Latest News
Khalilzad responds to McCaul’s draft resolution, says Doha agreement claim is ‘flatly untrue’
Khalilzad said the draft resolution states he “baselessly asserted the Taliban would honor their commitments and respect basic human rights.”
Former US special envoy for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad said in a post on X early Thursday that a claim in House Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul’s draft resolution on him having said he “baselessly asserted the Taliban (IEA) would honor commitments” was untrue.
Khalilzad said the draft resolution states he “baselessly asserted the Taliban would honor their commitments and respect basic human rights.”
“This statement is flatly untrue. I never made such a statement. I am surprised that such a claim would be made without documentation – ‘baselessly,’ so to speak,” he said.
On Wednesday, House Republicans voted to censure President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, capping their work in Washington with legislation that carried no legal weight but drove a political point ahead of the November elections.
The resolution condemned Biden, Harris and other officials in the administration for “decision-making and execution failures throughout the withdrawal from Afghanistan” and blamed them for the deaths of 13 U.S. service members who were killed by a suicide bomber at Kabul’s airport during the final days of the evacuation.
With regards to the Doha agreement, the resolution stated: “Whereas, in 2021, under the Biden-Harris administration, Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation, Zalmay Khalilzad, baselessly asserted the Taliban would honor their commitments and respect basic human rights.”
Khalilzad responded by saying in his post on X: “The Doha Agreement that I helped negotiate under President Trump did not deal with human rights.
“It dealt with the terms for the safe military withdrawal including no attacks on US forces, and not allowing terrorists, individuals or groups, including al-Qaida, to use Afghanistan soil to threaten the security of the United States and our allies.
“The Taliban (IEA) had agreed that a new government for Afghanistan – and presumably its human right policies – would subsequently and separately be negotiated between them, the (former) Afghan government, and other Afghans.
“Some such negotiations took place, but no agreements were arrived at before the completion of our withdrawal,” Khalilzad said.
He went on to state that Biden decided not to condition the US withdrawal on a political agreement among Afghans, fearing a return to Islamic Emirate attacks against US forces if Intra-Afghan negotiations dragged on.
“Aside from adding four months to the withdrawal timeline, the Biden Administration did not make any other changes in the Doha Agreement,” he said.
“In addition to not having made any statement about the Taliban (IEA) honoring commitments on human rights, in my appearances before various congressional committees, whenever asked whether I trusted the Taliban (IEA) to honor their commitments in regard to military matters and terrorism, my reply invariably was that we were talking about international relations, an arena in which no one can be trusted, and least of all the Taliban (IEA).
“I emphasized that it was not about trust. The agreement as negotiated was condition-based, not trust-based, and delivering on our commitments in the agreement was linked to the Taliban’s (IEA) delivery on its commitments, which would need to be continuously evaluated and verified.
“I did report that the Taliban (IEA) were – up to the time of my appearances – honoring their commitment not to attack US forces and needed to do more to meet their obligation on terrorism.
“Indeed, several elements of the agreement remain unfulfilled by us because the Taliban (IEA) have not fulfilled some of their commitments,” he said.
Khalilzad concluded by saying: “Undeniably, the final phase of the withdrawal was a disaster.
“The main reasons for this were a.) poor intelligence (we did not foresee that the Afghan government would simply collapse before we had even departed or that its military would essentially dissolve and b.) our own inadequate military planning and execution in light of those unexpected developments.
“Our soldiers performed heroically under the circumstances, which had devolved into chaos in and around Kabul Airport,” he said.
Latest News
Afghan official slams Shehbaz Sharif’s ‘shameful’ claims on Islamic unity
Khubaib Ghufran, spokesperson for Afghanistan’s Ministry of Information and Culture, sharply criticized Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif over his recent claims about Islamic unity in relation to the war in Iran, calling them “shameful.”
On his X account, Ghaffran wrote: “You praised Trump as a hero of the Gaza peace plan, yet today you claim Islamic unity regarding Iran in a war that the same criminal (Trump) and his allies initiated?”
He added that while Afghanistan is governed under an Islamic system, Shehbaz Sharif has shown no compassion even toward the most vulnerable groups—from children to women and drug addicts—and that this cruelty persisted even during the holy month of Ramadan.
Ghaffran described Sharif’s stance as a “grave shame” and a stark example of “historical hypocrisy.”
Latest News
Airstrike on Kabul drug rehabilitation centre sparks legal concerns
Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for Research, Isabelle Lassee, said the scale of casualties suggests the presence of a significant civilian population at the site.
An airstrike on a drug rehabilitation facility in Kabul has drawn sharp criticism from Amnesty International, raising serious questions about compliance with international humanitarian law.
The strike, carried out on 16 March, targeted a site at Camp Phoenix, a former military base that has functioned largely as a rehabilitation centre since 2016. Pakistani officials have claimed the attack was aimed at an ammunition depot allegedly located within the compound.
Responding to those claims, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for Research, Isabelle Lassee, said the scale of casualties suggests the presence of a significant civilian population at the site.
“While the total number of casualties has yet to be independently verified, it is clear that the attack caused extensive civilian harm, with reports indicating hundreds killed or injured,” she said.
Lassee emphasized that the facility was widely known to house civilians undergoing treatment, and warned that any military action should have taken this into account. “Pakistan’s military should have taken all feasible precautions to avoid harming civilians and civilian infrastructure,” she added.
She further noted that even if a military target had been present within the compound, international law requires that any strike be proportionate, ensuring that civilian harm is not excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.
“The scale of destruction raises serious concerns about whether an adequate proportionality assessment was conducted and whether sufficient steps were taken to verify the target and minimize civilian casualties,” Lassee said.
Amnesty International has called on Pakistani authorities to disclose the intelligence behind the strike and to launch an independent, impartial, and transparent investigation into the incident. The organization stressed that findings should be made public to ensure accountability.
The group also urged all parties involved in the conflict to adhere strictly to international humanitarian law and to protect civilian infrastructure, including medical and rehabilitation facilities.
The airstrike formed part of Pakistan’s “Operation Ghazab Lil Haq,” which included strikes in both Kabul and Nangarhar Province. The targeted rehabilitation centre, known as Omid, reportedly had the capacity to accommodate around 2,000 individuals.
Casualty figures remain contested. Islamic Emirate officials claim more than 400 civilians were killed and over 200 injured, though these numbers have not been independently verified. The United Nations has so far confirmed 143 deaths.
The strike comes amid escalating tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, at least 76 civilian casualties had already been recorded since the conflict intensified in February.
Pakistani officials, meanwhile, reported civilian casualties on their side of the border, including four deaths in Bajaur district on 15 March and the killing of a child in North Waziristan earlier in the month, allegedly due to cross-border fire from Afghanistan.
The latest developments underscore growing concerns about civilian safety as hostilities between the two countries continue to intensify.
Latest News
Afghanistan expresses condolences after deadly helicopter crash in Qatar
-
Latest News5 days agoPakistani shelling hits Kunar districts despite ‘pause in hostility’ over Eid
-
Sport4 days agoAfghanistan national buzkashi falls short in Kokpar World Championship semifinals
-
Regional5 days agoPakistan among top nuclear threats to America, US intelligence chief tells senate
-
Sport3 days agoIreland to host Afghanistan for ODI series in August
-
World5 days agoUS weighs troop deployment as Iran war enters new phase
-
Latest News5 days agoSecurity Sources: Pakistani military shelling in Kunar and Nuristan leaves female doctor dead
-
Latest News3 days agoMojtaba Khamenei calls for improved Afghanistan–Pakistan relations, offers help
-
Sport4 days agoFIFA sanctions Israeli Football Association over discrimination violations
