Connect with us

Latest News

SIGAR blasts Washington for withholding key information on Afghanistan

Published

on

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), John Sopko, said on Friday he has faced recent pressure from the U.S. State Department to redact some of the organization’s reports while noting the Pentagon classified much of its work detailing the failings of Afghanistan’s military forces.

He also referenced numerous attempts to “impede” his work, adding that “U.S. agencies have not made honest reporting easy for SIGAR.”

Sopko’s comments, published on SIGAR’s website, came at the Military Reporters & Editors Association’s annual conference, where the inspector general detailed multiple efforts by the State Department to get SIGAR to redact information from its reports, and remove all mentions of former Afghan president Ashraf Ghani.

“Those of you who have followed SIGAR’s work know that many of the reasons for the unexpectedly quick collapse of the Afghan government are problems that SIGAR has reported on for years – corruption; ghost soldiers; the dependence of the Afghan military on U.S. airpower, contractors, and other enablers; and incompetent Afghan leadership, to name but a few,” he said.

He also said SIGAR may be the only U.S. government agency that told “inconvenient truths” about the situation for the last 10 years.

“But we all know that U.S. agencies have not made honest reporting easy for SIGAR,” he stated.

Sopko’s address coincided with the release of its 53rd quarterly report, which includes information that shortly after the fall of Kabul, the State Department wrote to him and other oversight agencies requesting to “temporarily suspend access” to all “audit, inspection, and financial audit…reports” on SIGAR’s website because the state department “was
afraid that information included in those reports could put Afghan allies at risk”.

He said while he felt strongly that Afghans at genuine risk of reprisal should be protected, the state department was never able to give specific details on threats to individuals as a result of SIGAR’s reports.

He also said the state department did not explain how removing SIGAR reports could protect anyone since many were years old and already extensively disseminated worldwide.

“Nevertheless, with great reservation, I acceded to State’s initial request because it was made at the height of the emergency evacuation from Afghanistan,” he said.

After Sopko complied, the state department returned with another request, this time passing along a spreadsheet listing some 2,400 items it wanted redacted — something SIGAR reviewed and “found all but four to be without merit.”

“Given how hard the Department reportedly was working to evacuate Americans from Afghanistan and resettle Afghan refugees, I was surprised they found the time to go through every one of our reports and compile such an exhaustive list,” he said.

“Upon reviewing their request, it quickly became clear to us that State had little, if any, criteria for determining whether the information actually endangered anyone,” he added.

Among the requests was a plea to remove the name of a USAID official who publicly testified before Congress in 2017 and whose testimony is still posted on the committee’s site. It also asked SIGAR to remove Ghani’s name from all of its reports.

“While I’m sure the former president (Ghani) may wish to be excised from the annals of history, I don’t believe he faces any threats simply from being referenced by SIGAR,” Sopko said.

Addressing conference delegates he said: “No audience better understands the dangers of limiting public access to information in the name of ‘security’. And simply because the war in Afghanistan has
concluded does not mean the American people – or its elected representatives – do not have a right to know the truth about what happened in Afghanistan over the last 20 years.”

Sopko said that Congress has now tasked SIGAR with a number of assignments that include reports on why the Afghan government collapsed in spite of the $146 billion reconstruction effort; why the Afghan security forces collapsed; and whether Afghan government officials fled the country with U.S. taxpayer dollars; among others.

“In my opinion, the full picture of what happened in August – and all the warning signs that could have predicted the outcome – will only be revealed if the information that the Departments of Defense and State have already restricted from public release is made available,” he said.

He pointed out that the Department of Defense restricted from public release a range of information going back to 2015 on the performance of the Afghan security forces, purportedly at the request of the Afghan government.

This included information such as casualty data, unit strength, training and operational deficiencies, tactical and operational readiness of Afghan military leadership, comprehensive assessments of Afghan security force
headquarters leadership; and operational readiness rates down to the corps level.

“In essence, nearly all the information you needed to know to determine whether the Afghan security forces were a real fighting force or a house of cards waiting to fall.

“In light of recent events, it is not surprising that the Afghan government, and likely some in DOD, wanted to keep that information under lock and key,” he said.

“This information almost certainly would have benefited Congress and the public in assessing whether progress was being made in Afghanistan and, more importantly, whether we should have ended our efforts there earlier,” he added.

In recognition that this information will be essential for SIGAR to effectively respond to its Congressional directives, he said the bipartisan leadership of the House Oversight and Reform Committee and its National Security Subcommittee have formally requested that all information in SIGAR’s classified appendices be declassified by the originating agencies.

“At a bare minimum, DOD should immediately make available to SIGAR and the public the information restricted at the request of the Ghani government, for the simple reason that there no longer is a Ghani government and the Afghan security forces have already completely collapsed,” he said.

Sopko also called on Washington to declassify and make available to SIGAR and Congress all internal Department of Defense and State Department cables, reports and other material reflecting the security situation on the ground over the last few years – especially reports that differed from the public statements of the agencies in Washington.

“It is also important for SIGAR and Congress to have access to any reporting related to the reaction of the Ghani government and Afghan people to the withdrawal agreement signed between the Trump administration and the Taliban (IEA) in February 2020,” he said.

“What possible reason could remain for keeping all of this historical information out of public view?”

“Rather than attempt to impede SIGAR’s work, I believe the current administration should have every incentive to help us deliver the answers Congress has demanded,” Sopko said.

He also stated: “To answer these questions, we must find out what our government knew, when it knew it, and what it did, if anything,
with that information.

“SIGAR’s investigators are already interviewing Afghans who were evacuated to the United States to see what information they may be able to provide about corruption and other nefarious activities by former Afghan officials; SIGAR’s auditors and subject matter experts have already interviewed U.S. and Afghan government and military officials to start to put together the full picture of everything that happened that ultimately led to the Taliban (IEA) takeover just over two months ago.

“We already know a lot,” adding that while SIGAR has identified key lessons, “there is without question much more to be learned as we dig into what happened in Washington and Kabul during the months, weeks, days, and hours before Ghani fled and the Taliban (IEA) marched into his presidential palace without resistance.”

Latest News

Doha Forum spotlights Afghanistan’s emerging role in regional connectivity

The annual gathering, which has drawn around 5,000 participants from 160 countries, is once again positioning Doha as a key platform for global dialogue.

Published

on

The second day of the Doha Forum 2025 has brought renewed global attention to Afghanistan’s evolving role in regional connectivity, as policymakers, diplomats, and experts discuss the country’s shifting place in international cooperation and development.

The annual gathering, which has drawn around 5,000 participants from 160 countries, is once again positioning Doha as a key platform for global dialogue.

Zakir Jalali, Director of the Third Political Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Emirate, said in a post on X that the forum’s opening day focused heavily on major global crises and on Qatar’s increasing influence as an international mediator — from the conflict in Gaza and the war in Ukraine to crises in Sudan, Syria, and other hotspots.

Jalali confirmed that a dedicated panel on Afghanistan’s role in regional connectivity is scheduled for today. The session will feature Dr. Abdulhai Qanit representing Afghanistan, along with Esmatullah Ergashev, the Special Representative of the President of Uzbekistan, and Faisal bin Abdullah, Qatar’s Special Envoy from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

He noted that Qatar has established itself as a successful mediator in recent years, with Afghanistan being one of its prominent examples.

This year’s forum, he said, marks a shift in how the international community engages with Afghanistan: moving away from a security-dominated narrative toward one that increasingly recognizes the country’s potential as a hub for integration, trade, and economic development.

According to Jalali, this evolving perspective offers a new window of opportunity for Afghanistan and its neighbours — one that requires thoughtful engagement, strategic planning, and a deeper understanding of the region’s long-term connectivity ambitions.

Continue Reading

Latest News

US sets 2027 deadline for Europe-led NATO defense, officials say

Some officials on Capitol Hill are aware of and concerned about the Pentagon’s message to the Europeans, one U.S. official said.

Published

on

The United States wants Europe to take over the majority of NATO’s conventional defense capabilities, from intelligence to missiles, by 2027, Pentagon officials told diplomats in Washington this week, a tight deadline that struck some European officials as unrealistic, Reuters reported.

The message, recounted by five sources familiar with the discussion, including a U.S. official, was conveyed at a meeting in Washington this week of Pentagon staff overseeing NATO policy and several European delegations.

The shifting of this burden from the U.S. to European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization would dramatically change how the United States, a founding member of the post-war alliance, works with its most important military partners.

In the meeting, Pentagon officials indicated that Washington was not yet satisfied with the strides Europe has made to boost its defense capabilities since Russia’s expanded invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The U.S. officials told their counterparts that if Europe does not meet the 2027 deadline, the U.S. may stop participating in some NATO defense coordination mechanisms, said the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Some officials on Capitol Hill are aware of and concerned about the Pentagon’s message to the Europeans, one U.S. official said.

Conventional defense capabilities include non-nuclear assets from troops to weapons and the officials did not explain how the U.S. would measure Europe’s progress toward shouldering most of the burden, read the report.

It was also not clear if the 2027 deadline represented the Trump administration position or only the views of some Pentagon officials. There are significant disagreements in Washington over the military role the U.S. should play in Europe.

Several European officials said that a 2027 deadline was not realistic no matter how Washington measures progress, since Europe needs more than money and political will to replace certain U.S. capabilities in the short term.

Among other challenges, NATO allies face production backlogs for military equipment they are trying to purchase. While U.S. officials have encouraged Europe to buy more U.S.-made materiel, some of the most prized U.S.-made weapons and defense systems would take years to be delivered if ordered today.

The U.S. also contributes capabilities that cannot simply be purchased, like unique intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance that have proven key to the Ukrainian war effort.

Asked for comment, a NATO official speaking for the alliance said European allies had begun taking more responsibility for the continent’s security, but did not comment on the 2027 deadline.

“Allies have recognized the need to invest more in defense and shift the burden on conventional defense” from the U.S. to Europe, the official said.

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson said: “We’ve been very clear in the need for Europeans to lead in the conventional defense of Europe. We are committed to working through NATO coordination mechanisms to strengthen the alliance and ensure its long-term viability as European allies increasingly take on responsibility for conventional deterrence and defense in Europe.”

European nations have broadly accepted U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand they take more responsibility for their own security and have pledged big increases in defense spending, Reuters reported.

The European Union has set a target of making the continent ready to defend itself by 2030 and says it must fill gaps in its air defenses, drones, cyber warfare capabilities, munitions and other areas. Officials and analysts said even that deadline is highly ambitious.

The Trump administration has consistently argued that European allies need to contribute more to the NATO alliance, but it’s not always clear where the president stands on NATO.

On the campaign trail in 2024, Trump frequently bashed European allies, and he said he would encourage Russian President Vladimir Putin to invade NATO countries that did not spend their fair share on defense.

But at the annual NATO leaders’ summit in June, Trump effusively praised European leaders for agreeing to a U.S. plan to boost the annual defense spending target for member states to 5% of gross domestic product.

In the months since, Trump has vacillated between a harder line on Russia – the bloc’s main opponent – and, more recently, a willingness to negotiate with Moscow over the Ukraine conflict. European officials have complained that they were largely cut out of those negotiations, read the report.

At a meeting of NATO foreign ministers this week, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau said it was “obvious” NATO allies should take responsibility for Europe’s defense.

“Successive US Administrations have been saying this in one form or another pretty much my whole life…but our Administration means what it says,” Landau wrote on X.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Minister of borders calls school–madrassa separation ‘occupiers’ conspiracy’

Published

on

Minister of Borders, Tribes and Tribal Affairs Noorullah Noori says Western countries are trying to create division among the people under the labels of madrassa and school, but he says they will not achieve their goals.

Speaking at a graduation ceremony for more than 700 students in Kabul, Noori added: “Seeing school and madrassa as separate is a Western idea and a conspiracy of occupiers. This is a corrupt plot by the enemies of the religion of Allah and of Afghanistan.”

Noori stated that the government is committed to religious education, especially modern sciences, and considers the country’s progress impossible without them.

He emphasized that today, jihad and the defense of the homeland are carried out based on technology, and that necessary attention has been given to this area as well.

At the ceremony, Mohammad Ali Jan Ahmad, the Deputy Minister of Borders and Tribal Affairs, described both religious and modern education as an obligation.

Jan Ahmad said: “Learning modern sciences is obligatory for religious affairs. If we acquire religious sciences to prepare ourselves to confront the infidels, then certainly modern sciences are also obligatory for us.”

The newly graduated students also called on the Islamic Emirate to provide more opportunities for them to continue their education.

Meanwhile, the ministry officials also said that during the past twenty years, efforts had been made to promote Western culture in Afghanistan.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Ariana News. All rights reserved!