The Daily - America’s Final Hours in Afghanistan

Episode Date: August 31, 2021

On Monday night, after a 20-year war that claimed 170,000 lives, cost over $2 trillion and did not defeat the Taliban, the United States completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan. As the last of the American forces left under the cover of darkness, there was celebratory gunfire from the Taliban. The moment of exit, a day earlier than expected, was both historic and anticlimactic.We explore what happened in the last few hours and days of the American occupation, and look at what it leaves behind. Guest: Eric Schmitt, a senior writer covering terrorism and national security for The New York Times. Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: The last American flight from Afghanistan left behind a host of unfulfilled promises and anxious questions about the country’s fate.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Last night, after a 20-year war that claimed more than 170,000 lives, cost over $2 trillion and failed to defeat the Taliban, the United States completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan. I spoke with my colleague, Eric Schmidt, about the final hours of the American occupation. It's Tuesday, August 31st.

Eric, we are talking to you at 645 on Monday night. A lot has just happened in Kabul. And I wanted to start by asking you to describe the last few hours there. I want to start by asking you to describe the last few hours there. So in the last few hours, the last five American military planes carrying the last American troops in Afghanistan, including the general and top diplomat in the United States, left Afghanistan. The last of the troops were loaded onto these planes, and then shortly before midnight, these gray C-17 transport jets, one by one, took turns speeding down the single runway and took off under the blanket of darkness into the Afghan sky.

And on the streets of Kabul, there was celebratory gunfire from Taliban fighters celebrating the departure of the last American troops who they had been fighting for 20 years in their country. The final victory of their forever war. Good afternoon, everybody. I'm going to turn the podium over to General Frank McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command. He'll have some opening comments.

And shortly after that, the overall commander, General Frank McKenzie, said, Good afternoon, everyone. I'm here to announce the completion of our withdrawal from Afghanistan and the end of the military mission to evacuate American citizens. That the evacuation operations had closed. Tonight's withdrawal signifies both the end of the military component of the evacuation, but also the end of the nearly 20-year mission that began in Afghanistan shortly after September 11, 2001. That was the end, essentially, of a 20-year war in Afghanistan.

It's been a long day. The operation's gone smoothly so far, and I just look forward to recovering the force completely, getting everybody home. Thank you, General. Thanks for your time. Thank you all. Have a nice afternoon. afternoon. It's such an interesting moment, Eric. It's both historic

and also anticlimactic because it feels like we have been building up to this moment. And when it came, it happened under the cover of darkness very quietly and ahead of schedule by nearly a full day before that August 31st deadline, right? That's right. And that was all for a reason, for several reasons, actually.

There were some concerns about weather. Monday and Tuesday, they could delay the final flight and postpone the deadline. There were concerns about trying to get out in darkness. So they wanted to start Monday evening and use whatever time they had as a cushion in case the plane broke down or something like that. There were concerns that the same crowds that overwhelmed the airport in those early days after the first evacuation flights were taking off would rush the tarmac again. And then finally, there was a very real concern that ISIS-K, the Islamic State branch that had carried out the attack last week that killed 13 service members, would try once again in these final hours. So this was all an effort by

the military to both honor their promise to get out and take in as many Americans and Afghan allies with them, but to get out with the last forces getting out safely. Right. And all those pressures must have been very meaningful for the U.S. to have given up those precious final hours before the deadline, hours that I imagine mattered a great deal to the evacuation operation. And of all the pressures that you just mentioned, it feels like the most urgent one was

terrorism. So can you catch us up on how that terror threat evolved over the past few days since the terror attack on the airport that killed dozens of Afghan civilians and those 13 U.S. service members? Well, since the attack last week on the airport, there's been kind of a cat and mouse game going on between ISIS-K, which is this branch of the Islamic State made up of disaffected Taliban, and the United States military. that the airport was this remarkably tantalizing target for the terrorists to strike, both because of the American military presence there, but also the large crowds of Afghan civilians. Right. And since the attack on the airport, the United States has carried out two drone strikes. The first was carried out in eastern Afghanistan against two ISIS-K senior planners,

who military officials say were actually planning future attacks. The second drone strike was carried out on Sunday against a vehicle in Kabul, about two miles from the airport, that the military says was filled with explosives, either explosive vests to be used by suicide bombers, like the one that detonated outside the gates last week, or just explosives that could be detonated as a car bomb. And of course, there's a controversy over whether they made the correct strike. What do you mean? Well, we've now reported, our colleagues on the ground have interviewed family members at the scene

who say the driver of that car was not an ISIS member. He was an engineer, had nothing to do with the terrorist group, and that the strike actually killed 10 people altogether, including several children that were killed by the blast or by flying glass or other debris. The military insists this was indeed an ISIS target. They won't say publicly how they know this, but sources tell me they've got imagery from drones and other intelligence sources that show two men putting explosives into the back of this white Toyota Corolla, and they're tracking this car in fear it could be a major car bomb. And then just this morning, on Monday morning, there were five rockets that were launched at the airport. Three of them went awry and fell

outside the perimeter, but the U.S. counter rocket system at the airport shot two of them went awry and fell outside the perimeter. But the U.S. counter-rocket system at the airport shot two of them down. So the threat was quite real and quite serious, as Pentagon officials say, right up until the end. Literally, as the final troops were getting ready and preparing to fly out in the hours ahead of their departure, ISIS-K was launching attacks on the airfield. So when we think about why the U.S. would be eager to get out well before that deadline, we should probably realize that every hour that American soldiers shaved off that deadline

was an hour in which civilians and U.S. soldiers were not going to be targets of suicide bombs or rockets at that airport. That's right. I think that weighed heavily on the minds of commanders. But for every hour they shaved off to protect American forces was one fewer hour that they could use to evacuate people out of the airport. And so it was a balancing act for commanders.

Wayne, could they get one last batch of people out, whether they be Americans or Afghans? Could they get one last batch of people out, whether they be Americans or Afghans, could they get one last batch through the gates that were increasingly being locked up before they said, that's it. And the last flights had to be reserved for American troops to get out and get out quickly. We'll be right back. So Eric, now that the United States military and its diplomats have left Kabul, that last flight is gone, I have to imagine that the evacuation operation that we have been talking about with you and our colleagues now for days is over as well. Is that correct?

Well, it is and it isn't. Certainly the massive evacuation that we've seen involving fleets of American and other allied aircraft carrying hundreds, if not thousands, of people to safety is over. But the State Department, the Defense Department, insists there will still be ways for American citizens who remain in Afghanistan, as well as Afghan allies, to get out. How that will take place well as Afghan allies, to get out. How that will take place, will they be able to get out on commercial flights, chartered flights, will they be able to get out over land routes, make their way across the border, particularly those former Afghan military and intelligence officers who are being hunted by the Taliban, will they be able to get out some way? This is still very much an open question.

And how this will all work will, in large part, perhaps rest on this fleeting cooperation between the U.S. and the Taliban to provide safe passage for those who want to leave the country. Well, should those left behind be skeptical or should they believe that U.S. claim that if you're not out today, there's still a pathway out after today from Kabul to Europe or the U.S.? be the main ticket out, as dangerous as it was, making your way past Taliban checkpoints and braving the threat of ISIS-K bombings and just getting through to the gates and then getting on the airfield and waiting hours and hours to get a flight out. Now the path is much murkier,

how you would get out. Either how do you fly out? Who's going to be in charge of that? Who's going to be in charge of the airport? Just in terms of an operating airport that would be secure and that people can make their way to safely and get out that way. There are a lot of questions about how this is going to work from here on in for any American citizens, much less Afghan allies of this effort who want to get out now. So knowing that a certain phase of the evacuation, as you just said, the easier and larger scale phase of it is over and that all efforts to get out now are going to be infinitely harder, let's talk for a moment about who has been evacuated

and who has not been, starting with who has been evacuated. Well, we're talking about a total of over 120,000 people that have been evacuated, roughly, we're talking about a total of over 120,000 people that have been evacuated. Roughly 6,000 American citizens, the U.S. government said today, who wanted to leave have been able to be evacuated. The vast majority of the rest are Afghans. Some of these special interest visa Afghans who spent years working alongside American troops or diplomats in Afghanistan or who provided other services. But many, many more are left behind.

How many? Because what you just described is something on the order of 114,000 Afghan civilians. So how many were not evacuated? Well, by some estimates, there were as many as 300,000 people. Again, largely Afghans of different categories who were seeking to get out, who for whatever reason, either their paperwork wasn't completed, they couldn't pass through the checkpoints, or in the end, there just wasn't enough time to run the gauntlet and get onto the airfield and get on one of these last precious flights to safety. General McKenzie said everybody

who was inside the airport was on a plane by the end. There was nobody left inside the airport stranded, but there were plenty of people outside the wire who did not get a flight out. And he hinted at something that was interesting, Michael, in that he talked about the cooperation throughout these last two weeks between the U.S. military and the Taliban, erstwhile enemies who have actually been working pretty well, all things considered. And he suggested that that cooperation may extend further into the future, even after the military's left, to allow other American citizens who are still in the country now to get out by other means, which he didn't go into.

now to get out by other means, which he didn't go into. Well, what is the U.S. relationship to the country? We have gone from occupying force for 20 years to what exactly? How would you characterize what the relationship is right now? So it's right now a kind of a murky, fluid situation. On Monday night, Secretary of State Tony Blinken said that the core diplomatic staff had left, that essentially the American diplomatic presence in Afghanistan had closed for good. And the diplomatic presence that will engage with Afghanistan had moved to Doha, Qatar. And from there, U.S. will conduct some kind of relations with the Taliban. But there really isn't a relationship right now. It's kind of in limbo.

Why is that? I mean, why, if we're already talking to the Taliban, you have described this cooperation as being pretty constructive. Why don't we have formal relations? And why can't we keep some kind of embassy in Afghanistan? Well, again, I think this, what we've been talking about is a very short-term accommodation these last couple of weeks to get safe passage for Americans and allied Afghans to get out.

And this was basically accommodating the short-term self-interest of both the United States to get its people out, but also for the Taliban to get the foreigners out and allow them to get on with the business of standing up their government. Now we're facing a much broader set of issues, whether to engage diplomatically long-term with the Taliban, whether to continue humanitarian assistance to the country, whether to provide economic assistance and any kind of security assistance that was envisioned to an American-supported Afghan government is out of the question right now. Can you help me understand that, though? Is the Taliban officially now an enemy of the United States as we leave? Is that the definition of the relationship? Is that the dynamic? of the relationship? Is that the dynamic? Well, I'm not sure that the U.S. government would want to classify the Taliban as the enemy right now. Certainly they have been the enemy in the past when the U.S. was fighting the force, but now they control this country. They control a country that's still significant, has some significant interest in the United States, principally the fact that there are still many American citizens inside the country, and there's still

very much a concern of terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS-K that could regroup there. And so to the point where if the Taliban is willing to engage with the United States and help prevent some of these groups, which, like with al-Qaeda, has longstanding ties, to prevent, you know, them from regrouping to carry out attacks against the United States, that would be something the United States would want to, you know, work on. So to the degree that the U.S. will recognize the Taliban as a government, perhaps work with it, perhaps someday in the future have a real diplomatic relationship with, it wants the Taliban to earn that through

cooperation and good deeds that the U.S. wants from the Taliban. That's right. And I think the American officials have said this over and over. They'll judge this Taliban regime coming in by its behavior, by what it does, not necessarily by what it says. And it will build on things, very short-term things, like, first of all, trying to get American citizens out. Then it will build on just its pledge not to allow al-Qaeda or ISIS-K to regroup and be able to carry out attacks against the United States.

So I think you'll see some building blocks that would build confidence or not in this relationship. And I think based on that, we'll see how further diplomatic relations are extended. I think this will be over a long period of time, and we're talking months, if not years, before something like this happens. And, you know, we could see encouraging steps like we've seen just in the last few weeks when both sides could agree on some very narrow goals, but there definitely could be areas in the future, the Taliban's treatment of women, whether or not they do allow al-Qaeda to come back in large numbers and have training camps again. These obviously would be very serious obstacles to any further diplomatic relations between the two. Well, you just hinted at something that I want to better understand, which is how we and our military engage with the ongoing threat of terrorism in Afghanistan. The fear all along, the fear that brought the U.S. to

Afghanistan was that it would be the hosting ground for terrorism that could affect the U.S. And now that we've left, do we still see ourselves as having an obligation to fight terrorism inside Afghanistan? Well, President Biden has made that very clear, that the one area where the commitment to Afghanistan will be unwavering is to make sure that it never can be a sanctuary again for terrorists who would carry out strikes against the United States. And the way he envisions that taking place is by having American drones flying from thousands of miles away in the Persian Gulf, you know, watching over Afghanistan and our surveillance technology trying to pick up on budding plots or cells of al-Qaeda or ISIS in the country that could be plotting against Americans or the American homeland. This will be the commitment,

the main commitment the United States has to Afghanistan in the immediate future is to prevent it from becoming this safe haven again. But what if it's terrorism that just threatens the people of Afghanistan, not the U.S.? Well, sadly, I think that will be something, well, the U.S. will condemn that. And I think there's a very strong likelihood

that these rival terrorist groups, al-Qaeda and ISIS-K, for instance, in the same country, there could be further bloodshed. But so long as it does not threaten Americans or American interests, the United States is not necessarily going to get involved in that.

Mm-hmm. So, Eric, you're one of the few people who have been covering the story of the United States and Afghanistan since it began in late 2001. You were actually a Times military correspondent when the U.S. attacked and invaded Afghanistan. I went back and researched this tonight and couldn't believe just how long you have covered this story. You've traveled to Afghanistan as a reporter during the war, and now here you are covering the final hours of it. And so I wonder what you are thinking about this evening. Well, I mean, it's obviously, part of me is sad. It's

kind of sad for the people of Afghanistan and sad that the mission ended this way, in this kind of chaotic, frenzied way, with the death of 13 American service members and more than 100 Afghans. So that's certainly foremost in my mind now. But I think when I look at this, I think the era of these large military interventions overseas is clearly over. But the era of fighting terrorism is not. That I see lasting for a long, long time. And rather than it having just be in one or two countries, sadly, these different terrorist organizations, Al-Qaeda and ISIS, have successfully exploited local grievances in various corners of the world and enlisted fighters to rally to their cause.

And they've created affiliates from the Sahel in West Africa, to the Sinai, to Central Asia, to the Pacific, to Southeast Asia. And so I think while these large military occupations and all the destruction that they wrought and all the pain and cost they inflicted, those may be over. What isn't done are these small, diffuse terrorist cells that are spread all over the world and the threat that they could spread into Europe and the United States still. Not on a grand scale, but lethal enough to kill Americans, a handful here, a handful there. And that's really the problem that the United States is facing.

How do you stamp that out? That's going to be the real challenge. Well, Eric, thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you very much. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. What I can tell you is that the last couple days have not been good for our state, and for the next several days and weeks, they will not be easy either. Hurricane Ida has left more than one million people across Louisiana without electricity,

cut off the water supply to more than 300,000, and forced some 2,000 to relocate to shelters. But so far, officials said, the death toll from the storm remains low at three people. the death toll from the storm remains low at three people. And the vast system of levees rebuilt after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 appeared to succeed in protecting the city of New Orleans from catastrophic flooding. If there is a silver lining, and today it's kind of hard to see one, it is that our levee systems really did perform extremely well. However, the full extent of the storm's damage remains unknown, and a major search

and rescue operation is still underway. Today's episode was produced by Claire Tennesketter, Annie Brown, and Stella Tan. It was edited by Paige Cowett and was engineered by and contains original music by Marion Lozano. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Bilbaro.

See you tomorrow.