Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King
Click HERE to watch Senator King’s part the hearing and HERE to download broadcast-quality video
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Angus King (I-Maine), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today questioned academics and experts on their assessments of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. During his questioning, Senator King questioned the witnesses on the Doha agreement’s role in causing the “beginning of the collapse of the Afghan government,” and argued that a lack of understanding of other cultures is one of the “fundamental errors” of American foreign policy. In response to Senator King’s questioning, Dr. Vali Nasr – Professor of Middle East Studies and International Affairs at Johns Hopkins and former Senior Advisor to the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan – concurred that the Doha agreement triggered the collapse of the Afghan government and “sent a powerful sign to the region.”
“There are going to be lots of lessons from this episode, and I think one of the biggest ones is one that we keep not learning, and that is that we don’t understand other cultures,” said Senator King. “Mr. Nasr, I think you started your testimony talking about how we think everybody thinks like us, and everybody wants to be a liberal democracy, and everybody wants to have elections, and everybody wants to have a structure, and we don’t understand the ethnic divisions, the sending Tajik troops to Pashtun areas… and this is more of a comment than a question, but it seems to me this is something Americans – we get that wrong. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan – that’s one of the fundamental errors of American foreign policy is thinking and not understanding other cultures.”
“Here’s my question: Mr. Nasr, you testified, the quote was, “Doha ended the war.” And I think that’s really important – that the die was cast. When the administration agreed, number one, they made a deal with the Taliban, excluding the Afghan government entirely. And number two, it was a fixed May 1st, 2021, American troops are going to be out. Our war in Afghanistan was over when that agreement was signed,” continued Senator King. “Now, President Biden could have reversed it. I understand that. But that was the crucial moment, was it not, in terms of the beginning of the collapse of the morale of the Afghan government and the Afghan military? And the only real condition was that there would be negotiations which never occurred and we didn’t enforce as near as I can tell. Is that correct? Wasn’t the Doha Agreement the real end of the war in all practical senses?”
“Yes, Senator, that’s my understanding that when Doha Agreement… First of all, the negotiations already send a very powerful signal to the region that the United States was willing to negotiate with the Taliban directly. And that was obviously very different from our attitudes towards the Taliban for over the past 15 years. And secondly, that we did arrive at an agreement. The agreement was around a cease fire and an exit of the United States from Afghanistan,” responded Mr. Nasr.
+++
Later in his questioning, Senator King pressed Dr. Nasr on if 2,500 American troops would have been enough to stabilize Afghanistan had the U.S. decided to disregard the Doha agreement, a scenario raised in testimony earlier this week.
Senator King: “So let me ask this question: If President Biden had decided in April to abrogate the Doha Agreement, number one, what would have happened with regard to the Taliban’s cease fire with the Americans and, number two, what would have been required in order to return to a situation where the Afghan government could retain some measure of control? In other words, where would we have had to go? I think your testimony, Mr. Nasr, was 2500 troops wasn’t going to do it. Clearly, there would have had to have been an escalation of our presence. Isn’t that correct?”
Dr. Nasr: “Yes, that’s correct. The 2500 troops were only viable at that point in time because there was a cease fire. In fact, the 2500 troops were not permitted for under the Doha Agreement. So in a sense, we would have needed even a force protection plan to just protect those 2500. And then, you know, there could be a military assessment to see how many more troops would have been needed to stabilize the situation and give the Afghan government breathing room. I would say that when the Doha Agreement started, we had multiples of that close to 30000 troops, perhaps more. And we still were not able to stave off the Taliban offensive.”
Senator King, a member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, has been vocal about the need for additional answers on the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. On Tuesday, Senator King pressed U.S. military leaders for their assessments preceding the Afghanistan withdrawal initiated in negotiations between the Trump administration and the Taliban, and the advice they provided President Biden regarding the best ways to keep American troops and citizens safe during August evacuations. In response to Senator King’s questioning, General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, responded that maintaining a U.S. military presence in Afghanistan past the initial August 31st deadline would have required a significant increase in troops and predicted any ensuing effort to clear Kabul of Taliban forces and maintain the status quo would have resulted in “significant amounts” of U.S. military casualties.
Earlier this month, Senator King published an op-ed in TIME urging against a rush to assign blame until all of the facts are clear, and committing to engaging in congressional oversight through hearings such as this. In the piece, Senator King wrote that “the problem, of course, is that layered complexity or waiting for more information doesn’t make for the most compelling television or analysis, but this doesn’t make it any less important that we search for it—for ourselves and for the men and women who served, who deserve clear answers to difficult questions.” In the lead up to the Afghanistan withdrawal, Senator King cosponsored the bipartisan Afghan Allies Protection Act, to help protect the Afghan civilians who risked their lives to support the U.S. mission, and highlighted the need to protect our Afghan partners, while raising awareness and pressure for needed action from the Biden Administration. Additionally, he pressed a top Defense Department nominee in Senate testimony for his commitment to prioritize efforts to bring America’s Afghan partners to safety, and joined a bipartisan group of his colleagues to urge President Joe Biden to streamline the SIV program for Afghan nationals who worked for or on behalf of the United States.