance to the
    people of Afghanistan.
        You cannot even get our people out of the country, but we
    and the American people are to believe that $64 million of our
    tax dollars that is to be sent to Afghanistan will not fall in
    the hands of the Taliban or other terrorist organizations who
    you were relying upon to get our people out of the airport.
        Your legacy will be the Taliban flying our Blackhawk over
    Kabul while someone, maybe a U.S. citizen, hangs from a rope by
    his neck. And while this is happening, you are saying that you
    are working diplomatically with the Taliban to get our people
    out.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Colin Allred of Texas for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Allred. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I respect my colleague who was just speaking's service. I
    think much of what he said was not accurate.
        Mr. Secretary, would you like to respond to--I will give
    you any time you would like to have to respond to him.
        Secretary Blinken. It would take too long. And I very much
    respect his service as well. I respect the service of everyone
    on this committee, Republican, Democrat, whether they agree
    with what we did or vehemently disagree with it.
        Regardless of any of that, I deeply respect the service. I
    deeply respect the loss of those extraordinary men and women,
    the 13 Marines and others who lost their lives so that others
    could live their's in the terrorist attack by ISIS-K. And I
    also deeply respect the loss of the 2,641 servicemembers who
    gave their lives in Afghanistan over the last 20 years.
        And I would simply say--and I apologize for taking your
    time--but I would simply say that I believe the most important
    legacy we can leave is to have ended America's longest war, to
    make sure that a third generation of Americans does not have to
    go fight and die in Afghanistan, as well as having brought
    125,000 people to safety under the most extraordinary
    circumstances, made good by our commitments to work to get
    every American out and to continue to do that with the few that
    remain in Afghanistan, as well as to deal with the ongoing
    challenges that it poses. So I believe that will be the legacy
    that we are talking about.
        I apologize, Congressman, for taking your time. Thank you.
        Mr. Allred. No, thank you, Mr. Secretary. I mean, it is
    extremely difficult to end a 20-year conflict, and I think we
    are seeing that and, of course, you know, tempers are running
    high, and I know it has been a long day.
        But I want to thank you and the State Department personnel
    for helping my office evacuate the Afzali family from Kabul to
    be reunited with his brother who actually lives here in my
    district.
        Mr. Afzali worked with our embassy, and not only did he
    evacuate his wife and two kids, he got four unaccompanied
    children, whose mother was already in New York, out of Kabul as
    well. And so I want to thank your team for that success story.
        And as a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, as well
    as this committee, I want to speak to the many veterans of the
    Afghan war and their families who live in my district. And just
    to quote, President George W. Bush, who is actually my
    constituent, this weekend said that the causes you pursued at
    the call of duty is the noblest America has to offer. You have
    shielded your fellow citizens from danger. You have defended
    the beliefs of your country and advanced the rights of the
    downtrodden. You have been the face of hope and mercy in dark
    places. You have been a force for good in the world. End quote.
        And I want to thank all those who have served as well.
        You know, Mr. Secretary, in the time I have remaining, I
    want to say, 2-1/2 years ago, your predecessor, Secretary
    Pompeo, appeared before this committee. And I know it is not
    very satisfying to look to the past and sometimes maybe even
    think that you are pointing fingers, but at that time, I
    questioned him about the conditions of our withdrawal from
    Afghanistan that he was negotiating in real time with the
    Taliban.
        I asked Secretary Pompeo why he had abandoned previous U.S.
    policy regarding negotiations with the Taliban, such as
    insisting that they agree to respect the Afghan Constitution,
    including its protections for women and minorities, and of
    course as my other colleagues have said, most egregiously,
    excluding the Afghan Government from those negotiations almost
    entirely, undermining that very government in its own country.
        At the time, Secretary Pompeo was fairly dismissive, I
    think it is fair to say, of my concerns.
        But, Mr. Secretary, I want to draw your attention to the
    screen here showing an excerpt of the Trump administration's
    deal. It notes that the deal did not require the Taliban to
    disavow al-Qaeda and did not include a commitment to not attack
    Afghan security forces, which has also been discussed today.
        And I want to ask you, Mr. Secretary, based on your
    experience, what aspects of the deal that you inherited would
    you have handled differently based on past U.S. policy and the
    best diplomatic tools that at our disposal?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, look, hindsight is always 20/20,
    whether it is for us, whether it is for the previous
    administration, or the ones before.
        But I would say that to the extent there was conditionality
    in that agreement imposed on the Taliban, ideally, it should
    have gone further. Yes, very good to make sure that our forces
    were not being attacked during the pendency of the agreement
    until we withdrew all of our forces, but there was very little
    in that agreement that really compelled the Taliban to
    negotiate and get to an agreement with the Afghan Government
    about the future of Afghanistan, a future in which these basic
    rights and principles were upheld. That wasn't there, and I
    think that is unfortunate.
        Similarly, we can talk about the forces that we withdrew,
    you know, in the last few months, but in reducing, to the
    extent that we did, the leverage that we had by going from
    roughly 13,500 forces down to 2,500 forces by the end of the
    last administration, that made it very, very challenging to
    leverage the Taliban to even make good on what little there was
    in the agreement to begin with, never mind doing more.
        So, again, in fairness, you know, all of this is 20/20, and
    I hope we engage in that 20/20 hindsight, not just for the last
    9 months, but for the last 20 years, because there is a lot
    that we need to look at.
        Mr. Allred. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time is expired.
        I now recognize Representative Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Meuser. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, you are a long-standing, experienced
    American diplomat. Your service is to be commended to our
    country. Past hearings, you have been fair and informative.
        I, however, must State that I am very disappointed in your
    written testimony, your opening comments, and answers today,
    which really seem to me, sir, as a series of rationalizations.
        You are, in fact, blaming everyone but yourselves and the
    Taliban, which is interesting, for this disaster, and yet you
    seem to continue to be victimized by wishful thinking.
        Blaming the Trump administration, frankly, is equivalent to
    me planning a fishing trip months in advance, the day comes to
    leave, a hurricane comes in, you go anyway, and blame me for
    things going badly.
        The fact is, these epic mistakes and the ignoring of intel
    has left a country--OK, these are the facts, this is the
    reality of today--under a brutal terrorist regime, and the
    world is a more dangerous place. Massacres, murders continue.
        I just informed a newspaper of a horrific scene I heard of
    this morning, somebody being pulled out, an interpreter,
    murdered, in front of their children, the children taken. Okay?
    This are results of these incredible mistakes.
        Thirteen Americans tragically--tragically killed. 124,000
    Afghanistanians desperately fleeing for their lives, some
    falling off of airplanes as they leave, as they desperately try
    to get out.
        We have billions in American military equipment and pallets
    of cash, I understand, left behind in Taliban hands. Yet, sir,
    you sit and tell us that you did the right thing. Okay. That,
    frankly, makes us--kind of scares the hell out of us as to what
    decisions might be made next.
        So I will start with my first question. Are there any
    conditions where we provide pallets of cash to the Taliban?
        Secretary Blinken. None that I am aware of.
        Mr. Meuser. All right. Thank you.
        Intel said Taliban would likely overrun Afghanistan and all
    the cities, as it did. Of course, you mentioned General Milley
    a number of times, stating how, no, there was no intel stating
    11 days.
        What was the likely scenario that you all, your department
    and the Biden Administration, believed was going to occur after
    our retreat?
        Secretary Blinken. So, Congressman, throughout the spring
    and into the summer, if you look back at the intelligence
    assessments and collective assessments that were made--and
    typically you would have a worst case scenario, a best case
    scenario, some scenarios in between--it went from in the winter
    and spring to worst case scenario, the Taliban takes over the
    country in 18 months to 2 years after our withdrawal, to in
    July, the end of the year, the end of this calendar year.
        And even right up to the very end, as I have said before,
    to my knowledge at least, no one was predicting the collapse of
    the government and the security forces in 11 days. So, yes, it
    got narrower, the worst case scenarios, but it went from 18
    months to 2 years, to the end of this year.
        Mr. Meuser. Okay. That is getting it very wrong, regardless
    of the information available.
        Will the Biden Administration secure our southern border
    now that we have this serious additional crisis and terrorists
    on the loose worldwide?
        Secretary Blinken. We have been working assiduously to
    secure that border from day one. And we have also, as we talked
    about a little bit earlier, with regard to Afghans coming in to
    the United States, as you know, there are very significant,
    rigorous vetting procedures in place with Customs and Border
    Patrol, NCTC, FBI, CIA, et cetera, that are done initially in
    these transit countries before anyone comes to the United
    States and then continue on military bases here, which is
    usually the first point of landing after Dulles Airport for
    people coming from Afghanistan.
        Mr. Meuser. Thank you, Secretary.
        Just last, do you believe, and the Biden Administration
    believe, terrorists respond to strength and the willingness to
    use it?
        Secretary Blinken. Terrorists respond to effective
    counterterrorism, absolutely.
        Mr. Meuser. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back.
        I now recognize Representative Andy Levin of Michigan, who
    is the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific,
    Central Asia, and Nonproliferation, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for helping the President end
    our longest ever war, which was the right thing to do; for your
    Department's efforts to airlift out so many tens of thousands
    of Americans and Afghans when the Afghan Government and Armed
    Forces fell so precipitously; and for your patience and
    steadfastness here today.
        Obviously, you have heard a lot about our concerns today
    regarding Afghans seeking refuge in the United States and
    elsewhere, and I want to start there. What commitments has the
    administration secured from third countries to host Afghans for
    a sufficient duration to allow the administration to process
    their SIV P1 and P2 visas or humanitarian parole requests?
    Where are we at with that.
        Secretary Blinken. So we have secured a number of
    agreements that would allow us to, as Afghans come out of the
    country, and these would be SIV applicants, these would be
    potential refugees, with several countries where they could go
    to those countries. We could engage in the processing,
    especially with regard to SIVs, as you know, with a 14-step
    process, very hard to complete that. There are parts that we
    could not possibly complete remotely in Afghanistan. So we do
    need to get them to third countries where we can complete that.
    And we have----
        Mr. Levin. Do we have enough? I mean, is the capacity
    enough, basically, I guess that is the question. Or do we need
    more?
        Secretary Blinken. I am sorry?
        Mr. Levin. Is the capacity enough or do we need more, I
    guess----
        Secretary Blinken. I think the current capacity is enough,
    but that is something we are going to look very carefully at.
    And, of course, much depends on the ongoing ability of people
    to leave Afghanistan and to get to these countries.
        Mr. Levin. Okay. All right. Well, let's stay on the topic
    of Afghans who need protection right now. U.S. officials stated
    our commitment to Afghans at risk, such as civil society
    workers, human rights defenders, women's rights activists,
    journalists, and others, and that that commitment did not end
    with the withdrawal of U.S. personnel. Deciding where to draw
    these lines is super difficult.
        Who else specifically is the Biden Administration defining
    as at risk, and how does the State Department intend to support
    them?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, you are right, it is very
    challenging. In the summer, we put in place, besides the SIV
    program, we put in place the so-called P2 category for people--
    for Afghans who did not meet the requirements of the SIV
    program but who would nonetheless work, for example, for NGO's,
    for American news organizations, other institutions but not
    directly for the U.S. Government so that they could qualify for
    the SIV.
        Of course, the general refugee program is available to
    people. So if they can get out of Afghanistan, which is
    obviously--which is what we are working on, they can go to a
    third country and apply for refugee status.
        But we are particularly focused on Afghans at risk, and the
    ones most at risk are people who, by what they have done or
    what they have said or who they are, could be at real threat
    from the new government.
        Mr. Levin. All right. Finally, let me return to the
    question of the drone strike, the U.S. drone strike in Kabul on
    August 29, which reportedly killed at least 10 civilians,
    including 7 kids. Just going from media reports.
        What I want to ask is, what role is the State Department
    playing in helping to investigate any civilian harm caused in
    this strike? Does the State Department have a role in this or
    is it purely military or intelligence officials?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, without going into too much detail
    here, in the first instance, military intelligence is focused
    on reviewing everything that we did. They do that as a matter
    of course, and of course they are doing that in this instance.
    To the extent that we have any information that comes to us
    that is relevant to this, of course, we would feed it into that
    review process.
        Mr. Levin. All right. Well, I hope we can take this up when
    we have a classified discussion because, you know, it is just--
    it happens a lot and we have to do everything we can to stop
    it.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you so much, and I yield
    back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back.
        I now recognize Representative Claudia Tenney of New York,
    who is the vice ranking member for the Subcommittee on
    International Development, International Organizations, and
    Global Corporate Social Impact, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Tenney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to get
    right to it.
        My son served in the Marine Corps for 8 years. I spent the
    weekend with marines and Gold Star families. There is nothing
    worse than having someone show up at your door to tell you that
    your son or daughter was killed in action. I know you know
    that.
        I just want to say to some of our colleagues on this call
    who do not understand the anger and the anguish that many feel,
    you know, referring to this as histrionics and--by this side. I
    feel the pain of these people. I spent the weekend with them. I
    have been with my Gold Star families for many, many years, and
    I know you understand that.
        But my question to you is--and I want to reference back to
    something that Representative Issa had referred to. He referred
    to communications that our American citizens and others had
    received that said, make contingency plans to leave when it is
    safe to do so that do not rely on the U.S. Government for
    assistance, notify a trusted person of your travel and movement
    plans.
        This communication was given by the State Department to
    U.S. citizens, along with legal permanent residents and SIV
    applicants and holders. My question to you is, can you tell us
    that these people who--and I appreciate those who have been
    able to get out successfully--who have not been assisted, who
    are there in harm's way, will you give us a commitment that our
    American citizens and our legal permanent residents and others
    will be out safely?
        Secretary Blinken. Absolutely. But just to clarify--and,
    again, I invited Congressman Issa to share that with me.
        Here is my understanding. Starting in March, we issued 19
    separate----
        Ms. Tenney. Let me just----
        Secretary Blinken. No, no. But it is important--no, no, it
    is important. I do not want to take your time, but it is
    important to talk to this, if I could. No, no----
        Ms. Tenney. [inaudible] Briefly.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, no, no. So here is the--just to be
    clear, and I believe this is what this refers to, but if it is
    not, we will take that up. In the----
        Ms. Tenney. The question is, can you just make the
    assurance that these people will be out safely? Because I how
    have an American citizen, a family of seven, a 2-year-old is an
    American citizen, and they are still stranded in Afghanistan.
    They were told by the State Department in a letter, only one
    parent can accompany the family home--or this 2-year-old home,
    which means the other five are going to be left in Afghanistan.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. That----
        Ms. Tenney. I would like your assurance that all of that
    family will be kept intact and be brought home and will not be
    separated at the Afghan border.
        Secretary Blinken. First of all, Congresswoman, we are
    committed to bringing any remaining--any remaining----
        Ms. Tenney. Can I just----
        Secretary Blinken. I would be happy to address the question
    if I could, please.
        We are committed to bringing any remaining American
    citizens in Afghanistan out who wish to leave, and we are
    working on that every single day. Under the law----
        Ms. Tenney. Let me just--this is the question, though. We
    have an American citizen who has six family members who are
    legal permanent residents. We were told by the State Department
    only one gets to accompany the American citizen.
        These aren't people that do not want to leave Afghanistan.
    These are people that aren't going to abandon their children.
    So I just want to be sure that----
        Secretary Blinken. Under--let me be clear. Could I please
    answer the question? Because it is an important one and it
    deserves----
        Ms. Tenney. I just want a yes or no answer. It is really
    simple, because you are taking up my time, and I have a couple
    issues I want to get to.
        Secretary Blinken. Well, look, I am really happy to address
    because you raise a very important question. Just to be very
    clear, any American citizen, their spouse and their minor
    children, we are committed to bringing out. That is what the
    law provides under the Immigration and Naturalization Act. It
    is also what the other laws provide for.
        If we want to be more expansive than that, we invite
    Congress to change the law.
        Ms. Tenney. [Inaudible] Question. Thank you. I appreciate
    that.
        Mr. Secretary, would you agree that it would have been
    safer to evacuate these people had the U.S. and allied troops
    remained in Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. Had we remained in Afghanistan?
        Ms. Tenney. No. The question is, do you think it would have
    been safer to evacuate the----
        Secretary Blinken. No. No. I highly doubt that, because had
    we remained in Afghanistan beyond May 1, we would have been
    back at war with the Taliban not only firing on our forces but
    also
        [inaudible] Cities.
        Ms. Tenney. [Inaudible] Would it have been safer if U.S.
    servicemembers, allied troops were in Afghanistan while we were
    evacuating these people? Do you agree that that would have
    been--it would have been safer?
        Secretary Blinken. I apologize, I missed the last part.
    Could you repeat it, please?
        Ms. Tenney. Yes. I said, do you agree that it would have
    been safer to evacuate the people that I described--American
    citizens, green card holders, and others--had we kept the U.S.
    troops and allied troops there first and evacuated them later?
        Secretary Blinken. Oh, I see. Again, if the Defense
    Department, the government as a whole engaged in the drawdown
    from Afghanistan. But the single most important factor was the
    collapse of the Afghan security forces and the Afghan
    Government in 11 days. That is what radically changed the
    situation.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Abigail Spanberger of
    Virginia, who is the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Europe,
    Energy, and Environment, and Cyber, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Spanberger. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being with us today. My
    first question is specific to Afghan allies. And for those of
    us who have been working directly with people on the ground
    trying to get folks out, as I know you have, it has been a
    really challenging time.
        And I think one of the lessons here, one of the takeaways
    for me is that we must always plan for the worst case scenario,
    because I think we saw a confluence of worst case scenarios
    come to fruition.
        So, on that end, I would note that in your opening remarks,
    you stated that we expect the Taliban to ensure freedom of
    travel, make good on its CT commitments, uphold the basic
    rights of the Afghan people, including women, girls,
    minorities, and name a broadly representative permanent
    government.
        But I have also seen videos of women and girls being beaten
    by the Taliban. I know there have been night letters that have
    been posted on doors, marking people for interrogation or
    assassination. I have received photos and written testimoneys
    of some of the beatings and targetings that have occurred, and
    murders and beatings have been documented against those who
    have helped the United States.
        And so, sir, I would begin by asking, have you seen any of
    these videos? Have they made their way to you as well?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes, I have seen videos. I have seen
    reports. I have read news accounts. Yes. And these incidents
    are deeply, deeply disturbing.
        Ms. Spanberger. So looking toward the future, recognizing
    that perhaps we should hear your plan for the absolute worst
    case scenario, is the Department talking through what the
    contingencies are in the scenario in which the Taliban does not
    do the things that you stated are our expectations and hopes?
        Secretary Blinken. In short, yes.
        Ms. Spanberger. Okay. And thank you for that. And I also
    just want to thank every person on the ground, every person who
    has been so helpful.
        I represent many, many in the veterans community who have
    focused exclusively on ensuring that those who helped keep them
    alive and those who worked side by side with them would have a
    chance at a better life in the future. And so I am grateful for
    their service and their work.
        I recently sent a letter to you, sir, focused on border
    crossings. And I know there has been some progress toward
    working with border nations about the possibility of them
    opening the borders. Could you just briefly comment on what the
    status is related to the ability to exfiltrate people or allow
    people to cross at borders?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Thank you. And I saw the letter,
    and I thank you for it.
        We have been working with a number of countries, including
    Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, to ensure that, ideally,
    their borders will remain open overall, but certainly that they
    would remain open to American citizens, green card holders,
    visa holders, who seek to leave and who are assisting in
    leaving. And we have basic agreements with all three countries
    that that will be the case.
        And so the work now is to be able to see people start, as
    we saw last week with the flights that left Qatar--left, excuse
    me, Kabul for Qatar, that started to happen.
        Ms. Spanberger. Thank you so very much, Mr. Secretary. And,
    please, if any of that changes, I ask that you keep us apprised
    so that we can be helpful as possible.
        And last week I visited Fort Pickett, which is in my
    district, to see Operations Allies Welcome firsthand, and I saw
    thousands of Afghan children, women, and men who made it out of
    Afghanistan. It is a testament to a whole-of-government
    approach--public servants, U.S. servicemembers, NGO workers and
    volunteers standing up an incredible effort on very, very short
    notice.
        On behalf of the community that I represent, I would just
    want to reiterate the importance of really ensuring that the
    interagency team engages and communicates with local
    government.
        I was very happy to learn about the health screenings on
    the ground and the initiation of English language classes that
    have begun onsite. I hope that continues.
        But I am curious, how long do you anticipate Operations
    Allies Welcome will continue to utilize military installations
    across the United States, including the one that is in my
    district?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, thank you. And I am really
    grateful for that support, the engagement of the community. It
    makes all the difference. And I want to make sure too, like
    you, that we have the right, you know, connectivity, that we
    are talking and coordinating with the local community.
        We have to make sure that we have the ability to put people
    into the resettlement process with resettlement agencies across
    the United States. We are determined to move them as
    expeditiously as possible. Let me come back to you with a
    better timeframe, because we also have to do it mindful of
    making sure we complete any security checks that are necessary.
        Ms. Spanberger. And I do appreciate the robust security
    provisions that I witnessed when I was visiting.
        And I have run out of time, though I have many more
    questions. I appreciate your time, Mr. Secretary.
        I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time is expired.
        I now recognize Representative August Pfluger of Texas, who
    is the vice ranking member for the Subcommittee on Europe,
    Energy, the Environment and Cyber, for 5 minutes.
        You are muted, Mr. Pfluger. Please unmute.
        We will come back to Mr. Pfluger.
        I now recognize Representative Nicole Malliotakis of New
    York, who is the ranking member for the Subcommittee on
    International Development, International Organization, and
    Global Corporate Social Impact, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Secretary, for being with us today and
    answering our questions and concerns.
        You said that the Afghanistan mission was, quote,
    successful. You know, I speak for millions of Americans when I
    say that it was a kick in the gut to see our American military
    vehicles parading in the streets with the Taliban flags.
        You know, this has been a real hasty withdrawal; U.S.
    citizens unable to get through the gates, the SIV process was a
    mess. Our offices had to work with veterans on the ground
    because you couldn't get responses in some cases from the State
    Department. And we still have a hundred American citizens still
    behind enemy lines, which is the same number that it was 2
    weeks ago. And, of course, the 13 soldiers who were killed. So
    I do not know how anyone can call that a success. But then
    again, it is coming from an administration who has misled the
    American people throughout this entire withdrawal.
        Today you said the Taliban is committed to not allowing
    Afghanistan to be used as a base for terrorism. You know, the
    Taliban, as you said, is a designated terrorist organization
    itself. It harbored al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden leading up to
    9/11.
        And the U.S. Government has also designated the Haqqani
    Network a foreign terrorist organization. Mr. Haqqani, as you
    know, is now one of the Taliban's new cabinet members. He is on
    the FBI Most Wanted list. We have a $10 million reward for
    information leading to his arrest.
        I fear that this is a type of weakness, incredulity that
    has gotten us in the situation that we are currently in.
        The FBI still has even questions for the Haqqani Network,
    the January 8, 2008 attack at a Kabul hotel that killed 1
    American and 5 others, a 2011 suicide truck bomb in Wardak
    province that wounded 77 American soldiers.
        You know, now that we have no presence on the ground in
    Afghanistan, how is the administration working to ensure that
    these same terrorists do not attack Americans again just as
    they did at the Kabul Airport? And you know, how can we trust,
    how can you trust the Taliban to say that they are going to do
    this and actually work to prevent terrorism when they are a
    terrorist network themselves? And what have they told you about
    rooting out ISIS-K, who is responsible for those 13 soldiers'
    deaths?
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Congresswoman. First of all,
    it is not about trusting the Taliban at all. It is about
    holding them to the commitments they made not just to us but to
    the international community when it comes to not allowing
    Afghanistan to become a haven for outwardly directed terrorism.
        There are two groups that you pointed to that are very
    important in this. One is ISIS-K, the group that killed our
    servicemen and women just a couple of weeks ago in Afghanistan.
    As it happens, one thing one could say about the Taliban is
    that they and ISIS-K are sworn enemies, and the Taliban has
    spent the last 5 years, even as it has relentlessly been moving
    to take more territory, to also take territory away from ISIS-K
    as it sought to implant itself in Afghanistan, and they remain
    very much at odds.
        And I think the greater question with regard to ISIS-K is
    less whether the Taliban has the intent and more whether it has
    the capacity to effectively deal with it. But over the last 5
    or 6 years, it took away virtually all of the territory that it
    held.
        Then you rightly point to al-Qaeda, the ability of that
    group to engage in outwardly directed, homeland-focused
    terrorist attacks has been dramatically degraded. And the
    assessment of the community right now is that they do not
    currently have that capacity. Having said that, we will remain
    extremely vigilant to detect any reemergence of that
    capability, and of course, take action against it if it
    reemerges.
        And as we were talking a bit earlier, we would welcome the
    opportunity to go into more detail about that in a different
    setting.
        Ms. Malliotakis. I would appreciate that because I am very
    concerned that, you know, the government is relying on the
    Taliban for counterterrorism, and that should not be something
    that we should even be flirting with.
        But in addition to that, you know, just while we were in
    this hearing, $64 million is being reported in additional aid
    to Afghanistan. And how do we know and how can you guarantee
    the American people that this isn't going to end up in the
    hands of the Taliban just like our military equipment and
    vehicles and weapons did?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. It is an important question,
    Congresswoman, and here is what I would say. That money and any
    other assistance we provide, humanitarian assistance we
    provide, will not be provided to the government of Afghanistan.
    It is provided to NGO's that we have worked with for many, many
    years and to U.N. agencies that we have worked for many, many
    years. And they have tried and true mechanisms in place to make
    sure that the assistance gets to the people who need it, not to
    the government.
        Ms. Malliotakis. Well, I mean, I still question that. I
    think that we have to be--you know, I do not agree with this
    decision at this time. I do believe that we need to be
    concerned even about NGO's that are doing work on the ground
    and making----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
        Ms. Malliotakis. And child brides. If you could touch on
    that, just where the status----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Chrissy Houlahan of
    Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Houlahan. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr.
    Secretary. I know that most Americans are still supportive of
    the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and I also know that the
    airlift was remarkable and historic in its scale, but I do
    think that this process was not without its missteps, and now
    we do have some opportunities from which to draw on these
    lessons and hopefully have the ability to together steer
    ourselves more positively into the future.
        So I do have some questions, and I think it is important to
    point out that it is appropriate within Congress'
    constitutional role and responsibility of oversight to ask
    these questions. I really do this in the spirit of my
    responsibility, not in the spirit of whether a D or an R is in
    the White House. In the 20 years that this war has happened,
    there has been ample opportunity to spread blame all around.
        And I can also say that both Rs and Ds on this committee
    have personally served themselves, and I can personally
    understand the pain and anxiety that many of us are feeling
    during this very important and contentious discussion. Our pain
    and anxiety knows no party, and no party owns patriotism.
        That said, here is my first question, Mr. Secretary. In
    July, the U.S. military left Bagram Air Field, and on August
    15, the State Department made the decision to close the embassy
    chancery and evacuate to the airport. What drove that decision
    to withdraw from Bagram and a few weeks later to close the
    embassy? Sir, I know that you reflected that it was largely the
    DoD's decision to vacate Bagram, but it certainly was your
    decision and responsibility with the embassy.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, and I very much appreciate
    the spirit with which you are asking these very important
    questions as well as the oversight role that the Congress
    plays. It is central to our system.
        With regard to Bagram, this was part of the drawdown plan
    for the military. Again, the base was handed over to the Afghan
    national security and defense forces I believe on July 2. I
    leave it to my colleagues to get into the details of that. But,
    in essence, as we were drawing down, force protection is job
    one. It would have taken very significant forces remaining in
    place to defend Bagram.
        And in terms of departures from Afghanistan, and this was
    before the collapse of the government and the security forces,
    the airport in Kabul was a much better place to do that from.
    Bagram, as you know, is about 40 miles outside of the city. So
    getting there is a challenge, and at the end of the day, any--I
    am sorry. Go ahead.
        Ms. Houlahan. If it is okay, I would like to kind of lead
    into my question because I think it relates to that. I do want
    to understand something that many of us remain unclear on which
    is the timelines that were laid out both publicly and privately
    for withdrawal. It may have something to do with the decision
    to vacant Bagram and the embassy.
        I empathize that you were given an agenda and not
    necessarily a plan from the prior administration, but as far as
    I can tell, September 11 was announced publicly as a date
    certain by which we needed to be gone as was August 31 later
    on. And I was always led to believe that that telegraphing, let
    alone speaking out loud the dates that you were planning on
    doing things was something you should not signal to your enemy.
    Why did we do that? Can you help me understand that? And was
    that somehow--did that somehow drive the Bagram decision and
    the embassy decision.
        Secretary Blinken. Sure. No. This all goes to the fact that
    as we have been discussing earlier, we inherited an agreement
    that required us to leave Afghanistan by May 1. And had we not
    made good on that agreement, then we would have seen a
    resumption of the war with Taliban forces firing once again on
    us and our partners and seeking over to take over the cities
    which would have required us to put in more forces and restart
    the work. But having said that----
        Ms. Houlahan. There was some magic to September 11 that I
    just do not understand, so----
        Secretary Blinken. So we--so in doing our work on how to
    deal with May 1, the military told us that in order to, as they
    put it, retrograde in an orderly and safe manner, they needed 3
    to 4 months to do it the right way. And so the President took a
    risk in pushing past the May 1 deadline in terms of actually
    getting everyone out but making it clear that we were doing
    that to meet the commitment that his predecessor had made.
        And the--you get to September by those 3 to 4 months that
    the military said it needed to retrograde in a safe and orderly
    manner.
        Ms. Houlahan. Sir, with my remaining time, once September
    11 had been decided, it was also clear that we were on a very
    much more rapid path than September 11 which left us--we pulled
    out troops that could been around longer, and then we ended up
    having to bring back troops. Was that--why did we decide a date
    and then escalate the date and make it even more rapid?
        And I am sorry. I only have 7 seconds of my time, so I will
    have to take it for the record.
        Secretary Blinken. Sure, I am happy to come back to you,
    but in essence, everything changed when the government and the
    Afghan national security forces collapsed over 11 days in
    August. And then we moved into an emergency evacuation
    situation. And what was critical in order to do that, to get
    American citizens out, to get Afghans at risk out, was to make
    sure that we had control of the airport.
        And to do that as effectively as possible, the President
    had forces on standby for exactly this kind of emergency or
    contingency to make sure that we could go in, secure the
    airport which we did in 72 hours, and get flights moving out of
    the airport.
        So that is why those forces on standby went back in to
    secure the airport so we could do the evacuation.
        Ms. Houlahan. Sure. I have run out of time. I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        And I will again reach out to Representative August Pfluger
    of Texas for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me?
        Chairman Meeks. Yes, we hear you. You are breaking up, Mr.
    Pfluger. You are breaking up.
        Secretary Blinken. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I could not
    hear the Congressman.
        Chairman Meeks. I could not hear either.
        Mr. Plfuger, we could not hear you. You broke up.
        Mr. Pfluger. Okay. Can you hear me now.
        Chairman Meeks. We can hear you better.
        Mr. Pfluger. Okay. I would like to start by saying thank
    you to Ambassador Rosenblum and also to Deputy Secretary
    Viguerie for their help in getting the Afghan pilots out of
    Uzbekistan and to their onward destination.
        I now want to ask a very pointed question, Mr. Secretary.
    Are there any American hostages being held in Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. Mark Frerichs who is of great concern to
    me and to the entire administration who has been hostage there
    going back a couple of years and who we work on every single
    day to bring back home.
        Mr. Pfluger. Are there any other American hostages being
    held?
        Secretary Blinken. To the best of my knowledge, no.
        Mr. Pfluger. Are we going to bring Mark Frerichs home now
    that we have left Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. We are doing everything in our power as
    we have been and as the previous administration was doing.
        Mr. Pfluger. Who is holding Mark Frerichs right now?
        Secretary Blinken. I would be happy to take that up in a
    different setting.
        Mr. Pfluger. So would it be fair to say that this is going
    to be very difficult to bring him home now that we have left
    Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. It was obviously extremely difficult
    since it did not happen over the last couple of years, and we
    are determined to see that through.
        Mr. Pfluger. Have you received any classified briefings on
    the situation as it relates to the terror threat inside
    Afghanistan, classified briefings recently?
        Secretary Blinken. We get briefings, yes, on a regular
    basis on----
        Mr. Pfluger. Would you character those as positive, like
    the world is a safer place, or negative, like the threat is
    rising?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, needless to say, I do not want to
    get into any details in this setting. Again, happy to come back
    to you, but it very much depends on what you are looking at. If
    you are looking at outwardly directed threats against the
    homeland and against others outside of Afghanistan, the basic
    assessment is the groups in question currently do not have that
    capacity. But that could change, and that is why we are being
    extremely vigilant to see if it reemerges and to do something
    about it if it does.
        Mr. Pfluger. At the 9/11 museum in New York City, and I
    will read, in the Bin Laden museum, the al-Qaeda, with
    Taliban's permission to operate in Afghanistan, pursued its
    campaign against the U.S. and its allies. The Taliban provided
    al-Qaeda members with passports and stamps, allowing them to
    travel freely, and import vehicles, weapons, and money.
        I find it hard to believe that so much has changed in the
    20-year period that now that threat has been mitigated. How
    many evacuees have met criterias of known or suspected
    terrorists at this point in time at our lily pad locations?
        Secretary Blinken. Known or suspected? I do not--I do not
    have that information. We are engaged in a--in an extremely
    vigorous verification process involving multiple agencies, law
    enforcement, intelligence, security. No one--no one will get to
    the United States who----
        Mr. Pfluger. Where are they going when they pop on either
    KST or some other similar list? Where are they going? What are
    we doing with them?
        Secretary Blinken. So we have a number of countries I
    think, as you know, where we are transiting anyone coming out
    of Afghanistan. That is where the initial checks are done.
        And if we need more time on those checks to verify
    something, they stay in place, or they move to another location
    where we have arrangements to make sure that we have the time
    we need to go through all of the checks before they get to the
    United States.
        Mr. Pfluger. Thank you. And we have requested in a
    bipartisan manner to conduct oversight and have been denied
    that ability at the lily pads. We will continue to press. It is
    not right to be denied that oversight.
        Mr. Secretary, did the President follow military, best
    military advice to the letter, on the execution of the
    withdrawal as he stated in a speech recently?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. And when it comes to, for example,
    the question of August 31, it was the unanimous recommendation
    of the military, starting with the Chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs, the Secretary of Defense, all of the commanders on the
    ground to move forward with getting out by the 31st because as
    they said, if we did not do that the risk to force and the risk
    to mission would be exponentially high.
        Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Do you feel that the
    United States of America has abandoned our citizens?
        Secretary Blinken. No. Absolutely not. On the contrary. On
    the contrary.
        Mr. Pfluger. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I
    appreciate your responses. And with that, I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you, Congressman.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Tom
    Malinowski of New Jersey who is the Vice Chair of the full
    committee for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, as someone who was screaming about this from
    the rooftops at the time, I can count on one hand the number of
    my colleagues from the other side who joined in expressing any
    concern about the former President inviting the Taliban to Camp
    David or the shameful surrender agreement that undoubtedly set
    us on the path to this tragedy.
        And if anybody believes that the previous administration
    would have evacuated any Afghans to the United States, much
    less tens of thousands as President Biden did, I would suggest
    that they ask the Kurds their opinion of that.
        That said, those of us who have been consistent about this
    I think are entitled to say that it was also a mistake for this
    administration to pick up where President Trump left off. It is
    certainly true that we were never going to be able to fix what
    was wrong with Afghanistan. That does not mean that we were
    obliged to sacrifice everything that was right with
    Afghanistan. And the sacrifice, I think, is profound.
        An extremely important counterterrorism partnership was
    lost, and a terrorist State is now upon us. Enormous gains for
    women, for the rule of law, for democracy, for human rights,
    mass displacement. The Afghans remade their society. We did not
    do it. They did it. It was our withdrawal, I am afraid, that
    has unmade their society.
        And what have we gained for this? Our troops are not coming
    home. We need to be honest about that. They are merely moving
    to other bases in the same region to conduct the same
    counterterrorism missions, including in Afghanistan, but from a
    longer distance with no partners on the ground, no NATO allies
    on the ground, presumably more civilian casualties. That drone
    strike in Kabul was not the last act of our war. It was
    unfortunately the first act of the next stage of our war.
        Now, I do not want to ask you to respond to all of that. I
    think this is just a philosophical difference that will have to
    rest. I do want to ask you, Mr. Secretary, about the next stage
    of this evacuation to which I know you are committed.
        There was one Afghan woman in particular that I worked to
    get out, one of many, an activist. I will not name her. She was
    on social media, interviewed by the international media a lot,
    tremendously at risk. Tried to get to the airport several
    times. Once got on a bus that a third country had organized,
    was taken off that bus. And, again, to be honest, in the very
    short time we had before August 31, we were never able to make
    the evacuation of those Afghans at risk a priority.
        The message that we got from the State Department was if
    they got to HKIA, we would try to evacuate them, but they were,
    in effect, on their own to get there or dependent comment on
    private groups to get there.
        My question for you today, very practically, is whether
    with this new phase with most Americans out, with the airport
    restarting operations, whether the State Department will
    proactively prioritize trying to get individuals like that
    women's rights activist out.
        And let me say what I mean by that specifically. Will the
    State Department, for example, reach out to all the private
    groups and NGO's that have been working on this to try to
    consolidate and rationalize these lists that they have and that
    you have?
        Will you work to try to proactively contact these people to
    get them visas either to the United States or visas that we can
    encourage third countries to give them? And would we work,
    then, proactively with countries like Qatar that are still in
    place to try to arrange for safe rides to the airport?
        Secretary Blinken. Congressman, in short, yes, and I think
    we do have to do everything we can to bring some of these lists
    together to the extent that has not happened and ultimately to
    prioritize those who are most at risk.
        Our priorities going forward are, of course, on any
    remaining American citizens who wish to leave as well as on the
    special immigrant visa applicants who worked side by side with
    us over the years and Afghans at risk.
        And I think we do need to make sure that we are looking at
    everything that different organizations are providing, Members
    of Congress are providing so that we can identify those who we
    believe to be at the highest risk and we can focus on that
    population.
        Mr. Malinowski. Thank you. What I am hoping is that you are
    very proactive about this rather than putting the burden on
    them to find a way out of the country first.
        And then finally, very quickly, I know you have served all
    kinds of personnel to Germany and to other places where people
    we evacuated on our planes came out. Are you willing to do the
    same for Afghans who were brought by private groups to
    countries like Albania?
        Secretary Blinken. We want to make sure that we have in
    place, wherever necessary, the personnel required to help
    process people and to make sure that we can do what checks are
    necessary and also to support their efforts to move from their
    initial landing place to an ultimate destination.
        Mr. Malinowski. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Peter Meijer of Michigan for
    5 minutes.
        Mr. Meijer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
    Secretary, for coming before us today. I just want to do two
    quick clarifications on some of the questions that my
    colleagues asked.
        No. 1. Congressman Green asked whether or not the Taliban
    was a terrorist organization. You said yes. I am assuming you
    are referring to their listing as a specially designated global
    terrorist?
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Meijer. They are not on the foreign terrorist
    organization list.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Thank you for clarifying that. That
    is correct.
        Mr. Meijer. And then Congresswoman Houlahan had asked
    earlier, and you had answered part of this question, but you
    did not get to one component of it. She was asking about why
    the deadline had been changed from September 11 which it
    appears the Taliban had consented to and had acknowledged to
    August 31, and I did not hear a response from you on that
    front.
        Secretary Blinken. The deadline that the Taliban repeatedly
    made clear that they were looking to was August 31, and we got
    that in various ways, in various communications. And so one
    risk, and you have to assess it, is had we pushed beyond that,
    what actions might they take.
        Mr. Meijer. Mr. Secretary, I certainly understand the risks
    of pushing for that August 31 deadline. I had initially
    believed that that was necessary and understood that the
    position we were in would not allow for that.
        But I want to also get at something that we had discussed
    earlier. You had mentioned several times these emails that the
    State Department had sent to Americans who were in
    Afghanistan----
        Secretary Blinken. Yes.
        Mr. Meijer [continuing]. Warning them to leave. As somebody
    who was a civilian in Afghanistan, I remember getting alarmist
    emails from the State Department all the time, so I can also
    understand if they had a little bit of fatigue in being told
    the sky was falling. And I am also sure there was maybe some
    changes to verbiage that maybe did not come across as much. But
    I guess I am a little bit challenged to square that with the
    delay that we saw.
        As a member of the Honoring our Promises Working Group on
    special immigrant visa applicants, you know, we had reached out
    to the administration on April 21, you know, imploring, urging
    to clear the backlog, and I understand some logistical hurdles
    there. We worked to expedite and streamline the processes.
        But still, if we were so concerned that we are sending
    these grim emails that Americans should have received and left
    the country immediately, how come we weren't moving more
    quickly? Why did it take 99 days before the first charter
    flight took special immigrant visa applicants out.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. So two things. Of course, as you
    know Congressman, because you know this so well, it is a
    complicated process, but two things very quickly.
        First of all, with regard to the Americans citizens that
    were there. The warnings were increasingly explicit, and we
    wanted to make sure to the best of our ability because we were
    in a very volatile security situation, and we had an
    obligation, first and foremost, to any American citizens who
    were there to put them on notice and to strongly urge them to
    leave while, you know, there were clearly commercial means to
    do so.
        With regard to the special immigrant visas, and I know your
    commitment to this which I deeply, deeply appreciate. Again, we
    were in a massive acceleration of the program starting from
    February, not from, you know, when things--when the government
    and the security forces imploded.
        And we had a program, as we discussed, that was pretty much
    in a dead stall. We had an executive order from the President
    on February 4 ordering us to improve it. We went from 100
    visas, 100 visas a week to 1,000 a week from March to late
    July, so we were in the process of doing that.
        And then, of course, we put in place something that is not
    even called for which was Operation Allies Refuge which
    actually flew people out which, as you know, is not part of
    the----
        Mr. Meijer. My deep regret is that it just--it took so long
    because obviously, we had that concern, expressing it to
    citizens. But, you know, talking with folks behind the scenes
    and still understanding some of the procedural and logistical
    impediments, I just--I wish we would have had that task force
    appointee earlier.
        Secretary Blinken. This is something I hope we can keep
    working on together going forward.
        Mr. Meijer. Mr. Secretary, I want to touch upon something
    that you mentioned multiple times, that some of the folks who
    were left behind are dual nationals. Do you make a distinction
    for prioritization between native born American citizens by
    birth and those who are naturalized citizens?
        Secretary Blinken. We do not. It is really by means of
    explanation of why this decision is so hard for so many--for
    some people, which is to say that especially in the case of
    dual nationals, often, it is people whose entire life has been
    in Afghanistan. That is really what they know as home. And that
    just explains why literally people have been going back and
    forth; do we want to leave, do we not want to leave.
        Mr. Meijer. Well, and Mr. Secretary, in some of these
    cases, some of those individuals have maybe not a direct
    dependent, maybe not a wife or husband, maybe not a son or
    daughter, but they might have a brother or sister who is an SIV
    eligible or has had that approved, and those flights are being
    delayed. So please work to free the planes in Mazar-e-Sharif,
    and I yield back my time.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Andy Kim of
    New Jersey for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Mr. Secretary, I wanted to drill down on some elements
    that you talked about. You talked about the challenge that we
    faced a month ago as the collapse of the Afghan security forces
    as well as the Afghan government, and I want to unpack that a
    little bit.
        From your assessment now that we have a month behind us,
    was this a situation where the Afghan security forces did not
    fight, or was this a situation that they were not given the
    orders to fight or given a strategy to actually implement? I
    wanted to see if there was a greater sense of granularity that
    you have on that.
        Secretary Blinken. So I think it was a combination of both
    factors, and you are right to point to them. But I think that
    to some large extent, those security forces were ill served by
    the leadership that they had in giving them a coherent plan.
        We--throughout the summer, we were pressing, and obviously,
    the experts were pressing, our military leaders and other
    experts. But also me, in conversations that I had with then
    President Ghani and others to put in place an effective plan,
    and in particular, to make sure that they were consolidating
    their forces to most--to more effectively defend the major
    cities, Kabul, and the large provincial capitols.
        And so in the absence, despite extensive efforts to get
    them to adopt those plans, I think that made it a lot harder on
    the security forces that wanted to fight.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Yes. No, I think so. And I think,
    look, this is going to be one of the most important questions,
    you know, when we look back at this and try to understand and
    diagnose where the problem was.
        A related element to this is a question I have actually
    asked to some State Department staff and senior staff before,
    but I wanted to get your take on it.
        Mr. Secretary, did former President Ashraf Ghani secure
    anything for his people with his departure, or did he flee as a
    coward?
        Secretary Blinken. Look. I do not want to characterize his
    departure other than to say that that combined with as an
    institution, the Afghan security forces, not putting up
    resistance, and all of this taking place in the space of 11
    days obviously is what put us into this emergency evacuation
    situation.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Did you have any prior knowledge
    that he was going to flee, or did you hear about it when he
    announced it on social media?
        Secretary Blinken. I spoke to President Ghani on Saturday
    night, and this was when we were in the process of working in
    Doha to try to organize a transfer of power and to have a--
    toward a representative government and to see that he would
    participate in that, and what he told me in that conversation
    was that he would.
        He would go along with that effort but if the Taliban
    wouldn't, he would, and I paraphrase, fight to the death. That
    was Saturday night. He left the next day. I had no advance
    warning of that.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Mr. Secretary, I wanted to ask you.
    Have you personally spoken to any Taliban leadership?
        Secretary Blinken. I have not.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. I guess the question is are you
    actively choosing not to speak to them? Is this a point of
    leverage and legitimacy in your mind? And if that is the case,
    who is the most senior person in U.S. Government right now
    talking directly to the Taliban? And who is their counterpart
    on the other side?
        Secretary Blinken. We have made very clear to the Taliban,
    as have countries around the world with our leadership and
    organization, that any legitimacy that they may seek from the
    international community, any support that they may be looking
    for is going to be contingent on their actions, and basically
    the nature of the relationship that they might have with us or
    anyone else will be defined by what they do.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. So just--just in terms it of what is
    happening right now----
        Secretary Blinken. So we have had--yes. We have had a--we
    have had a political channel with them going back to the
    previous administration with a team that does engage them
    politically, and Ambassador Khalilzad has been leading that
    effort but with other members of the team. They are ones as
    well our mission in Doha.
        The Afghanistan affairs mission, once the embassy shut
    down, was moved to Doha. Ian McCary who runs that is also
    engaging with their political commission members in Doha.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Yes. And just a final question here,
    you know. There is a lot that we need to unpack over the course
    of 20 years, and certainly, these different committees we are
    on in Congress will see different elements. We have the
    political side, the diplomatic side, the military intelligence,
    et cetera, but I wanted to ask you.
        Would the administration support a 9/11-like independent
    commission that would look across all of these different
    pillars to try to assess an analysis of what happened?
        Secretary Blinken. I cannot speak for the administration on
    that. All I can say is that as others have said, we are all
    going to do our hot washes, to use the vernacular, on the last
    9 months since we have been in office. And I hope and expect
    that all of us will engage in a review of the last 20 years.
        Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Great. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Ronny Jackson of Texas as
    the Vice Ranking Member for the subcommittee on Africa, Global
    Health, and Global Human Rights for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Jackson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, how many members of the State Department
    were killed in the recent evacuation efforts in Kabul?
        Secretary Blinken. Members of the State Department killed?
    None.
        Mr. Jackson. Okay. Mr. Secretary, in your earlier
    testimony, you stated that members of the State Department ran
    into the airport and were serving side by side with the Marines
    at that gate. Although I deeply appreciate any and all efforts
    of the State Department personnel on the ground to rescue
    American citizens, for you to try and ride the coattails of the
    13 brave servicemembers that gave their lives in this effort is
    absolutely shameful in my mind, and it really shows the
    American people how out of touch you continue to be.
        Secretary Blinken. I am not riding anyone's coattails,
    Congressman. For your information, the men and women of my
    department----
        Mr. Jackson. It was a statement, not a question. It was a
    statement, not a question.
        Secretary Blinken, exactly 1 week ago, four of my
    constituents escaped Afghanistan, the first known to leave the
    country since your administration abandoned American citizens
    in Kabul on the 30th of August. Your officials left this young
    mother and her three children behind. The youngest was 2 years
    old. The family remained hidden and terrified for 12 long days
    until my team and a group of brave patriots on the ground
    facilitated their evacuation.
        During this time, the State Department did nothing to help
    this family. Instead, you directed them to go to the Taliban
    checkpoints repeatedly where the mother eventually had a pistol
    placed to her head and then told them to stay in their homes as
    the Taliban went door to door searching for American citizens
    and Afghan allies, all while you were vacationing in The
    Hamptons and your diplomats were safe in Doha.
        Then miraculously, after their safe arrival, the State
    Department jumped in to claim full responsibility for what had
    happened. The response from your team is revolting. It takes
    credit from the brave patriots who risked their lives to
    actually bring my constituents home safely.
        Mr. Secretary, did you even know of this family's existence
    until you wanted to take credit for their harrowing journey?
    Also, can you explain to what your team--exactly what your team
    did to help them escape Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. My team has been working 24/7 around the
    clock and around the world to get every American citizen who
    wishes to leave Afghanistan and their families out. They have
    been putting themselves on the line. They have been putting
    everything on the line to do that.
        I very much applaud the efforts that people, including
    yourself, have engaged in to do the same thing, to help bring
    people out. And I am glad that we are able to work together to
    do that including in this case, where to the best of my
    knowledge, we facilitated their departure from Afghanistan,
    including making sure that we worked to get the Taliban to
    allow them to leave as well as working at the border with
    consular officials to make sure that they could be received
    when they got to Uzbekistan and cared for. So I am glad that we
    were able to do that together.
        This is not about taking credit. I applaud the work that
    has been done, including by you, and I hope going forward we
    can continue to do even more of that in closer cooperation and
    coordination to get any remaining American citizens who wish to
    leave out.
        Mr. Jackson. Mr. Secretary, while I do thank you--I do
    thank you for coming to this committee meeting today. I do
    thank you for staying the extra time so that you could actually
    hear my statement and my question, I do have to say that I am
    deeply disappointed in your administration's action and what I
    consider to be your gross incompetence.
        Not only did you risk countless American lives by
    prematurely and haphazardly withdrawing from Afghanistan, but
    in the aftermath, you have tried to act as if you have made
    zero mistakes, and there has been a continuous effort in the
    State Department to pat yourselves on the back which most
    Americans at this particular point do not appreciate.
        Your tone deaf approach and your attempts to spin the truth
    and claim victory from this clear blunder is deeply disturbing.
    This includes your disgusting attempts to seize credit for this
    evacuation of my constituents.
        We will find out later which I think you had very little,
    if anything to do with. You and the rest of Biden
    Administration owe the American people an apology. You have
    ruined any trust we have with our allies and any credibility we
    have on the world stage.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman yields back.
        I now recognize Representative Sara Jacobs of California
    who is the vice chair of the Subcommittee on International
    Development, International Organizations, and Global Corporate
    Social Impact for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Jacobs. Well, thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and thank
    you, Mr. Secretary, for answering our questions and for staying
    so that some of us more junior members get a chance to ask you
    questions as well.
        I first wanted to say that while I have been publicly
    critical of many of the positions made around the evacuation as
    a member of the working group that, as you know, I used to work
    at the State Department, and I have talked to so many former
    colleagues and friends who were on the ground in Kabul who were
    working tirelessly, night and day, no sleep for weeks on end,
    trying to get people out.
        And I think it is an incredible disservice to our
    diplomatic corps and to the brave people who work there every
    single day to say that they are not deserving of praise. I
    disagree with some of the things that were made, but the people
    doing the work around the clock deserve to be praised.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Ms. Jacobs. Now I want to raise a letter I sent with
    Senator Merkley and many of my colleagues. While I remain
    committed to working to get people out of Afghanistan with my
    colleagues, I also want to make sure that we are doing
    everything we can to deliver humanitarian assistance and, you
    know, urging the Treasury Department to issue an OFAC general
    license.
        So I look forward to working with you and the
    administration to make sure that the 18 million Afghans that
    are in need are provided support. I think we heard just today
    from the U.N. how dire that that need is.
        I also think, you know, we talked a lot about policy
    failures in the last few months, in the last 20 years. And I
    know you are still observing the lessons of the past 2 decades,
    and I look forward to working with you on that and on the
    lessons learned, especially as someone who has done a lot of
    work on--and complex stabilization.
        I wanted to followup on something you addressed with my
    colleague, Mr. Phillips, on a very specific failure we
    encountered over and over again in Afghanistan, and that is on
    corruption. Why was the State Department unable to address this
    issue over 20 years? And what can we do to make sure that as we
    work with other countries and promote good governance around
    the globe that we are not continuing to have those same
    problems?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. That is a great question and one
    that I do not have a good answer to because it is manifestly a
    failure of our policy over the last 20 years and one that we
    need to address because ultimately, that corruption, I think,
    among other things, undermined any trust or confidence in the
    government as well as allegiance to the government.
        And so when you are asking, you know, Afghan security
    forces to fight for their country and to fight for a
    government, when there is that much corruption that is endemic,
    it is awfully hard to get that allegiance. So you are a hundred
    percent right to point to that problem.
        We are putting a special emphasis in the department at
    large on trying to more effectively combat corruption around
    the world, and I think we need to understand very much the
    lessons of Afghanistan as part of that effort. We certainly
    welcome working with you and others on that because we see this
    around the world as a source of profound instability.
        Ms. Jacobs. Well, I appreciate that. I will look forward to
    working with you on that and especially looking at how the way
    we do our assistance and security assistance feeds into the
    incentives around corruption.
        I know you have been busy, so I am not sure if you have had
    a chance to read the recently released cigar lessons learned
    report, but I was wondering specifically what the
    administration plans on applying going forward on how we are
    conducting peace building and development in all of the
    countries we are working in.
        Because I think what we saw in Afghanistan was obviously a
    failure of some of our military strategy, but also that in 20
    years, we could not do the development and peace building
    programs that would have made the rest of the engagement more
    durable.
        So, you know, how do we plan our foreign engagements going
    forward with realistic goals, space to course correct, and how
    do we make sure we are actually peace building and helping
    countries develop and not just, you know, doing the same thing
    that we just saw did not work in Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. Well, first, I hope that I can actually
    get my senior team in place to work on just that. But as we
    were talking about a little bit earlier, the most senior
    officials, unfortunately, are stuck in the Senate right now but
    we do need to--I have seen summaries of the report.
        I have not yet read the whole thing, but I have seen the
    summaries of it. This is going to be an important, very
    important document in informing what we do going forward and
    how we do it better. So, again, this is something we welcome
    working with Congress on in the weeks ahead.
        Ms. Jacobs. Well, thank you.
        And, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady yields back.
        I now recognize Young Kim of California who is the vice
    ranking member of the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific,
    Central Asia, and Nonproliferation for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Kim of California. Thank you, Chairman.
        Secretary Blinken. I appreciate your patience. It has been
    a long day. I will get right to the point, and I would
    appreciate if you could keep your answers brief too.
        The withdrawal from Afghanistan continues to be a disaster
    that has been worsened by this administration's response, and I
    want to be clear the issue is not whether we should have
    withdrawn but how we withdrew and the complete lack of
    accountability from this administration.
        We left hundreds of Americans stranded behind enemy lines,
    abandoned our Afghan partners who fought by our side, left
    behind 500 journalists from the U.S. Agency for Global Media in
    Afghanistan, and left the fates of women and children in the
    hands of Taliban.
        Let's recognize that many State Departments and their
    employees risk their lives and work tirelessly over the last
    months, so I want to thank them for their service. However, due
    to a vacuum in the leadership from this administration the
    veterans, ordinary citizens, and congressional offices were
    forced to step up, and in many cases, take the lead in helping
    Americans and allies flee the country through independent
    rescue operations.
        Unfortunately, many of these operations, especially charter
    flights, have met resistance from the State Department every
    turn. And one of the Afghan SIVs we work with with the Marine
    veterans to try to evacuate was Sayed Obaidullah Amin. He
    served heroically and risked his life as a translator for the
    U.S. forces.
        Despite having a pending SIV, P-1, P-2 application, he was
    abandoned by this administration during the evacuation process.
    He and his wife were killed at Abbey Gate during the Kabul
    airport attack, fighting to get to safety, leaving their two
    infant sons orphans.
        There are still P-1 and P-2 applicants and need the State
    Department's help. It is too late to save his life, but we
    still have time to save others. My office and other
    congressional offices have been working with a third party to
    evacuate civilians, people that this administration left
    behind.
        This group includes Americans, Afghan partners, and
    civilians of allied Nations. This operation, without the help
    of the State Department, has secured routes into a neighboring
    country and has the approval of officials to stage people there
    for transfer to a safe third country where NGO's stand ready to
    feed, treat, and process those people.
        Without basic support from the State Department, this
    country has made it very clear that everyone in this group will
    be sent back to Afghanistan to die at the hands of the Taliban.
        Secretary Blinken, they have started moving as we speak,
    and the first group has 60 people in it, and 40 of them are
    children. Your team already has all the necessary information
    that we provided but has been repeatedly refused to provide any
    assistance. I have called your office two times and talked to
    your officials. These people are all doomed if State does not
    approve and provide transfer to a safe third country.
        Secretary Blinken, I need your commitment now that your
    department will approve and provide transport for these people.
    Do I have your word that you will make this happen?
        Secretary Blinken. We are committed, Congresswoman, to
    working with you and to working with every other member on
    securing the safe transport for people that you identified and
    that seek to leave Afghanistan, so we will work directly with
    you on that, but I remind you that we do not control who leaves
    the country.
        Ms. Kim of California. That is why--Secretary Blinken, you
    do not understand. If we do not do anything right now, even for
    another day, these people are in grave danger. I need your
    commitment now.
        You are a Department. Your office have all these
    information. We just need your commitment right now that you
    will work with them.
        Secretary Blinken. I have here,--it may be hard to see on
    the screen. These are all the cases, and I am--no, from the--
    from members of this committee that we are working on. We have
    had 26,000. We have responded to 21,000 of them and we are
    working on every single case to the best of our ability.
        But what we are trying to do right now is to put in place a
    system that recognizes people who can leave, making good on
    commitments that have been made to us in the international
    community by the Taliban, and to get that system moving. That
    involves the airport, it involves land crossings in three
    different countries, and it involves working with different
    groups and organizations so that we can get this and get this
    moving, and we are committed to doing that wherever we possibly
    can.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        I now recognize Representative Kathy Manning of North
    Carolina who is the vice chair of the Subcommittee on the
    Middle East, North Africa, and Global Counterterrorism for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
    Secretary, for your patience and for your service on behalf of
    our country and the American people.
        Mr. Secretary, prior to this hearing, I read the agreement
    reached between the Taliban and the Trump administration, and I
    was shocked. Basically, President Trump agreed to withdraw all
    troops, all coalition partners, all civilian personnel by May
    1. He agreed to release 5,000 prisoners to work with the U.N.
    to lift the sanctions against the Taliban, to seek economic
    cooperation for the reconstruction of Afghanistan, and to
    refrain from the threat or use of force against Afghanistan or
    intervene in its domestic affairs.
        In exchange, the Taliban agreed to release up to a thousand
    prisoners. It agreed not to allow its members to attack our
    personnel on the way out and not to allow Afghanistan to be a
    base for the training or fostering of terrorists against the
    U.S. in the future.
        I did not see any demand for the protection of Afghan women
    and girls. I did not see any guarantees that the Taliban will
    prosecute anyone who commits atrocities against women or girls
    or Afghan men, for that matter. I did not see any commitment by
    the Taliban to prosecute people who take steps to attack the
    United States or any of our citizens. The Trump administration
    did not leave you with much to work with, did they?
        Secretary Blinken. Not much.
        Ms. Manning. Nevertheless, Mr. Secretary, you have stated a
    commitment to the safety and well being of Afghan women and
    girls, and I am proud that this committee passed a bipartisan
    resolution that I authored to support these women at risk.
        Unfortunately, the Taliban recently announced that they
    have abolished the Ministry of Women's Affairs, replacing it
    with a Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of
    Vice. Certainly this is a very worrisome sign, as is the lack
    of any women in the Taliban's interim government.
        Representative Spanberger has detailed videos and news
    reports of atrocities that are already taking place.
        Do you plan to assemble an international coalition to hold
    the Taliban accountable for the treatment of women and girls in
    Afghanistan? And can you tell us how you plan to monitor their
    safety, and how can the coalition be effective in ensuring
    those protections?
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman, and in
    short, the answer is yes. And, in fact, we have already been
    doing that. We put together a group of leading countries. I led
    a meeting with about 22 of them, as well as NATO, the European
    Union, and the United Nations on the expectations of the
    international community when it comes to the Taliban-led
    government's conduct to include upholding the rights of women
    and girls and minorities.
        And so there is a clear understanding. It is also enshrined
    in a U.N. Security Council resolution that we initiated and got
    passed, and that has some real meaning to it beyond the fact
    that it is a resolution because there are significant U.N.
    sanctions on the Taliban.
        There are travel bans and other things that if the Taliban
    is in violation of this U.N. Security Council resolution, to
    the extent it wants to see those sanctions lifted or travel
    bans lifted, that is not going to happen.
        There are many other points of influence and leverage, and
    overall, we have made very clear, not just us, countries around
    the world, including many leading countries have made very
    clear that the Taliban's conduct will dictate whether they get
    any support or any legitimacy whatsoever from the international
    community. And that conduct goes among, other things,
    critically to how it treats women and girls.
        Ms. Manning. Mr. Secretary, this committee met over Zoom
    with brave and highly intelligent Afghan women who told us they
    were determined to stay in Afghanistan and fight for the soul
    of their country. These extraordinary women who held important
    professional, educational, and governmental positions in
    Afghanistan, should they find themselves targeted by the
    Taliban, will we have their backs? Will our country be willing
    to help these women and their families escape to safety?
        Secretary Blinken. We would do everything within our means
    to have their backs, and so would many other countries around
    the world with whom we are working. And we look forward also to
    working with you in Congress to make sure that we have every
    possible tool to support these women.
        Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I know my time is
    almost up, so I just want to encourage you to please do
    everything you can to speed up the SIV processing and to
    provide assistance to those whose documents, whose passports,
    documents, applications were destroyed in the embassy in the
    tumult of the evacuation.
        And, again, thank you for your service.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Jim Costa of
    California for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank
    you, Mr. Secretary, for staying the entire length of time so
    all of us could answer our questions and for your service to
    our country.
        In listening to the hearing today, I am reminded that the
    old adage that we try in America to limit politics at the
    water's edge. With all the finger pointing that has been taking
    place, this maybe a thing of the past. But I would like to
    focus on the current situation with the P-2 process and the P-
    1s. We have been trying to work with the State Department, and
    we have, frankly, been frustrated. What is the extent that the
    administration is exploring options for in country or virtual
    processing for P-2 humanitarian patrol applicants?
        Secretary Blinken. We are looking at all of that,
    Congressman, and I would very much appreciate working with you,
    working with your office, and if that is not happening, we will
    make sure that we fix it. But we are looking at everything to
    figure out how can we--whether it is an SIV or whether it is a
    P-1 or P-2 streamline, expedite, consistent, of course, with
    our security.
        Mr. Costa. Like a lot of my colleagues, I have a lot of
    constituents, and we have a hospital that an NGO group here in
    the California valley has sponsored for women and children over
    the last 13 years. Seventy-five percent of the physicians and
    nurses are women. Excuse me, 40 percent of them are women and
    children. They are in great fear. They are minorities in the
    country, and they have been trying to find a way out.
        Are you considering fast tracking the P-2 applicants? And
    what is the process date the department is looking at scaling
    up on the high volume of these applicants, and what sort of
    infrastructure? I mean, it is not equipped to handle, and will
    the department's--will the State work--will you expedite any
    humanitarian patrol petitions, parole petitions, and how long
    is that process for State to finish.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. We are looking at all of that. I
    want to come back to you and come back to Congress on some of
    the ideas that we have for doing that as well as looking at
    what resources would be needed to do that because I think we
    are going to need more support, and this goes across the SIV
    program to P-1, P-2.
        Mr. Costa. Who would be the key person that our office
    would work with you folks at State?
        Secretary Blinken. I am going to have the head of
    Legislative Affairs in the first instance, her office followup
    with you and your office, and we can take it from there.
        Mr. Costa. It has been very frustrating. There are about,
    you know, almost 200 individuals with their families that are
    kind of in just great frustration and fear of their lives,
    frankly----
        Secretary Blinken. Yes.
        Mr. Costa [continuing]. Notwithstanding all the good work
    that they have done. And so, you know, I am just reminded of
    the fact that it seems like with what the State Department
    maybe has not been able to do, and I know you have made a great
    effort, a humanitarian effort in the evacuation.
        But I am working with other folks, and it seems like a
    modern underground railroad of some kind is taking place with a
    lot of third parties trying to get people by any means to the
    Uzbekistan border or to Tajikistan. How do you see that
    continuing, and with great risk, I might add.
        Secretary Blinken. Yes. Look. I think that there are people
    who are doing extraordinary things to try to help get people
    out of Afghanistan who want to leave, whether it is NGO's,
    individuals, veterans groups, and others. Wherever possible, we
    want to make sure that we are coordinated. We want to make sure
    that we are doing whatever we can to support these efforts.
        But we are also working, Congressman, to make sure to the
    best of our ability that we have in place an overall process,
    and an overall understanding that will allow people to leave
    openly and freely with the necessary documents. That would be
    the best way to do this.
        Mr. Costa. Right. But you are processing these P-2
    applicants, and getting some understanding by the Taliban is
    obviously key to that happening.
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Costa. And so let me just close on this, on the bigger
    picture at 20,000 feet. You have been asked this question, and
    please get back to us because these brave people are in great
    fear of their lives.
        Last night I do not know if you saw it, but CNN did a great
    presentation, 2 hours of 20 years of Afghanistan, was it worth
    it, under four different administrations. And I remember
    meeting with Malakey the third time in 2010. I made the same
    comment that was made earlier. How do you expect to create
    Democratic institutions where corruption in this part of the
    world is endemic, it is a way of life, and he gave me a BS
    answer. What is the lessons to learn here that you have gotten,
    and you cannot answer that in 10 seconds, but----
        Secretary Blinken. Well, I think one of them is exactly the
    one you just cited, Congressman, which is when you have got
    corruption corroding everything that you are trying to do, it
    makes it a lot harder, if not impossible, but that is certainly
    something we need to followup on.
        Mr. Costa. Look forward to working with you. Thank you.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Juan Vargas
    of California who is the vice chair of the Subcommittee for the
    Western Hemisphere, Civilian Security, Migration, and
    International Economic Policy for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want
    to thank the Secretary. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate the words
    that you said that you were working with the veterans groups in
    particular. We stood up--not we. The veterans stood up an
    incredible group here in San Diego and did heroic work as they
    did when they were serving.
        I hope you continue to work with them and the State
    Department as a whole. They know the interpreters. They know
    the people that helped them. And, again, they did magnificent
    work obviously as soldiers, as airmen, as Marines, and they are
    doing magnificent work now as citizens trying to help those
    that helped us.
        Secretary Blinken. Sure. I agree with you. Yes. Thank you
    for underscoring that. I very much agree, and we are doing
    everything we can do work closely with them. As I mentioned, I
    met with about 75 veterans groups about 10 days ago, and our
    leadership has been engaged with them across the board as well
    as the Pentagon and others, so thank you.
        Mr. Vargas. Well, good. The one thing that we have kind of
    talked around a little bit but haven't really hit square on is
    the issue of intelligence, and obviously, this is not a
    classified briefing.
        But you did bring up the notion that while the briefing had
    stated that we thought that it would be 2 years, potentially, I
    think you said, 18 months to 2 years before the collapse. Then
    you said the shortest time was maybe by the end of this year.
    How many months would that have been? So what is the shortest
    period?
        Secretary Blinken. That, I believe, was an assessment that
    was made in July, so 4 or 5 months, 6 months.
        Mr. Vargas. I have to say I read all the classified
    information. I went to all the briefings. I do not remember
    anything shorter than that.
        Secretary Blinken. I do not either, but look. I want to be
    clear and be fair. You know, there are going to be individuals'
    voices who may point to something different. As you know, you
    try to do this with worst case scenarios as well as best case
    scenarios and other scenarios, and you have to look across the
    board at all of this. The question is, where does the kind of
    weight of it land, and that is what I was referring to.
        Mr. Vargas. What I remember and how I remember this, is all
    the information that I read--and obviously some we cannot
    discuss in this setting--but nobody said that they would
    collapse in a month.
        Secretary Blinken. That is correct.
        Mr. Vargas. Nobody said they would collapse in 2 months.
    There were some people that were saying that, you know, it
    might go quicker than 6 months. But this was a real failure of
    intelligence.
        And my concern is this, that I believe that we could have
    that same failure of intelligence with Iran and its nuclear
    program. Again, I do not think that we are looking at this
    wide-eyed and open-minded. I think that Iran, we are going to
    wake up one of these mornings and find out that our
    intelligence is very wrong there.
        I think we have a very difficult time understanding these
    religious fanatics and what they would do to either liberate
    their country as they see it or to create the weapon of choice
    as they see it. I do not think we have good intelligence on
    them. I do not think we understand what they would be willing
    to do, and it very much concerns me.
        We can look at blame, and certainly I agree with Mr.
    Malinowski. I was very upset when President Trump announced
    that he had secretly invited the Taliban to come to Camp David,
    and then the smiling pictures that we saw--and I hope you do
    not do this--the smiling pictures that we saw with Pompeo and
    the Taliban, saying that he looked into their eyes and he could
    see that they were telling the truth and all that kind of crap.
    I hope you do not do that. I hope you have wide eyes open and
    not those starry eyes of Mr. Pompeo, looking into the eyes of
    Taliban and saying, oh, yes, they are going to be good boys
    this time. They are not.
        But, again, I think our intelligence is lacking, and I do
    not know how we can correct that.
        Secretary Blinken. Let me just say, this is--look, this is
    a collective responsibility, and I think all of us, whether it
    is the intelligence community, whether it is the military,
    whether it is the State Department, need to make sure that we
    are doing everything we can to provide the best possible
    assessments and feeding all of the information in and coming to
    conclusions. So I think this is a collective responsibility,
    and that is very important.
        You know, Iran, there is lots that goes into that,
    different things, but when it comes to what we put in place
    through the agreement that is now no longer being adhered to,
    the JCPOA, we actually had on the ground, eyes-on intelligence
    inspections monitoring unlike any we have ever had, and that is
    different than, you know, assessing someone's intent.
        Mr. Vargas. Well, again, my time is almost up. I do thank
    you for all the work that you have done, but, again, I do think
    we got it all wrong with our intelligence. And I think we are
    going to get it all wrong with Iran, and I think we are going
    to pay a big price. But, again, I thank you for your hard work.
    I appreciate it.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Meeks. I now recognize Representative Brad
    Schneider of Illinois, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Schneider. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
    for hosting this critically important hearing.
        And before I go any further, I want to remember and honor
    the service and sacrifice of our military, as well as our
    diplomats and others, who have served our Nation in Afghanistan
    over the last 20 years.
        As you, Chairman Meeks, noted at the top of this hearing,
    800,000 people have served in our military operations in
    Afghanistan. 2,461 U.S. personnel have given their life,
    including, tragically, 11 Marines, one Army soldier, and one
    member of the Navy who died at Hamid Karzai International
    Airport last month.
        I also want to acknowledge the tremendous effort expended
    last month to coordinate the evacuation of more than 124,000
    people from Afghanistan. Nevertheless, I know we are all
    concerned to know that Americans and Afghani allies remain in
    Afghanistan after our last troops left on August 31.
        Mr. Secretary, as you have previously affirmed, our Nation
    remains committed to help any American, as well as citizens of
    allied nations and Afghans wanting to leave. I know this body
    is counting on your commitment there, and please know that we
    are prepared to assist in any way.
        Mr. Secretary, I also want to thank you for staying for a
    very long hearing to allow all of us to have a chance to speak
    and ask questions. We have covered a lot of ground today, some
    of it addressing very difficult issues.
        Let's be clear. The current situation in Afghanistan and
    the tragic events of this August were the consequence of
    policies taking place over 20 years, not the policies or even
    the events of the previous 20 weeks or even 20 months.
        I can just touch on some of those, going back to the very
    beginning, as was noted earlier, in December 2001, less than 3
    months after the 9/11 attacks, the Taliban leader, Mohammad--
    Mullah Mohammad Omar, reportedly offered to recognize the new
    government and surrender their arms, but U.S. Secretary of
    Defense Donald Rumsfeld rejected that.
        We can go on into 2010 when we surged to 100,000 troops,
    but in that, President Obama said that he would begin
    withdrawing those troops within 18 months, which he did.
        By 2010, the Obama Administration came to a sense that
    there was no political--or no military solution and began low-
    level negotiations with the Taliban in 2010.
        Then jump ahead to last year in 2020, when the U.S. signed
    an agreement with the Taliban after Donald Trump's
    administration initiated the first high-level direct U.S. talks
    with the Taliban.
        In November of last year, President Trump ordered the
    drawdown of our troops.
        On January 15 of 2021, the number of U.S. Forces was at
    2,500 troops, the lowest level since 2001.
        And on April 14 of this year, President Biden announced
    that though he would not have negotiated the deal that the
    previous administration did with the Taliban, he would follow
    through. And we know Kabul fell on August 14, and the last
    troops left on August 31.
        Mr. Secretary, I would like to focus a little bit on the
    agreement that was struck in 2020. According to the agreement,
    the Taliban was supposed to prevent terrorists from threatening
    the U.S. and our allies which, of course, was a farce, given
    the attack that we saw take place over the course of many
    months.
        My question is, under that agreement, how many prisoners
    were released as a condition of the negotiations with the
    Taliban?
        Secretary Blinken. We prevailed upon--the previous
    administration prevailed upon the Afghan Government to release
    about 5,000 prisoners. The Taliban released about 1,000
    prisoners.
        Mr. Schneider. Did any of these prisoners play a leadership
    role in the Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan?
        Secretary Blinken. It appears to be the case that some of
    them played a significant role in leading military operations
    in various parts of the country, yes.
        Mr. Schneider. So, you know, jumping forward from the
    agreement, as you said, it left an agenda without a plan--the
    previous administration left an agenda without a plan.
        Based on the 2020 agreement, what would have been the
    implications of keeping U.S. troops in Afghanistan beyond the
    deadline set?
        Secretary Blinken. The implications were very clear,
    Congressman. Had the President not made good on the agreement
    reached by the previous administration, the attacks on our
    forces and partner forces would have resumed, and the offensive
    to take over Afghanistan's cities would have commenced.
        And the result of that would have been that in order to
    protect ourselves and to prevent the takeover of the country,
    we would have had to have reintroduced a substantial number of
    forces into Afghanistan, in effect, restarting and re-upping
    the war, not ending it.
        Mr. Schneider. So with the last couple of seconds, just to
    quickly summarize, had we stayed beyond the deadline, we would
    have had more troops than the 2,500 that started at the
    beginning of this year. Those troops would have been at risk
    and engaged in active conflict with the Taliban, likely
    resulting in casualties to American forces, costs of both blood
    and treasure for our country. Is that a fair statement?
        Secretary Blinken. It is.
        Mr. Schneider. My time has expired, but, again, I just
    implore you, we must do everything we can to bring every
    American home that wants to come home, all of those special
    immigrant visa applicants seeking to come to the United States
    after vetting----
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Schneider [continuing]. Anything we can do to help you,
    please let us know.
        Secretary Blinken. Thank you.
        Chairman Meeks. The gentleman's time is expired.
        Member questions are now concluded.
        I want to first thank Secretary Blinken for his testimony,
    his patience, and his time here today. He has been accessible
    to this committee, and we look forward to continuing the
    relationship that we have as we utilize our oversight
    responsibilities.
        And as I close, I think it is important to recognize that
    our actions have consequences, and many times these actions are
    not easily reversible.
        The Trump administration's excluding the Ghani government,
    while legitimizing the Taliban through direct negotiations,
    fundamentally altered the power of the country. The deal the
    Trump administration struck with the Taliban forced the Afghan
    Government to release 5,000 prisoners. It was a deal they
    failed to obtain a commitment for a cease-fire or a commitment
    to not attack the Afghan Government, and that failed to obtain
    a commitment from the Taliban to separate from al-Qaeda.
        In exchange, the Trump administration agreed to withdraw
    all of our troops, to include all nondiplomatic personnel, by
    May 2021. There was a consequence to this agreement and
    consequences of the policy decisions that were made throughout
    the 20 years our military was deployed in Afghanistan.
        When I first became chair of this committee, I said that
    the American foreign policy is in desperate need of humility,
    and that includes understanding the limits of U.S. military
    intervention.
        And at the start of this hearing, I cited how many
    Americans were killed over 20 years of war in Afghanistan. But
    that alone does not capture all the full human cost.
        Those numbers do not capture the family members and friends
    forever changed by this conflict. It does not capture the
    suffering endured by Afghan civilians trapped in the middle of
    a civil war.
        The costs of war are immeasurable, and not just the human
    toll. Last year alone resulted in 17 veteran suicides a day, on
    average. We could not ask our servicemembers to fight overseas
    without a clear, winnable objective.
        As Members of Congress, this is our responsibility. In the
    weeks and months to come, we will continue our oversight of
    Afghanistan and take a sober look on how we got here for over
    20 years of war and how we can prevent making the same
    mistakes.
        I also would be remiss if I did not say thank you, after 20
    years, to all of our military and all of DoD. Thank you to the
    State Department and all of our diplomats there. Thank you to
    USAID, USAGM, the Department of Homeland Security, the DEA, the
    CIA, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Justice,
    the Department of Commerce, and of course, our Afghan allies
    who stood side by side with us for 20 years. I want to thank
    each and every one of them.
        This is not the end. We will conduct, as I have stated
    earlier, continue our oversight responsibilities, bringing in
    individuals from the past administrations as we completely
    oversee and look back and forward to what has been and should
    be and will be in the future.
        And, with that, this hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 7:22 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                                    APPENDIX
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FROM REPRESENTATIVE CONNOLLY
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]