House Panel Considers Contempt for Blinken Over Afghanistan Testimony

In a developing situation in Washington, the Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee is poised to recommend that Secretary of State Antony Blinken be held in contempt of Congress. This action arises from ongoing tensions regarding Blinken’s testimony concerning the tumultuous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Committee Chairman Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas issued a subpoena to Blinken earlier this month, insisting on his testimony and warning that he could be found in contempt if he did not comply by September 19. According to McCaul, it is crucial for Blinken to appear as the committee deliberates on potential legislation aimed at preventing such extensive failures in the future.

The State Department, however, has stated that it proposed alternative dates for Blinken’s appearance. The department cited the Secretary’s overseas travel, which is part of ongoing U.S. efforts to negotiate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. They have offered Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell as a substitute if the committee was adamant about last week’s date.

State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller expressed confusion over the committee’s decision to move forward with the contempt action, labeling it “extraordinarily unnecessary and unproductive.” Miller emphasized that Blinken had previously responded to questions regarding Afghanistan during his 14 appearances before Congress, including four specific testimonies before McCaul’s committee.

The committee’s spokesperson, Emily Cassil, countered with accusations against the State Department, suggesting consistent obfuscation and avoidance of accountability regarding the issues raised.

McCaul postponed the meeting by five days to allow for another opportunity for Blinken to testify. The latest notice states that if Blinken continues to avoid appearing, the committee will proceed with a full markup suggesting that the U.S. House of Representatives find him in contempt for defying a legitimate subpoena.

Although Blinken remains in the U.S., he is attending the United Nations General Assembly in New York City and engaging with global leaders, which complicates his availability for the hearing.

Miller reiterated that the committee’s choice of date has been unilaterally decided without proper communication, suggesting this approach lacked good faith. As Congress prepares for a recess starting next week that will last until October, the opportunities for Blinken to testify are becoming increasingly limited.

Even if the committee’s measure succeeds in passing, the entire House will need to vote on whether to refer the matter to the Justice Department for potential prosecution—a prosecution that is deemed unlikely under the current Biden administration.

Previously, the Republican majority of the committee released a report documenting their investigation of the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. This report accuses the Biden administration of misleading the public about the circumstances surrounding the withdrawal.

The report is sharply critical of President Biden, asserting that he disregarded urgent warnings from military and national security advisors as well as allies about the dangers of a complete withdrawal. It contends that he prioritized politics and his legacy over protecting national security interests.

Tragically, the evacuation resulted in the deaths of 13 U.S. service members in a suicide bombing in Kabul. McCaul stated in a recent interview that this tragic event could have been mitigated if the State Department had effectively executed the evacuation plan.

The committee’s investigation included 18 transcribed interviews with various Biden administration officials and a review of over 20,000 pages of related documents, some retrieved through subpoenas. Notably, Blinken did not participate in this testimony.

In response to the Republican report, Democratic members of the Foreign Affairs Committee produced a defense of the Biden administration’s actions, highlighting the rapidly changing conditions during the withdrawal. Ranking Democrat Rep. Gregory Meeks stated that the Republican majority intentionally overlooked important facts related to former President Trump’s role in the situation.

The Trump administration had previously negotiated a deal with the Taliban for a withdrawal deadline by May 2021 under the Doha Agreement, which listed conditions still needed for the Taliban to meet before U.S. forces could leave.

A partially declassified report released by the State Department last year criticized both the Trump and Biden administrations for their lack of thorough planning on this issue.