Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) sharply questioned Secretary of State Antony Blinken about the estimated “tens of billions” of U.S. taxpayer dollars sent to Afghanistan since the chaotic U.S. withdrawal in August 2021.
Mast’s remarks came during a heated hearing, where he highlighted concerns over funds allegedly benefiting the Taliban and questioned the lack of oversight in ongoing aid programs.
Mast, recently selected to chair the House Foreign Relations Committee starting next month, focused on the Biden-Harris administration’s handling of the withdrawal and the subsequent flow of funds to Afghanistan.
Celebrate Trump’s Historic 2024 Victory with the Exclusive Trump 47th President Collection!
Current committee chair Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) had issued multiple subpoenas for Blinken to testify, culminating in the hearing under threat of a contempt of Congress vote.
Mast pointed out that the United States no longer has an embassy or diplomats on the ground in Afghanistan. “Yet we are still giving the Taliban tens of billions of dollars,” he said.
Kamala takes credit for the Afghanistan withdrawal…. pic.twitter.com/TtNuPqztJ3
— Brian Kennedy (@Brian_Kennedy) August 14, 2024
He questioned the logic behind continued financial support, citing examples of funds allocated for questionable purposes.
He detailed that $14.9 million was spent teaching Afghans carpet weaving and $280 million went to the United Nations for cash transfers for food aid.
Mast expressed frustration that the U.S. was not sending physical aid, such as food products from American farmers, but instead relying on cash distributions with limited oversight.
Mast also criticized a $75 million program intended to teach Afghan women farming skills. “I don’t believe that we spend $30 million in the United States of America to teach women to be farmers,” he said, doubting the program’s effectiveness given the Taliban’s severe restrictions on women’s rights.
Citing reports from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), Mast noted that the lack of U.S. presence in Afghanistan makes it nearly impossible to verify how funds are being used.
He referenced additional funding, including a $3.5 billion transfer to an Afghan fund intended to “protect macro financial stability on behalf of the Afghan people.”
“What the hell does that mean?” Mast asked.
“We do not even have an embassy in Afghanistan. We have no diplomats there. What are we doing giving them $1?”
Blinken responded by explaining that the funds are distributed through international partners like United Nations agencies and NGOs.
Mast pushed back, highlighting instances where funds had been misused in other programs.
“Your people had to come back and correct. Hey, it turns out we were, in fact, spending half a million dollars to expand atheism in Nepal through the third-party implementer of Humanist International,” Mast said.
He criticized the State Department’s reliance on third-party implementers without sufficient oversight.
In response to Mast’s criticisms, Blinken defended the continued funding, arguing that the aid has saved lives and addressed urgent humanitarian needs.
“The work we have done through these partners, and many other countries have done, has saved many, many lives in an incredibly difficult situation,” Blinken said.
Mast countered, stating that without proper oversight, U.S. funds risk benefiting the Taliban or being misused. He concluded, “We do not even have an embassy there. We have no business putting one dollar into that place.”
NEW: Rep. Brian Mast just ripped Tony Blinken over the BILLIONS in cash that we have sent to the Taliban since the botched withdrawal in 2021:
“The United States right now is literally sending tens of millions of dollars to the Taliban, $14.9 million to teach Afghans how to do… pic.twitter.com/gJpZM1Vcq7
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) December 11, 2024
The hearing underscored ongoing tensions between the Biden-Harris administration and congressional Republicans over the handling of Afghanistan and foreign aid spending.
As Mast prepares to take over as chair of the House Foreign Relations Committee, scrutiny of such programs is likely to intensify.
.
