>> officials from the state department and usaid are testifying the house foreign affairs committee. >> kathy manning from north carolina and then we are fortunate that we have joining us today the chairman of the foreign affairs committee of texas. like every american i watched as it is in afghan citizens fell from airplanes, crawled through sewage and through infants over barbed wire fences attempting to escape following the biden administration's surrender to the taliban in august 2021. sadly to me this is the worst foreign policy decision, worst defense decision in the history of the united states. the consequence we see today

with the imitation of slaughter around the world, with that in mind this example of appeasement was a devastating review of the administration's foreign-policy as we know see iranian puppets fully empowered as war criminals mercilessly launch stuff into ukraine. as the chinese communist dictatorship threatens the wonderful and free people of taiwan. biden broke his promise to those who had breast lives in service to america. there is still nearly 200 americans remaining in afghanistan. some being held hostage by the delavan and tens of thousands of afghan partners and their families are living in your. in september 2023 under secretary of state for political affairs victoria newland told this committee that the taliban are not committing reprisal attacks against afghan allies.

sadly, this is sad, we want the president to succeed on behalf of the american people, but sadly what he said was not true. last year they went documented over to hundred health and reprisal killings, experts estimate the true total is 10 times that amount. often family members of those killed by the taliban learn of their loved ones murder through gruesome photos and videos that the taliban sends them. many former afghan terry members living in the united states report receiving images of their spouses, children, siblings and parents and butchered with these photos and videos, the taliban include a warning, come back to afghanistan or we will kill more of your family. that's how they practice a killings is so well-known among the afghan and international community that secretary newland cannot plead agreements

for her comments. her statement can only mean one thing, the ministration is attempting to whitewash the taliban actions in order to make their deadly withdrawal from afghanistan look less disastrous and the taliban less wicked. we know how the ministration attempted to downplay the chaos of the u.s. withdrawal from afghanistan with 13 u.s. service members murdered and they were murdered despite the fact that we had a sniper who had a bomber in his sights, but he could not get the rules of engagement to dispatch the bomber which was holding 13 americans and nearly 300 killed. we are still watching as they rewrite the reputation and help the taliban to gain legitimacy. the united states voted 15 times in 2023 to approve travel

to sanction caliban members. never once voting in opposition to the request with help from the united states, taliban members barred from travel toward the group stopping in russia and china to attend international political accomplices with in the chinese communist party. afghanistan is once again a safe haven for terrorists. reports indicate dozens of men regrouping with some enemies of the taliban furthering the stabilization and sadly making an attack on america and our allies imminent with an attack here in the united states as the fbi has indicated an imminent attack sadly as we had with 9/11 and many attacks here in the united states because of the safe haven of anna stan. this administration the taliban is partnering with the chinese

communist party. just last month the chinese communist party welcomed a master from afghanistan making china the first country to recognize and abbasid are appointed by the taliban. the chinese arty aspirations in afghanistan are so obvious to enslave the country to their initiatives. in october 2023 the taliban traveled to beijing to attend china's foreign where they announced their admission to the china pakistan economic corridor, a staple of the initiative china's investing in afghanistan industries looking to capitalize on afghanistan's oil and rare earth metals and minerals and last year a chinese company developed a $1.5 million deal with the taliban. the administrations complicity to the partnership between the chinese communist party and the

taliban, to the world's most oppressive and evil dictatorships is undeniable. before this administration took office, afghanistan enjoyed relative stability. girls were free to go to school. the afghan economy was stable terrorist did not control the government. i know firsthand the achievements of the american military in the last 20 years where they protective americans deterring terrorism. the national infantry brigade commanded by joe bob livingston was playing across the country and when i would visit them, my fellow cardmembers would say how much they had such great appreciation of their afghan brothers. now those afghan brothers are targets. i also treasure that my youngest son hunter wilson served as an engineer in afghanistan developing a great appreciation for the people of afghanistan. in three years this administration watched as

afghanistan has become one of the world's most repressive countries where women are enslaved, dictators have free reign, children go hungry and our afghan allies are hunted for sport. i look forward to hearing from each of you on your plans to fix the mess, the disaster that is at ministration has created. i refer to kathy manning. >> thank you to truman wilson for calling this important hearing and thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. special representative last and special envoy of mary and mr. ship. thank you for being here for the important work that you do everyday to advance our interests in afghanistan and help the afghan people. since the fall of kabul in august 2021 we have witnessed the tragic consequent is of the taliban takeover of the afghan

people. the disaster that has occurred to the rights of women and children. this reality, i am eager to hear from our witnesses given this reality. i am eager to hear from our witnesses about the approach to afghanistan and how we are facing the challenge of advancing our key u.s. national security and foreign policy priorities in afghanistan without legitimizing or benefiting the taliban. one of the most wrenching tragedies of the taliban's rule has been a devastating impact on the women and girls of anna stan. women who had high ranking positions, who had good productive jobs, who are no longer able to work. girls who are attending school who love learning, who are preparing for the future and are no longer able to get an education.

i remember meeting with a group of these women before the taliban takeover. we asked them if they were trying to get out of the country. they told us no. they wanted to stay and fight for the soul of their country. i admired their courage and their determination, but i hate to think about what their lives are like today. since taking power in 2021, the taliban had introduced repressive controls on women and girls that restrict their movement and dress them up or hit them from going outside to public places and limit their education beyond the sixth grade level. the taliban have placed restrictions on women's opportunities to work including banning afghan women from working for the u.n. or ngos. in response to the taliban's edict, a significant number of ngos paused operations and only

resumed activities in certain areas where female staff had been allowed to operate. we must redouble efforts to reverse the telegrams draconian edicts and preserve a future for afghan women and girls. afghanistan has also faced a severe economic attraction and it has exacerbated the country's humanitarian crisis. despite successful international efforts last winter to serve food and other assistance to the country to save off famine, afghanistan continues to experience high rates of hunger and nutrition. the un's afghanistan humanitarian needs and response plan estimates that in 2024 15.8 million people will experience crisis and emergency levels of food insecurity and an estimated 23.7 million

people more than half of afghanistan's population are projected to require humanitarian assistance. facing reduced international aid contributions, many afghans remain in need of basic lifesaving services and we must not abandon them. as the single largest humanitarian aid donor in afghanistan, the united states must continue to support the afghan people with desperately needed humanitarian assistance, so long as we have mechanisms in place to ensure that none of this eight and really benefits the taliban. i hope to hear from our witnesses about the impact of our assistance on the afghan people and how we can ensure he was assistance goes directly to trusted partners, not the taliban and we must continue to engage with all is necessary and to help secure the release

and return of wrongful detainees, advance human rights and economic opportunity and ensure that afghanistan will never again be used as a base to plan attacks against the u.s. or our allies. i applaud the administrations diplomatic efforts that have resulted in continued nonrecognition of the taliban as a legitimate government of afghanistan and other efforts on human rights, counter narcotics and counterterrorism. i would like to hear more from our witnesses about some of the serious challenges they face and the ways congress can help with these important objectives. finally we must not abandon our afghan allies who fought alongside american troops, served with our diplomats for more than 20 years. that is why we have welcomed more than 130,000 cans to the united states since august of

2021 and we must continue working to provide these resources to the program and help settle more refugees. congress should pass the afghan adjustment act and ensure that adequate visas are allocated to the siv programs. afghans face a brutal reality under the rule of the taliban. i hope that this hearing and our collective efforts show that we have not and will never forget them. we must provide vital humanitarian assistance, increase our diplomatic efforts and continue working to help advance our interests and improve the well-being and security of the afghan people. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you very much kathy manning. your statement indicated bipartisan, our hopes to the people of afghanistan and we want to work together and work with the administration.

we are really grateful that we now recognize the chairman of the committee for an opening statement and i particularly appreciate chairman makes passion for exposing the threats to the chinese communist party dictatorship. >> thank you. i appreciate your leadership and holding this hearing as well. i request consent to have a statement from david kramer, executive director of the george w. bush presidential center and the record >> thank you. following the u.s. withdrawal, afghanistan is no better off today than when that united dates first entered. after 20 years of treasure, any progress made has been a race. this administration is a deadly and chaotic and draw with was conceived from the start. there were no plans to ensure peace or to support the people. under the administration's failed policies, afghanistan

continues to deteriorate. the taliban are terrorists even though they want us to take them off the list. afghanistan continues to deteriorate everyday. contrary to what many in this administration think, they are no moderate taliban members. it appears the ministration believes that befriending the taliban that they can influence their behavior, yet the telegrams actions has proved they cannot. today afghan women and girls are worse off at any point since the u.s. withdrawal. a 20-year-old who never lived under that dark cloud, that dark veil, they are barred from public places, they are not allowed to travel outside of their homes without a male chaperone and afghanistan is the only country in the world where girls are banned from receiving an education about the six grade level. taliban funding, equipping and

providing safe haven to terrorist groups including al qaeda, the $7 billion in military equipment left behind during the withdrawal is sold by the taliban and used by terror groups and other american adversaries around the world. the leader of al qaeda was living in downtown kabul under the protection of the leader of the network who is now the telegrams minister of the interior or in other words the administer of security is now the network leader who harbored the number two deputy. you cannot make this up the connection is real and you can't change the truth. facts are stubborn things. currently 6 million americans are held captive by the taliban. there are more americans

detained by the taliban right now than at any point in the last two years and one of those americans is ryan corbin whose wife testified before this committee last november. he has been captive in afghanistan since august 2020 to. right now the taliban is hunting down our afghan allies partners using our biometrics door-to-door, checking their fingerprints. they tortured them, killed them with the same weapons that this administration left behind for their use to murder now the taliban are benefiting more than ever from u.s. taxpayer dollars with a steal from ngos to enrich their fighters and solidified their power. the inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction, more commonly known as cigar testified to the committee in november of last year that the taliban is stealing and benefiting from humanitarian

aid. they are demanding payoffs from ngos. they will not hire women. they are diverting eight favorable to beneficiaries and fighters. they are creating fake ngos in order to receive humanitarian aid. they are embedding taliban intelligence officials within u.n. agencies. obviously by failing to treat the taliban as a threat they are, this administration does not disengage the activity and said they have emboldened them this administration has repeatedly voted at the u.n. to grant travel ban waivers to sanction taliban members work in all the while the administration is hiding from accountability. cigar also testified at the state department is the least cooperative they have ever engaged with since the establishment of their off this into thousand eight. that is quite a state. according to cigar the state department has failed to

respond to at least 30 outstanding requests for information some of those have been pending for over a year. this is simply unacceptable it is time for the administration to evaluate their policy priorities, which have clearly achieved so little in afghanistan. they need to focus on developing a strategy that will ensure the u.s. is not supporting the taliban but rather innocent afghans. anything less and the failure of american leadership, we went to help the people of afghanistan, half of them are at the poverty level and starting, but we don't want to fund the taliban either. it is the job of this committee to provide oversight to ensure, and cigar, to ensure this does not happen in the future. let me say with respect to the chairman's words, the saddest thing is the women left behind under the veil, but also the

fact that guess who is in afghanistan today? china. they are exploiting the rarest minerals into would not be surprised if one day we woke up and guess who is going to take over the base that was a crown jewel of our capability for that region that we turned over to the taliban. i would not be surprised if one day we woke up, we find the ccp operating that precious jewel that we had in afghanistan. at that i yield back. >> thank you. we now proceed and want to welcome our witnesses today. thomas west, special representative for afghanistan and secretary of the bureau in central asian affairs at the state department. we also have ms. amiri u.s. special envoy for afghan women and girls and human rights of the state department. finally we have honorable

michael sheppard, the assistant administrator of the bureau for asia for the united states international development. i want to thank you for being here today. your full statements will be made for the record and i will ask each of you keep your remarks to five minutes in order to allow time for members to ask westerns. i now recognize mr. west for his opening statement. >> chairman wilson, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to discuss the biden/harris administrations afghanistan policy. i would like to acknowledge the many americans who served and sacrificed in afghanistan since 2001 including members of this committee. almost 800,000 people deployed to afghanistan over the course of our 20 year commitment. over 2400 american servicemembers died in combat and noncombat causes in afghanistan many thousands of diplomats and other civilians and contractors also served and some paid the ultimate

sacrifice. in the two years since the united states and allies completed our military withdraw from in a stand with the biden administration policy is focused on protecting american interest and came to support the afghan people. in my remarks i will focus on where we stand in terms of our national interest, enormous challenges that afghans face today and the path ahead. our most chemical interest will ensure it never again becomes a launching pad for terrorist attacks against the united states or our allies. we have reorganized our antiterrorism capabilities to monitor and prevent the re- emergence of threats from afghanistan. our greatest ability is pakistan at the low point since the group relocated in 1996. al qaeda's capability as a result of successful counterterrorism action by the united states and its allies over 20 years.

the challenging was a violation of their security commitments. since then we assess the taliban have undertaken efforts to fulfill their security commitments with regard to al qaeda. the terrorist group's capabilities and intent concern us the most in afghanistan, the islamic state province. they harbor clear intent to launch external attacks and we monitor their capabilities and planning vigilantly. u.s. citizens are currently being wrongfully detained by the taliban and we are working to secure their release. during my time a special sonata for afghanistan and with the help of colleagues such as special presidential envoy roger carson, we have successfully returned several u.s. citizens to their families. we remain in close contact with families of u.s. citizens held by the taliban securing the release of these americans is among the administration's highest priorities and any engagement with her present

incentives. the humanitarian and economic crises in anniston are staggering in scope and addressing afghans urgent needs is a policy priority. with thanks to congress for its support, the u.s. has been the leading provider of humanitarian assistance to units and contributing more than 2 billion since august 2021. that assistance has reached millions and helped to improve food security and address urgent needs after natural disasters. all u.s. assistance is channeled through human bodies, international institutions and international and local ngos, not the taliban. my colleague can speak to our rigorous oversight mechanisms in greater detail. >> as we seek to address the urgent needs of all and we are reminded daily that nowhere in the world are women and girls more repressed than in afghanistan. this is the result of reprehensible taliban policies. our policy hybridizes the centrality of respect for human rights and particularly women and girls rights for

prosperity. we have emphasized the taliban that the normalization they seek is unreachable without a radical shift in their human rights conduct, in particular their treatment of half of the population. that is why the secretary appointed my colleague a special envoy for afghan women, girls and human rights. we continue to enable and support the resettlement of afghans who worked alongside us during our 20 year presence of the country. this effort is led by the office of the coordinator or at and relocation efforts at the state department and it is one that congress has strongly supported. we are grateful for it. across these priorities we have built consensus within the international community regarding our collective interest and any changes in tone and context. with support the resolution 2721 and recommendation of u.n. special coordinator for the appointment of a u.n. envoy to afghanistan. such an envoy should develop a

road map that outlines taliban delivery on international priorities and return for mobilization. thank you for your time today. i welcome questions. >> thank you. now we recognize mr. amiri for her opening statement. >> chairman wilson, ranking member distinguished committee members, thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the devastating human rights situation in afghanistan. particularly the extreme restrictions against afghan women and girls and for your sustained bipartisan support. i will be summarizing my original statements. when i assumed the position of special envoy can women and human rights in january 2020 to, i knew it would be a difficult undertaking and that despite the taliban's rhetoric promising to respect the rights of all afghans, the struggle to ensure respect for human rights, particularly for the

rights of women and girls was an uphill battle. unfortunately that assessment has proven devastatingly true. in the last two years the human rights situation in afghanistan has severely deteriorated. members of ethnic and religious minority communities, are exposed to threats and violence. media freedom has been curtailed and mobile groups in a state of peril. restrictions against women and girls have been the most extreme. the taliban has systemically targeted afghan women and girls with more than 50 discriminatory units at the national level and many more at the subnational level. they have attempted to erase afghan women and girls from society, revoking access to education beyond the primary level, limiting women's employment and depriving them of the opportunity to put food

on the table. they restrict freedom of movement for women and effectively remove them from public spaces. those who have raised their voices have faced harassment and violence at the hands of the taliban. given the taliban's track record and extreme ideology, the road ahead continues to look extremely challenging, yet even as we acknowledge the difficulty, we must remain resolute and support afghan women and girls if we do not continue to stand up for the rights of afghan women, we put in peril women's rights everywhere. to address these challenges, my work is on five key areas first we support human rights and afghan men with our partners and allies and in our dialogue with the taliban. we underscore that the united states will not support steps with the taliban unless there

is a profound and meaningful shift towards respecting the rights of all afghans, particularly women and girls. we also make it clear to the taliban that human rights are central to u.s. policy with afghanistan and will not be de- prioritized or siloed. second, we ensure that the afghan women and girls is not an effort led by the western countries, but it is a global effort championed the region, particularly muslim majority countries. we recognize including the voices afghan women themselves and injecting their expertise and perspectives into u.s. and international policymaking. we established the mechanism and we have helped approximately 200 consultations with afghan women in society including high-level meetings

with u.s. and international leaders. in cording with our interagency and department partners, we mobilize resources to advance education and economic resilience for women and girls including virtual education programs and job skills training for afghan women and girls inside and outside. to that end my office lunch alliance for economic resilience and have efforts underway to support millions of f in women with access to virtual education opportunities and employment support. we support protection and accountability measures your sustained work with you and human rights instruments as well as international human rights organizations. i am grateful to the opportunity to speak with you on these important matters and i look over it to continue to engage in congress as we support afghans, particularly

women and girls and their violent struggle for their rights. we are under no illusions about the challenges ahead. we must at least master the determination. supporting human rights, particularly the rights of women and girls offers a prospect for secure and stable afghanistan at peace with itself and its neighbors. what we invest in today will determine the future. thank you. >> thank you. i now recognize esther sheppard for his opening statement. >> chairman wilson, chairman paul, members of the committee. hank you for inviting me to testify today on the efforts to deliver basic needs and humanitarian assistance to the most vulnerable people in afghanistan. consistent with objectives, our efforts over the past two years to prevent an economic collapse have deferred a scam and and

ensures there are services to the afghan people. usaid has developed a model that demonstrates our commitment to the people of afghanistan and u.s. values and stands in contrast to the taliban's methods cannot be further from our own especially when it comes to the rights of women and girls. we believe that not only do we have a moral obligation to support the people of afghanistan, but it is in our interest to do so and to ensure that afghanistan's ongoing economic crises do not worsen and we are clear about the challenging environment in which we operate. the taliban take over overrated decades of goals and increased economic insecurity and ministries services. half the country's population lives and property and women and girls face increased

marginalization. to have an impact on the environment we have a highly adaptive and flexible framework to respond aligning with the u.s. government foreign policy priorities we engaged with a wide range of partners to support basic needs in education, health, livelihoods and agriculture into work where we can to give people a voice to independent india and to support honorable populations, especially afghan women and girls. for example consistent with humanitarian principles we ensure that women are involved throughout the assistance, including delivering and receiving assistance. where this cannot be done our partners often voluntarily suspend operations until a solution is found. fortunately they have managed to find workarounds to support them in and girls in a in assam. in the past two years we have earned to provide sector employment for more than 7000 women in the saffron industries.

we have helped 16,000 farmers grow crops such as fruits and veggies with private sector support to deliver those crops to market. we have incorporated afghan health workers including midwives and women doctors and our science in math lessons on youtube has been downloaded more than 13,000 times so far. since the taliban take over in august 2021 the united states has provided to billion dollars in humanitarian assistance to support the afghan people amid the country's ongoing humanitarian crisis including more than 1.4 billion from usaid that focuses on food assistance, health and nutritional services for communities with greatest need. this communitarian system complements more than 700 and additional basic needs assistance. because we are clear eyed about the up routing environment in afghanistan and about talent and intent we remain extremely vigilant against attempts to interfere with the assistance delivering.

we take it sturdy as a steward of u.s. taxpayer dollars extremely seriously. we hold implementing partners to the highest standards to ensure that funds are used wisely effectively and further intended purposes. we cooperate with all oversight bodies including congress, the inspector general and special inspector general for afghanistan to protect against fraud, waste, and abuse. he owned our standard controls insurance is common to all programs. these independent third-party monitoring to provide additional levels of oversight on the ground. we also require partners to have safeguards, risk mitigation systems and reporting procedures in place to ensure that element into military assistance reaches those who are in most need. our partners have reported attempted interference and we make sure that windows attempts

are made we place in due diligence on our programs and that includes temporary suspension of activities and other responses to ensure that we are able to continue to deliver assistance to families. we do not provide assistance to or through taliban authorities. we continually analyze the operational environment to prevent and mitigate fraud diversion and abuse and to ensure that assistance does not reach the taliban. the situation in afghanistan continues to pose serious challenges. we are mindful that when we secure assistance for three months, afghanistan was brought to the bank of famine and the potential for cans to replace u.s. national interests and risks. without our engagement for example the only healthcare and education that women and girls in afghanistan would be allowed to have it be with the taliban. that cause and effect is clear. we remain steadfast in our

support of the people of anniston and our aquatic person providing assistance. we continue to work with congress and this committee and those efforts and appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. i look forward to your advice, counsel and questions. >> thank you. we know as an indication of how important this hearing is, our first questions will indeed be from chairman mccall of the foreign affairs committee. >> let me say first i recognize the challenge. it is almost impossible to put assistance or aid into afghanistan without the taliban taking a cut. they are the de facto operational control along with some factions of al qaeda and i sincerely appreciate how difficult this mission must be, but the special inspector

general from afghanistan before afghanistan testified before this committee that the state department is the least cooperative he has seen in his 12 years. there are 30 outstanding requests from cigar which the state department is refusing to respond to. i have their letter here that is in the record, mr. chairman. some of these are over a year old and half of them are signal document requests which the state department could easily fulfill today. and you commit to this committee and cigar to respond to these 30 outstanding requests this month. >> thank you. i had a chance to sit down with him last week and we talked about continuing cooperation of the state department with cigar. his statements before committee caught us by surprise because they were inconsistent with the october quarterly

report issued noting that the state department is collaborating well with cigar. between august 2021 and today we estimate that roughly 13,000 staff hours have been devoted at the state department. he says their entire job is to focus on cigar, there are elements of other parts of the bureau whose entire job is focused on work with cigar, so it isn't, it is time-consuming and we respect the role that he has and we will continue to work closely with them. as for the specific outstanding requests i wish i had looked at them before this hearing. i would be happy to take a look at them personally. >> i would encourage you to. do your homework on that. i would ask you to respond to that. if you could respond to me with respect to the 30 outstanding

requests, that would be helpful. secondly as you know this committee is investigating dra afghanistan. investigating dra we have, now, the number of transcribed interviews. there are quite a few. some have to do with the agreement itself. i know you were involved with that, mr. west. you were actually deputy. is that correct? >> i was not a part of negotiating. that was the last administration. i started the day after the president was inaugurated. >> we've heard testimony that while there were conditions attached to that agreement, that the president decided to withdrawal those conditions. do you know anything about that? >> i know there was a lot of back-and-forth between the staff at the state department and this committee before this hearing.

i'm hoping we focus today on u.s. policy toward afghanistan following the withdrawal, as is consistent with the testimony. >> do you know whether the conditions set forth in the doha agreement had any bearing on president biden's decision to withdrawal? >> i know there was a lot of back-and-forth between the staff at the state department and this committee before we sat down today. it's really our hope to focus on current u.s. policy in afghanistan, and not the withdrawal. >> this committee will look at oversight as the past policies of the state department, when it came to the withdrawal from afghanistan, which had aggression from china, russia and iran. did you have any discussions with your colleagues about the doha agreement? >> i'm very hopeful that the bulk of this hearing will focus on -- >> -- i'm asking you if you had any discussions -- >> -- i'm happy to answer

question but of course, the doha agreement came up during the first eight months of my time, my former title as the deputy -- >> -- the answer is yes. maybe you could provide to me -- my time is going to expire. the summary of those discussions. we will meet separately on this matter. lastly, did you have any discussions with either jake sullivan or the president of the united states, regarding the doha agreement, pertaining to the taliban? >> no. >> okay. with that, i yield back. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. we now will hear from ranking member, kathy manning. >> thank you to all witnesses for your testimony in your service to our country. after years of progress, i'm appalled that the taliban's

brutal and despicable treatment of women and girls. civil society and media organizations have crumbled, with anyone openly speaking in opposition of the taliban's rule facing serious threats and violence. women and girls are treated like property. unable to work, or even move freely in public without their husbands or male relatives. i was struck by one story of a young woman, a former government employee, who was beaten by her husband in front of her children, and is too afraid to report this violence to the authorities. she said, and i quote, "i have never felt so alone. many times, i have decided to end my life, but i think about the state of my son. deprivations of the right to work and education have severely affected mental problems and created depression. imagine a generation in depression. this generation will be the

mothers of the future, the children of hopeless and depressed people are dangerous for the future of afghanistan." mr. chana marin, i would like to request to enter her full story into the record. >> i admit it without any objection. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am deeply concerned that systemic discrimination against afghan women has led many, like this young woman come into depression. in some cases, even suicide. what are we doing to reverse these oppressive edicts, sidelined hard-liners in the taliban, and avert the most desperate outcomes? >> thank you very much, representative manning. i share your heartbreak over the devastating situation in afghanistan. i have also been speaking with afghan women over the course of the last two years, and have

heard the same heartbreaking stories. the mental health crisis in afghanistan is severe, and it is a context in which afghan women tell me of the desperation they are under, the fact that protection mechanisms that were in place have been stripped from the country, and that they feel that they are under a virtual prison. what we are doing -- first, i want to make it absolutely clear that we condemn the taliban. we have condemned them publicly. we have condemned them privately and we have mobilized the international community to make it very clear to the taliban that as long as they engage in human rights abuses, that they are conducting against the afghan population and women, there will be no movement forward, and that they will continue to be a pariah of the international community. this is something we have made

clear to the taliban, but in addition to diplomatic work, we are also walk -- working on concrete efforts with the afghan women's economic resilience initiative. one of the areas we are looking at is mental health support, and my colleague at usaid can also speak to some of that that they are undertaking in that regard. >> certainly. thank you for the question. representative manning, it's an extraordinarily important part of the focus of our work to seek to address the needs of afghan women and girls, during what is an extraordinarily challenging and dispiriting era of afghanistan. we have sought to work creatively where we can, and where we see openings and opportunity to be able to meet basic needs and to address livelihoods. and, other humanitarian needs. we have managed, for example,

the past couple of years, to create more than 7000 jobs for women in the cashmere, carpet, and saffron industries, working through private sector partners. we have managed to support 15,000 women farmers, to grow strategic crops, fruits and vegetables, and get them to market. as rina amiri has commented on, we have supported distance learning programs , providing some access to education for afghan girls. in the healthcare industry, particularly, training women doctors and midwives to be able to meet needs as well. it it is challenging. it's not easy. it requires all of our creativity and all of the creativity of our partners. we are doing our level best to

make sure that even under the circumstances, afghan women and girls are not left behind. >> thank you. i have 20 more questions, but my time is expiring, so i would yield back. >> thank you very much, ranking member manning. i look forward to your questions being submitted at a later time, which is part of our rules that we will be very happy to provide. again, as we proceed, i now recognize myself, and in my opening statement, i mentioned how grateful i was that i have the opportunity to have the service of the army national guard, led by bob livingston, with my youngest son, taylor wilson, as an engineer in afghanistan, and i saw the country vol. the first time i went there it was total rubble. there was no traffic, just one lane of traffic with rubble everywhere. the consequence of the soviet

murderous occupation, which achieved nothing, except mass slaughter of the people of afghanistan. with that, i saw a hopeful society developing. ms. amiri, it was so inspiring to see little girls freely walking to school. little guys walking along with baseball caps to school. it was really inspiring. then, mr. schiffer, one of the most inspiring things i saw in a very remote area of the country, was a sign directing where a school was located. it was a rusty sign. it had a hand clasp of the american and afghan flags together. if people didn't appreciate it, as i mentioned, it was rusty. they had every opportunity to take it down, but there was a lot of pride, and that's why, to me, the surrender is more horrific, because i saw what

our military and allies did in korea. 40 or 50 different countries, meeting with troops from bulgaria. over and over again, our british allies. so much was done to be abandoned. that's why, sadly, to me, on august 26, 2021, the president made a really sad speech, explaining america's surrender, and he claimed that military leaders supported his decision, and he added a phrase, and he had letters. "that night, i respectfully sent a letter to the president, requesting copies of the letter. on numerous occasions, and again today, i will be sending a letter asking for copies of the letters, because we've never received a response. " that is an insult to our military, military families, and to the american people.

it just needs to be answered. this is so important. it's inexcusable, with the progress that americans made, to abandon it, based on letters that have never been revealed. with that, mr. west, following the surrender to the taliban in afghanistan, there were reports that indicated rapid resurgence of terrorist groups operating in the safe haven of afghanistan. do you have an assessment of the number of recognized terrorist organizations, and offshoot groups? we know they change their names every day, so please, how many different groups are there? there are some who are taliban supporters, and some not. they all have a goal. it is death to america. what are we doing? >> mr. chairman, the group we worked most with was i 6k, the

isis offshoot. just leading up to the fall of the republic, the taliban, unbeknownst to them, they opened up some jail cells and allowed some 1800 isis k fighters released. they rejoined ranks, and we saw throughout much of 2022, devastating attacks against afghanistan civilians and the shia population. that is a group that harbors clear intent to attack foreign countries. i think you probably saw that isis k claimed responsibility for the attack that took place in iran. we have no reason to doubt that claim of responsibility. they have launched attacks against too a stand and is pakistan, and they have ambition to strike the united states and the west as well, so we worry about that group.

when it comes to al qaeda, they are at their most operational capability since 1996. we believe they have a very low operational capability. tdp, this group that is based in afghanistan, but really, is seeing an uptick in attacks on pakistani forces, i'm very worried about that group. it's something i spoke about with pakistani leaders when i visited last month. for regional stability, and for our own interests and pakistan's stability, we should help for concerted efforts to eliminate that group outside of afghanistan. >> indeed, pakistan. i have been to as llama bod. pakistan has been, over the years, a country we have worked with closely. i'm concerned about al qaeda itself, and that is the

perpetrators of mass murder, the world trade center, pennsylvania, the pen again. there are two provincial governors, and several ministry of defense personnel. is it true that al qaeda has that position in the government? >> i'm not aware of that. >> please look into that. those are reports we've got. i'm equally concerned about how bizarre this is. the afghan central bank of directors included three taliban members sanctioned by the united nations, including the director and deputy director. how can we count on that being transferred to the people, being diverted to support a dictatorial regime? >> it's accurate that there are pieces of the leadership of the central bank that are sanctioned taliban members. that is why, among many other reasons, we think it would be

deeply irresponsible to seek to recapitalize the afghan central bank. that is why we do not work through the taliban in the delivery of aid. >> it's bipartisan. we want you to succeed, but the thought of the different aid programs going to a dictatorial regime, authoritarian regime, every effort should be made. we are very fortunate, as i mentioned, bipartisan. we are joined by the ranking members of the full committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you. from the great state of south carolina. >> here here. >> thank you, chairman, again, for convening this very important hearing. i'm glad that this committee will give us the opportunity to

discuss afghanistan policy with members of the administration, with policies and ample mentation. it's really important. let me start off by thanking the witnesses for their appearances. and, for the work you have done on this matter, on behalf of the american people. when i look at what you do on a regular basis, to me, often times, the type of policy work you do is always underappreciated. i want to take this opportunity to really thank you for your work. and, what you do on a regular basis. lastly, and i have stated in our full committee hearing, last november, i believe it was. i, clearly, think where we are in a bipartisan matter, are not

under any illusions about who or what the taliban is. i think that is something that we are all very clear on. but, i also believe that we have to be very strategic about how we pursue our goals in a uniquely challenging environment , that kind of environment we are confronted with. and, how we engage where it serves our interests and helps the people of afghanistan, and our foreign policy of the united states of america. what i'm trying to do, and i want to make sure that i'm clear , that i am especially concerned about the impact of the taliban's control over afghanistan, particularly, on women and girls of that country. that is something that is very,

very important. i know, and i have been an advocate for a review and comprehensive review, about the entire 20 year period we were in afghanistan, under each and every administration, from the obama administration through the trump administration, and of course, the biden administration. but, i know that during the trump administration, when the doha agreement was made , administration officials at that time suggested to congress that the caliban's view on women and girls has changed. clearly, it has not. there have been some small spaces created for women and girls in afghanistan. the taliban has curtailed their freedom. i don't think there is any question.

i guess the question i have for any of you is, what drives the taliban leadership to continue to place these limitations on the rights of women and girls in afghanistan? within those constructs, where do you see the potential opportunities to advance the rights of women and girls in the country? >> thank you, representative meeks. and, thank you for putting this situation of women and girls in the spotlight. it is the worst situation in the world for there is no country in the world that deprives girls of education beyond the secondary level. it's a situation that we have called attention to, and all of our public statements, at every level of our leadership -- in terms of what drives the

taliban, the taliban would like to make the claim this is based on religious grounds or cultural grounds. those have been countered by muslim majority countries how you have said this is contrary to the practice of any islamic country. this has also been countered by the afghan population. they have roundly condemned the practices of the taliban, and men and women, tribal communities, elders, families, fathers have said they want their daughters educated, and they want them to be able to have the opportunity to work. afghanistan is a country that is driven more by pragmatism than by ideology, and certainly, not the extreme ideology of the taliban. the ways that we support afghan women and girls is, first, we amplify the voices of the women themselves. they are their best advocates. they are their strongest advocates. not only do we amplify their

voices through their mechanisms, but we encourage every country that is working in afghanistan to make sure that they include afghan women when they are engaging on the situation in afghanistan. we encourage everyone to tell the taliban publicly and privately, in very empathic therms, that as long as they continue these practices, there will be no movement forward. finally, we believe it is absolutely critical to empower the women themselves, who are going to be, ultimately, the force that will change these policies, because as the taliban can say they are going to ignore the international community, they cannot ignore the afghan people. the people that we have invested in for the last two decades are still the people we need to invest in today. with that, i will turn it to my collie. -- colleague. >> thank you for your answers. we appreciate you.

>> thank you very much, congressman greg meeks. i'm so grateful. we are both proud natives of south carolina, but he has really done well. he represents queens. we are proud of the success of greg meeks. we now proceed to congressman rich mccormick of georgia. >> thank you, mr. chair. as an afghan veteran, i would openly state that i think i would drop that afghanistan was an abject failure, and i am a history teacher. as a student of the game, i think we have dissected that enough, so i will move on to more germane things i'm worried about here that apply to your experiences. according to the january 5th news article, isis was

responsible for the most recent suicide bombing that killed 100 people. we have well-documented instances of how the taliban are treating their female population. reports are that the taliban have offered isis and al qaeda leaders to withdrawal. there are plenty of terrorist bases for training in afghanistan, that we know of. all of that said, in october, we looked at the afghanistan government. it announced its plan to be formerly part of the china belt and wrote initiative. the taliban, according to my information, testified in november that 37 ngos reported they provided a total of $10.1 million in taxes and fees to the taliban. just from us. the problem i have with the way we are running our coordination

with sigar is that, mr. west, when you said, al qaeda is at their lowest capability, which i heard when i first came in. all of the things i just stated are still true. it doesn't diminish the fact they are actually building a presence in contrast with every single thing we are trying to achieve, both in afghanistan and globally with our initiatives. in my opinion. the other thing you said, i think, and i'm not going to paraphrase. you did an excellent job of responding to sigar responses, but i think there is a big difference between a response and being responsive. i want to go over a couple of things that have been presented to me as evidence, and contrary to what you just stated. we have 30 outstanding requests for information by the state that you have yet to fully comply with, which affects the

ability of sigar to accomplish their initiatives. the states rationale for not providing this information seems unreasonable to me, at least. in some cases, blatantly absurd, because it's just a desire to obstruct sigar itself, and it seems to be coming from the state department. i don't understand what that purpose is. why are we not complying with something? literally, unable to get information that is classified. unable to do their jobs. why would we possibly have a reason to obstruct the very agency that we appointed to get to the bottom of the problem? why would we work against ourselves for accountability? it makes no sense to me. i think that when we talk about this frivolous rationale used by the state, just by these delays in responsiveness, they even used the freedom of information act exemption to justify withholding information from the auditor.

that makes no sense to me. i would like your response on that in a second. i'm going to pylon. only a five minutes. have to get this all out. basically, i did not understand why the department has placed restrictions on unclassified information. i don't understand. we have an obviously bad acting actor. we are giving money to bad actors, and the state is, literally, saying, i don't want you to have the response you need or the information you need to do your job. can you respond? >> thank you, these are important questions. first, i will offer an example of the kind of concern we have. we don't want any information about our implementing partners out there in the public domain that will put a target on them. inside afghanistan but >> when you say it lamenting partners, what are you referring to? >> i'm not going to get into specifics about exactly which organizations we rely on to deliver humanitarian aid, but sigar has a job.

we want to be sure that if they want to talk directly to our implementing partners, that they respect the absolute sensitivity of that information, because if they publish it, the taliban can read. they can then target those organizations for their activity. that is one example. as i said to the chairman, i will look into these 30 outstanding requests. it's a fair question. let me turn to my colleague on this question as well. >> certainly, just to add to what special representative west offered, we fully agree with the importance of oversight and accountability for all of our work. we are fully cooperating with sigar. we've had something like 370 engagements with sigar over the past year or so. i will get you the exact number. we have teams here in washington

and with our afghan affairs unit overseas, that are dedicated to producing material in response to all of their questions, and doing so on a production schedule that both we and sigar find workable. there have been times where we had to negotiate out some of the questions, where we have concerns, because the potential risk of the provision of certain information, and we have been able to do that successfully, but sometimes, that has resulted in a process that has been slower than we are satisfied with. certainly, that sigar has been satisfied with. i have met with john sopko several times, had very positive conversations, we are doing our utmost given how

important it is for us to be responsible to the american taxpayer, to make sure we are providing sigar with all of the information it needs , so that it can help us do our job better and help support this committee as well. >> i'm out of time, but i will make the statement that you and sigar have a different opinion of the experience you're having with each other, and i think that is important to note. if the one accountability agency that we have, that represents us, the people, if they are not satisfied, that means we are not satisfied. i hope you will do a better job. >> thank you. we now proceed. >> picking up on what the gentleman from georgia said, i think he is entitled to answers if they can be provided publicly. mr. schiffer, will you give the full subcommittee a classified briefing in answering these questions? >> certainly, i would be happy to talk to the committee.

i can assure you that we have been able to provide -- >> we have several scifs in this building. i'm reclaiming my time. we went to afghanistan to get in lawton. we got him. we would have got him sooner if we hadn't focused too much on iraq. we are prepared to take whatever military action is necessary in afghanistan to prevent it from being a source of a mass casualty attack on the united states. so far, the various forces in afghanistan seem to be more focused on killing each other. we went to afghanistan for a second reason, one we never voted on. that was to seek to remake afghanistan's society. historians will have to tell us whether that was ever possible to do. clearly, we failed to do it. we then had president trump,

who promised the american people that we will get out of what he classified as a forever war. he was clever, and that he gave the promise of the the withdrawal before the election, intending to do the withdrawal after the election, because there is no such thing as an orderly withdrawal under the circumstances. we did not have an orderly withdrawal from saigon. our military told us we would have an early withdrawal and an orderly withdrawal, because they believe that since the afghan army could fight the taliban successfully for 3 to 6 months, that they would, which is absurd, to think that the average grunt in the afghan army is going to lay down his life, while the leaders of the country and those most connected to the united states are trying desperately to leave afghanistan. of course, there was a disorderly withdrawal, and then we had the attacks from the other side saying, we should

have taken our weapons back from the people who wanted to continue holding them, but do it all with no american casualties. so, we left. we now have, and have failed to acknowledge, that we have very limited power, at all. we care more about the afghan people. certainly, the half of the afghan people that are women. we can threatened to cut off aid, but the taliban may not care at all. we could bomb taliban military targets, but i think that is absurd, as the united states is not in the mood to do that. we were told that we would make them a pariah in the international community, but they have little reason to care. and, china and russia, who is certainly part of the international community, will be very happy to do business with the taliban. we have seen our aid interrupted

, or might be interrupted because we know it's being stolen. our aid was being stolen by criminals. we interrupted hundreds, maybe thousands of people -- i'm much more concerned about our aid being stolen by terrorists than by economically driven criminals. we have commented that we should somehow prevent taliban officers from visiting russia and china. gee, i don't know how we are supposed to do that. we would like to believe that the afghan people share our values, and certainly, those afghans we've talked to tend to share our values, but the problem is, over 20 years, and with all of the money that any afghan could ever imagine on one side, and the ideology of the taliban on the other, we lost. we are told that we have a moral obligation to the afghan

people. i think we have a moral obligation to everyone in the entire world, but the idea of taking the most generous country in the world, the country who sent its men and women to die by the thousands to help other countries, has some sort of guilt for its involvement in afghanistan, from which it derives a moral obligation, greater than that of china or norway. i think it's simply wrong. when we went into afghanistan, things were terrible, and they had a civil war, and 90% of afghanistan women under the taliban were as repressed then as they are now. we did not break afghanistan. it was broken when we got there. now, the afghan government is seeing hundreds of thousands, or perhaps, millions of people, deported from pakistan.

it has fought a border skirmish with iran overwater. how does afghanistan get along with its neighbors? >> thank you for that question. the relationship between pakistan and the taliban at the moment, it's not good. the pakistanis are extremely worried, as they have said publicly, about this sharp increase in attacks against their security forces. just in recent days, there have been senior members of the taliban that have visited islamabad and seen senior leadership. i don't have great insight into whether that is a reflection of, perhaps, actions by the taliban to crack down, but this security issue is dominating the taliban's relationship with pakistan, and pakistan's relationship with one of its

neighbors. to the north, i will give you one example. was becca stan. among the difficult issues they have with the taliban is over a particular canal that the taliban are seeking to build in the north that could divert large percentages of the river that supports tends of thousands of people. that is one issue. at the same time, they are generously providing electricity to support the afghan people. even tajikistan. tajikistan itself, within the region, has the most concern about taliban activity inside of afghanistan. on iran, again, the iranians, like every other country in the region, have an embassy. they have a special envoy, and they probably have deep security concerns as well, particular, in the aftermath of this attack.

>> do you fault the taliban for not controlling anti-shiite murderers, who exploded a bomb just a few days ago in iran? >> they probably have concerns . look, i don't want to talk for iran, but any country attacked, i think they would have concerns about their ability of their neighbor to take action, to ensure those attacks don't happen. >> i you back. >> thank you, we now proceed to congressman brian mast of florida. >> the taliban, isis k , do they run afghanistan today? >> i would not say that isis k runs afghanistan today. >> they run a portion of it. they run as a level authority. >> what we are finding with isis k is that they are largely choosing to keep a low

profile, and then, execute attacks in cities, as well is outside of the country. >> the taliban, yes. >> the taliban, i don't want to step into territory around anything to do with recognition. >> the taliban runs it enough that we don't want to give money to the afghan central bank. >> i think the taliban are in control of the afghan central bank, as well as other institutions, yes. >> are you familiar with the name, shami robbie? he's one of the four board members, one of the co-chairs of the afghan fund. 3 1/2 million dollars. who is in charge? >> the process that we followed detailed, consistent with the federal reserve act, we

certified this person, who was put forward -- >> who put him forward? >> the credit representative of afghanistan? >> the accredited representative of afghanistan >> who is that? >> i would be happy to talk to you in it private setting. i have legitimate security concerns. i don't want to speak further but >> you don't want to say who the accredited representative of afghanistan is? just say no. >> i would be happy to speak with you privately. >> enough with the washington, d.c. bs. just say no or yes. was he fired, misrepresenting his credentials, saying he is a doctor when he's not? >> these are allegations that we are not aware of. it would not have changed our determination in the end. >> it would not change her

determination to appoint him as a co-chair? had you known that he was fired from a college for saying he was a doctor and he wasn't? that would not have changed? i really don't have to ask a lot more, because that really goes to the heart of what i was getting at. what's going on at the state department, about the vetting of these individuals. the idea that you would say yes, you were totally aware of what went on with this in -- individual, misrepresenting their credentials, saying they were a member of an honor society. these are allegations. we haven't asked you about all of them. you haven't confirmed all of them. you are saying it would not have changed. that is disturbing to me, number one, but it really goes to another question. you said that you acknowledged the taliban runs afghanistan, in large part, and certainly, controls the central bank.

shavi rami is a member of the national bank. what does that say about the taliban? >> he is not controlled by the taliban. he is an american citizen. he teaches at montgomery college. he's had a decade-long career. >> he's had a decade-long career, and has been fired for misrepresenting his work from the place he had a career in. i don't know the entire history, but i would like to hear more about it from you all, perhaps, in another setting. but, he is a board member of the afghan central bank on one hand. you just acknowledged that is controlled by the taliban. if you want to be a board member there, you have to be in cahoots with the taliban, and we appointed him as part of this entity in switzerland, one of four people that will control three and half million dollars on behalf of the united

states of america, to determine if this goes back to the afghanistan central bank. that seems moronic to me. it seems like an absolute conflict of interest. is he getting paid as a board member of either of those? >> no. >> he doesn't get paid as a board member of the afghan central bank? >> no. he does not get paid as a member of the afghan fund. >> to go on, one more time, do you know, was he fired from washington college? >> i saw the allegations that sigar brought to our attention. we were not aware of them before they were brought to our attention. >> i'm sorry, i'm running out of time. i want to hear from you more. i don't want to just interrupt. for the record, mr. chairman, this letter from sigar is stating that the state responded to many concerns for ongoing audits, however, there is a difference between simply responding to the request and providing fulsome answers to

our questions. that is directly from sigar about the state department's response to them, and how they are being not cooperative. please submit that for the record. >> without objection, and enthusiastically, so honored. >> thank you, mr. chair. >> we are so grateful our newest member, all the way from the republic of rhode island. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman, and thank you to the witnesses. as we know, the conditions in afghanistan have been brutal since the taliban took over in august 2021, and they have only worsened. the dire situation, for over 29 million afghans in need of assistance. we must be unhindered for all aid workers to serve vulnerable populations.

while it is essential humanitarian aid gets to those populations, it does not address the underlying causes of afghanistan's deteriorating situation. the taliban are responsible for the deterioration of the economic and humanitarian situation. it is their responsibility for the recovery of the country and the improvement of their economy, but we must support, whenever possible, in expanding network to ensure people have their basic needs met. private-sector initiatives can grow, and women in power can be foster. i do want to shift note to a topic, i think mr. west, you briefly addressed. the united states must also be a partner in resettling. we did so much for our effort. this is something i saw firsthand with operations. we should welcome those who want to be integrated into our

society as friends, neighbors and business owners, who can contribute to our economy and enrich public life. a report from my university last year highlighted how some of the refugees, who resettled in rhode island, experienced post traumatic stress following the exit out of kabul. also, how they had skills, when combined with command of english can be transferable to our local economy. in providence, i have seen this directly with the refugees training center. it's every settlement organization that has been really impactful, just in my neighborhood. a gourmet granola company founded with the mission to help refugees, especially the most vulnerable. mr. west, at a high level, can you discuss the current assistance provided to help resettle refugees, via the

efforts of the office of the coordinator of relocation efforts? >> thank you very much for that question. as you've said, we have an office led by my colleague at the state department, exclusively focused on relocations and resettlement. they work very closely with prm, another piece of the state department. it is prm that deals with resettlement agencies, and we would be glad to arrange for professionals from prm to come and talk specifically about assistance going to refugees resettling in this country. top line, though, the effort to help and enable the relocation and resettlement of those who served alongside us over 20 years, that is a personal priority of secretary blinken. it is one that does bleed into my work on occasions, with afghans, as well as with the taliban, and it's one that will

continue. >> one of the question. could you briefly discuss the travel sanctions that are currently in place on taliban leadership, and how the un security council is reviewing waivers, specifically? tell me a little bit about why it's in our interest to work within that framework. >> if we rewind to say, july of 2022, there had been in place for years, what is called a travel ban waiver. that meant there were about 14 senior taliban leaders on that list, who could travel anywhere they wanted, and the countries helping them didn't have to ask anybody for permission. as a result, really, more than anything, of the taliban's reprehensible decision to bar women from attending secondary school, and a refusal to reverse that decision from march of 2022, the un security council made a decision to take

that waiver away. from august of 2022 onward, what we've seen is quite effective and dramatic curtailment of senior leader travel since then. before that period from the taliban take over to august of 2022, it was a whole lot of travel by senior leaders. i think the travel ban has been quite effective at keeping taliban leaders in afghanistan. there have been instances, as the chairman himself noted in his opening remarks, when a country that wants to engage with a taliban leader, they need to come to the security council. they need to put it in writing, this is the reason this person is coming to our country. this is how long this person will stay, and then the security council gets time to review that request. all 15 members, not just the united states. now, it's a tough call, but the reason we haven't vetoed is

because we don't want to invite a veto by one of our adversaries when we need to see a member of the taliban leadership around a important issue, be it terrorism, relocation related, human rights related. a hostage issue that we need to engage upon. again, i would return to saying the travel ban has been effective at dramatically reducing travel by senior leaders, but these requests do come when countries want to engage with the leader. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. we now proceed to congressman jim baird of indiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think our witnesses for being here today. secretary west, i want to focus on you first. in march of 2023, chairman

mccaul requested several reports related to assistance in afghanistan, and this past sunday, sigar released their findings on the three have billion dollars in the afghan fund, and they found these four concerns. so, the first one is, over a year since creation, the fund has made no disbursements for activities intended to benefit the afghan people. the treasury and the state are not currently willing to support the return of these funds to the afghan central bank. my question is, what is state department strategy here, and is there a disbursement date, and when was the last time the state talked to the swiss partner about this fund? >> thank you very much. the activities in the afghan fund are very important. i appreciate the question. on the board of trustees for

the afghan fund, it is four individuals. the american is the treasury department -- really, it's the treasury department that leads on the afghan fund. it is correct that there has not been a disbursement. we want to be sure that we have absolutely, rock solid accountability mechanisms in place, so that any disbursement that is made is done so, again, unaccountably, with the correct auditing in place. i refer to the treasury on the exact status of the fund. >> thank you. ms. amiri, do you have any thoughts on this issue? >> thank you. perhaps, my colleague at usaid -- >> mr. administrator.

>> thank you, usaid does not play a role in the afghan fund, so we refer to our colleagues at the state and treasury. >> i can say a bit more. this fund was set up for two purposes. first, to preserve and protect assets for the benefit of the afghan people. second, disbursements that would enhance economic stability in the country. an example of one such disbursement that we have long considered is, paying down on arrears that the state of afghanistan posed to international finance institutions. the world bank and the asian development bank, they have funds called bank resources that can be drawn upon to meet the basic needs of the afghan people, to meet humanitarian needs as well. but, those funds are inaccessible if these arrears are not paid. i think it's a good thing we have engaged with members of the taliban, as well as technocrats from the ministry

of finance, from their so- called central bank. two payments have been made that have enabled the continuation of efforts to draw upon these bank resources from these institutions. it has been necessary to dip into the afghan fund for those purposes. >> continuing on, the funds unanimous vote requirement help -- could help prevent the fund from engaging in risk activity. there are currently no controls in place that specifically address the issue of taliban diversion. however, further safeguards that do address diversion may be developed in the future. the question is, what safeguard has the state department come up with or is working on to ensure there is no taliban diversion? we have 54 seconds. >> i will be quick. it's a very important question.

i think the professionals at the treasury department, who are focused on this level of granularity around exactly the mechanisms in place to ensure no diversion if there is a disbursement, they are going to be in a much better place than i will to talk about that in detail. i'm very confident that the treasury department is focused on that. >> thank you. we now proceed to jason crow of colorado. >> thank you, chairman. i appreciate the time. thank you for all of your testimony today. as a combat veteran of the afghanistan war, like many of my colleagues, and like many of you here today, we have left pieces of our hearts with afghanistan, and we also know, in a very deep and personal way, that we can be -- detect the brutality of the taliban, and push back against the taliban, and support resistance against the taliban, but we can also support the people of

afghanistan. we are capable of making that distinction, and finding ways to support people that, frankly, over 20+ years, learned to love freedom, to yearn for freedom and democracy, an entire generation of afghans that got a taste for that freedom and will continue to resist. i feel like we have a lifelong responsibility to support that. consistent with that, we know from the world food program, that over 15 million of the afghan people, many of whom we fought with and for, are food insecure in the last year. 29 million. two thirds of the population are in need of humanitarian assistance, but there remains a lot of this information and false claims about the level of diversion, and the taliban taking that information. could you briefly paint a high- level picture. we know how to do this. this is not the first time ever that the united states and our

allies provided assistance to people that we have committed to in support, but do so in a way that doesn't support rogue regimes or oppressive regimes that those folks live under. can you paint that picture for a moment? >> sure. thank you very much for that question. like you, and for the exact same reasons that you have laid out, we also believe that we have an ongoing moral commitment to the people of afghanistan, and one that is extremely important for us to uphold. >> can you speak up a little bit, please? >> certainly, i will try. i apologize for my creaky voice at times. on this question of diversion, as i laid out in my opening statement, we take these questions to be extraordinarily serious, because we believe it

is absolutely critical that we make sure that our assistance benefits the people of afghanistan, and does not benefit the taliban. we do that, in part, through the way in which we design our programs. for example, our agricultural programs work directly with farmers and we make sure that the benefit flows to them, and their ability to plant crops and bring those crops to market , so that there is no benefit that goes beyond the individuals and to the taliban. beyond that, with our implement and partners, we have rigorous oversight processes and systems in place. we require all of our implement and partners to report to us if there are any allegations about the diversion of funds, and we have seen them take swift action more than 25 times, thus far,

to suspend assistance when there are concerns, until they and we are able to make sure that those concerns are fully addressed. >> thank you, mr. tran20 five. i appreciate you. we can talk a lot about this, but there are many checks, and we go directly to the people. we have lots of partners and lots of capability to do that, because this is not the first time we have done that. ms. amiri, to you, there is often times this false impression that providing humanitarian aid will support oppressive regimes, but what we actually know is that oppressive regimes oppress. that is what they do. when people actually have food and have security, and they have resources, they are more able to resist oppression. you have the amazing work -- the amazing job of helping support the afghan women and girls, who tell me how those

resources helped those women and girls resist and continue to pursue freedom. >> thank you very much for that question. one issue we lose sight of is, afghan women are embedded in society. they are not separate. with the humanitarian assistance we provide, it is the population that is in most need and most vulnerable. they are women and children. in fact, when you look at the numbers, 70% go to weldon and children. the conversations that i have with afghan women and girls, they are desperate they have lost everything overnight. but they struggle with is not just the fact that they have

lost their voice. many of the women that i speak to, they note that one of the things that they mow struggle with is the fact that they do not know how they're going to feed their children. two thank you, we now to -- proceed to tim burge and from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chair. >> is it possible to help without the aid benefiting the taliban? >> we believe it is. we believe that we have systems in place to make sure that assistance is going directly to the afghan people. i offered that without any illusions about how difficult and operating environment it is. >> the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstructions that it is impossible to provide aid without benefiting the taliban. i am a little worried that the

u.s. aid is making its way to the taliban. you are tommy that is not happening. >> i am telling you that we have a very rigorous processes in place to make sure that none of our assistance is diverted. when we have concerns as i was mentioning earlier, we work with our implement partners to take swift action. we have been willing to suspend assistance to make sure about any of those concerns are addressed precisely because we share your concerns that the taliban does not benefit. >> that aid sent to afghanistan, how much do you think is paid -- it is just paid for taxes, fees, rents and other bells? is not being tracked? >> it is being tracked. i would offer there is a distinction between a diversion and things like payment of utility bills. tour an example, they need

running water. they need electricity to be able to deliver healthy babies. we would not suggest to are implementing partners that they not pay utility bills. >> i appreciate that. i am surprised that sigar polled 37 ngos and they found $10.1 million tax dollars paid to the taliban. they just pulled 37. from my perusal there is hundreds of those. that is contradicting what you are saying. i am really concerned what is going on with your organization. >> i would offer and we are happy to come up and talk to you about this in more detail. we have certainly talk to sigar about this . in arriving at that $10.1 million figure, they

amalgamated another different categories. i would not consider, for example, the payment of utility bills to be a support for the taliban in the ways that i know concern you and concern us. >> i am just a little confused. you are telling me it does not exist and the other body is saying that it does. i am glad that we passed a bill at the end of last year that was supposed to require the state department to track this number and report it to congress. i am hoping that the president sees fit to sign that into law. it does send a conflicting message out. are you comfortable with the partnership between the taliban and china?

>> the chinese are pursuing a very different policy from the united states than that of afghanistan. they still have an embassy operating. they are leaning pretty far forward in terms of business activities. from what we can tell the flash of the commitment you hear from beijing that there is not great data to back it up around a major, huge bra or c peck in afghanistan. >> last year the chinese had $1.5 billion oil deal with the taliban and what is the state department doing about that? >> we don't see afghanistan as a place where we need to compete with the chinese and

the russians. as for this particular deal, i would be happy to follow up. i am not familiar with it. >> quickly, as an implementing partner ever made harm of the sigar info? it is simply yes or no. i am out of time. >> apologies about that. i would like to come back and talk about this question in a separate setting. precisely because we don't want to create additional risk for any of our partners or for the afghan people. two thank you. we will now proceed -- >> pearman -- chairman, i would asked to make that happen. we have a lot of questions that don't seem to be answered. at some point congress needs to know. if the constitution tells us we are over this and i think we

should be exercising our ability , if not i think we have to cut some funds. >> i agree with all of the above. congressman like lawlor of new york. >> mr. west and mr. schiffer, in reports and his testimony to the committee he documented several ways in which the tally band has been diverting and stealing humanitarian aid do you have any reason to believe that he is lying in his testimony or his reports? >> i will offer from any u.s. aid perspective, we don't have any reason he is lying. i think we have questions which we are talking about about the analysis that underlies that that we have not yet seen. and making sure we are drying distinctions between diversion -- >> it is clear that there have been instances of reports of diversion and reports of the

taliban trying to interfere in a delivery. when that happens -- >> i asked a simple question. do you have any reason to believe he is lying? yes or no ? >> i would say the same thing as administrator schiffer. we are in close touch with sigar about the methodology . >> i'm going to ask you yes or no questions and please try to stick to that. have you seen any evidence of the taliban demanding payoffs to permit the implementation of aid projects? yes or no? >> i do apologize. i am happy to have a fuller discussion in a -- >> mr. west. yes or no? >> i would be happy to have a conversation -- >> yes or no, have you seen other residents of the town been diverting aid to population such as spiders and family members? yes or no? >> with all due respect we have

seen -- >> you are were showing no respect to this committee. yes or no. i am asking you very simple and basic questions. it is yes or no. >> we have seen attempts. >> yes or no, mr. west. >> we have likewise seen attempts. i am aware of several incidents in which our implement and partners have fully ceased operations. in some cases entire providences. >> yes or no, have you seen evidence of the taliban pressuring the u.n. and other ngos to hire taliban members relatives and allies? >> again, we have seen attempts. >> same. >> have you seen evidence of the taliban pressuring the u.n. and other ngos to issue contracts to taliban and affiliated companies? >> i have not personally seen that. i have heard there has been attempt to do that as well. >> same >> have you seen evidence of the taliban pressuring the u.n. and other ngos to partner with tally band affiliated ngos?

>> again, i know there has been attempts. >> same here. >> have you seen evidence of the taliban embedding intelligence officials in u.n. agencies to supervise their work, facilitate interference and aversion and sensor reporting about it? >> on that when i have no knowledge. >> on that one, no. >> have you seen evidence of the taliban collecting taxes and other fees from u.n. and u.s. funded implanting partners? >> depending on what constitutes other fees, yes. >> i agree with my colleague. >> certainly through testimony that this committee has received we have establish that the taliban have benefited from the aid that we send to afghanistan mr. west, this past november it was testified that they have

been trying to meet with you since you were appointed to and a half years ago. he has met with every special represent for afghanistan since 2012 but it was not until after they testified publicly of your refusal to meet that you finally agreed to a meeting last week. why did it take you to and a half years and congressional testimony for you to finally meet with the special inspector general? >> i was glad to have the opportunity the state department suspects the role that sigar plays and the oversight of afghanistan policy. we had a productive exchange that i hope will continue. >> that is not what i asked you. i asked you i took 2 1/2 years. >> i was glad to have the opportunity to sit down with mr. socko. we need to do so more often. >> a lot faster than 2 1/2 years? >> you know, when decisions are

made about whether to meet with an oversight body, it is a conversation that i have together with the leadership of the state department. when we have those discussions, we did feel it was appropriate at the time -- >> given his testimony before this committee. given the contradiction between some of the things that you have testified to and what he has said, would you not think it would actually behoove you to quickly get to the bottom of the discrepancies between you and he on what is actually happening with the taliban? >> you know, i think at the onset of the administration, our sense was that sigar's role was to oversee construction activities . we are completely out of the re-construction activities. what we are doing is meeting the basic humanitarian needs of afghanistan. we have had a time to reflect on the kind of relationship we

want with sigar. the secretary had a productive meeting back in june. we are on the cusp of arriving at a so-called enhanced protocols for the treatment of sensitive information that sigar authorities one axis to. my engagement with him is an effort to improve our relationship. >> i would just know, mr. chairman, before concluding that bureaucracy is a lot less important than figuring out whether or not the taliban is benefiting from u.s. taxpayer money. i would hope that moving forward the nonsensical bureaucracy and discussions about what kind of relationship we have is a lot less important than dealing with the actual issue of whether or not the tally band is using u.s. taxpayer money to fund their operations.

>> thank you very much. it is very appropriate. we have got. pennsylvania. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks for being here. what is the end goal? how long will we be in afghanistan providing this? what is the plan? can you quantify that in one sentence? will be there forever or what are we doing? >> we are dealing with a really tough environment. it is to protect american interests. our goal is to protect the american people, first and foremost. to secure the release of american hostages and multiple americans as i said at the onset. >> i get that. >> we want to get to relocation and resettlement operations. thankfully, those are continually -- >> that does cost a lot of money. the strategic national security interest, can you talk to me that i can you talk to us about

that you make are we hoping that afghanistan is a bulwark against iran? what is the national securities asked security interest that it can cost us billions of dollars to be there? what i feel like is that we got in a fight with a bully. we lost the fight and we got punched in the face. he took our lunch money and that we keep paying the lunch money and hope that he does not beat us up again. tell me the national security interest here. >> i him sure you have seen the same reports that i have. brown university estimates we have spent two jillion dollars. >> it is gone. we are not getting it back. >> it is radically, by many factors more modest. >> i get that. we are not over there occupying the country. that does not tell me what the national -- are we trying to, somehow, safeguard the $2 trillion assessment?

>> i'm going to revert to our national interests. >> you are the guy. it says right here you are the deputy assistant secretary. they sent you. you should know this. can you describe it for anybody? >> our national interest is to ensure it never again becomes a safe haven. >> it is. it is a terrorist superstate, brother. are you kidding me? >> that is not our assessment. >> it is reality. can you talk to me in the remaining time about the security chief of kandahar and that taliban intelligence -- whatever they call his last name matchmaker is three last names here. and if he can tell me about him traveling to korea in cooperation? >> no. >> are you aware of it? >> actually not. >> you know anything about it. that is a false claim.

>> i've not heard of it and i'm happy to talk to you. >> please do. it has been widely report on open source. what about the interest in taking nuclear weapons from pakistan? the taliban. >> i have seen no indication. >> you her no reporting to the same. >> no. >> you will run that down and you will report back to us and the classified setting that we are going to have. like i have doubts about whether it exists but i'm happy to -- >> i hope you do. i will give you my when you give me yours. we had a conversation a little while ago where we were talking about people from the taliban traveling. you kind of implied there was an agreement -- they were restricted from travel except for the portion where they were given a waiver. they wanted to go travel and work out the arrangements of the american withdraw.

the waiver expired they are prohibited from travel can you tell us why the united states voted 15 times -- the waiver expired in 2022. in 2023, the u.s. voted 15 times to sink sure and taliban members. why do we do that? >> we see as a part of the strategy of engaging all afghans and that includes the taliban in order to protect our interest. >> it is in our interest to let terrorist places traveling to north korea wherever else. >> to occasionally meet with senior members of the taliban in order to talk about issues to do with the fulfillment of their security commitments, the release of american hostages. >> we are paying them billions of dollars. this poor slob, this poor guy,

ryan -- i don't know if his family is here or whatever. what are we doing to leverage the billions of dollars to afghanistan to get this poor guy out? this lady up here as this poor woman what she is doing about depression and mental health. this is a terrorist superstate with a regime that is credible and terrace and act like animals, like she can do something about that. what are we leveraging with billions of dollars to get this guy out and the other people out and to get the circumstances of women and children in the country? what are we doing to leverage that? >> you talk about leverage. the kind of normalization that the taliban seek, it is about sanctions relief, 135 taliban members are still subject to 1980 sanctions. that includes an asset freeze and travel ban. they want a normal relation with international financial institutions. they want return of $9 billion in assets that are located outside of afghanistan.

they want to seek their probative representative in new york. they also want diplomatic accreditation. all of that is off the table until they stop taking american hostages, until they get girls back in school at the secondary level and the university level. they need to be allowed to dissipate in public life. until they take additional steps that would give us greater confidence they take their security commitment seriously. >> i appreciate your answer. it is hard to remain calm. people in hell want ice water. the taliban will not do that stuff . they don't have to. they just need to keep coming in while they keep doing those things. i yield. >> atomic very much, congressman perry. as we just saw with the excellent concerns of congressman perry, we have established in this hearing that the taliban are benefiting

from u.s. tax dollars. this needs to be put in the context of and corbett, whose husband is a hostage in afghanistan. her tax dollars are being used to fund her husband's captors. that is inexcusable. we will proceed with a further backup hearing. at this time, i do appreciate the witnesses being here and the questions. they may have additional questions will be provided. we would like you to respond in writing and pursuant to committee rules. all members may have five days to submit statements, questions next readies materials for the record subject to the length limitations without objection. the subcommittee stands adjourned.