What did Trump say about the Kabul airport evacuation and its security after 2021?
Executive summary
Former President Donald Trump criticized the Biden-era evacuation from Kabul and later commented on the airport’s security and related matters in 2025, tying those comments to ongoing policy decisions such as pausing Afghan immigration and reconsidering refugee flows (examples in recent reporting) [1] [2]. Coverage in the provided reporting also records Trump calling for re-examination of Afghans admitted under Operation Allies Welcome and later pressing for re‑access to bases such as Bagram as part of a security strategy [3] [4].
1. What Trump said about evacuees and the Kabul airlift — blunt public rebukes
Trump publicly attacked the Biden-era evacuation program known as Operation Allies Welcome, urging a re‑examination of “every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden” after a 2025 shooting incident and saying the government must remove anyone who “does not belong here or add benefit to our country,” according to NPR’s summary of his social‑media reaction [3]. That criticism frames the evacuation as both an operational and a vetting failure in Trump’s messaging and is cited by outlets reporting on post‑evacuation incidents and subsequent policy moves [3].
2. Linking the Kabul airport security episode to later policy actions
Reuters and other outlets in 2025 document the Trump administration taking concrete steps that reflect those criticisms — for example, cancelling or delaying flights for Afghan refugees and pausing or altering refugee and parole programs, with hundreds or more applicants affected [2]. The New York Times reporting likewise notes a halt in processing immigration requests for Afghan nationals pending “review of security and vetting protocols” [1]. Trump’s rhetoric thus dovetailed with administrative measures that tightened Afghan admissions and refugee processing [1] [2].
3. Framing the airport attack and security as a continuing national-security justification
Trump’s public statements and presidential proclamations in 2025 repeatedly invoke the August 26, 2021 Abbey Gate bombing at Hamid Karzai International Airport — an attack that killed U.S. service members and others — to underscore the security risks tied to the chaotic 2021 evacuation and to justify tougher stances on Afghan admissions and counterterror measures [5]. Government messaging in 2025 leverages that attack to argue the U.S. must reassess how it secures evacuations and screens entrants [5].
4. Calls to recover or re‑establish basing as a security fix
Beyond admissions policy, Trump has publicly advocated for re‑establishing U.S. access to Afghan bases — notably Bagram — arguing strategic platforms are necessary to prevent groups like IS‑K from reconstituting and to provide a secure hub for operations; reporting warns such plans would require large troop commitments and advanced defenses [4] [6]. Press citations quote Trump-style demands that Afghanistan “return” Bagram or face “bad things,” and analysts warn retaking or running Bagram would be complex and manpower‑intensive [7] [8] [4].
5. What reporting says about vetting and the actual risk profile
Available reporting in these sources describes the vetting process for evacuees as involving multiple agencies and “rigorous” biometric and biographic screening, and concludes the FBI and other agencies flagged most serious threats — a point used by outlets to temper broad-brush claims that the entire evacuation was an open‑door security catastrophe [3]. NPR’s coverage notes that the majority of evacuees were not considered security risks, even as officials and political figures emphasize the smaller number of dangerous cases [3].
6. Competing narratives and implicit agendas
There are two competing frames in these sources: Trump and allied officials use the airport attack and later incidents to justify dramatic policy reversals on Afghan admissions and calls to re‑occupy or control bases [5] [4] [7], while other reporting underscores that large-scale vetting programs did operate and most evacuees posed no known threats [3]. The political agenda implicit in Trump’s rhetoric is to prioritize domestic security narratives that bolster restrictive immigration measures and to legitimize re‑establishing military footholds in Afghanistan [1] [2] [4].
7. Limits of the available reporting
Available sources do not provide a comprehensive transcript of every Trump statement about Kabul airport security from 2021 through 2025; instead, the material here links his 2025 public and policy actions to the 2021 evacuation and subsequent incidents [1] [3] [2] [5] [4]. Detailed rebuttals or confirmations of specific tactical or intelligence claims made by Trump about who slipped through vetting and why are not present in the supplied reporting (not found in current reporting).
8. Bottom line for readers
In these accounts, Trump’s public comments tie the chaotic Kabul evacuation and the Abbey Gate bombing to later policy choices: re‑examining Afghan parolees and refugees, reducing or cancelling resettlement flights, and seeking renewed basing options in Afghanistan — all presented as security remedies though independent reporting also emphasizes that most evacuees underwent multi‑agency vetting and were not flagged as threats [3] [2] [5] [4].