0 are you negotiating with that taliban on the issue of legitimizing them as a real government? >> not only us but virtually the entire international community has made clear what we expect and insist on from the taliban. if they want to seek any legitimacy or support. it starts with freedom of travel. we've been intensely engaged with turkey and qatar to get the airport in kabul up and running again, which is now the case. we started to get flights out last week with american citizens on board. with regard to masari shareef. there's been charter flights there for some time that have not been allowed to leave. we want to see the flights leave. we need to so a process put in place to allow the flights to start to move. we're working on that every day. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. mr. secretary, we requested sets of classified briefings not long ago. welcome your assurance to schedule this briefing sometime in the immediate future. >> yes. absolutely. >> i now recognize respect brad sherman from california for five minutes. >> secretary blinken, thanks for reminding us that americans were not required to registered if they were in afghanistan. i hope my colleagues will support my legislation to require americans to register if they go to a war zone. the ranking member says that he never thought he would see an unconditional surrender of the united states to the taliban. he saw it in 2020. when president donald trump announced that we would be out by may 1 of 2021, force the release of 5,000 of the taliban's best fighters and most importantly created a circumstance where there was not even a credible possibility that we would engage in force to support the afghan government. there's those that say we should get out all of our afghan allies and all those that face oppression or death from the taliban. i would point out the afghan army together with all of its veterans over 20 years together with all of their families, you're talking about millions of people. while the taliban may be harsh to the girls that are music students, orphans, imagine how harsh they'll be to a girl whose father was in the afghan army trying to kill the taliban. the administration took over. the american people made it clear. we had to get out in 2021. the afghan government some thought had some chance to fight to a stalemate. by spring those closest to us, those most in the know, were demanding visas to get out, to flee as quickly as possible. they weren't asking for guns to build trenches to fight the taliban. they were asking for visas, demanding visas. making videos how they will be killed. when they started to flee, that standed a stampede and there's no way the administration could have an orderly our successful stampede. seems absurd to think the average afghan grunt would fight while seeing those best connected desperate to flee in a matter of days. secretary blinken, when you came into office on january 20th, we were committed to pulling every one out of afghanistan within three months, may 1. did the trump administration leave a pile of notebooks as to exactly how to carry out that plan? did we have a list of which afghans we were going to evacuate? did we have a plan to get americans from all over afghanistan to kabul and out in an orderly way? how meticulous was the planning for the trump administration declared may 1 withdrawal? >> thank you, congressman. we inherited a deadline. we did not inherit a plan. >> so no plan at all. it's amazing it wasn't much worse. it was controversial when we gave up five taliban for bergdahl. not the most meritorious of american fighting men. the trump administration gave 5,000 of the taliban's top fighters back to the taliban. what did we get for that other than empty promises that were broken? >> congressman, the deal that the previous administration struck involved as you rightly said committing to remove all u.s. forces by may 1 of this year and in addition as that deal was being negotiated and put into effect, pressing the afghan government to release these 5,000 prisoners, many of whom went back to the battlefield. at the same time, in return, getting from the taliban few commitments. one, not to attack our forces or allied and partner forces during the time of the agreement from the time it was reached until may 1 when we were supposed to pull out our forces as well as not to go up to major cities and take steps to ensure that afghanistan would not be used by al-qaeda or any other -- >> one more question. you're criticized for not getting our weapons out. they were all over the country. was there a way to disarm the afghan government without being seen by the world as betraying the afghan government and was there a way without casualtying to go all over afghanistan to get the trucks and the tanks and et cetera? >> simply put, no. a lot of excess equipment was handed over to the afghan security and defense forces, partners that we worked with for 20 years, supported and equipped for 20 years to take on the equipment. when those forces collapsed in 11 days, some of that equipment wound up in the hands of the successor forces, the taliban. our folks worked very hard to disable or dismantle equipment that we still controlled before we left afghanistan. what we see now is much of the equipment that was left behind incluing in the hands of the afghan forces that fell to the taliban according to my colleagues at dod will be inoperable or will soon be maintained inoperable. it's not good of strategic value to threaten us or their neighbors or given the taliban uniforms and guns and some other equipment that is now in their hands. >> i now recognize representative chris smith of new jersey, the ranking member of the subcommittee of african global ball health and alliance for five minutes. >> mr. secretary, you testified that you had encouraged americans to leave the country. simultaneous with that is statements being made by president biden that afghan's military capability was 300,000 man strong and that they had the best training imaginable. so at best, i would say they were misled. you don't mention withdrawal conditions that were placed by president trump on any exodus from afghanistan. i do have a couple of questions i'd like to ask. did you concur and support president biden's july 23 phone call telling president ghani to be untruthful about the taliban success? according to reuters, which reviewed the transcript and the audio. president biden said "and there's a need whether it be true or not, there's a need to project a different picture." was that an ad lib by was biden or was that live scripted into the phone call and if it was scripted, by who? secondly, have any americans been arrested, beaten or killed by the taliban or isis-k since we left and do we have the capability to know that? third, were there any gaps or weaknesses in the vetting process of afghan evacuees especially in light of the fact that reliable information on some or perhaps many that got parole wasn't available to conduct a meaningful background check. are you concerned that the taliban may have embedded its members as evacuees? i visited our base at fort dix recently. i asked a number of questions. i was very concerned about the vetting or lack thereof and the fact that about 70% strong at our base and going to 13,000, they could leave if they would like. they're free to leave. it's not clear whether or not they would return but free to leave. finally, one of the profoundly negative consequences outside of afghanistan has been china and taiwan. the state-controlled chinese communist party are saturating the taiwanese with messages to give up and surrender to beijing because the united states will just as it did in afghanistan abandon them too. that's what the global times is saying. start off with the first question, i would appreciate it. >> thanks. let me see if i can address those questions. first, with regard to the phone call you said and i'm not going to comment on leaked transcripts or phone calls. what the president said in that conversation with then president ghani is exactly what he was saying in public. that the issue is not the capacity at that point of the afghan government and the after again security forces to hold the country and to hold kabul. it was their will and whether they had a plan to do so. we were concerned they weren't demonstrating that will or that plan. he pressed president ghani on the need to consolidate his forces on the military advice from our leaders to make sure that he could defend the places that needed defending and not overstretch the forces and -- >> i understand. my question is -- >> that's what he said -- >> i have two minutes. was it a real -- is the transcript untrue? >> i'm not commenting on any purportedly leaked transcripts. i telling you what the president said and what he said is in public. second, with regard to american citizens remaining behind. the ones we're in contact with were -- we have 500 people on a task force. teams dedicated to them to be in regular contact with them. i have not heard from those people. i can't say whether there are any american citizens that are not in contact with or may have been mistreated in some fashion in afghanistan. third, with regard to the background checks. this is very important. you're right to focus on it. you know, as you know, before afghan -- afghans were evacuated, they go to a transit country. that's where checks are done. we have surged our border patrol and surged our law enforcement capacity to do the initial checks. when they get to the united states, first at a military base, those checks are continued using all of law enforcement, intelligence security agencies to do that so that we can make sure that we're not letting anyway in to the country that could pose a threat or a risk. it's exactly that balance that is so important as well in the sie program. we all want to bring avenue agains at risk in the united states. we also have an obligation that you point out to the security of fellow citizens. finally on china and taiwan. whatever they're making in newspapers or propaganda, there's nothing that china would have liked more than for us to reuped the war in afghanistan and remain bogged down another five, ten years. that would have been against our strategic interests and in china's strategic exists. >> gentleman's time has expired. i recognize the civilian, security and economic policy chair for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. secretary, for being with us for the third time. i want to also say thank you to the work that the state department has done in getting people, including 11 members of one family that were all united and here now in this country. so my hats off to those people that worked so hard. the question that i have is the taliban seems to be having a complete hold of the country. i understand there's other groups in afghanistan. how fragile or how strong, firm, is the taliban's hold on this country and do you see that breaking apart? everybody wants their piece down the line. this country is made up of pieces, people that control certain pieces of the country. >> it's -- thank you. it's a very good question and an important one. it's very hard to predict with with any certainty. the country is in so many ways as you pointed out fractured among different groups. different ethnic groups. north, south, east and west and different outside actors that support one group or another. so for the taliban to consolidate control, that is -- that remains an open question. it's also why ironically it would be profoundly in taliban's interest to put forward a genuine and representative government. because to the extent it doesn't, to the extent that everybody is left out, that is likely -- at some period of time, whether it's tomorrow, next week, next year or thereafter cause those left out to try to assert one way or another their rights and needs. so all of that i think is an open question at this point. one last thing i mention. the country itself is desperate straits. the u.n. estimated half the population is in need of humanitarian assistance. we have severe malnutrition, health problems, covid-19, droughts, et cetera. so there too, the taliban has a big problem on its hands and of course it's generating very, very little revenue in order to deal with that. all of, which i might add, gives the international community very significant leverage and influence going forward. >> i also read where they're running out of food in the next few months. >> yep, that's correct. we've seen a terrible drought. growing nutrition problems. it's one of the reasons that we think it's so important to make sure that regardless of anything else, we and other countries find ways to continue humanitarian assistance to the people of afghanistan. we've committed additional funds to do that. a pledging conference called by the united nations ongoing and we can and will do that consistent with the sanctions and laws by directing assistance through the ngos, not through the government. we need to do everything we can to make sure the people of afghanistan don't suffer any more than is already the case. >> i would like to see us help with food, aid, extract certain commitments from them before we just give them food. last thing i want to say, i want to commend the country of columbia. i think they have taken thousands of afghanistans and vetting them before they get here is. that accurate? >> there's a number of countries around the world that have made the commitments that are serving as transit countries or resettlement countries. taking in afghans as refugees and we deeply appreciate the countries that have stood up to do that. >> i don't have anymore questions. >> gentleman yields back. i now recognize representative joe wilson of south carolina who is a ranking member of the subcommittee in the middle east, north africa for five minutes. >> thank you very much. glad to join with our dear colleague and thanking our great ally of columbia of helping the afghan refugees. sir, in my service of the foreign affairs committee, the armed services committee, the ney though parliamentary assembly and the helsinki commission, i've always been impressed by american foreign service diplomats worldwide. their dedication to service is inspiring. that is why i'm shocked that your actions superseding military advice leading to the sur representedner afghanistan to be a safe haven for murderous terrorists. biden-harris have also opened the southern border stopping the wall of president trump. this allows identified terrorists of the terror watch list to enter american neighborhoods as suicide bombers to murdering a many americans as possible. american families have never been in a greater risk of attack at home than today. as the global war on terrorism is not over, it's been moved from aboard to american homes. as a grateful father of an afghanistan veteran, i especially see your actions as indefensible. with 12 visits by me across afghanistan to thank the army national guard troops, the 218th brigade commanded by joe livingston, i know first and they appreciated serving with their afghan brothers. i saw the success in building schools, agricultural projects, bridges and roads and hospitals. my beliefs have been expressed by the "new york post" editorial board september 1. that is "six lies joe biden told about afghanistan." how can any american believe what biden says after he lied? if there's any american citizens left, we're going to stay until we get them out. biden admitted americans remain stranded in afghanistan. a senior state department official confessed to nbc nbc that the majority of afghans didn't make it out of kabul. lie. the united states stands by its commitment that we made to vulnerable afghans like women leaders and journalists. true. team biden didn't ensure american journalistses made it to safety. lie. ask by a reporter of what you've seen happened in vietnam. none whatsoever. zero. true. not even a month later, pictures came from kabul of a helicopter flying over the american embassy. lie. biden vowed to continue to provide air support. true. then he pulled the air support and contractors. the after again military couldn't operate. lie. july 8, biden added that the likelihood there's going to be a taliban overrunning everything is highly unlikely. true. in fact, biden knew the taliban were overtaking the afghan government and asked president ghani to lie about it. whether is it true or not. sadly the advanced military and equipment left to the terrorists -- i end the quote of that article. sadly, the advanced military left to the equipment is comparable to all of the equipment that we provided to israel since 1948. the countries that suffered most from islamic extremist tearist attacks are in danger. they chant death to israel, death to america. we must never forget the may 8 bombing in kabul where islamic extremist terrorists slaughters over 80 innocent young girls. you should have changed course then. because of this grew some revealing fact. the murders of that attack now will have a safe haven to attack american families at home. your bizarre abandons of bagram led to 13 marines murdered in kabul. you should resign. i yield back. >> mr. secretary, we only had 43 seconds left of the five minutes. so your response, i know you will not be able to answer many of the questions that were put forward by representative wilson, but if you choose, you have 43 seconds of which to respond for whichever questions were asked of you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me simply thank the member for his support for the men and women of the state department. i appreciated that part of the statement. thank you. >> i now recognize representative jerry connelly of virginia, the president of the nato particle men -- parliamentary assembly for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, thank you. i guess i would say to my friend from south carolina, if i were the member of congress that committed one of those acts in the stayed of the union address, when mr. obama was our guest to show out "you lie", i might take more care about enumerating other alleged lies in a hearing with the secretary of state. mr. secretary, what were listening to on the other side of the aisle sadly is sort of a solid mix of selective fact thats and a lot of amnesia in the salad dressing. the history of instability in afghanistan didn't begin on august 14 of this year, did it? >> i'd did it not. >> am i correct in remembering that in fact you could trace direct routes to 1977, 1978 when there was a communist coup and the president of afghanistan was assassinated in the presidential palace. is that correct? >> it is. >> one year later, the soviet union because of that instability decided to invade afghanistan. is that correct? >> yes. >> ten years later, the soviets left afghanistan because they had mounting and maybe really unsustainable military casualties and felt that they were engaged in a process that could not be won. is that correct? >> it is. >> meanwhile, because the united states decided once that happened it would disengage from afghanistan, groups like the taliban had 12 years in which to create political power. is that correct? >> it is. >> and in 2001, we reentered afghanistan in response to the tragedy that we just remembered, 20-year remembrance this week, and we rolled up the tall been by mixing with groups in the north and moved south until they lost control of the country in that year. is that correct? >> yes, it is. >> the purpose of our involvement was to defeat al-quaida because the taliban were harboring this virulent tear list group that had attacked american. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> would it be fair to say that we achieved that objective? >> it would. >> would it be fair to say ten years later the leader of that group who mastermind