Taliban asserts new gains against Afghan-based IS offshoot amid skepticism

ISLAMABAD —

The Taliban said Monday that their security forces had killed and captured several “key members” of a regional Islamic State affiliate for plotting recent terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, alleging that the suspects had crossed over from Pakistan.

Zabihullah Mujahid, the Taliban spokesperson, listed the claims and so-called successes against Islamic State-Khorasan, or IS-K, locally known as Daesh, in a formal statement without providing evidence to support them.

The assertions came after the country’s three immediate neighbors and Russia jointly urged the de facto Kabul government this past Friday to take “visible and verifiable actions” against transnational terrorist groups, including IS-K, on Afghan soil.

Mujahid said the IS-K operatives in question had been involved in several recent attacks in Afghanistan. They included a suicide bombing in the Afghan capital earlier this month and a May gun attack in the central city of Bamiyan, he added.

Both attacks resulted in the deaths of at least ten people, including three Spanish tourists, with IS-K claiming credit for them at the time.

The Taliban spokesperson said that IS-K insurgents had established “new operational bases and training camps” in the Pakistani border provinces of Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa after fleeing Afghan counterterrorism security operations.

“From these new bases, they continue to orchestrate attacks, both within Afghanistan and in other countries,” he claimed, noting that “some of the arrested individuals had recently returned to Afghanistan from the Daesh Khorasan training camp” in Balochistan.

Islamabad has not immediately responded to the Taliban’s allegations, which came two days after neighboring Pakistan, China, and Iran, along with Russia, at a meeting in New York this past Friday, urged the Taliban to eradicate bases of IS-K and other transnational terrorist groups in Afghanistan.

The ministerial meeting warned that these Afghan-based terrorist entities “continue to pose a serious threat to regional and global security.” According to a joint statement released after the huddle, the participants recognized the Taliban’s efforts in combating IS-K.

“They called on de facto authorities to take visible and verifiable actions in fulfilling the international obligations and commitments made by Afghanistan to fight terrorism, dismantle, and eliminate all terrorist groups equally and non-discriminatory and prevent the use of Afghan territory against its neighbors, the region, and beyond,” the statement stressed.

It identified the groups in question as IS-K, al-Qaida, Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement, ETIM, which opposes China, anti-Iran Jaish ul-Adl, and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, TTP, as well as the Baloch Liberation Army, BLA, both waging attacks on Pakistani security forces and civilians.

The United Nations, in a recent security assessment, also described TTP as “the largest terrorist group” in Afghanistan, with several thousand operatives, noting that IS-K activities in the country are also turning into a significant regional threat. It noted that the group had intensified cross-border attacks in Pakistan since the Taliban regained power three years ago and is being facilitated by the de facto Afghan rulers.

A new report issued Monday documented nearly 1,000 deaths of civilians and security forces in Pakistan during the first nine months of 2024. The Islamabad-based independent Center for Research and Security Studies stated that most of the fatalities resulted from attacks by TTP and BLA-led insurgents.

Pakistani authorities have consistently urged Kabul to extradite TTP leaders and militants to Islamabad for trial for instigating deadly violence in the country.

The Taliban has rejected Pakistani and U.N. allegations, saying they are not allowing any foreign groups, including TTP, to threaten other countries from Afghanistan.

The United States has designated TTP and BLA as global terrorist organizations.

Taliban asserts new gains against Afghan-based IS offshoot amid skepticism
read more

A child bride won the right to divorce – now the Taliban say it doesn’t count

Mamoon Durrani

BBC Afghan Service
Kawoon Khamoosh

BBC World Service
28 Sept 2024
BBC Nazdana looking at her divorce documentsBBC
Nazdana fled from Afghanistan with her divorce documents

There is a young woman sheltering under a tree between two busy roads clutching a pile of documents to her chest.

These pieces of paper are more important to Bibi Nazdana than anything in the world: they are the divorce granted to her after a two-year court battle to free herself from life as a child bride.

They are the same papers a Taliban court has invalidated – a victim of the group’s hardline interpretation on Sharia (religious law) which has seen women effectively silenced in Afghanistan’s legal system.

Nazdana’s divorce is one of tens of thousands of court rulings revoked since the Taliban took control of the country three years ago this month.

It took just 10 days from them sweeping into the capital, Kabul, for the man she was promised to at seven to ask the courts to overturn the divorce ruling she had fought so hard for.

Hekmatullah had initially appeared to demand his wife when Nazdana was 15. It was eight years since her father had agreed to what is known as a ‘bad marriage’, which seeks to turn a family “enemy” into a “friend”.

She immediately approached the court – then operating under the US-backed Afghan government – for a separation, repeatedly telling them she could not marry the farmer, now in his 20s. It took two years, but finally a ruling was made in her favour: “The court congratulated me and said, ‘You are now separated and free to marry whomever you want.'”

But after Hekmatullah appealed the ruling in 2021, Nazdana was told she would not be allowed to plead her own case in person.

“At the court, the Taliban told me I shouldn’t return to court because it was against Sharia. They said my brother should represent me instead,” says Nazdana.

“They told us if we didn’t comply,” says Shams, Nazdana’s 28-year-old brother, “they would hand my sister over to him (Hekmatullah) by force.”

Her former husband, and now a newly signed up member of the Taliban, won the case. Shams’ attempts to explain to the court in their home province of Uruzgan that her life would be in danger fell on deaf ears.

The siblings decided they had been left with no choice but to flee.

Nazdana and her brother shams
Nazdana and her brother Shams say they had to flee to save their lives

When the Taliban returned to power three years ago, they promised to do away with the corruption of the past and deliver “justice” under Sharia, a version of Islamic law.

Since then, the Taliban say they have looked at some 355,000 cases.

Most were criminal cases – an estimated 40% are disputes over land and a further 30% are family issues including divorce, like Nazdana’s.

Nazdana’s divorce ruling was dug out after the BBC got exclusive access to the back offices of the Supreme Court in the capital, Kabul.

Abdulwahid Haqani – media officer for Afghanistan’s Supreme Court – confirms the ruling in favour of Hekmatullah, saying it was not valid because he “wasn’t present”.

“The previous corrupt administration’s decision to cancel Hekmatullah and Nazdana’s marriage was against the Sharia and rules of marriage,” he explains.

But the promises to reform the justice system have gone further than simply reopening settled cases.

The Taliban have also systematically removed all judges – both male and female – and replaced them with people who supported their hardline views.

Women were also declared unfit to participate in the judicial system.

“Women aren’t qualified or able to judge because in our Sharia principles the judiciary work requires people with high intelligence,” says Abdulrahim Rashid, director of foreign relations and communications at Taliban’s Supreme Court.

Abdulrahim Rashid, Taliban's supreme court
\
Abdulrahim Rashid, Director of foreign relations and communications at Taliban’s supreme court

‘If we can’t speak, why live?’ – BBC meets women after new Taliban law

The hospital struggling to save its starving babies

The Afghan women who escaped to get an education abroad

For the women who worked in the system, the loss is felt heavily – and not just for themselves.

Former Supreme Court judge Fawzia Amini – who fled the country after the Taliban returned – says there is little hope for women’s protections to improve under the law if there are no women in the courts.

“We played an important role,” she says. “For example, the Elimination of Violence against Women law in 2009 was one of our achievements. We also worked on the regulation of shelters for women, orphan guardianship and the anti-human trafficking law, to name a few.”

She also rubbishes the Taliban overturning previous rulings, like Nazdana’s.

“If a woman divorces her husband and the court documents are available as evidence then that’s final. Legal verdicts can’t change because a regime changes,” says Ms Amini.

“Our civil code is more than half a century old,” she adds. “It’s been practised since even before the Taliban were founded.

“All civil and penal codes, including those for divorce, have been adapted from the Quran.”

Taliban court decisions
A shelf for resettled court cases of the previous government at Taliban’s supreme court

But the Taliban say Afghanistan’s former rulers simply weren’t Islamic enough.

Instead, they largely rely on Hanafi Fiqh (jurisprudence) religious law, which dates back to the 8th Century – albeit updated to “meet the current needs”, according to Abdulrahim Rashid.

“The former courts made decisions based on a penal and civil code. But now all decisions are based on Sharia [Islamic law],” he adds, proudly gesturing at the pile of cases they have already sorted through.

Ms Amini is less impressed by the plans for Afghanistan’s legal system going forward.

“I have a question for the Taliban. Did their parents marry based on these laws or based on the laws that their sons are going to write?” she asks.

Under the tree between two roads in an unnamed neighbouring country, none of this is any comfort to Nazdana.

Now just 20, she has been here for a year, clutching her divorce papers and hoping someone will help her.

“I have knocked on many doors asking for help, including the UN, but no-one has heard my voice,” she says.

“Where is the support? Don’t I deserve freedom as a woman?”

The BBC has been unable to reach Hekmatullah for comment.

A child bride won the right to divorce – now the Taliban say it doesn’t count
read more

Iran Can No Longer Accept Afghan Refugees

Eskandar Momeni, Iran’s Minister of Interior, told reporters that his country can no longer accept Afghan citizens and that the deportation of illegal migrants is one of Iran’s top priorities.

The minister also said that the Iranian law enforcement forces are at the forefront of this issue, and in line with the demands of the people and the government, this matter has been placed on their agenda. He further clarified that all necessary plans for the implementation of this decision have been prepared.

The Interior Minister said: “They are our brothers. We share many commonalities; however, our country can no longer accommodate them. All of the country’s resources and subsidies are being spent on this, and therefore, our top priority, with a proper plan, is to deport those who have entered the country illegally.”

At the same time, some Afghan refugees in Iran have criticized what they describe as increasing restrictions imposed by the Iranian government on Afghan citizens. These refugees claim that their residency documents have been declared invalid by the Iranian government, and their bank cards and SIM cards have been deactivated.

Mehdi Alizadeh, an Afghan refugee in Iran, told TOLOnews: “There has been violence; they have been insulted and humiliated. They have insulted their nation and land, and even those migrants who have legal documents have been deported.”

Akbar Soltani, another Afghan refugee in Iran, said: “Since 2021, census forms or residency permits for migrants have been declared invalid, and there have also been issues with SIM cards and bank cards for migrants.”

In recent months, restrictions on Afghan migrants in Iran have increased, with Iranian officials, including the Chief Commander of Law Enforcement Forces, repeatedly emphasizing the deportation of Afghan migrants from the country.

Iran Can No Longer Accept Afghan Refugees
read more

Quadrilateral Meeting Stresses Cooperation with Islamic Emirate

The Islamic Emirate welcomed the stance of these four countries regarding dialogue with Afghanistan’s interim government.

A quadrilateral meeting of Russia, Iran, China, and Pakistan was held on the sidelines of the 79th UN General Assembly session to discuss the situation in Afghanistan.

The Russian Foreign Ministry announced in a statement that participants in the meeting emphasized that without dialogue and cooperation with the interim government, there is no solution for Afghanistan.

The statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry read: “On September 27, the foreign ministers of the regional quartet – Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan – held their third meeting on the Afghanistan agenda on the sidelines of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov took part in the event. The parties compared their approaches to the Afghanistan settlement and underscored that there was no alternative to establishing mutually respectful dialogue and partnership relations with the current authorities of Afghanistan.”

Fazl Rahman Orya, a political analyst, told TOLOnews: “Eastern powers like Russia have been engaging with the new Afghan government since day one, and this engagement continues. For the Western world, there is no other option but to engage with the Afghan government as well.”

At the same time, the Iranian Foreign Ministry also issued a statement, noting that the meeting was hosted by Iran’s Foreign Minister. According to the statement, Seyyed Abbas Araghchi warned about Afghanistan’s security situation during the meeting and emphasized the need to form a united front against terrorists.

Sayed Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister, stated during the quadrilateral meeting: “Terrorist groups like Daesh not only threaten the people of Afghanistan but also the security of the region. Neighboring countries cannot allow terrorism and violent extremism to take root in Afghanistan.”

The Islamic Emirate welcomed the stance of these four countries regarding dialogue with Afghanistan’s interim government, stating that such dialogue paves the way for improved political relations.

Hamidullah Fetrat, the Deputy Spokesperson for the Islamic Emirate, said: “We welcome and affirm the positive stance of Russia, China, Iran, and Pakistan, which consider dialogue with the Islamic Emirate and political dialogue as the only solution. The reality is that dialogue and political discourse between countries facilitate positive engagement.”

Sayed Muqadam Amin, another political analyst, stated: “There is a need to establish regional and even global convergence to obtain firsthand information, which could serve as a good plan for coordinating against terrorism.”

During the meeting, Iran’s Foreign Minister highlighted his country’s hosting of more than six million Afghan refugees and called on the international community to cooperate with the countries hosting these refugees.

Quadrilateral Meeting Stresses Cooperation with Islamic Emirate
read more

Kabul’s Response to Sharif: Terrorist Groups Not in Afghanistan

Sharif also emphasized the need for an inclusive government and respect for women’s rights in Afghanistan.

The Islamic Emirate has rejected the statements made by the Prime Minister of Pakistan at the UN General Assembly, who claimed the presence of terrorist groups in Afghanistan. The Islamic Emirate once again pledged that Afghanistan will not pose a threat to any country.

Hamidullah Fetrat, the Deputy Spokesperson for the Islamic Emirate, told TOLOnews that the interim government supports positive regional policies and will not allow any foreign group to operate in Afghanistan.

The deputy spokesperson of the Islamic Emirate said: “Afghanistan does not pose a threat or danger to any country. We do not permit foreign groups to operate in Afghanistan, nor do we allow anyone to use Afghan soil as a threat to others.”

Shehbaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, claimed at the UN General Assembly that terrorist groups are present in Afghanistan and that the Islamic Emirate should take action against them.

During the 79th session of the UN General Assembly, Sharif also emphasized the need for an inclusive government and respect for women’s rights in Afghanistan.

Shehbaz Sharif said at the session: “We endorse and share the international expectation, that the Afghan Interim Government would respect human rights, including the rights of women and girls, and promote political inclusion. In particular, the interim government must take effective actions to neutralize all terrorist groups within Afghanistan, especially those responsible for cross-border terrorism against neighboring countries.”

Australia’s Foreign Minister also criticized the restrictions imposed on women in Afghanistan during the session, stating that these restrictions hinder Afghanistan’s progress.

Penny Wong, Australia’s Foreign Minister, said: “Australia will join Germany, Canada and the Netherlands to take unprecedented action to hold Afghanistan to account under international law for the Taliban’s treatment of women and girls.”

Rashid Meredov, the Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan, also emphasized during the session that supporting the people of Afghanistan is the most crucial aspect for ensuring regional security.

The Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan stated: “The most important aspect of ensuring security is cooperation in the Afghan direction and support for the people of Afghanistan in their aspirations to begin peaceful, constructive work to rebuild the economy and social sphere and solve humanitarian problems.”

On the sidelines of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly, the Foreign Minister of Uzbekistan and the UN Secretary-General also discussed the situation in Afghanistan.

Kabul’s Response to Sharif: Terrorist Groups Not in Afghanistan
read more

Foreign, Domestic Companies Considering Investments Totaling $5 Billion

USAID supported major projects in Afghanistan, including CASA-1000, but halted its operations after the Islamic Emirate’s return to power.

The Economic Affairs Office of the Prime Minister has announced that dozens of domestic and foreign companies are interested in investing over $5 billion in Afghanistan.

According to the statement from the Economic Affairs Office, domestic and foreign investors aim to invest in sectors such as agriculture, infrastructure, industry, energy, mining, telecommunications, healthcare, and transportation in the country.

Hamidullah Fitrat, the deputy spokesperson of the Islamic Emirate, said: “Domestic and foreign companies have shown interest in investing approximately 5.348 billion dollars in agriculture, infrastructure, industry, energy, mining, telecommunications, healthcare, and transport sectors.”

Meanwhile, the Minister of State for International Cooperation of Qatar discussed the situation in Afghanistan and development projects in the country during a meeting with the Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Mohammad Nabi Afghan, an economic expert, commented on the activities of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), saying, “USAID was very active and greatly supported the private sector, particularly in assisting farmers with fruit exports and in infrastructure projects.”

Sayed Masood, another economic expert, highlighted the importance of USAID’s activities, saying, “I believe if USAID resumes its operations in Afghanistan after three years, it will create a sense of regional trust.”

The Ministry of Economy has emphasized the significance of USAID resuming its activities for the country’s economic growth and stressed the need for USAID and other organizations to restart their operations in Afghanistan.

Abdul Latif Nazari, Deputy Minister of Economy, told TOLOnews: “USAID can help Afghanistan in economic development, including the growth of agriculture, trade, and small and medium-sized industries, as well as managing natural resources like the environment and infrastructure issues such as water supply, electricity, and road construction.”

USAID supported major projects in Afghanistan, including CASA-1000, but halted its operations after the Islamic Emirate’s return to power.

Foreign, Domestic Companies Considering Investments Totaling $5 Billion
read more

New GOP-backed bill would ban aid to Afghanistan to avoid giving US dollars to the Taliban

A group of Republican lawmakers is introducing a new bill that would cease all aid dollars to Afghanistan over concerns of interception by the Taliban.

“The Biden-Harris administration’s disastrous withdrawal has plunged the country back under Taliban rule, and now it turns out that our taxpayer dollars are being used to the benefit of the Taliban,” Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., sponsor of the legislation, told Fox News Digital.

“This legislation is needed so we can ensure that no more of our tax dollars are being irresponsibly used in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.”

placeholder

The House bill is co-sponsored by Republican Reps. Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Nick Langworthy of New York, Barry Moore of Alabama, Erlic Burlison of Missouri, Matt Rosendale of Montana and Randy Feenstra of Iowa.

The U.S. is the largest donor to Afghanistan. It spent a total of $21 billion on the nation and Afghan refugees who have been evacuated since the withdrawal. However, critics say much of that aid ends up in lining the pockets of the Taliban, who they say have taken control of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in the country.

The United Nations (U.N.), meanwhile, has flown in some $2.9 billion in U.S. currency cash to Afghanistan since the Taliban seized control, the bulk of that being from funds allocated by the U.S., and at least some of which ends up in the Taliban-controlled central bank, according to the SIGAR report from July. 

The Taliban “taxes” this cash at multiple points of distribution.

The bill would prohibit federal agencies from giving any direct cash assistance to Afghanistan and prohibit any taxpayer dollars from going to the U.N. for the purpose of assisting Afghanistan. It also prohibits Federal Reserve Banks from selling U.S. currency to the U.N. for the purpose of direct cash assistance to Afghanistan.

In a briefing to the U.N. Security Council on March 6, Roza Otunbayeva, the U.N.’s special representative for Afghanistan, did not mention the money going to Da Afghanistan central bank but said it was necessary to get medical care and food for Afghans.

The shipments have “injected liquidity to the local economy that has in large part allowed the private sector to continue to function and averted a fiscal crisis,” Otunbayeva told the council.

In a letter provided in response to the SIGAR report, the State Department said the U.N. was in charge of managing the cash transfer program.

“We remain committed to providing critical, life-saving humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people. We will continue to monitor assistance programs and seek to mitigate the risk that U.S. assistance could indirectly benefit the Taliban or could be diverted to unintended recipients,” the letter said.

For 20 years prior to the Taliban takeover, Afghanistan received some $8 billion in foreign assistance per year, representing 40% of its gross domestic product and financing three quarters of the government’s public expenditures. When the U.S. and other foreign entities stopped supplying aid, the country fell into an economic crisis – and aid dollars began flowing once again.

In June, the House passed a bill that would force the State Department to investigate which countries give aid to the Taliban – and also get U.S. assistance themselves.

New GOP-backed bill would ban aid to Afghanistan to avoid giving US dollars to the Taliban
read more

Taliban to be taken to international court over gender discrimination

in New York

The Taliban are to be taken to the international court of justice for gender discrimination by Canada, Australia, Germany and the Netherlands in a groundbreaking move.

The move announced at the UN general assembly is the first time the ICJ, based in The Hague, has been used by one country to take another to court over gender discrimination.

The case is being brought under the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, which was adopted by the general assembly in 1979 and brought into force in 1981.

Afghanistan, prior to the 2021 Taliban takeover of the country, ratified the convention in 2003.

In the first legal move of this type since the Taliban took over, it is expected that Afghanistan would have six months to provide a response before the ICJ would hold a hearing and probably propose provisional measures.

Advocates of the course argue that even if the Taliban refuse to acknowledge the court’s authority, an ICJ ruling would have a deterrent effect on other states seeking to normalise diplomatic relations with the Taliban. Signatories to the ICJ are expected to abide by its rulings.

There has been concern that the UN has held talks with the Taliban in which women’s issues have been excluded from the agenda in an attempt to persuade the Taliban to attend.

The initiative has the support of three female foreign ministers: Penny Wong from Australia, Annalena Baerbock from Germany, and Mélanie Joly from Canada. It is also being backed by the Dutch foreign minister, Caspar Veldkamp.

In the latest round of suppression in Afghanistan the Taliban have decreed that Afghan women are prohibited from speaking in public, prompting an online campaign in which Afghan women sing in protest.

At a UN side event this week the actor Meryl Streep said: “A female cat has more freedom than a woman. A cat may go sit on her front stoop and feel the sun on her face. She may chase a squirrel into the park. A squirrel has more rights than a girl in Afghanistan today because the public parks have been closed to women and girls by the Taliban. A bird may sing in Kabul, but a girl may not.”

The countries involved in the litigation say they are willing to negotiate with the Taliban in good faith to end gender discrimination, but will, if the necessary stages prove fruitless, seek a hearing at the ICJ.

Last month, the Taliban published a new set of vice and virtue laws that said women must not leave the house without being fully covered and could not sing or raise their voices in public.

Streep spoke alongside Afghan activists and human rights defenders, who called on the UN to act to protect and restore the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan

Asila Wardak, a leader of the Women’s Forum on Afghanistan, said that the system of what has been described as gender apartheid being imposed on women and girls in Afghanistan, was not just an Afghan issue, but part of the “global fight against extremism”.

Akila Radhakrishnan, strategic legal advisor on gender justice at the Atlantic Council thinktank, said: “This case, by centering violations of women’s rights not only has the potential to deliver much needed justice to the women and girls of Afghanistan, but also forge new precedents for gender justice.”

Taliban to be taken to international court over gender discrimination
read more

House Condemns Biden and Harris Over Afghanistan Withdrawal

Reporting from Capitol Hill

The New York Times

Ten Democrats joined the G.O.P.-led effort to rebuke 15 senior members of the Biden administration for the failures of the Afghanistan withdrawal in a symbolic vote.

A bipartisan House majority passed a resolution on Wednesday condemning President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and 13 other current and former members of the administration over their roles in the chaotic and deadly U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, after 10 Democrats joined all Republicans in delivering the rare and sweeping rebuke.

The 219-to-194 vote was the House’s final roll call before members departed Washington to focus on the election, in which control of the chamber is up for grabs. Though the resolution was uniquely broad and direct in condemning the president, members of his cabinet and top advisers in a personal capacity, instead of as an administration, the vote was symbolic because the measure carries no force of law.

Still, the participation of 10 Democrats — almost all of them facing tight re-election contests — buoyed the Republicans behind the effort to formally hold senior administration officials primarily responsible for the failures of the withdrawal in the summer of 2021, which left 13 U.S. service members dead. Democratic leaders have dismissed the resolution as a politically biased crusade.

“Ten Democrats just joined me in condemning Biden-Harris admin officials who played key roles in the deadly Afghanistan withdrawal,” Representative Michael McCaul, the Texas Republican who is the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement on social media after the vote. “I am glad these colleagues put politics aside and voted to do what was right — deliver accountability to the American people.”

“After their laughingstock flop of an impeachment investigation, they’re flailing about now to attack the president or the vice president however they can,” Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, who opposed the Afghanistan measure, said after Wednesday’s vote. “The country sees it as cheap election-year antics and games.”

Republicans began the congressional session signaling that their investigations, which ran the gamut from Afghanistan to the business dealings of Mr. Biden’s son Hunter, could deliver serious, tangible consequences for the president, including even impeachment. Earlier this year, the G.O.P.-led House impeached Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, over the administration’s border policies, voted to recommend contempt charges for Attorney General Merrick B. Garland for failing to comply with a subpoena, and rebuked Ms. Harris for her handling of immigration and security at the southern border.

But efforts to take similar aim at the president ran aground, particularly after Mr. Biden exited the presidential race. In the last several weeks, the G.O.P. has been scrambling to refocus its scrutiny on Ms. Harris, now the Democratic nominee, who had not previously been the main target of any investigations.

Republicans defended the pivot, and the fact that their final, pre-election punch against the administration’s top members was effectively a messaging resolution, as a satisfactory outcome.

Representative Chip Roy, Republican of Texas, added in an interview: “Democrats effectively impeached Biden when they abandoned him in July and went with Kamala Harris. Democrats executed their own president, politically.”

Democrats said the resolution was a politically craven effort to sully Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris by cherry-picking evidence from the Afghanistan investigation that would put them in a bad light. Mr. Biden’s approval ratings fell sharply after the chaotic withdrawal and never recovered.

“Could it have something to do with the elections that are coming up in less than 45 days?” Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs panel, said on the floor, dismissing Wednesday’s move as intended “solely to attack the Biden administration in an election year.”

Mr. McCaul had recommended that both Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris be rebuked in a 353-page report that the panel’s Republicans released this month, blaming the “Biden-Harris administration” for the failures of the withdrawal. Former President Donald J. Trump has asserted that Ms. Harris was responsible for the deaths of the 13 service members during the evacuation because she professed to be the last person in the room when Mr. Biden made the decision to withdraw.

Ms. Harris has in turn accused Mr. Trump of trying to exploit the members’ deaths for political gain, including by taking campaign photos and videos at Arlington National Cemetery. The G.O.P.’s report largely excused Mr. Trump from culpability, despite his administration’s having struck the deal with the Taliban that pledged the United States to a timeline to depart Afghanistan.

Condemnation resolutions are often used to express lawmakers’ animus against policies, adversaries, terrorist groups and actions that lawmakers deem reprehensible enough to demand congressional castigation. But they do not carry formal consequences, beyond shaming the targets of the resolutions in a more formal manner than the heated debates that are a daily occurrence on Capitol Hill.

Among the people the resolution condemned alongside Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris are Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser; Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken; Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III; and certain current and former press secretaries for the White House, State Department and Pentagon. The resolution did not fault any uniformed military officials for the withdrawal.

The Democrats who joined Republicans in voting for the measure were Representatives Yadira Caraveo of Colorado, Henry Cuellar of Texas, Don Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, Jeff Jackson of North Carolina, Greg Landsman of Ohio, Susie Lee of Nevada, Mary Peltola of Alaska and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington. Their offices did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

House Condemns Biden and Harris Over Afghanistan Withdrawal
read more

House Panel Recommends Holding Blinken in Contempt

Reporting from Washington

The New York Times

Republicans on the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday recommended holding Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken in contempt of Congress for failing to testify in their investigation of the chaotic U.S. exit from Afghanistan, in what Democrats charged was a political stunt ahead of the election.

The committee’s party-line vote came just days before the House was set to disband for the campaign trail and as Mr. Blinken was in New York, participating in high-level diplomatic meetings during the United Nations General Assembly.

It is one of two expected Afghanistan-related moves in the House this week. The full chamber is also expected to vote on a resolution condemning 15 senior members of the Biden administration — including President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and Mr. Blinken — for their roles in the withdrawal.

Representative Michael McCaul, Republican of Texas and the committee’s chairman, said he was forced to pursue contempt charges after Mr. Blinken declined for months to commit to a September date to give testimony.

But Democrats said Mr. McCaul’s insistence on a September appearance was politically motivated and accused Republicans of trying to damage the Biden administration at the height of a critical campaign season.

“Why is there suddenly a rush to hold this contempt vote, when the secretary has made it very clear, time and time again, that he is willing to testify?” asked Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the panel. “One reason: politics.”

House Republicans have stepped up their attacks on the Biden administration over the U.S. departure from Afghanistan as it becomes an issue on the campaign trail. Former President Donald J. Trump has blamed Ms. Harris for the deaths of 13 U.S. service members during the evacuation. Ms. Harris has accused Mr. Trump of trying to exploit the casualties for political gain, criticizing him for taking campaign photos and video at Arlington National Cemetery.

This month, Republicans on the panel released a 353-page report accusing the “Biden-Harris administration” of bumbling the withdrawal. It largely absolved Mr. Trump of any responsibility, though his administration reached the agreement with the Taliban committing the United States to a timeline for its departure.

Days before the report was released, Mr. McCaul issued a subpoena for Mr. Blinken’s testimony, ordering him to appear before the panel on Sept. 19. Mr. Blinken ended up being in Egypt that day. So on Sept. 18, Mr. McCaul issued a superseding subpoena, ordering Mr. Blinken to appear on Tuesday — the same day Mr. Biden was set to deliver a speech to the U.N. General Assembly.

“I believe you would agree U.S. representation at the highest levels in these engagements is essential,” Mr. Blinken wrote to Mr. McCaul in a letter dated Sunday and obtained by The New York Times. He added that he was “profoundly disappointed you have once again chosen to send me a subpoena and threaten contempt, rather than engage with me through the constitutionally mandated accommodation process.”

In a follow-up letter dated Monday and also obtained by The Times, Naz Durakoglu, the assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, said the Justice Department had concluded that Mr. Blinken could not be compelled to abandon his diplomatic duties at the United Nations to comply with the panel’s subpoena.

“As a matter of law,” she wrote, “the secretary may not be punished by civil or criminal means for failing to appear at the scheduled hearing.”

But the Republicans on the panel were not swayed by such appeals.

“Secretary Blinken is hiding at the United Nations General Assembly in New York,” said Representative Jim Baird, Republican of Indiana.

Other G.O.P. lawmakers recommended that House members take matters into their own hands.

“I recommend the use of inherent contempt,” said Representative Keith Self, Republican of Texas, referring to the House’s power to fine or imprison people who flout congressional subpoenas, without relying on the Justice Department to bring charges. While the House has not invoked inherent contempt in almost a century, House Republicans tried and failed to impose a $10,000-per-day fine on Attorney General Merrick B. Garland this summer.

It is unclear when the House might vote on a contempt resolution for Mr. Blinken. Earlier this year, the chamber voted to recommend that Mr. Garland be held in contempt of Congress and to impeach Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary.

The committee issued two previous subpoenas to Mr. Blinken for documents in the course of its Afghanistan investigation.

Edward Wong contributed reporting.

House Panel Recommends Holding Blinken in Contempt
read more