Pentagon Leaders: Not Enough Capacity For Rescue Operations In Kabul

WASHINGTON: The Pentagon does not currently have the capacity to both defend Hamid Karzai International Airport and send forces out to collect Americans struggling to reach the last bastion of American presence in Afghanistan, according to the US defense secretary.

Speaking to reporters for the first time since Afghanistan began to collapse 11 days ago, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the focus has to be on keeping Kabul’s airport secure in order to facilitate getting as many Americans and accepted Afghans out of the country.

Yesterday the State Department estimated that 10,000 to 15,000 Americans remain in country. That number does not account for Afghans who are eligible for evacuation, or the many locals who have not been formally cleared but supported American forces over the last two decades and now fear for their lives.

Both men were pushed repeatedly on the fact that there are reportedly a number of eligible individuals who are trying to get to the airport, but are being stopped by Taliban checkpoints. The Taliban has established a perimeter around the airport, and are controlling who can pass through; the US State Department are working with Taliban officials to provide proper credentials. (Austin said there have been no “hostile” interactions between US forces and the Taliban.)

The answer, it seems, is that those who can’t get through aren’t going to see American rescue squads coming their way.

“We will continue to deconflict issues with the Taliban, and we will stay focused on securing the airfield. We cannot afford to either not defend that airfield, or not have an airfield that secure, where we have hundreds or thousands of civilians that can access the airfield at will and put our forces at risk,” Austin said.

“I don’t have the capability to go out and extend operations currently into Kabul,” he added. “And where do you take that? I mean, how far can you extend it to Kabul, you know, and how long does it take the flow those forces in to be able to do that?”

Milley, however, seemed to gently contradict Austin — indicating that the issue is not a lack of capability, but a policy limiting the size of the US military force authorized to operated there.

“That’d be a policy decision,” he said, “and if directed, we have capabilities they can execute whatever we’re directed.” He also stated that special operations forces from the United Kingdom and “other” nations are on site, and coordinating with the US.

But such a policy change, at least for now, seems unlikely. Austin’s comments came just hours after the State Department issued guidance for any Americans still trapped outside the wire in Kabul.

“U.S. government-provided flights are departing. U.S. citizens, [legal permanent residents], and their spouses and unmarried children (under age 21) should consider traveling to Hamid Karzai International Airport,” reads the guidance. “THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CANNOT ENSURE SAFE PASSAGE TO THE HAMID KARZAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.”

Other items of note from the roughly half hour press event:

American airpower available. Milley said that the US is currently flying 20 C-17 sorties every 24 hours, with the ability to increase that as needed; 5,000 Americans have been evacuated so far. There are now 4,500 troops at the airport, which will grow to 6,000 in the coming days. Regionally, Milley said, there are “multiple squadrons” of F-16 fighters, AC-130 gunships, B-52 bombers and MQ-9 drones available if needed, as well as “significant” rotary wing assets on the ground in Kabul.

Afghan airpower missing. Reports are that members of the Afghan military used military aircraft and helicopters, mostly of US origin, to flee the country once the government fell, with many of them ending up in neighboring Uzbekistan. A Reuters report says that 22 military planes and 24 helicopters crossed the border, along with almost 600 military personnel.  The vast majority of that equipment was paid for by American tax dollars, but right now, tracking those lost assets aren’t a priority for the defense secretary.

“I have received reports of a number of aircraft that were flown into Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, exactly how many, you know, I don’t have firm numbers on,” Austin said. “In terms of what we’re doing about them currently, right now, we’re focused on the airfield and getting people out safely. And so we’re going to take that issue up at a later date, and we’re going to continue to try to gain greater fidelity on the issue as well.”

Why leave Bagram? As the US military struggled to clear and contain the commercial airport in Kabul, many have pointed out that Bagram airfield — located outside the busy city, with two airfields and US-controlled infrastructure — would be the perfect place to launch an air evacuation from.

But Bagram was abandoned by the US in early July — literally overnight, by some descriptions — and is now unusable. Was that a mistake?

“Securing Bagram [requires] a significant level of military effort and forces. And it would also require external support from the Afghan security forces,” Milley said. “Our task, given to us at that time, our task was to protect the embassy in order for the embassy personnel to continue to function with their consular service and all that.”

In other words, the Pentagon was told to draw forces down to a number that was too low to keep both the embassy and Bagram, and the decision was made that the embassy was more important. “If we were to keep both Bagram and the embassy going, that would be a significant number of military forces that would have exceeded what we had,” Milley said.

But given the current situation, would it make sense of the US to reclaim Bagram in order to expedite the flow of civilians out of country?

“Good question, great question,” Milley said. “But I’m not going to discuss branches and sequels off of our current operation. I’ll just leave it at that.”