Follow us on social

2021-08-19t195826z_771805846_rc2j8p9g2idx_rtrmadp_3_afghanistan-conflict-germany-returning-evacuee-scaled

Four steps Biden can take now to get evacuees out quickly

Now is not the time for bureaucracy or delay. The United States will only get one opportunity to get this right.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

President Biden’s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan ended an unsustainable U.S. military intervention with no end in sight. Over the last two decades of the war in Afghanistan countless Afghans assisted the American mission by working as interpreters and in civil society and human rights. 

Right now, Washington is undertaking a massive evacuation of U.S. citizens and permanent residents, special immigrant visa applicants (SIVs), and other refugees with priority statuses. Kabul’s airport only has one runway and the Taliban have set up checkpoints outside some of its gates and along routes to the airport. Now is not the time for bureaucracy or delay. The United States will only get one opportunity to evacuate as many vulnerable people as possible. Below find four steps the Biden administration can take immediately to accomplish this goal. 

Establish a through line between U.S. government agencies and civil society. There are several organizations that have worked around the clock for months on the issue of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) and refugees with priority statuses. These organizations are staffed with subject-matter experts who have continuous contact with at-risk individuals and often have significant military or government experience. The Pentagon and Department of State should take advantage of this resource through an organized joint effort. It is also critical that information from U.S. government agencies is distributed through an established pipeline. Ad hoc releases of information and rumor mills have only induced panic. 

Secure the airport. With the Taliban in control of Kabul it is increasingly difficult to secure the airport and its immediate surroundings. Nevertheless, a more orderly process would decrease chaos and entry points could be made more efficient to avoid trapping vulnerable individuals who are turned away or asked to wait and find themselves stuck in limbo between airport gates and Taliban checkpoints. Increasing consular staff and services inside the airport will also help. 

Stop fixating on the paperwork. There should not be reports of C-17s departing from Kabul half filled. A fixation on prioritizing certain categories of evacuees over others, minutiae of paperwork, and whether an Afghan national is in contact with a U.S. based organization is slowing down the evacuation process. U.S. soldiers are not trained to serve as customs officials. A minimal set of details should be verified and then individuals should be evacuated to a third country. Details can be worked out in third countries and individuals who do not qualify for entry into the United States can be referred to the UNHCR or third countries. President Biden himself appeared to endorse this approach in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos when he said, “I had a meeting today for a couple hours in the Situation Room just below here. There are Afghan women outside the gate. I told 'em, ‘Get 'em on the planes. Get them out. Get them out. Get their families out if you can.’"

Use backdoor diplomacy where possible. The Taliban have set-up checkpoints, discharged their weapons, and harassed and beat individuals attempting to make their way to the airport. The United States has limited control over these actions, but keeping the communication lines open could prove critical to preventing the situation from deteriorating even more. A clear message should be delivered to the Taliban that slowing down the evacuation is not in their interests.


A boy is processed through an Evacuee Control Checkpoint (ECC) during an evacuation at Hamid Karzai International Airport, Kabul, Afghanistan August 18, 2021. Picture taken August 18, 2021. U.S. Marine Corps/Staff Sgt. Victor Mancilla/Handout via REUTERS THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN SUPPLIED BY A THIRD PARTY./File Photo
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.