Western media discussed whether Thursday’s deadly suicide bombing at Kabul airport could have been avoided if top Pentagon commanders had strictly followed the decision to close the abbey gate on Thursday afternoon, rather than keep it open. Had it been done, it could have been avoided. The decision to keep the Abhay Gate open longer is reported to have been taken by a field commander.
A report published by US news website Politico on Monday, based on leaked notes from the Pentagon, said top Pentagon commanders put forward plans to close the AB gate at Kabul airport by Afghanistan time on Thursday afternoon. But the Americans decided to keep the gate open longer to allow for their British allies, who intensified their withdrawal operations to evacuate their personnel based at the nearby Barons Hotel.
As a result, American troops were still processing those entering the airport at the Abbey Gate at around 6 p.m. A suicide bomber detonated his explosive vest in Kabul on Thursday, killing nearly 200 people, including 13 US soldiers, the report said. However, British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said on Tuesday that Britain had sided with the United States and did not press for keeping the gates open at Kabul airport.
Raab told British TV news channel Sky News: ‘We got our civilian employees out of the processing center by the AB Gate, but it is not correct to suggest that in addition to keeping our civilian staff safe inside the airport, we leave the gate open. Were pressurizing you to leave.’ He said Britain had taken appropriate action, including warning people not to come to the airport.
Raab told BBC News: ‘We also sent a civilian at the Barron Hotel to the airport, because being a short distance from where the terrorist attack took place, it was obviously not safe, but one of these There was no need to leave the AB gate open either.
Politico said an account of internal conversations between top Pentagon leaders in the hours following Thursday’s attack on the airport were classified notes from three separate calls provided to Politico and two defense officials with direct knowledge of the calls. Interview is based. Politico said it was withholding information from the Pentagon that could affect military operations at Kabul airport.
However, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in a statement: “This story is based on the illegal disclosure of classified information and internal discussions of a sensitive nature.” As soon as we became aware of the content provided to the reporter, we engaged Politico at a high level to prevent publication of information that would put our troops and our operations at the airport at greater risk.
“We condemn the illegal disclosure of classified information and oppose the publication of a story based on it when a dangerous operation continues,” he said.