What were the immediate security and humanitarian outcomes after Biden completed the withdrawal?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The U.S. completed its troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, after which U.S. forces airlifted roughly 124,000 people out during the chaotic evacuation and 13 U.S. service members were killed at Abbey Gate; watchdogs and congressional Republicans have cataloged large material losses—commonly cited as about $7.1 billion in equipment left behind—and continuing humanitarian flows and aid spending by the U.S. government [1] [2]. Sources disagree sharply on responsibility and on whether the withdrawal’s outcomes were avoidable; official reviews and partisan hearings present competing narratives that place primary blame on either Biden’s execution or the prior Trump deal and longer-term policy failures [3] [4].
1. The immediate security fallout: Taliban regained control and U.S. forces completed a hurried airlift
When U.S. forces left, the Afghan government rapidly collapsed and the Taliban seized control, turning an evacuation into a large-scale airlift; U.S. military operations evacuated roughly 124,000 people in days while protecting the airport and embassy during the withdrawal [1]. The collapse accelerated after the Taliban offensive that began in May 2021 and the decision to end U.S. combat presence by late August, a timeline that intelligence and military assessments had warned could permit a rapid Taliban advance [5] [1].
2. Casualties, chaos and a deadly attack at the gates
The withdrawal saw direct human cost: 13 U.S. service members were killed in an ISIS-K suicide bombing at Abbey Gate during the evacuation, a fact repeatedly cited in congressional reviews and oversight hearings as emblematic of the operation’s peril [6] [2]. The attack underscored both the security risks on the ground and the limits of what the evacuation could accomplish in a collapsing theater [1].
3. Material losses and watchdog accounting: billions cited as left behind
Multiple congressional statements and oversight materials put the value of U.S. military equipment left in Afghanistan in the billions; Republican reports and House hearings have cited figures like $7.12 billion in taxpayer-funded equipment left behind, framing that as a clear security loss and long-term risk [2]. Independent and partisan accounts differ in emphasis, but the scale of materiel transfer to Taliban control is a central, repeated finding in the immediate post-withdrawal record [2].
4. Humanitarian outcomes: mass evacuations, ongoing aid, and resettlement efforts
The collapse transformed the operation into a humanitarian airlift: tens of thousands of Afghans who aided U.S. efforts and others at risk were flown out under Operation Allies Refuge; afterward, the U.S. became a leading donor of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan, with aggregate aid totals cited in congressional hearings and reporting [1] [2]. Congress and oversight bodies note continuing U.S. financial assistance and U.N.-facilitated cash shipments intended for humanitarian relief, showing the withdrawal shifted U.S. engagement into aid channels [7] [2].
5. Political and investigative aftermath: competing narratives and accountability fights
In the months and years after the withdrawal, partisan and institutional investigations proliferated. House Republican hearings and reports have labeled the withdrawal “disastrous,” blamed Biden’s planning and execution, and called out failures in consultation and vetting [6] [8]. The White House and some reviewers placed substantial responsibility on the Trump administration’s 2020 deal with the Taliban and on long‑term policy choices that left the U.S. with few options for a graceful exit [3] [4]. These competing framings animate ongoing debate rather than producing a single consensus.
6. Security threats and vetting concerns: contested claims, some alarms flagged
Some outlets and partisan reports have alleged that evacuees included individuals with extremist ties and that vetting was suspended or inadequate; these claims have been amplified in right‑leaning commentary and committee statements and remain part of congressional scrutiny [9]. Fact‑checking and major media reviews in the available record emphasize the complexity of rapid evacuation vetting, note intelligence flags in some cases, and show the topic is contested in investigations and political messaging [9] [3].
7. What’s missing or unresolved in the available reporting
Detailed, non‑partisan quantified accounting of how much materiel ended up in Taliban hands versus what was destroyed or disabled is variably presented across sources; independent inspector general reports and official after‑action reviews are referenced in hearings but full consensus figures and interpretations differ across political actors [2] [10]. Available sources do not mention a single definitive, universally accepted attribution of blame; instead they record overlapping responsibilities across administrations and institutions [3] [4].
Limitations and context: Sources provided here are heavily weighted toward congressional hearings, partisan oversight releases, and a mix of mainstream and opinion coverage; those sources present competing conclusions about causation and consequence [6] [4] [11]. Readers should treat the immediate outcomes—mass evacuation, fatalities, large materiel losses, and sustained humanitarian aid—as established in the record while recognizing that assessments of responsibility remain disputed among the cited oversight and media sources [1] [2] [3].