episode of civics forward. we can all be engaged in fixing this. and q joining us. -- thank you for joining us. you can learn more at u.s.

more than three and a half hours.

[silence] [background noises] [background noises]

>> this hearing will come to order. sec. blinking thank you for joining us today. last week the new york times reported on the local craft camp report of who caused by the nama demonstration by several women protesting against the taliban. he was arrested and camera confiscated. he said i told him he was journalist and showed him my id card put accused and took me into a room multiplan and started beating me with thehe

cable. the horror he experienced was hard to have them, he described the covenant blood of being severely beaten abusing prisoners. one of the colleagues said they were mocking us andd saying you want freedom? what freedom? this is not the taliban of 2001. this happened last week. the oversight work plant in afghanistan we must lose sight of people like the courageous women who continued to protest in the streets calling for freedom in the face of violence and threats. repression of the afghan people is happening in real time in the world must bear witness and hold taliban accountable. return to the focusoc of today's hearing. the execution of the u.s. withdraw was clearly and fatally arflawed. the committee expects to? receive full decision on

afghanistan since coming into office last january. there has to be accountability. we'll have other hearings to develop a set of lessons learned over the course of the war to understand many mistakes made over the course of 20 years. attention resources in the bush administration decided to invade iraq. why pakistan providing a safe haven to the taliban and the list goes on. we need to understand why administration so many of the same mistakes repeatedly. we need to understand why the afghan government and military collapsed so precipitously. this robert collapsed a pair of fact that successive administrations lied to congress over the years about the durability of afghan military governing institutions and we

need to understand why. the chaos is due in part to the fabric 2020 surrendered you negotiated by president trump, ideal clearly built on a set of lies that led to the release of 5000 hardened taliban fires boosting the group on the battlefield is number. we know the taliban had no intention of pursuing a political a pattern peace deal with the afghan government and had no intention of pursuing a democratic pattern, no intention of breaking ties with al qaeda and clearly no intention of allowing women to have rightful seat at thent table to participe fully in society. that's about taliban expected to result, i think is somewhat absurd. afghanistan said we will hundred killed and some porn.

no such thing as a reformed taliban. t there stuck in the 14th century. i the political representation in the genesee is based squarely on the use of force and intimidation. the administration said we should judge the taliban pie their actions andda i agree that actions over afghanistan have been horrifying beating women activists murdering religious minorities, separating class by gender, shutting down local media, refusal to break with al qaeda, appointing head of foreign terrorist organizations designated by our government to lead and the list goes on. with this in mind, u.s. and united nations should maintain existing sanctions on the taliban, u.s. should reimpose sanctions waived during

negotiations in the u.s. should consider new measures to impose higheria costs while ensuring lifesaving humanitarian aid is able to assist those most vulnerable. nor should any country be in a rush to unilaterally recognize thisy regime. a minimum following criteria must be met before recognition is considered. equality of rights for girls and women, protection of minority ethnic and religious groups, commitment to democratic elections and a call narcotics related activity. the taliban runs afghanistan now but that does not mean we ever accept their behavior. i support a decision to eventually withdraw from afghanistan, i have long

maintained however how the u.s. left mattered. doing the right thing in the wrong way can end up keying the wrong thing and to get this right biden administration needed to answer two fundamental questions. first, with the withdrawal leave ngpolitical in its wake? allies maintain and ability for counterterrorism operations in region with groups including isis k seeking to do us harm. i believe the u.s. was short on the first major the prospects don't look promising. how did to buy the administration is as on the ground of president trump's deal with taliban? the administration attempt or

better terms on comingg into officece? the president's april withdrawal announcement set in motion explicit contingency planning in the event taliban took over the country rapidly? what was the plan to evacuate americans? was a plan to evacuate p1's and p2's and other groups? was applied to evacuate was affiliated with liberty, was of america, national endowment for democracy andd u.s. funded organizations? president trump stephen miller intentionally blocked from being processed which i think is a barbaric and cruel position which will likely resulted in tough and some. they accelerate processing them while coming into office and third, or the plan to avoid or deal with refugees at "humanitarian crisis"?

i expect you'll just shoot remarks. let me applaud efforts of personnel on the ground for the state of defense working under horrific circumstances. their actions and evacuated want 20000 c individuals were nothing short of heroic and these personnel deserve interest in american public deserve interest and they deserve answers. let me close, while communications on the administration has been frequent throughout this crisis, information from the white house has half been contradictory. this was a difficult situation among members and this has to improve. frustration came on top of years of stonewalling the trump administration and refusal to engage theni senate on the talin negotiations. it's an example why i've been

trying to pursue the case act understand what the written agreements are between adam administration and others. maybe if we had seen all elements would help and it in a better position. i'm disappointed secretary austin declined to testify today. full accounting of the u.s. response of this crisis is not complete without the pentagon especially when it comes to understanding complete collapse of the u.s. trained funded afghan military. his decision not to appear before the committee will affect my personal judgment. i expect secretary will be in the near future and if he does not, i may consider use of subpoena power to compel him and others over the course of these last 20 years to testify. i implore administration to remain focused on afghanistan. it isre important witness and te action when possible in response

to taliban abuses. your visit center-right message and i strongly urge sustained attention talk and is for months and years to come. i urge the administration for result efforts to secure relocation is visible citing partners at grave risk who were left behind in afghanistan. include heroic individuals working for organizations on front lines of u.s. to strengthen democracy and human rights including rights of afghan women and girls. i know senator young is not with us today, he's home in indiana attending funeral of marine corporal sanchez, among those killed in the horrendous terror attacks in the kabul airport. i'd like to suggest we have a moment of silence and pay respects to all those brave american service members who

were killed or injured day and we honor thousands of american service members, afghan soldiers and civilians captured in this 20 year war join me in a moment silent. [silence] thank you. >> thank you very much. good morning and welcome back to our committee. you're doing the right thing testifying today and i think. i am disappointed some of your colleagues have declined to clearly secretary austin. those questions we really need answered and it's disheartening they declined to testify. the debacle in afghanistan is interagency failure in the fact to you are the only one stepping up, i agree the withdrawal was

an eminent failure. one thing we need to get a bottom of, who is responsible office and who made the decisions? as well questions right now as to who is making the decisions. we know for a fact the president of the u.s. is somewhat disadvantaged here and some is calling the shots. we can even speak with someone in the white house entering it or spinning off on it as recently as yesterday in mid sentence was cut off by someone in the white house making the decision the president off u.s. is not speaking correctly so i'd like to know who this person is. a puppeteer asked if you would and we need to know who's in charge it is making these decisions and the only way we could live as when we have people like you who coming to answer questions and when we get

question, i have more questions but i supported the responsible and to the war in afghanistan. america cannot and war simply by walking away. our s enemies laid on the arm and. indeed is a fierce battle of ideas on the world stage the u.s. cannot remain neutral. president biden presented a false choice in afghanistan and to rush an embarrassing retreat is a stain on america's credibility i will have implications for years to come. i feel this administration is trying to blame prior administration and contrary to the prior administration starting this, that's simply not

true. the prior administration when they took steps toward withdrawing from afghanistan entering into an agreement that had very specific conditions, i was privy to those in the fairway 2020 agreement was contingent upon the taliban reducing violence and engaging talks with the afghan government. these were very important and most importantly, it was telegraphed to the taliban failure to meet t commitments would be met with grave circumstances for the taliban failing to meet these commitments and yet this administration turned the country to them. president biden chose to withdraw from afghanistan without conditions are proving planning and obviously without most important telegraphing to the taliban as it would enforce

conditions the taliban had agreed to. it was a strategic unforced error into this because he advised the commanders in the ground the most embarrassing things i thought was strike need and we can talk about it while we know from the intelligence field but the strike made after theri taliban enter the country minimally strike or desire. the president's withdrawal led to a dramatic democratically elected government slamming the door in any chance for their agreement reversed her rights and results from a safety of many of whom is to attack u.s. thousands in interim we

displaced afghans in need of immediate emergency assistance.i in secretary blinken characterized the evacuation as extraordinary effort. you've touted 144 evacuees evacuating, we prioritize departure department efforts lack of basic planning or failure to energize the process months in advance and ignoring repeatedy congressional office o helplp and failure to recognize the taliban for what is, a terrorist organization. you evacuated 6040 americans and only a couple hundred remain. iran department holds his committee in july there were ten to 15000 americans in afghanistan. as a huge difference between 6,015,000. what happened to these other americans? the situation with the visa

evacuation is even more disturbing not counting sip before the cobbles fall, you evacuated 705 of roughly 20000 principal as i be applicant. what happened? we ask for additional -- what additional authorities or resources needed and retrieve contradictory responses or no responses at all. the biggest problems was the enormous failure of the department of defense to provide records needed to validate afghans who bravely helped the forces. the fact that the dod didn't keep accurate records is a responsible and a slap in the face to those who fought alongside us. obviously we want to talk to secretary austin about this. despite efforts of troops enterp vermont on the ground, preventable tragedy unfolding at thepr airport was a disaster of

leadership and the administration's making. not only unable to ensure americans have access to the airport, many turned awayy repeatedly but americans outside kabul had no chance of evacuation. we hold carter's holders should happen with access but there is no mechanism to get inside it was around the bureaucratic administration set up at the airport and should not have come to that. the administration on this evacuation is like an arsonist taking credit for saving people from a burning building they just set on fire. the u.s. military and government can be so much more than they did if only their political bosses had gone out of the way. we have an untold number of americans, contractors and sib

skeleton american afghanistan despite repeated assurances look at the map. he been unable to. sib applicants are in hiding because taliban is there. you said you'd have make mechanisms after 31 august, where's your plan? not seen, i don't think i've talked to anyone whoro has seen it. i've seen a rebuke from european allies, a page for help but we are not how big her own citizens. we had to rely on generosity of partners like cutter. we've heard and read the u.s. is a reliable ally and the way the evacuation was conducted i can't. despite screens in relations with europe and analyzed, everyone knew the u.s. was he confident and capable partners andhe trusses to be as heavy-handed wheel to navigate many difficult situations and

confidence has been shattered. allies and competitors like china think they can exploit the situation. the pride no ministration is responsible for this debacle and consequences. the charges become even harder to resolve. we must rebuild our credibility. the u.s. will need more policies on counterterrorism and security around the world to discourage comparators. we marked the 20th anniversarynd of september 11 but yet to receive of thery administrations so-called over the horizon counterterrorist plan will succeed. taliban take over destroying thatis strategy and despite repeated requests we have yet to receive a single piece of information about the administrations revised counterterrorism plan. the taliban continues relationships with al qaeda and

interior editor and 10 million-dollar for killing americans. he must redouble efforts with afghanistan neighbors to reach agreement and serve intelligence networks. any country that offer support to the taliban in recent should risk strategic concrete in their relationship with u.s. we also understand pakistan's role in this matter as the chairman alluded to, it's difficult but important situation. concerns of the administrations normalizedti taliban government, this must not occur without itextensive consultation. i suspect other members of the committee will speak to that,

that will be a heavy lift radio. the u.s. and over $80 billion on afghan security forces, many bypassed oversight state department in the committee and we see the n consequences of department of defense operating security cooperation on its own. the taliban is one of the best armed terrorist organizations on the planet. loose and repeatedly in the plan to address we have yet to receive any as secretary, i hope you demand all dod assistance programs once again require state department concurrent. i'd like to speak directly to our diplomats, men and women in uniform, gold star families and humanitarian workers and veterans. on behalf of the american people i'd like to say thank you, the ineptitude of his administration does not tarnish her service. you did mattered, you served

nobly and stood on the wall and prevent terrorist attacks against u.s. for over 20 years at enormous cost to you y and yr families. america will always be indebted to you. >> secretary agreed for each member to answer theseh questis and because of the nature of the subject, i believe there's an opening statement. >> thank you very much and to all members, i appreciate the opportunity to be with you all today. we are, how we got here and where we are going in the recent months had. twenty years congress conducted oversight and provided funding provision and afghanistan and i know from my own time as a staff member here in this room were

then senator biden held invaluable a partner is. when i was nominated i believed strongly in congresses traditional role as partner in foreign policymaking and i'm committed to working with you on the path forward in afghanistan in the interest of the american people. on this 20th anniversary of 9/11 as we honor nearly 3000 men, women and children who lost her life we are reminded of why we went to afghanistan in the first place, to bring justice to those who attacked us and ensure it would never happen again. we achieved those objectives a long time ago.s osama bin laden was killed in 2011, al qaeda's ability scores reduced significantly. after 20 years, 2461 americans lives lost, 20000 injuries $2 trillion spent, it was time to

end america's longest war. president biden took office in january and inherited the agreement with intolerant to remove all remaining u.s. forces from afghanistan. he reduced armed force presence, 2500 troops. enrichment taliban agreed to stop attacking and refrain from attacking. major cities for the taliban continued checkpoints, villages and villages as well as roads connecting cities. by january 2021, the taliban was at its strongest position since 9/11 and the smallest best forces in afghanistan since 2001. as a result, upon taking office,

president biden immediately faced a choice between ending the war orth escalated. had he not followed through on his commitment, attacks on our forces and allies would have resumed calvin's nationwide assault on afghanistan's major citiesou. i would require substantially more u.s. forces in afghanistan to defend ourselves and prevent taliban takeover taking casualties and with at best, prospect of restoring and remaining stuff in afghanistan under fire indefinitely. it is no evidence staying longer would have needed the security forces or afghan government anymore was. it 20 years was not a surprise, i would another year, five or another ten? is nothing competitors like

china and russia and poora adversaries like iran and north korea would be more and further u.s. to re-ou up the 20 year warrant and remain in afghanistan for another decade. i was in constant contact with allied partners to hear theirth views and the president announced withdrawal, nato immediately embraced. we also had to work together on the drawdown. 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 without warning as well as offers of help including financial assistance to pay for plane tickets. despite this, timely evaluation began there were still thousands in afghanistan almost all of

whom evacuated by august 31. many are dual citizens and afghanistan for years, decades, generations deciding whether or not to leave the place they know is home is a wrenching decision. in april drawing on our embassy and will use this time to significantly speed up the processing for afghans who worked for us. we took office we inherited a program based on a statutory framework enacted by congress involving multiple agencies and a backlog of 70000. they had not put a single sib applicant interview couple going back to march 2020. within two weeks of taking office we restarted the process in kabul.

february 41 of the first orders president biden directed to review the program, identify causes of undue delay and find wayss to get through quickly. i directed significant additional resources is banning people in washington from ten to 50 doubling sib adjudicators in kabul and her embassy there. personnel began to return under order departure lease and more officers to couple to process applications. as a result of these and others including working with congress especially this committee, by may we reduced these by more than oneme year. even amid a covid search in kabul we continue to issue visas and went from 100 visas a week

in march to more than 1000 week in august on evacuation relocation. the emergency evacuation was sparked by the collapse of the security forces and government. throughout the year we were constantly assessing heart and considering multiple scenarios. even the most pessimistic assessments did not predict the government forces in kabul what collapse while u.s. forcesps remained. her focus on what happened after the u.s. withdrew from september on. the chairman of the joint chief of staff said nothing i or anyone else saw indicated collapse of the army in this government in 11 days. nonetheless we plan to exercise a wide range of contingency and because of that planning were able to trotbe on empathy and remove meeting personnel to the airport within 48 hours in the military placed on standby pride

present biden was able to secure the airport as our evacuation within 72 hours. evacuation was an extraordinary effort under the most difficult conditions apply to format, military and intelligence professions, . they worked around the clock to get american citizens and afghans who helped allies and partners and afghans on planes out of the country. our team worked 24/7 to reach out to americans in country making 55000 phone calls and 32000 e-mails by august 30 and they're still at it in the midst of this heroic effort isis k attack killed 13 service members with the others. their lives so others can

continue to live theirs. in the end, we completed one of the biggest airless history, 124,000 people exactly did to save and are cathartic and cuddle, mission and afghanistan officially entered in a new diplomatic mission began. i want to acknowledge more than two dozen countries helped with relocation, some serving as transit hubs and some are coming evacuees for long periods of time and as 9/11 reports he suggested, it's essential we accelerate the appointment of process for national security officials since catastrophic attack occurred with little to no notice. today there are nearly 80 state nominees before the senate daily article out of the committee

bipartisan basis simply awaiting a vote in the senate were national security, i respect we urge the senate and the committee should move as quickly as possible for allbl nominees o address what is a significant distraction and national securityt policy. let meon outline what the state department has done the last couple weeks and where we are in the weeks ahead. diplomatic operations kabul to doha afghan affairs team is hard at work team partners have done the same thing. with continued dilemmas efforts to help any remaining americans as well as afghans and citizens partnered allies to leave if they choose. last week on thursday, charter flight with russ citizens on board departed couple and a half biden, the second flight carrying your assistance and

others departing. these are coordinated efforts of the u.s., cutter and turkey reopen the airport and diplomacy start fights and in addition, half a dozen american citizens and permanent residents of the u.s. left afghanistan via overland route with resistance. we are in constant contact with american citizens who wish to leave. he's kind of case management team offering guidance and instruction, some declined to hammacher sliders and i reasons including needing more time to make arrangements, wanting to remain in the familyy for an hor or medical issues including traveling last week. we will continue to have americans and afghans to whom we have a special commitment to depart afghanistan if they choose us as we have done in other countries are with evacuated emphases in hundreds

or even thousands of americans remain behind. in libya, syria, somalia, there is no deadline. third, we areth focused on counterterrorism. taliban committed to have external operation to threaten u.s. or outcries including al qaeda and isis k. we will hold them accountable for the end of 19 we will rely on them and maintain vigilant efforts to monitor threats, robust counterterrorism in the region to neutralize threats of necessary and as we do and places around the world we do not have military forces on the ground. we continue diplomacy with allies and partners we have a statement trained by more than 100 countries and united nations

security council resolution sending out international n communities or taliban government. we expect the tile vanquisher freedom of travel to make good on its counterterrorism and uphold basic rights of the african people including women, girls and minorities, a probably representative permit. governmet legitimacy and supporteg in 60s seeks will depend entirely on its conduct. last week i let i let meeting with the eu, united nations to align our efforts and fifth, will continue to support humanitarian aid to the afghan people with sanctions, this will not flow through the government but rather through independent

organizations like ngos and un agencies. yesterday we announced u.s. provided nearly 64 million in new humanitarian assistance to make critical health nutrition needs to address protection concerns of women and children and minorities and including cause going back to school. 330 million in assistance to the afghan people this fiscal year. i toured facilities will be evacuated, the ebbing process before moving onto the next destination. here at home, more than 45000 afghans have been processed after arriving in the u.s. it is remarkable to see what diplomats and military and make civilian agencies across u.s. government have been able to achieve in a short time. they've met an enormous human

need and need food and water and sanitation for thousands. they are arranging medical care including the delivery of babies reuniting families separated caring for unaccompanied minors in the upper powerful testament to the skill and dedication and humanity of our people and i think we can to be deeply proud of what they are doing and as we have done throughout our history americans are walking families from afghanistan into our communities helping them reset all taster lives in is something to be proud of. with that, i think the committee and look forward to your questionsnk. >> thank you, mr. secretary. let me begin by asking unanimous consent a lot of other u.s. afghan immense counsel calling on the biden administration take immediate action united nations

to protect afghan civilians particularly women and girls. without objection, so ordered let's start a seven minute time series charts remember can get an opportunity and make sure i don't exceed my seven minutes. prior to the flight, we heard from both american citizens and afghan partners seeking to access the airport they were either not being allowed to the gates, being sent back home presently appended. we understand and appreciate security issues at play compounding such a chaotic process so when did the administration begin to plan for worst-case scenario contingency? >> spring and summer. >> of this year? >> yes. >> multiple interagency meetings, exercising and looking at different ways.

>> was a specific planning and a likely scenario that american citizens would have to evacuate under hostile situations? >> the ability to move embassy quickly as we did and 48 hours including the effort to make sure we can control the airport, bring flight and any likely people out. one thing that happened is a situation outside the airport became incredibly chaotic with thousands of people at the airport, the gates of the airport and not created among other things, a very challenging situation. should there have not been a bigger surge on the sib i recognize i think it's only fair to put in context your own testimony suggested 17000 sib

backlog, nine months passed by without a single interview so obviously you inherit a significant backlog. how many were during the trump administration? >> are numbers in front of me but inu think over the course of the administration, there must have been several thousand. >> so when should we not have surged or significantly -- i know you 50 individuals knowing you are preparing for contingency of worst-case scenario should not back in march there be a more significant search to process as ivs and entire universe and who needed to be taken out? >> i believe we did search those resources. we quadrupled the number of people in washington and it's a critical stage in processing,

the approval the stage in which applicants are deemed eligible under criteria established by congress the program and those whoan apply the washout rate is about 40% because it turns out many people will apply and qualify under criteria set by congress or unable to get documentation. it is to prove they worked faithfully and loyally for the rest, there are some situations where people commit fraud and understand and we have a likely process, 14 steps multiple agencies involved in work to think is moret i work we like to do going forward to do that but bottom line, we did significantly surge

resources to that while in the approval process drooping them and we went from ten to 52 now i believe 61 or 62. we doubled resources we had in kabul and go from 100 fees us to a f week to 1000 but will not anticipated the collapse in 11 days of the afghan government and military. >> are numerous press reports last week about a new or refined process for the state department to lead efforts in coordination with department of defense to work with outside groups to evacuate americanin citizens and allies left behind. new to helpne me what they are n coordination with individuals handled by who, what's the neighbor nature, give us a sense

of. >> we have john doss went back to the airport to help lead evacuation efforts. he's leading to managed ongoing efforts to bring people who wish to leave out and including ordination with outside groups as well as congress working themselves heroically to help in this effort. seventy-five organizations a couple of weeksga ago i met with given average veterans either individually or in groups are doing to help and h we want to make sure we are escorted as we possibly can be to make sure we know who's doing what and what assistance we can provide and make sure we work together going

forward. we have many people working on this, i'm dedicated to american citizens focus on as ivs and others focusing on coordinating different groups. i'd like to give the opportunity to set the record straight, commentators suggested as department moves forward with a response bureau opposed by the trumpmp administration as i was walking out the door it would happen able to respond better to the afghan situation but it's my understanding that bureau had not been stood up yet when you decided to curtail the proposal with any additional resources or capabilities to those very hot a bureaucratic movement not creating or getting rid of capabilities and that

potentially createsha damage of department operation, is that a fair statement? >> yes. >> if is not ccr,, and was the answer? >> in regard to ccr whether it's a beer or not, there's no change we already had a and to work on these efforts and the focus of this group and existing structures or how to become a bureau, there were congressional holes across the aisle on this effort nonetheless went through and tried to go forward. as you described, very accurately we found this would add note has as to what we already had a hand, it would

just be a different bureaucratic structure but mr. something designed primarily for individual medical emergencies, men and women part of our medicalr unit who do incredible work but not the kind of work public largeto evaluations. >> thank you. i listened to you in a handful of others trying to put a best face on this is possible and i can tell you the american people is not there yet, this goes both ways is not enough lipstick to make it look different than what actually is so the american people want to know who's responsible so let's start with

his. who made the decisions on this? was at there president of the united states? >> ultimately, the resident makes the decisions, correct. >> did he in this case? >> as in every case, ultimately the present. of course to be specific, there are hundreds of thousands of decisions every single day go into a situation like this one. big decisions decided by the president, operational decisions are made by different agencies -- >> i'm more interested in the top decision-making. we've all seen this as recently as yesterday, somebody in the white house has authority to press the button and cut off the

president, who is that person? >> i think anybody who knows the president including next he speaks clearly and deliberately or himself, no one else does. >> are you saying there's no one in the white house can cut him off? because yesterday it happened and has happened a number of times before and has been reported somebody has the ability to cut him off from speaking, who is that person? >> there is no such person. the president speaks for himself and make strategicak decisions informed by the best advice from the people around him. >> are you unaware that this is happening? it happenedly yesterday at the inner agency center of the reported the media reported on its and is not the first time

it's happened, are you h telling this committee this does not happen, there's no one in the white house to push a button and can cut him off midsentence? >> that's right. >> so it didn't happen yesterday or the other locations with the media showed be american people his sentence was cut off midsentence? are you saying that didn't happen? >> i don't know what you are referring to, all i can say is having work with the president for now 20 years here on this committee and the last nine months in the white house, the president very much speaks for himself. >> but take a different path, he does speak for himself away oehappens when somebody doesn't want him to speak?

you're telling us you don't knot anything about this a somebody cut him off midsentence? is that what you're trying to tell this committee? everybody here has seen. >> until you based on my own experience over the last 20 years, anyone who tries to stop him from saying what he wants to it would probably not be long for theirir job. >> received in july, are you willing to give a copy of what you got from two dozen diplomats regarding imminent catastrophic collapse in afghanistan? are you willing to give a copy to the committee? >> this is something i place tremendous value and importance on, it's a way for people in the state department to speak the truth as they see the power and i've read everything : we've

gotten in his administration and responded with every single one and factored what i read and heard into my thinking and into my actions but legitimacy of the channel and ability foror people with confidence share their thoughts and views to what their seniors have said or policies being prescribed in their integrity and it's designed by regulations only to be shared with senior officials in the department and what i don't want to see is a chilling effect going forward is as to those who think of writing in the future about this to be widely distributed in ways that would have that chillingg effect. >> do you admit you received in july signed by two government

diplomats warning about the collapse the collapse? >> i received the cable and read responded to it and factored its contents into my thinking and what is had probably was two things. it is not suggested government and security forces were collapse g prior to our departu. it expressed concerns about durability after our departure and focus on the efforts we were making on the sib front to expedite moving them out and a number of recommendations made were already trained and others notai whether trained once or te placement of operation allies refuge and received it the 13th and that was put into force july 14.

the identification and relocation putting them on planes which is not part of a program relocating them in working to establish so we can put them there while we finish processing. >> as a problem with not having access, you're telling us you been told by others it was different than what you are saying. we like to see the response because i think history will be interested in that particular cable and your response to it. i'll save my next question for the next round. >> i've asked questions -- i have a hearing i have to go to. thank you. >> thank you for being with us today t and thank you during the

afghan evacuations almost daily briefings you have remembers of the united states senate and keeping us informed to the event unfolding. what happened during the trump years where we were not kept informed at all between the trump administration and the taliban we have no information at all meetings between the u.s. and north korea or the united states and russia. our committee could not conduct oversight is so important as you point out working with the executive branch check and balance from the unity of our country so thank you for the way you kept us engaged and informed as decisions have been made. the present administration was

dealt a different difficult hand. ... afghanistan a bush by the -- by the bush administration. we never talked about setting a deadline and releasing prisoners and moving forward with the production of troops when there were very little options that the administration had. it doesn't negate the

information that was made available to you about the strength of the afghan security forces and the administration's will to stick with it in afghanistan. and i think many of us are interested in knowing how the intelligence got that so wrong. and the contingency plans are one that we really do want to review because it seems to us there had to be better ways to secure passage to the airport then what ultimately happened. but considering the hand you're dealt and the crisis that developed evacuating 124,000 was a miraculous test so we congratulate all that were involved in the evacuation of so many people under such a short period of time under such difficult circumstances during this process the state department was open to all members of congress democrats,

republicans and as we filtered information about vulnerable people in an effort to get them out of afghanistan. today the offices are still being deluged by requests to help people that are in afghanistan. can you share with us the process that you are using in order to filter information about americans that are still in afghanistan but want to leave, those that applied for status and those afghans that are at risk how do we transmit that information and what process is in place so we can try to get these people out of afghanistan? >> thank you, senator. as i noted, we established a task force focused entirely on relocation and help those that wish to leave afghanistan, whether they are the remaining american citizens, whether it's applicants, afghans at risk, the

nationals of partner countries. that involves a number of things for the american citizens. case management teams, 500 individuals whose task is to be in contact with any remaining citizens that wish to leave and that's what they are doing and it also includes together with our legislative affairs office being in constant contact with you as well as outside groups that have identified and are trying to help people that seek to lead. as many of you have been working and we are deeply grateful for those efforts. we put it into our database so that it's already there and we are able to track it and

coordinate. we were trying to do all of this in real time making sure we took in the information that you are providing and acting on it and in some cases we didn't get back to people to say here's what we've done and we've been working to make sure we get back to everyone. we had 26,000 inquiries from congress and we've responded to 21 or 22,000 of them. >> we stillor have the categoris of reporters that work for us in afghanistan. we have officials in afghanistan that are at risk and ngos that work with us that have employees yoat risk. so you're saying we still have an opportunity to work with you to get that information to the sources that you're using to try

to arrange further exit. >> we invite that and want to make sure we have as best as possible a unified coordinated list so that we know what everyone is working on and we can track and help where we can. >> can i get your best guess on the numbers? we thought there might be around 100,000 of u.s. citizens and afghans at risk that wanted to leave. obviously the number was low. we've already evacuated over 124,000. do we know how many are in afghanistan that want to exit today and how many are in the status that want to exit and how many at risk we want to help? >> on thee american citizens tht want to leave the number is about 100 and it is hard to give

a real-time number at any given moment because it is very fluid. some people were in more direct contact with this group. some are very understandable reasons are changing their mind from day today about whether or not they want to leave. others continue now to even raise their hands and say i am an american citizen and afghanistan, someone that wouldn't identify themselves before and i think as you know very well, we do not require as a country our citizens to register or identify themselves to any country in the world when they travel or reside there. the numbers that we are tabulating right now because we are trying to account for everyone that's coming. some remain in transit countries and other people are now in the united states. we are putting all those numbers

together to determine the overwhelming majority that have come out of afghanistan thanks to the efforts are in one way or another afghans at risk. some will be applicants and others will be none of those categories but afghans at risk. we are breaking down all of those numbers and we should have breakdowns for you in the next couple of weeks. >> senator rubio. >> mr. secretary in your statement i think the most troubling thing is the following quote from you even the most pessimistic assessment didn't predict the government forces with collapse while the forces remained. you also cited general millie who said there was no indication that there would be a rapid collapse of the afghan army and government. for much of last year i'm now the vice chair and i've been tracking this very, very closely. going back c to the beginning of

this year, i can't quote the titles of the pieces but suffice it to say there are numerous pieces that would be categorized as it's going to hit the fan. but let's put that aside because i think any analysis of those pieces would have led anyone to that conclusion. we had every reason to believe and plan for the rapid collapse of the afghan military and the government. at the beginning of 2020 by all admissions we already had a bad status quo in afghanistan. we had a small footprint but we had a strong commitment to air support and that he sustained the forces ability to resist the taliban. they were suffering the 10,000 casualties a year. the taliban was suffering casualties but they enjoyed a safe haven in pakistan. they were able to go there to train and recruit and so in summer even before the withdrawal we had a terrible

status quo. the security forces, small number of u.s. forces continued to die. we have u.s. losses as well but the government was still corrupt and the taliban challenged safe havens and i'm paraphrasing your own words in the statement if after 20 years hundreds of billions of dollars in support ofof equipment and training there's not enough for the afghan government or the security forces to become more resilient was self-sustaining, what did we think was going to happen as that support began to be removed? what did we think was going to happen when that terrible status quo was changed? it doesn't take some exquisite piece of intelligence or analysis to conclude. this isn't an argument in favor

of staying. that ship has sailed because a lot of time has been spent on justifying the withdraw.w. we are not debating or arguing it. we had a terrible status quo as isib by your own admission. the government after billions of dollars was not to self-sustaining more resilient and we should have known they began to draw down support. we were going to see the potential for the collapse and that is what all of these pointed to. so no reason to believe that there could be a rapid collapse. more to that point we began to see the science. now going from intimidating the small afghan posts to actually getting them into quitting.

with five to 8,000 taliban fighters this is at the same timefo as i believe on july 8th president biden was still giving this prediction about the fighting capabilities of the forces. we could see them meticulously focused on the north and see they were splintering the remains. they were going to isolate from the north cutting off all the supply routes. so we knew before all the traditional routes of the taliban encroachment were nearly sealed. couple faced the prospect of the afghan government faced the prospect of being unable to mountei any viable opposition ad sustained defense. what did we think was going to happen? all of those things were in place at the time and i think

the most concerning part of it is if we didn't have and an analysis that looked at all of this, that this isn't a failure of intelligence it's a failure of policy and planning. we have the wrong people analyzing this. see this either someone didn't see this or didn't want to see this because we established we wanted to be out by september 11. on the anniversary of 9/11 the fact of the matter is, or at least on top of the other things that have been mentioned from the geopolitical perspective isn't a good place i think china and russia and iran look at this withdraw. they had very little say if any or control over the timing and the execution of all this. they are now number one and have to be wondering about the reliability and the credibility of our defense agreements but they also have to be really upset at the prospects of a

massive refugee crisis landing right on their borders here very soon. india, and i know the announcement today there will be meeting very soon, which is a good development except in the indo pacific region if you are in the yeah you are looking at this saying of the united states allowed pakistan to unravel their standing, the pakistani role in all of this and the multiple administrations are guilty of ignoring it, the role in enabling the taliban and is ultimatelye a victory for those hardliners and the pakistani government. they have to be looking at this and saying of the united states could have a third rate power like pakistan p unravel, what chance do they have of confronting china. so i think this leaves us in a terrible situation but i go back to the initial point i don't know how it's possible. we didn't see all these factors and conclude that there was a possibility of the rapid collapse than we've got the wrong people making the military

and diplomacy decisions in our government. >> senator, i'm happy to respond in the time that we have. as you know from your expertise and leadership on these matters, there are constant assessments being done and in this particular case, assessments being done of the resilience for the afghan security forces with the afghan government and different scenarios and from best case to everything in between. and ultimately thehe preponderae of the intelligence and assessments land someplace and there are always going to be voices and it's important that we listen to all of them who may be talking about exclusively the worst case, some best case and some in between. here's what i can say in this

setting. back in february, the assessment awas after a complete u.s. military withdraw that could potentially in the worst-case worst casescenario lead to the g couple within a year or two. that was more or less where thingsgs stood the taliban and continued to make progress on the ground and in july indicated that it was more likely than not that the taliban would take over by the end of the year. we did not say the country might collapse. it would be likely to occur in a matter of days and then you

referenced as i did earlier, nothing that he saw, that i saw suggested that this government and security force would collapse in the matter of 11 days. you're right i think we need to looko back at all of this becaue go collectively hundreds of billions of dollars of equipment, training, advice, support and based on that as well asin what we were looking t real time, we didn't see this collapse but it's important we go back and look at this. >> senator shaheen. >> thank you for appearing before the committee today.

i appreciate and share the frustration of my colleagues over the challenges with the evacuation over the situation of special visa emigrants. but asen it has been given by several others, where we were when we got to that is because the failure of both democratic and republican administrations and i want totr know where that outrage was when year after year for ten years starting with senator mccain, i and others in the senate tried to give more applicants through the process so that they could leave afghanistan, leave the threat and come to the united states and there were a few republicans in the senate who blocked usmo year after year from getting more applicants to the united

states. i want to know where that was when they were giving away the rights of women and girls and when secretary pompeo came before thismp committee and blew off questions about what they were doing to pressure the taliban to have women at the negotiation for the peace treaty. so i think there's a lot of regret and a lot of incrimination to go around and the important thing for us to do noww is to figure out how we can work together to address those people who need to be evacuated and also to ensure that we can do everything possible with the international community to help protect the human rights of the women and girls who remain in the country and those minorities. so that is where i am going to put my effort. i do think we need an accounting. that's important for us in i gog forward but let's stop with the

hypocrisy about who's to blame. there's a lot of people to blame and we all share in it. mr. secretary, as you know, i was one of those who was opposed to withdrawing from afghanistan. i'm not going to revisit that but a lot of my concerns were around the rights of women and girls if they fell into the hands of the taliban. so i want to ask you and you've been very specific on the concerns and i recognize you believe it's a priority for this administration to do what you can to protect the rights of women andan girls, so can you tk specifically about what steps the department is taking to provide and how to rally the international community behind that effort? let me start by thanking you personally for your leadership for a long time now on these issues both on the siv's and the

work that we have actually been able to do to try to improve the program the more work needs to be done and as well of course on women and girls from advancing women's peace and security in that agenda to ensure there's an tequal playing field for women and girls. we have made a difference. collectively in afghanistan and probably the biggest difference we made b was for women and gir. access to education, access to healthcare, access to work and opportunity. all of that was as a result of the efforts we made and the congress made and supported including with very significant

assistance. this is hard. i was in kabul after the president announced his decision and i met with women leaders from the then parliament ngos, human rights defenders and learned about the concerns about the future just the last couple of weeks i talked to young women and girls we had evacuated. their gratitude and deep concerns about the future for the women and girls who remain in afghanistan. so with that, we've done a few things and this is where we want to work closely with you and every member. we worked to rally the international community to set clear expectations of the

taliban going forward to include the expectation that it will uphold the basic rights of women and girls and minorities. that's visible in the statement and it's also in the security council resolution we initiated and got past. i know people say it's a statement it doesn't matter. in the case of the resolution to cite one example there are significant sanctions from the united nations on the taliban. there are travel restrictions on the taliban. the idea that if the taliban is in violation of the security council resolutioncu it will get any relief that alone the sanctions are travel restrictions. that is just one point of

leverage. we've been working to make sure the speak with one voice and act together including on this. second, we want to make sure that assistance continues to flow. we are doing that consistent with our sanctions and we are able to do that working with ngos and n the agencies. i don't want to sugarcoat this because we know that while the taliban seeks and will probably support and protect basic humanitarian assistance through theseen agencies like for food d medicine it may be a different story when it comes to those directed at women and girls. it's monitored effectively including by the agencies doing it and i spent some time working with the agency in terms of

having a clear modernhi the mechanism to carry that forward for marshaling the efforts for women and girls and minorities in afghanistan i think it's important that we have a focal point in the government at the state department whose responsibility is to carry forward this agenda working closelyo with you in the weeks and months ahead. >> i am out of time but can you share who that official is? >> yes, of course. >> thank you mr. chairman. if i were just to read your testimony not having watched any news, i would literally think this was a smashing success. i do read the news as most americans do and we realize that this is a complete debacle and i think that what concerns me the

most among many things is the detachment from reality is self-inflicted wound, a crisis created by president biden's policies who completely thrown open our borders yet the administration denies we have a problem at the border. so i've got a number of questions. first of all approximately, what is the dollar value of the equipment that's been left behind that now the taliban and controls. >> senator, i believe the equipment provided over the last 15 years was about $80 billion. of that equipment that remains as you know was given -- of courset that is now in the hans of the taliban. >> i was also struck by your comment that the most pessimistic assessment didn't predict the government would

collapse as quickly as it did. but you just in your testimony said the realistic predictions before the complete withdrawal was goingfo to collapse by the d of this year so they continue to the surrender knowing that taliban would be in control of $80 billion worth of sophisticated equipment, correct? did that discussion ever come up in terms of maybe that wouldn't be a good idea leaving all of that equipment behind as we get out b of afghanistan? >> that assessment came in july. much of the equipment, and again i will defer to my colleagues at the pentagon who are more expert in this than i am. much w of that equipment was mae in operable and other pieces of equipment will become inoperable because there is no ability on the part of the taliban to

maintain it, none of it to the best of my knowledge poses a threat to us or any of the neighbors. what we are looking at a -- >> we have a letter we would like response on that. let's click talk about the decision to close down bog rum. the president says this was unanimously decided by the military, but is it true the president decided with the troop level would be, a very minimal troop level. the president decided that we would keep the embassy open and he forced the military's hands. any idea it was his decision not the military's decision? >> the president makes the strategic decisions on the retrograde to use the technical language those were decisions made by his military commanders he sought their best advice and that is what was carried out including the timing of the decision -- >> you said when the president announced the withdrawal

immediately unanimously embraced it. the foreign affairs chief of the european union his statement on the surrender is that it's, quote, a catastrophe for the afghan people, western values, credibility and the developing of international relations. "the wall street journal" summarizesee it quite nicely in the title hell biden broke nato, the chaotic afghan withdrawal shocked and angered u.s. allies. again that's detachment from reality. >> i went well before the decision and spend the day with all of our nato allies listening to them and reviews and their prescriptions and ideas for what we should do moving forward in afghanistan.

i shared some of our initial thinking at that point and we heard in our own decision-making process. >> just like you plan for -- its bureaucratic speak. again my concern is to detect from reality. so as we are surrendered we are hearing all of these comments almost like a wellmo oiled machine, flights leaving and people being evacuated. omwe heard something completely different so tell me what is wrong about what i heard. first of all, prior to the taliban providing security, there was no security and basically tens of thousands of afghan flooded into the airport,

correct? >> we didn't know who these people were. we had tens of thousands. i asked the commanding general again when did you first find out that your mission would be as an intake facility for the afghanistan refugees and he said ten days ago. at that point in time do we know they have some form of id, and we didn't. we are hearing all of these assurances that we are getting diametrically screened. a 14 step plan.

i asked the head of the northern command to describe those steps to me. have we screened them in the past to compare them to a database, what is that process in detail? ttell me, described to us in detail how we are keeping the nation safe from such a chaotic situation. >> the 14 step process refers to specifically the visa applicants, and there's a lengthy process. >> how about for the other 124,000 people. >> a couple of things. we arranged as you know, transi countries so that any afghan coming out of afghanistan would initially goin to a transit country where we could initiate the screening, the vetting, the background checks.

we searched the customs and border protection officials to those transit points as well as other security law enforcement agencies to do these checks with biometric, biographic, other informatione that we had. then as people are cleared in these points they come into the united states but they are not being resettled immediately. they are going once they landed at the dallas or philadelphia they are being sent to the military bases where the checks continue and are completed. >> the time of the senator has expired. i'm sure you can follow up with the rest of your questions. >> thank you chairman and does and ranking member for the hearing and a secretary blinking for your service and testimony today. we have i'm sure lots of opportunities to look backwards at the 20 years of the engagement in afghanistan and decisions but i had hoped as the committee would rise above the

temptations of the politics and use this hearing to consider the urgent questions still before us, and i hope that we will get a minute to focus on this. how do we get the residents and those afghans who served alongside us or worked with and for us and who are most at risk out of afghanistan? how do we make sure afghanistan doesn't become asa safe haven fr terrorists again and to deal with the taliban with leverage we have been doing and to also make sure humanitarian aid gets into afghanistan and most urgently, how do we support and reassemble those afghan refugees that we have evacuated to third countries and that much smaller population thatop has reached te united states? let me start with my thanks to the state department to the employees in kabul and qatar and the task force that's worked with the evacuation repatriation ofan afghans and americans and

americans whom i've heard from former military folks that served in afghanistan, former diplomats and development professionals eager to help, and i look forward to coordinating with you and agencies, advocacy groups and other partners on resettlemen' efforts. i'm glad the former governor has been asked to step forward to help resettle this effort. i was encouraged to see today welcome the u.s. launch brought multi-faith bipartisan national organization cochaired by three former presidents, bush, obama and clinton and the dozens and dozens of groups and nonprofits to welcome afghans to the united states. we wrote a bipartisan letter in august urging expanded eligibility for the program

under the existing programs to include family members and to support the government worked alongside but were not direct employees. i wantnt to start, if i could, y asking you a yes or no question about three groups other senators mentioned. there is about 550 employees and family members from voice of america, radio free europe and d liberty who were not evacuated. as the department prioritizing and is the department committed to the partners from the national endowment of the democracy, are those also being prioritized? and other partners from the university of afghanistan as well? if you would take the four minutes we've got left and explore with me how do we ensure safe passage across land orders, whether it is in touch because dan or pakistan, safe and regular flights out of afghanistan whether for a

missouri, cherise or kabul and how do we get the documents into the hands of those that don't have identity documents either because they were i destroyed in the embassy or they destroyed them themselves out of fear of the taliban, and how do we make sure that we are providing the financial support needed for the whole group of refugees who after a thorough vetting ultimately reach the united states? >> those are all important questions. let me try to respond briefly to them and we can take on the details after this session if need be. first, we needed and we have established expectations from the taliban out about allowing people to leave the country to include american citizens, green card holders, afghans that are probably documented with a visa including specifically those who worked in some capacity for the united states?

not only do we have that understanding and public statements by the taliban, of course it's built into everything we've done with a large coalition of countries in terms of setting an expectation and making very clear the failure to fulfill that would have significant consequences we can get into. second, very important to make sure that there are ways to travel freely from the country. we made an intense effort before we left to understand and share with qatar and turkey to step up and do this. what was necessary to continue to function. it could have charter flights and commercial flights going in under international organization standards. we did intensive work and brought to the congress back in the midst of the evacuation. we've been running the airport and handed off a very detailed plan which is now being

implemented. third, the proxies. we worked with pakistan, is because dan on this to make sure that as we moved people out of afghanistan they would facilitate the crossing it into their countries and we would have consular officials surged to the necessary places to handle people coming out in that fashion. now to your important point about the documentation we are working on a mechanisms and there's multiple ways of doing this, people that don't have the necessary document for example. you were asked at the outset what are the factors that we decide the future of the relationship with the taliban.

we recognize it as a terrorist organization that has done horrific things within afghanistan. for the thousands of people that we still care deeply about a number of american citizens i've been in contact with didn't leave because their families were still afghanistan. to perform in ways we would accept and what we think would be the turning point to make decisions with our allies. the t nature of the relationship and the taliban what happened with us and most other countries around the world would depend entirely on its conduct and

actions specifically with regards to freedom of travel as well as to making good on its counterterrorism commitments up while not engaging in reprisals et cetera. these are the things not only we but countries around the world are looking at and there is i think significant leverage that we and other countries hold when it comes to things that the taliban anna says it wants but won't get if it does not act in a way that meets these expectations. we talked a little bit before about the existing u.s. sanctions on the taliban. the security council resolution setting up the expectations for what the taliban has to do and

additional sanctions includingde the federal reserve and other banks about $9 billion. all of that has been frozen. ithere've been significant resources in the institutions. over the last they've provided about 70% of the afghan government's annual operating budget. that also has been frozen. so among all the things the taliban anna says it seeks both basic legitimacy and support they have a hand on much of that so we have to see going forward what conclusions they draw from that and what the conduct would be matching the basic

expectations that we set. thank you mr. chairman of mr. secretary for taking time to answer questions today for the government and security forces it seems the taliban was running the table throughout afghanistan and the prospect of them continue to run by coming in was a significant that should have been planned for. in your view mr. secretary, has the taliban abandoned their sympathy and collaboration with groups like al qaeda and the haqqani network and do they have the same aim and are they of like spirit or has that relationship been severed?

the views and the relationships changed in any kind of definitive way. i think it is fair to say two things. one, whatever the taliban views on al qaeda, they do know the last time they harbored al qaeda and engaged in the attack on the homeland certain things followed that would have an interest in not seeing repeated so whatever their views on al qaeda there's a strong disincentive built in to allow it to engage in these attacks which the intelligence committee isn't capable of doing. the other thing is you know, the taliban were sworn enemies and five or six years since the

emergence. the question i think is less of whether they have the will to deal with isis and whether they have the capacity. the 2001 au mf no longer played a role of significance. there was collaboration and sympathy with al qaeda and the network. is it not appropriate for the state department to revisit your recommendation that we abandon the au mf? >> we need to look to make sure we have all of the authorities that we would need for any potential contingency including the reemergence as a threat of al qaeda or the further emergence as an outwardly directed threat. if we don't have those authorities, we should get them, whether that means new ones.

because of the conditions that have developed in the most recent weeks. nothing wrong with conditions leading to a change in perspective. i for one thought of some years ago we should withdraw from afghanistan and the conditions that i saw in the ensuing years saw i was wrong and like senator shaheen, i was one of those that felt president trump was wrong to enter into the agreement and i thought president biden was wrong or to continue with that withdraw andon of course i was appalled by the disastrous withdrawal process itself. i would like to focus on the moral stain of leaving people behind and understand what we can do to make sure we are not

leaving people behind. i understand we are down to a small number of americans and it's hard to know how many are left behind but in terms of the legal premise, is your priority just as hard to get them out as it ist to get out citizens or s there a different level of commitment from the residents of that return to the united states relative to be citizen? >> the number one priority as american citizens and i think that has long been the case in this situation in afghanistan in this situation. in afghanistan we did everything as well to make sure the green card holders could identify themselves to us. we don't know at any given time how many there are in any given country around the world. >> and to make available resources to them but any citizens that initially, i didn't realize this was a secondary level for the permanent residence.

how many of them approximately so we don't know the exact number but how many are we convinced are still in afghanistan? >> in the thousands. >> likewise in terms of applicants or people who worked with us that have been our partners through the years, how many of them are still in afghanistan that want to come to the united states? >> this is what we are doing an accounting on basedgh on two things, the pipeline of applicants as it existed and then looking at those we are interested in evacuating. oa number are still at transit points around the world. >> so it would be tens of thousands. realistically, two things. wanda, we talked about this a little bit earlier, but of the applicants in the program and as

i said about 18,000, about half of those and this remains more or less the case now are at a point that it's before the chief has given his or her approval that they are eligible for the program. i was looking for a number and what i was leaning to his given the fact the process was so slow and not undertaken during the artrump years in a significant y you sped it up that's great. although there was no way you were going to get all these people out in time given the rapid collapse of the forces and you said yesterday that you inherited a date but in fact you didn't inherit the date. it was may 1st and you pushed it to august 301st. why did you push it much later so that we would have been able to process the applicants as well as those who had worked

with us and not yet applied? i don't understand why the date was not inherited and it wasn't selected that it would be sufficient to remove people from the nation in a way of keeping with our commitment to honor our citizens and our green card holders as well as those that worked with us over the years. >> two things if i may. first, we took some risks in terms of what the taliban and would do or would not do after may 1 and pushing beyond a first and we worked this very hard. >> it is a risk on people we care for. >> to be clear if i could the military told us that inha order to get wood retro grade its drawdown from afghanistan in a safe and orderly way in three to four months. that's why we pushed to move beyond and get to the end of

august or early september. second to your point, our expectation was that beyond august 31 beyond the military drawdown, the government, the security forces were going to remain in control of kabul, the major cities, the embassy was fully planned to remain up and running. we were leaving about 600 military behind to make sure we could secure the embassy so that it could continue to operate and we had robust planning to include continuing to bring out anyone who wished to lead, notably so that was very much the plan and expectation. what we did not anticipate is that in the collapse of the government security forces that changed everything. >> senator murphy?ou >> thank you mr. secretary for spending so much time with us. i think what links the failures in iraq and afghanistan is that

they are both fundamentally failures of hubris believing we can control things and influence events on the other side of the world that are beyond our control or influence in america can be a force for good in the world but there is a limit to what we can achieve and so there's been decades long magical thinking with respect to what's in our control and was outside of our control. it turns out it wasn't in our control to stand up and american-style democracy and american looking military in afghanistan that was going to be able to protect the country from the taliban but we spent 20 years trying to achieve it. so, mr. sec., you covered some of this in your opening remarks but i wanted to ask a series of questions to level this up. for the committee. a situation that you inherited what was in your control and what was outside of your control and then to look at the events of the last 30 to 40 days in

that same lens what was in your control and what was outside of your control? >> i think that these are yes or no answers. some you covered in your testimony but it's important to get it on the record. mr. sec., if president biden had chosen to breach the agreement, president trump had signed with the taliban, would the taliban have restarted attacks against the u.s. troops in bases? >> yes. >> as you sit in your opening testimony, by the time the tadministration took office, te taliban was on the outskirts of several provincial capitals. if president biden had chosen to reach the agreement between president trump and the taliban, would they have begun offenses onta these urban centers? >> yes. >> so the taliban had begun the siege on the city's and resumed attacks on u.s. troops would 2500 troops have been enough to keep the country from falling to the taliban? >> no. >> would double the number have been enough?

do we know how big the force would have had to have gotten? >> the assessment of the military leaders not to put a number on it but a significant significantadditional forces woe been required to protect ourselves and to prevent the onslaught against the provision capitals and ultimately against kabul. >> this wasn't a decision between leaving and the status quo but between a significant commitment of u.s. resources or to the continuation of the withdrawal plans, correct? let's talk about the last one. once the government and military it seems it was pretty predictable and understandable that there would be panic on the ground among the afghan people. so could it be expected that a few thousand u.s. troops and diplomats on the ground at the time would have been able to prevent this panic? >> no. >> much has been made about these dramatic heartbreaking scenes.

2500 or 5,000 troops was not enough to stop the afghan people from rushing to the airport? it created a security nightmare for you but was there any way for the limited number of personnel that were there to prevent individuals from rushing to the airport? >> they did control the airport as we did we could establish a basic perimeter around the airport as we did but they couldn't control what happened beyond. >> let's talkk about that parameter. others say we should have controlled a bigger perimeter. we should have taken back parts to secure the passage of americans and afghans to the airport.e let's say you quadrupled this number of troops. let's say you had 10,000 troops without the afghan military or a functioning government, would that have been enough to retake couple to be able to secure the passage of everyone to the airport? >> i don't want to profess to be a military expert so i would really differ to my colleagues at the pentagon but i would say

that i think i can safely say it would have taken a substantial number of forces to try to retake the city or establish a much broader perimeter and of course if that was ultimately opposed by the taliban in a sense it would have defeated the purpose because anyone outside of the perimeter wouldn't be allowed to get through it to come to the airport. >> so once the afghan military collapses and disintegrates, we don't have enough troops to retake i couple and we are in te position of having to rely on the taliban or at least communicate to make sure we get individuals to the airport. >> that's correct. >> i think that this is important to put on the record in a clear and concise way because we have to have a reckoning in this country about what we can accomplish and what we can't. it's extraordinary that this administration had 130,000 people out of afghanistan given

those circumstances and the situation that they inherited, that you inherited in january of this year. my worry is that what we suffered for the last 20 years, this idea that it was just a bad plan but the failure of execution as to why we couldn't succeed in iraq or afghanistan is plaguing us again today that right now we are having a conversation as if we had a better plan, if we executed better we could have avoided these things at the airport and guaranteed that using safe passage of everyone into that facility. it is heartbreaking what happened. it was impossible for americans to watch. but if we just simply leave today believing that if we had planned better, if we had better execution, we could have avoided this i think that we are just

inviting another iraq and afghanistan in the future. finally mr. sec. just quickly to expand on your point about the messages since, this idea that the chinese would love if we stayed another ten or 20 years and why this isn't a sign of weakness but in fact it's and the ability for you and the national security infrastructure to reorient the resources towards the fights we can't win. >> i think you put it very well. in my assessment and the assessment of many others as i said, there's nothing that strategic competitors like china or russia or adversaries like iran or north korea would like better than for us to have doubled down on it and remained bogged down in afghanistan for another year, five years, ten years, 20 years with all of that dedication and resources, all of that energy and focus as opposed

to the challenges that we have to face today and i might add this committee has done a very good job on trying to refocus this, notably from china. i think that would have been doubling down on this war after 20 years. after nearly $2 trillion. after 461 american lives were lost, 20,000 injuries and not to preserve the status quo that existed before may 1. that would have been one thing. but to be in a situation where the war with us was restarted, the taliban attacking the forces and the partners and allies going on the defensive across the country to retake the city's, that would have required a doubling down on the war and the bottom line is this.

we were right to end the war. we were right not to send a third generation of americans to afghanistan to fight and die there and i believe we were right in the extraordinary efforts that were made to make sure we could bring out as many people as possible and now we have an obligation to make sure we can continue to do that and of course to guard against the reemergence of any threats coming from afghanistan. >> thank you mr. chairman. and i appreciate the fact that you are having this critical hearing today. i must say i'm going to change what i was going to talk about based on the last two interactions. thank you for being here. i wish general austin were here because sec. austin could answer manyma of the questions that hae been posed. senator murphy as he knows this wasn't a choice between either a

dangerous escalation of the war, which has just been laid out, or a precipitous chaotic withdrawal to embarrass us around the globe to say that it wasn't a sign of weakness the way we left. i don't know who you're talking to, but if you are talking to our allies they will say that it was a sign of weakness. if you are talking honestly to the adversaries, they will certainly say that it's a sign of weakness and so will the terrorist groups around the world. .... soldiers and

sailors and marines who killed trying to help others escape from the tyranny of the taliban. he never should've been put in that position it was an impossible position for our troops and the impossibility of that they faced was due to policy decisions are wass no alternative it was shut down in the middle of the night no notice to anybody. it was a surprise. they say yes the afghan troops were ' disappointment but then they provide that close their havert than they could pushback against the taliban. that's why we are here.

but we just left and pulled out all the military underpinnings we left a lot of people behind it wasr dangerous and chaotic senator romney asked for numbers and you said you are still working on it. here are the numbers that i have. the best that i have as the ranking member on homeland security we pushed and pushed, 18000 applicants we have 705. you said earlier the overwhelming number of people at risk got out. i don't think that is true. i will give you the numbers that i have. we think about 30000 at risk afghans were evacuated out of

60000 we can get good numbers from the administration but that is thehe best estimate. that is truepe we left people behind who stood with us and helped with and americans citizens green card holders , but thousands of people who stood with us and helped us. whoab came? earlier there was discussion about what type of vetting was taking place three quarters of the people who were evacuated were not greenme card holders, not american citizens, not siv applicants, not p1 or p2. three quarters of these individuals may not have qualified in the sense. you say they are being vetted? they should be. nobody knows they can get the information from the state department and others.

but from the start many have said what they do is based on conditions on the ground. quite frankly the presidents decision was notot based on conditions on the ground it was a disastrous withdrawal and put somebody people at risk and should have been an orderly withdrawal under the cover of military force we did a 2500 troops but 7500 nato troops. again many commanders were shot and they were surprised because there was not the coordination but the lack of coordination of people who stuck with us. talk about bagram and lack of interagency planning. of course we saw this with the chaotic withdrawal occurred. these are preventable problems and they put military and diplomats in this impossible situation.

it is an impossible situation but it was so resting chaotic had again we did not get the right people out and those we did seem don't to fall in the categories we were concerned about so now what do we do? i agree with that. so that the current government that taliban government has said they will fight back against terrorists. you believe the economy network a wanted terrorist according to your assessment do you believe that is an indication that they will fight back againstst terrorist?

from our perspective and the partners perspective if it will make good on commitments to make sure it's not used as a place for terrorist attacks. and they have made commitments but we are not relying on those commitments. we will make sure we have there ability to detect any emergence of that threat if it does emerge that wee can talk about in more detail. the connie network considered a terrorist group quick. >> it is. >> is the interior minister leader of the connie network? >> that is accurate. >>ti i think sally we have shaken the foundation of a lot of our alliances and we have work to do and i think we have demonstrated weakness and make the world a more dangerous as a result. let me ask you about a specific question. >> your time has expired. >> i will: follow the to the national financing questions submitted to secretary ellen

regarding foreign assets. >> thank you mr. chairman and mr. secretary. turning to the humanitarian situation inn afghanistan the world feel food program observed half the children under five are acutely malnourished and 14 million individuals in afghanistan on the brink of starvation 31 or 34 provinces are at risk of losing health services entirely in 1 percent of the country is vaccinated. and that is the challenge for both food and healthcare quick. >> it is dire. >> in the us just participated in the international conference one.$1 billion was pledged in humanitarian relief including additional commitment by the united

states but the ngos that often are essential for providing aid are concerned about a legal pathway tous do so. in 2002 it was a global terrorist organization under the emergency powers act and doesn't have the humanitarian exception. and those stepped in to create a legal pathway and the number of senators have written to secretary ellen with copies to you and samantha powers so let's use the same pathway here in which the office of foreign asset control issues a general a license with insulation providing humanitarian assistance. are you engage in a conversation how to create a

legal pathway to provide humanitarian assistance quick. >> it was issued about ten days ago and we are looking at what other authorities that humanitarian assistance can flow as best possible. >> we have a significant responsibility with the chaos of war in combination with the pandemic and general disruption in the country and it is a moral responsibility to provide assistance the letter from september 2nd that was sent to the administration. >> as provincial capital started to fall in on provincial capitals falling if the government of afghanistan were director reconsolidation forces to essentially

consolidate protection of the territory still held to the government of afghanistan take key strategic military decisions to consolidate forces quick. >> it did not it is a source of tremendous frustration across administration from the presidentio on down as the summer went on and we saw the taliban moving across the country we repeatedly and then to consolidate the forces and what could be defended not across the entire country which it did not have the full capacity to do. and unfortunately that consolidation the plan that we urged on them for how to effectively defend the major citieser never did. >> what was the response about

why they chose not to consolidateo forces? >> atk different moments there were different responses i w think initially that response was we cannot be seen to be given up on any part of the country nevermind over the or six years the amount of the part of the country by population controlled by the government of afghanistan going back 2014 t / 15 went from about 60 percent at the end of last year and about 40 percent it is happening outside the city of course relentlessly. but then as we pressed then yes we will do it but they did not. >> we have seen a number of

years the challenge of elections considered illegitimate by a portion of the country and abdullah was facing off creating paralysis and the key ministers to key positions and as we try to understand the rapid collapse, whereas there essentially a failure to create anre effective decision within the afghanistan government? >> there are a number of factors i hope y'all look at going back over the last 20 years. certainly a lack of unity in the government that was comprised of different groups and factions and in those in a unified way they could not or would not so in terms of their

effectiveness there are serious concerns that andfested themselves third one of the problems it had over the last 20 years is pervasive corruption. that has so many consequences. one is if you are being asked to fight andut put your life on the line for a government or an institution that is correct it's a hard decision to make so as we saw with many afghan forces and soldiers fighting but institutionally the military collapse in the course of 11 days as we go back and look one of the things we have to look at is the impact that is pervasive in terms of the institution in the will to fight for the country. >> and the provincial capitals

so that there was a falling capital almost a world in which he was disengaged and then the finance minister resigned and said he was leaving the country for family reasons but it was taken as a symbol on thehe verge of collapse and then shortly thereafter there president fled sunday august 15. did we have for warning the beginning of the cabinet to essentially free the country and how did we respond to that quick. >> we did not on saturday i spoke to president donnie working on a plan to have a transfer of power to the taliban led were probably represented given to include the many different actors

working on that in delhi and i was calling president ghani to make sure hee was support that and he said he would but if the taliban would not go ahead with it and i'm paraphrasing that he would fight to the death that was saturday. he left afghanistan the next day on sunday. >> so there is a subsequent going on it is my intention to continue to the process. senator paul. >> i have advocated to an end for the afghan war for over a decade i'm glad it's finally over. but never in my worst nightmares could i have imagined the administration with leave $80 billion worth of weaponry to the taliban. hundreds of thousands of automatic weapons and worst of

all 13 brave young men and women never in my worst nightmares did anyone conceive of such a colossal incompetence invading bagram air force base will be remembered as one of the worst military decisions in our historyle holding no one accountable, everyone circle the wagons you sayay we agree that was a great idea but this will be remembered by the people holding no one accountable for letting the base go it will be remembered and to add insult to injury this week youmi have now released $64 million of aid to afghanistan. that we have a prohibition about giving aid and comfort to theom enemy? and the argument is we are giving it to charities for poor people and women. but the taliban hasas a history of taking this they would take the money and was a big complaint when they were in power the last time they now

have $80 billion worth of weapons, 350,000 automatic weapons. are we really naïve enough table not interrupted? i think that's a foolish notion. >> 64 million is the tip of then iceberg that was designated for the afghanfo government can you place today the biden administration will not release this money to the taliban? >> absent making on the expectations of the international community previously, that is correct. >> maybe we deduct a fee for the weapons that they took. >> i will defer to my colleagues at the pentagon but $80 billion provided over the course of the last 15 or 16 years. much of that the significant

weaponry of planes and helicopters is inoperable without strategic threat. >> you y cannot say you will not give them the money if they behave you will give them the money so when we subtract 80 billion from that 10 billion then in their mind it is 70 the fact your entertaining good behavior they will get more money is a big mistake and the naïve notion we will change that stone age philosophy by giving more money with trillions of dollars this is the chance to have a peace dividend stop sending good money after bad. was he and aid worker or and isis-k operative? >> it is reviewing and in the fall assessment. >> younk don't know if it was

the aid worker or isis-k operative? >> i cannot speak to that. >> you don't know or won't tell us quick. >> i don't know we are reviewing. >> you thank you would know if you off somebody with ' drone if he is in aid worker or isis-k. is not just you it's ministration after administration the obama administration droned hundreds and hundreds of people and the thing is i don't know if it is see these pictures of the beautiful children killed in the attack. if that is true, guess what cracks maybe you create hundreds or thousands of potential new terrorist from bombing the wrong people we cannot have the investigation after we kill people it's before we kill people we have plenty of bombs we can bomb anything we want from anywhere in the world maybe we should have bombed the helicopters and planes we left behind. even you didn't know this once

they took our stuff we should have said you have 20 minutes to get out of it because we will blow it up then you would send the message of strength and stand we bomb somebody if we are not sure if it was in aid worker or isis-k operative that is not sending a signal strength and inor the end there will be more blood if you killed in aidci worker on accident are we better off because of that? you could've me the basic decision the fundamental decision that ruined the whole thing to abandon bagram air force base before you left and the americans route. anybody can argue would happen more quickly than we thought it would happen and those need to be relieved of their post but leaving bagram air force base is unforgivable mistake.

that julie these people in place that everybody needs to go. but it is a terrible mistake releasing many to the taliban adding insult to injury terrible for those 13 soldiers who died in the end the final to die in the war if you give money to the people that have been ruining the middle east and afghanistan for decades i hope you will release the money that would be a big mistake. >> thank you. i understand the senator is with us virtually? and before the senator begins i want the senator to preside so i can vote and come back. >> thank you secretary blinking for appearing before the committee. i want to zoom out and the defense establishment political appointee that think

take defense contractors are complaining about tactics because their strategy that failed they are complaining about how america's longest war ended because theyto don't want it to ever end because they think we should be the occupying force and definitely and they know that position is untenable so they wantan to talk about holding onto bagram and the fundamental mistake and in central asia and of the culture and after 20 years and to have security forces the afghan government reinstalled with no moreab capable to be a referee in the civil war than before we invaded that's not the fault of servicemembers or diplomats so what are the

lessons of the last 20 years of war? >> i thank you summed it up extremely well and i would say that there are two things. we went to afghanistan for one reason and those for attacked us on 9/11 to bring us to justice and to make sure that does not happen again. and then with bin laden in 2011 and al qaeda to conduct the homeland on afghanistan as integratedst that doesn't have that capacity. and with the best of intention

to remake the country and to use military force to remake another society and too your point that senator murphy and others m made, whatever our intentions, that is probably beyond our capacity. and the netr that is we were there for 20 years. we lost 2461 americans, 20000 were killed or injured. $2trillion was spent of indirect cost the equivalent of $300 million every single day for 20 years. on average if they say yes but you arrive in a place where the expenditures with people and resources were sustainable and that is not the reality that we face because as we

have discussed, given the deadline established for the removal of us forces, the choice we had was to go through with that and withdraw forces or re- up the war and escalate and send more forces more loss of life and resources indefinitely and to what end andto what result? in terms of having something sustainable for the security forces that could protect the country and uphold basic rights? so those lessons are important and profound and i all of us together will reflect on those and what we have learned in doing tactically with this administration as well as strategically across manyon administrations over 20 years. >> thank you mr. secretary with the act of violence of women and girls and the

taliban targeting minority groups those who have a brutal history to commit violence so what are we doing to ensure physical access from the ngos from the constituency? so in media reporting and videos and other reports that are deeply disturbing and whether it is us are many countries around the world we have been working to organize and focus to violate the basic expectations that we have of the taliban led government in terms to uphold to make sure

we're all speaking with one voice and acting together when it comes to the leverage we have for those expectations so when it comesma to humanitarian assistance and other support and we are doing whatever we can to help ensure those agencies and ngo are able to operate pressing directly and indirectly on the taliban led government to ensure their ability to do that and their protectionon. this is very much a moving picture and something we are focused on right now in the days and weeks ahead. >> one final question. i understand this is not the main thing people remain in

mortal danger but from your standpoint, the department of state, you have to beou a little worried about morale for those who have dedicated 20 years to this effort so what can we do on behalf of a foreign service when we need to be building back our diplomatic corps? >> thank you for raising that and it's very important to me institutionally. i spent time with all of our returning diplomats either personally or virtually depending on where they were and spend a lot of time listening to them, hearing them to address the concerns they have and so many people whoho have invested their work or careers or their lives in

to have a deep love for the country and this is very challenging and painful and those who participated in the evacuation itself literally at the gates at the kabul airport side-by-side with these extraordinary men and women in uniform doing that work including the 13 who lost their lives in the terrorist attack in and serving up to them before that attack by first name. so the impact over 20 years and more immediately with our people who arere there literally pulling people into safety to

help to talk people in and walk people in. officers around the department stood up to volunteer in many who ran into the airport to get people out. we are spending time and to provide them the support they may need. >> wee are over time and there is still eight senators who want to ask questions. >> thank you senator. >> thank you mr. chairman. president biden has described the evacuation and then extraordinary success. this has to be the lie of the 2t century it is dishonest and if he believes that it is decision delusional no one can ever say we leave no american

behind because joe biden did and by your own testimony there are still 100 americans trapped behind enemy lines. we have heard a lot about the 13 us servicemembers who died a couple of weeks ago. one why is riley mccollum jacksongo hole wyoming signed up on his 18th birthday. his wife isec expecting a baby and was delivered yesterday, a baby girl. i stand with riley's family and then pregnant wife on friday in jackson hole wyoming as his remains were brought back in the flag draped coffin never made it back home alive as a result of this administration failure people in wyoming look at it as a devastating loss and they do

believe it is the administrationul who should hold the blame for what has occurred that hearing it from other o senators and has been an epic failure, no planning or strategy kabul to gather at the last minute and didn't have to be this way. thinking back to your confirmation hearing there are questions and concerns on record of foreign-policy in these parts decisions have serious consequences i believe they embolden terrorist organizations aroundiold the gle but lives of men and women because of these failures it would be a grave mistake to confirm the secretary of state who has a demonstrated track record to repeatedly making the wrong decisions with american foreign-policy and national security. the actions i have seen from your last seven months has proven my assessment to be correct. the biden administration's misstepsco are numerous.

failed to start evacuation operations through the fall of kabul in august despiteil announcing the withdrawal in april. failed to heed the warnings ofth a collapse of the afghan government security forces failed to prepare for a rapid taliban takeover failed to adapt one —- adapt deadlines for withdrawal for the situation taking place onn the ground because we are so focused on the calendar of the wall to keep bagram air force base basic visiting eight or nine times the 21 ways to help evacuate civilians and we just heard failure with a vast arsenal of weapons getting into the hands of the taliban it seems the b most egregious that i hear about in wyoming and people all across the country is abandoning american citizens as well as our allies in afghanistan senator portman went overse the numbers "washington post" called it a morall disaster come i think it

is a moral disgrace you nearly dislocated your shoulder patting yourself on the back great job you have done yesterday you said we did the right thing layer citizens working feverishly to getut everyone of them out but you didn't get everyone of them out. have admitted again and again over 100 americans thehe top priority always must be getting americans home safely and now no us personnel in afghanistan, the american and president biden left behind instead of going on national television to say wen will not take the troops out until every american is out the options for escapingg are dwindling. trying to put this together to say how do we end up here? in april the president made a decision to announce everybody would be out by august 31st on may 8 a rehearsal of concept a dress rehearsal for withdrawal. i know the national security

council was there chairman joint chief of staff they were all there. my understanding is that you did not attend. is that true? >> my deputy responsible for the operation was there. >> i know where you were i thank you should've been here instead understand late june the state department was getting nervous because the military drawdown was moving on schedule but not the civiliania drawdown the state department was talking to the defense department to slow down the pace of not a withdrawal to tap the brakes isn't that true? >> i will not get into to get into an eternal deliberations or discussions so we have more

warnings the state departmentep so when did they formally make the request to the department of defense with the noncombatant evacuation as a secretary? >> the entity that was planned if necessary throughout the spring and summer we revised plans on a number of occasions and ultimately when the government security forces unexpectedly collapsed with the 11 days it went into effect. >> the middle of august why did you wait? >> a a government and security forces in place that by every estimate when protect the city and kabul and the other capitals through the years. >> yesterday you testify the taliban designated a terrorist organization. i want to be very quick. does this administration

believe the taliban is a terrorist organization? >> it is designated under the one of thees designations and any engagement will beem for the purpose of advancing the interest. >> when youre plan to list this as us designated. >> it is listed as a terrorist organization. >> you testify about the siv 40 percent. >> before mission approval. >> what percentage of the afghan population that left afghanistan with these efforts what percentage were vetted before they got on the airplanes? >> to leave kabul? most of them were not that is exactly why we establish transit points through negotiations to make sure before anyone came to the united states they would be vetted by the different law enforcement security agencies we established agreements with more than a dozen countries. >> who are you letting on the planes? anybody to show up?

>> initially those who would flood the airport we had to do an immediate assessment for those that come ind and go out but no one came to the united states without being checked somewhere else first to make sure they don't pose a security threat. >> my time is expired. i spent time overseas last week talking to nato allies at a security conference and individuals i will telll you our enemies are emboldened and our allies are enraged. >> mr. secretary thank you for being here and allotting so much time to take every single question posted. i went to first pick up what my friend and colleague asked can you characterize the americans that are still there? i know there are a lot of them that did not want to come

back, whole array of different reasons can you give us an understanding of those that have remained in their circumstances? >> certainly as noted , starting back in march we issued 19 separate messages to any american citizen who was registered with the embassy urging them to leave afghanistan and avail themselves of flights that were running offering assistance if they needed it because it was very volatile security environment and we started the order offr departure for the embassy on april 27 and is incumbent to make clear to the american citizens that so by the time of the evacuation the, despite the 19

separate messages there were still somewhere around five or 6000 american citizens left in afghanistan. and as we noted earlier we don't know if it is afghanistan or any country around the world how many citizens are there because nobody is required when you travel abroad you are not required to register with the embassy or with anyone else. many people do but many do not.fo we made an effort to determine how many people were there. so to get to your point, the reason that despite all of the warnings and that people remain is because for virtually all of them, afghanistan was there home. they lived there for years over decades or generations.

there extended family was there. it's the most wrenching of all decisions to decide. >> i want to give more texture to this conversation it's not that there were people there many people were in the category of not being abandoned by our country but made the conscious choice to stay in country. i've only been here eight years but i will say to you and your staff you have been the most responses state department team that my office has dealt with we have brought many people to your attention who wanted to get out and work with us and i am grateful for that. i have now witnessed with my senior senator going to a joint base to see the facilities for those who has met extreme that eating and

made it to the united states what is going on with a 13000 expected in new jersey and military personnel and state department personnel talking to me about this is the proudest work they have ever done and americans should be aware of that. we are a great nation and this is a reflection of the words on the statue of liberty. i want to pick up on the situation as it is senator merkley brought up concerns of humanitarian interest excuse me humanitarian crisis that is boiling over there. i want to get you to reiterate you issued one license but we really need more. correct? >> that is what we are looking at to make sure all of the authorities exist not just with our own ngos but others ast well.

>> it is a strategic situation we know we control significant resources that the afghan government is relying on to run basic services it is a strategic leverage over the taliban to continue to pressure them to honor human rights and theon rights of women and with those terrorist concerns however given what we understand about those resources, they will have continued b humanitarian suffering the world food program is estimating 40 percent of afghan crops willin be lost there will be a tremendous hunger the price of wheat will go up 25 percent those who own food stock is expected to run out by september so this is tremendous suffering that will come it will be exacerbated by climate change we can see issues of starvation heading the population that i guess if

you give me specifically what assurances b has the biden administration been able to secure for humanitarian access and how does the state department work with international partners? is not our responsibility to have near-term and long-term assistance for those afghans who ended up in locations without the proper support mechanism. >> you are right to draw a distinction between the basic humanitarian assistance to respond to a crisis among so many afghan people it's well over 50 percent are in the humanitarian assistance with the drought and economic conditions, covid, everything piling on 20 the poorest countries on earth to begin with so when it comes to food, medicine and the basics the international community irrespective of anything else not to be able to provide that

knowing the assistance will get to the people who need it and not diverted or used with any other way. we have long-standing mechanisms and arrangements in place with leading ngos to do just that as well as clear monitoring mechanisms to make sure even in the environment we don't control that assistance gets to the people who need it and i spent time with the head of the un agency to make sure that is happening we are coordinating with dozens of countries the un plays a lead role we just had a donors conference. >> thank you too many state department personnel in that region that are working through the crisis.

>> secretary lincoln so with the questions on the afghanistan withdrawal i understand you been here for almost three hours now i appreciate your persistence my staff has are working very closely with afghan special immigration some have been initiated over three years as you are aware i saw a letter last week that outlines my concerns but i hope deputies secretary mcewan i received updates three of the five siv cases my staff has been working for months i appreciate the efforts of your staff to get me this information which i provided for those veterans who requested my health and for that i want to thank you. however i would like you to be

aware of my concern that has hamstrung my effort to assist the siv applicants this is the departments position that it is precluded by law for providing updates for any potential applications. this would prevent members of congress with the constituent services in support of an applicant so where do you commit to me today you would review the departments procedures and fix this unacceptable procedure? >> i'm happy to review that. let me say first, thank you for the work that you and your

team and staffor have done to help folks in need and make sure we have the information we needed to try to be helpful and get people out for the were we have been able to do together we willur review all of these procedures there other requirements built into the lot or privacycy concerns to be addressed but we should look at everything. >> mr. secretary this is important enough and then we can come up with what changes come up to clarify because it should not be that hard to stay in contact to make those communications with members of the united states senate. our adversaries, mr. secretary and the creation of a power vacuum.

most certainly prepared to take this opportunity to use it to their advantage china has announced last week it will spend $31 million of aid to taliban -controlled afghanistan and report they are looking at bagram air force base for their own use the russian embassy that was leadership pakistan is considering the taliban government as a partner to cover india to open the call for the american military defeat and considering working with the taliban does the administration consider all foreign policy implications before such an abrupt withdrawal? and if they did, does the department have a a strategy to counter the adversaries in the region? >> we did and factored everythingrt in to the decisions we made including the impact

it might have on the neighboring countries and regional countries and those of various interest in afghanistan a number of the countries have a whole series of interest to include making sure that it is not the place for terrorism directly against then and ensure it is not a source of potential refugees as well all of those things are in play and looking to take steps to protect their basic interest so at the same time establishing more than 100 countries with the security council resolution of the taliban led government and if those are not met and other countries are aiding and abetting so that the taliban cannot fulfill those

expectations, there will be consequences for that. >> what i'm really curious about is do you have a strategy you established or did you have enough time before this withdrawal to establish a strategy knowing that there would be a void in afghanistan? >> thehe work that we have done to bring together across dozens of countries very active contact groups as we work together across these countries with the nato that eu as well as the un. we have a a collective strategy. >> do we have a strategy? if this has been laid out based upon the needs to move as quickly as e we did, do you have time to actually

establish a strategy to take care? i understand we've been here almost three hours but simply to say you're working on it with the other countries seems to me we need our own strategy here and it doesn't sound like you're in a position to share with us the best strategy today. >> i'm happy to follow up with you to share our thinking and our work on that. but we have organized several dozen countries that are collectively a are working on it implemented a strategy. >> if you would in a classified setting and what that strategy is?

to avoid now and then to be in a better position and what you could articulate today i expect my time is up at this point. >> senator markey. thank you very much. thank you for all of your work along with all of your colleagues but president biden was right to end the longest were fleeing is being afghanistan would ever be clean and easy one of the president's three predecessors would have done so if not anything from the 20 year war in afghanistan that it is easier to get into a more than to get out. however given the amount of second-guessing an armchair quarterbacking we have seen

over the last month i fear we haven't learned anything. we must reimagined our national security policy over the pharmacy to start endless undefined military engagement before they can begin. i want to be sure americans at home understand the position president biden was placed in president trumps deal with the taliban exchanged a halt of the offenses against our troop for a commitment to leave the country by may of this year president trump with the support of his national security team and many republican members of congress negotiated the steel without the participation or by an of the afghan government president biden faced a choice to break the deal essentially restarting the war in afghanistan and then to get the troops homero as promised that president trump of course

did not leave an actual plan to evacuate. all of those should have been taken out of afghanistan and president trumps vision without a plan was a hallucination so ultimately that was left to the biden administration which did its best to effectuate that agreement which president trump made and ultimately he was right to follow through on that commitment to end the country's longest war that they claim so many military lives so many tens of thousands of afghan civilian lives and saddled us taxpayers with $2 trillion worth of debt over the last two decades and the tremendous cost of war hit home in the final chapter as

the armed forces to put one of the largest airless in us history we our debt of gratitude yesterday senator warren and i both attended the funeral service for us marine corps sergeant from lawrence massachusetts one of the 13 american heroes who losthe her life on august 26 in the suicide bombing. she was guiding afghan women and girls to safety at the kabul airport. the work of triple heart recipient and others during operation allies refuge save thousands of innocent lives and we have to ensure that her own commitment to help the afghan people in doers past the take off with that last

transport plane two weeks ago. we honor her and all of those who gave their lives and sacrifice in afghanistan. every member of this committee has to agree to ensure that there is humanitarian aid that goes into afghanistan to help those that are in need. we spent $300 million every single day to conduct the war in afghanistan roughly the equivalent spending this entire year of humanitarian assistance for afghanistan. i sent a letter with four of my colleagues today asking for the administration to ensure the many previously allocated or requested for afghan war efforts be repurposed to assist afghans in need. can you give your view what should happen with that

funding now the defunct afghan and security forces are not there to receive that funding and then to ever further humanitarian catastrophe in afghanistan? >> i got your letter. we are looking at all of that. first that we are making good on our own contributions with what the afghan people need. we did that again yesterday organized by the unitedd nations and we will continue to look at the needs going forward and what we can do effectively to make sure assistance is getting to the people that need it not the taliban led government to make sure agencies whether the un or ngos can operate safely and effectively in afghanistan. >> leaving many national

organization relief stay behind we don't need to create redtape. are you about working with the treasury department to issue a general license so we so what additional authorities would be needed to have that to get in there freely quick. >> that's important and to telescope that timeframe to get that completedam is important and every major refugee assistance group has called for lifting the level at 200,000 people as refugee admissions into our country. what is the administration's view of the 200,000 person so

as you know senator and of course we used to assess there werere additional needs and then into this country and then to the support we need from congress on that will not for the most part cap into the refugee cap so there other means and mechanisms to ensure with your support and not actually cutting into that existing or future cap quick. >> thank you- and for all of your great work. i just hope 200,000 is the goal of the resettlement

agencies go towards that number and it is what we should all strive to meet to ensure these individuals not only survive but thrive in their new environment. is beyond the pale when we leave americans and our allies and those that have helped us behind. and i've also been over to visit with our allies in the uk and nato. their sense of surprise and

engagement is palpable. we have a very significant failure that has taken place of global proportion. it's facing the questioning of america's resolve and question of integrity and frankly they put us in a situation questioning whether we are a reliable partner. the reputation as a nationti i think has been put at risk in the failed evacuation. our thought is to get to the bottom of it as a committee that left the world a more dangerous place for the allies and those that depend on us. it's also armed and our enemies like never before and it's in ad emboldenedan our strategic adversaries. there must be accountability. secretary, my office and other congressional offices have heard rumors regarding potential

cabinet resignations over the situation in afghanistan. so i want to ask you have you submitted your resignation garegarding this issue? >> i've not. >> the lack of accountability here and in this administration is shocking to me.i i'd like to turn to another question regarding the intelligence that we'veve relied upon. in an internal report given on august 16, there was a warning of a breach at the kabul airport and said, i quote, a breach cannot bee fully prevented at current force levels. mr. sec., did you see that report? >> tell me that date again. >> the report given, and internal report from the embassy to the state department saying that a breach at the airport cannot be fully prevented current force levels. >> i can't tell you whether i saw that specific report, but that's why the president had on

standby 6,000 forces to be able to deploy immediately into afghanistan and the airport in case the airport was in jeopardy and that is what we did. >> the force level being insufficient i think was a significant reason for concern. something that in a plan of action should be accounted for earlier and going to the plan i'd like to cover that with you for a few minutes. the plan for afghanistan would be a plan on how to evacuate from a foreign country should the dangerous situation arise. >> that's correct. >> prior to turning overag the base on july 2nd, did they plan to evacuate americans have the bagram air base as a critical level in the strategy? >> the critical element for any was actually the airport in kabul because as you know, senator, bob graham is about 40 miles from kabul to the extent that the population you

are seeking was mostly the airport byor far the most convenient to them would be the airport. >> a civilian airport in a neighborhood that's difficult to protect a van and airport the size of bob gorham with two runways and inability to lift off, significant air lift capacity. i'm frankly quite shocked it would have had no inclusion but if i understand you correctly it didn't include bagram air base. >> i wonder as things began to change y on the ground what was the process? >> in the course of the spring and summer, we reviewed all of the plans including theen neo- plan. of course the elements no one anticipated as we discussed on numerous occasions was the

collapse of the government. we had plans in place to do the critical things we did. all the personnel, get people to the airport in 48 hours and did much cases less than that. the president ordered the standby force in place to make sure that the airport was secured and planes could come in and take off and we had a secure facility. >> denying there was an operation in afghanistan at that point but two days later on the 16th, he admitted there was a new operation going on. so i'm curious what data did the administration decided to execute the plan and when did

they begin to effectively evacuate? who would have made the decision execute? >> ultimately, the president would be asked for his decision approval to do that. based on the recommendations of the different government agencies. >> is that what happened in this case? >> that's right i believe so, sir. >> oversight isn't a simple checkbox exercise. it requires getting to the bottom of what's come to be the greatest u.s. foreign policy disaster at least in my lifetime. mr. chairman, we need more hearings on this afghanistan withdrawal failure. i'd also like to say leadership owning up to one's mistakes and requiresuiom introspection and the commitment to achieve what's right.

what we've witnessed has been a failure of leadership. it's one that's defected to blame and shame just as a nation. it's time to lead. i'm responsible for the decisions i make. i am responsible for the actions ofmy my department. i'm responsible for learning any lessons that flow from those decisions wereho those actions d for holding myself accountable to you and through you, to the american people, which is exactly what i'm doing here today and what i've been doing these past weeks and repeated conversations in the senate and house and what i will continue to do going forward.

we can all draw our own conclusions from that. i respect yours. i may disagree but that is exactly the process that i am engaged in and we will continue to do that going forward. a. >> my constituents expect that as well particularly the veterans in tennessee and that have reached out they are heartbroken about what's going on. there's been lots of life, loss of treasure and we've now armed terrorists at a level that i've never expected. our allies are more approximate than they are. they are concerned and we've got to find ways to work with them on that. i recognize what a huge

undertaking it is to airlift and work to get some of our closest partners out of harm's way after 20 years of american presence and troops in afghanistan. over 120,000 people and i understand and want to thank the people involved in that. that said i urge you to have more people in the process and out of afghanistan to help others, legal permanent residency and others. i have a list of a lot of the cases in the office and i willca give it to you and your staff if i could get your commitment that he will get back to us on these because we have had your help we had one case of a 2-year-old american citizen and we've been working with you on that. we also had cases of 15 legal

permanent residences and a number of our close afghan partners and at this point, the system at the state department and dhs is overwhelmed and we are just getting back for sponsors so i really urge you to keep at that. i must say the level of hypocrisy in the room is staggering. we should have more hearings on what happened in afghanistan, not the decision to divert huge amounts of resources to iraq in one of the biggest strategic wonders of the modern history where it is a clear matter of record that you're on has been the biggest beneficiary of that decision and let's fast-forward now to the trump administration. i did not oppose the decision to open upis negotiations. everybody in this room i suspect

recognized there was no military solution to this conflict, there had to be a political solution so i supported opening up that process isn't it a fact the trump administration asks the pakistani government to release three top commanders as part of that process? one of themri is the person thas now number two that everybody saw in the photos. >> that's correct. >> and they begin their discussions and didn't include the afghan government, did they? >> that's right. >> and they essentially questioned the government to release 5,000 taliban fighters. many of them involved in the attack on kabul today. now, let's see what the negotiation is. here i supported at the beginning the united states will

leave by may of this year. you can't attack american forces but you can attack afghan forces with impunity, right? >> that's right. >> so we pick a day and say you can attack afghan forces and then we sailed now let's negotiate the future of afghanistan. isn't that the way that it was set up when you walked in? there's a say that they have the watches and we have the time. the trump administration through the negotiation set up perfectly for theroup television. the green light to attack the afghan forces, no discussion going forward. and then isn't it true that the former president criticized president biden for not pulling the forces out earlier? >> i believe that's accurate. >> he said we need to stick to the may timetable and by the way

i'm handing you a negotiation where i've already said we are getting out and i've said go ahead and attack the afghan forces and now we are going to talk about the future so that's the hand you've been dealt. let me talk a little bit about the future and i'm glad you brought together the ministerial meeting with our nato partners and surrounding countries. this won't work if they do not have a been around the region. now, i'm very much in the mode and i know you are now also you watch what they do not what they say. theyey clearly have new pr peope and they also recognize that the actions they have to take in order to get any kind of support whatsoever from some of the western countries. i've heard you testify today to some of those conditions, free and safe passage for people who want to leave.

access by international humanitarian organizations directly to the afghan people not through any taliban. protection of girls, women and minorities. this is going to be one obviously we have to keep a very close eye on. fourth, you can't use the territory of afghanistan as a base for the future attacks whether it's al qaeda or anybody else. and a more inclusive government because right now we have a government comprised of taliban including two members of the haqqani network one who is wanted for questioning and so my question to you is that was a really important first step because we want everybody on the same page many close partners and surrounding countries.

do you have that from all the partners at the table that we will act in unison? >> we do have that buy-in not only from the means we have but from the statements many countries have signed on to. we have that security council resolution we initiated and critically we have moving forward established a group of countries and institutions that are going to work together to track this to continue to make sure we are speaking with one voice and acting in unison. there are countries that may need outliers inis this effort. some of them have been referenced to include china, russia, pakistan and that's something we are being vigilant about as well. >> i know the time is up, but i think a number of the countries at least pakistan have an

interest in preventing chaos and civil war in afghanistan and we ask them to release prisoners that they hadey locked up, talin prisoners. so obviously we have to keep an eye on the isi but let's all work together to achieve the goal of a stable afghanistan that protects the rights of its people. >> mr. secretary, thank you for being here. president biden and the biden administration have presided over the worst foreign-policy catastrophe in a generation. americans across the nation are horrified. our servicemen and women are angry, disillusioned and frustrated. our enemies g across the globe e emboldened which makes the world more dangerous today for our

allies. ever since the disaster began unfolding in afghanistan, we've seen the biden administration making political excuses. we've seen democrats on the committee explaining at great length how everything that happened in afghanistan is trump's fault. it's all trump's fault. mr. sec., joe biden is the president of the united states, harris is the vice president, you are the united states secretary of state. just like jimmy carter owns the disaster of the iran hostage crisis, you own this. the biden administration caused this disaster. it was caused by two things. number one, ideological naïveté and extremism repeatedly in this hearing and also on multiple conference calls over the last

month. you keep saying things like the step of the taliban need to take to be welcomed into the community of civilized nations. mr. sec., they don'the want to e welcomed into the community of civilized nations. they are terrorists who want to murder us. thisis administration doesn't understand that. joe biden doesn't understand that. but sadly, that ideological extremism was combined with manifested comments. there were four decisions this administration made that were utterly indefensible. number one, abandoning the bagram airfield giving it to the taliban. that's a decision that 100 years from now will be studied at war colleges as a colossal strategic mistake giving up to secure airfields necessitating an evacuation from a dense urban environment, a commercial

airport which led tragically to the suicide bombings and murders that killed 13 american servicemen and women. had we been evacuating with a secure perimeter, the odds are quite high that attack either wouldn't have happened or if it would have happened they would have been far less severe in its consequences. second, giving the taliban a list of americans and afghans we wanted out. third, the decision to leave americans behind. hundreds perhaps more, perhaps thousands, thousands of green card holders, tens of thousands of afghans who assisted the u.s. military, the biden administration abandoned and left them behind and forth, leaving billions of dollars of american military equipment that the taliban will now use to threaten our lives.

earlier in the hearing you said about the equipment, quote, none of it poses a strategic threat to us or their neighbors. that doesn't pass the test when you are looking at the taliban potentially having 64,000 machine guns, 33 black hawk helicopters, 16,000 nightvision goggles we will see american blood spilled because of these colossal mistakes. now, abandoning bagram airbase wasn't your call. it was the pentagon and the imwhite house ultimately. but i want to ask you flat out, did the state department give the taliban and a list or multiple lists of americans and/or afghans that we wanted out? >> those reports and the idea that we would do anything to endanger our citizens or anyone else at a time that we are trying to save their lives is flat out wrong.

>> yes or no -- >> letn. me be clear if i may, please. thankor you. in limited instances where we to get a bus or a group of people through a checkpoint, we gave them to the people at the checkpoint to demonstrate -- >> how many were on the list you gave? >> doesn't matter. >> some order of magnitude. >> and a handful of situations. >> is it your testimony it wasn't hundreds. did you give them thousands? >> no we did not. >> hundreds? >> i'm not going to put a number on it. >> it's to discover how many names and how many individuals you gave the name to that had been targeted for torture or murder. >> by definition, these were in limited instancesni with a bus r group of people to get them through a checkpoint. they got through the checkpoint. >> so not only did you fail to

evacuate americans and green card holders who were there, but you also brought in tens of thousands of afghans who had an adequate vetting bringing many of them to the united states and one of the things that has done is brought in a humanitarian crisis to america. child, marriage and domestic abuse are widespread in afghanistan according to the world health organization more than half of the women in afghanistan are married as child brides and 90% of women are subject to domestic abuse. 90%. on august 207th according to public reports, you distributed internal documentation highlighting numerous instances and intake centers of sexual abuse in which much older grown afghan males appear with children, young children claiming they were there brides, claiming they were

their wives and the document said the state department urgently requested guidance. that was your word, urgently subsequently the department of homeland security said that it showed the desperation of families that they were willing to give little girls to grown men to be subject to sexual abuse and child lives. my question as follows did you receive that urgentt guidance? how many children had been subject to sexual abuse and what have you done to rescue young children from illegal and abusivee relationships afterth being brought to america by the state department? >> across the entire government, everyone involved in the evacuation effort whether it's not a transit point in one of the countries we negotiated with, whether it's here in the united states at the dallas or philadelphia or the military bases, we have all of our officers at extreme vigilance to

look for and deal with any cases or concerns. >> the urgent guidance -- >> i don't know the specifici guidance you are referring to. i'm happy to look at it. >> is there not urgency? >> absolutely. we could detect and deal with the cases and to my knowledge there've been a limited number where we have separated people because we were concerned that they were. the cases i'm aware of, a handful. >> senator, you have the last word. >> thank you, mr. chair and ranking member risch. thank you for the time you've spent with us today. it's an important hearing and there will be many more. i'm going to a second one in about two hours and i expect over the course of the next week -- i'm going to just speak from the heartt to kind of set out what i'm thinking at a very

important moment, a complicated moment. i'm the father of a marine. i come from a state that is very, very heavily affected by the wars of the last 20 years. one of the states that was attacked on 9/11. the weeks of august and early september this is basically what i've done. i've watched afghanistan on television, talked to active duty and veterans, i've talked to you and other colleagues. i visited the pentagon for the pentagon employees commemoration of the 9/11 attacks. i went to arlington on line 11 to go to the fire station where the relief effort was spearheaded. i've also gone to fortt lee as you have, to see the incredible work that's being done to help afghans that stood with us integrate into american life. i've been to the air force center to see the families that traveled halfway around the world is still traumatized and

looking forward to a chapter where they can be free. and i have a lot of emotions. so let me tell you what they are. they are sadness and anger and pride and relief. sadness. i'm saddened by the unnecessary deaths of the 3,000 or so whoil were killed on 9/11. i'm saddened by the deaths of the more than 7,000 u.s. troops. i'm saddened by the deaths of more than 8,000 american contractors and i doubt that there's been a war in the history of the united states where more contractors died than troops, but this global war on terror has won the such a war. i'm saddened that the deaths of 400,000 innocent civilians in iraq and afghanistan and syria and i'm saddened that those that are now going to have to live under taliban rule and i am particularly saddened for the families of the 13 troops who were killed, to lose a child in any circumstance is horrible but in the h last days of the war. in the last days of the war that

has been declared over and is winding down. i don't know how that wound could ever heal for a parent and get those 13 died to save the lives of about 120,000 people who will have thee chance to lie in a free and better society because of their heroism. i am angry at the terrorist impulse. i was angry about it on 9/11 the urge to destroy with the planes flying into buildings and killing people and indiscriminately young, old, american, other nationalities, no religion, that indiscriminate urge to destroy, to blow up a demolition vest at the airport and kill 13 american troops and hundreds of your own country men and women for what, that angers me. angry after 20 years of american investments in an afghan security force dramatically larger than the television, better equipped that

security force just melted away and failed andnd the one thing i would be critical of you and the administration is the same point as senator romney was making earlier and senator rubio, the motion general millie said. i know that it wasn't the consensus opinion and i know it wasn't the most likely possibility, but the possibility of a collapse wasn't 0% and it wasn't one present. it probably wasn't ten. it's probably based on what we've heard in b the committee d others have, it was always a fairly possibility that had to be grappled with and one of the questions i will get into in the coming weeks is if the administration said nobody could see this coming that probably suggests the continuing see planning for something that was

a possibility should have been. my anger at the collapse of the security force we've got to get into it and decide did we train them wrong. did our equipping them lead to corruption. did we want thanks for afghans that the afghan leadership didn't want for themselves? we had good intentions about what we might have wanted but let's face it we can't get 30% of americans to get a vaccine, we can't get 30% to acknowledge the results of a presidential election. do we really think we can determine what the culture of another country should be? iro am proud of those who served in so many different ways from first responders who ran into the buildings to this generation of americans, many of whom didn't come from military families necessarily, but who volunteered to serve and not just once or twice, but this is

the only generation i believe of the american military that has seen five, six, seven, eight or nine deployments again and again injured, wounded, carrying some invisible scars that will affect the rest of their life. i'm proud of their service. i'm proud of the country and my virginians for what they are doing and welcoming afghans here. the outreach from virginians in my office and our vietnamese community we want to help afghans settle from churches where do we donate, how to be give through settlement agencies. when i visited fort lee to hear that afghans express their appreciation to the united states and even in the midst of their drama and anxiety about the next chapter, to be excited about the opportunity to live in a place not under taliban rule and have an opportunity for better lives for their children i am proud even amidst all the challenge that that is the way

they look at us. and i'm proud of the military. this mission is the most important mission to undertake but the last thing and if you might indulge me because i may go another 30 seconds passed. i'm relieved. no one has said this yet. i'm relieved that a child born today isn't born into a nationot at war. some will challenge my characterization because the world is a dangerous place and american troops are deployed all over the world and there's risks and threats, but we have been a nation in permanent war for 20 years. we were never supposed to be that nation, never. i heard a college student at the george washington state recently i know nothing of war because with the all volunteer army she doesn't have to but all i know is war. all i know is war.

president biden had the courage to say this nation is not a nation that should be permanently at war. it's going to take a while for people to wrap their head around the notion that though there are serious threats for us everywhere, we are not a nation now that is at war, ground wars in the middle east. it's going to take people a while to get used to it. some will resist it and want to say we've got to be on the front edge and on permanent war footing at all moments from now into infinity. but id. am relieved that for the first time in 20 years, children being born in the country today are not being born into a nation at war and i will yield back mr. >> let me move into a record statement to exile the leaders and human rights defenders. the united states to continue to support women's groups across

afghanistan and central drivers ofgh change. mr. secretary, thank you for your testimony. you've been here over three and a half hours. i think the interest every member of was present and had the opportunity to ask questions and you give substantive answers. i will close by saying while the focus today has been the present administrationti decisions, this is going back 20 years and as someone who sat here as a staff director of the committee and someone that was at the nsc and an assistant deputy secretary and now the secretary i think you might join me in saying that over the last 20 years in different times congress has been misled. assessments were overly rosy to say the least and if we are not to repeatt the past, we need to learn from it and that is what the committee's ultimate pursuit

will be. the record of this hearing will remain open until the close of business on thursday and with the thanks and respect for your participation, the hearing is adjournedd thank you. >> [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]island

monica mcwilliams who served as one of the signatories on the 1998 agreement.