topics

politics-policy

epstein-files

donald-trump

2026-midterm-elections

immigration

behind-the-curtain

race-and-equity

technology

privacy-tech-regulation

automation-and-ai

tiktok-news

big-tech

social-media

cybersecurity

economy

social-security

inflation

tariffs

federal-reserve

jobs

transportation

business

stock-market-news

retail-news

crypto

media

elon-musk

dealmaking

health

rfk-jr

drug-prices

axios-explains-abortion

public-health

world

israel

axios-explains-ukraine

iran

russia

china

energy-climate

nuclear-energy

climate-energy-policy

climate-change

extreme-weather

alternative-energy

electric-vehicles

science

emerging-tech

biomedicine

newsletters

pittsburgh

atlanta

san-diego

charlotte

boulder

washington-dc

kansas-city

dallas

denver

detroit

des-moines

austin

boston

chicago

cleveland

columbus

houston

indianapolis

miami

nashville

new-orleans

nw-arkansas

philadelphia

phoenix

portland

richmond

salt-lake-city

san-antonio

san-francisco

seattle

tampa-bay

twin-cities

raleigh

huntsville

colorado-springs

axios-local

axios-pro

axios-live

the-axios-show

National

The Biden administration's "over-the-horizon" strategy in Afghanistan is drawing serious questions from lawmakers and counterterrorism experts, as the U.S. withdrawal shifts calculations about threats and capabilities.

Driving the news: Tensions ramped up in an Aug. 27 conference call between President Biden's top national security officials and senators from both parties, sources familiar with the discussions tell Axios. One said members of the intelligence community label it, derisively, the "over-the-rainbow" strategy.

With the 20th anniversary of 9/11 behind us and Secretary of State Antony Blinken set to testify this week before House and Senate committees, expect more public questions.

The big picture: Critics tell Axios that Biden and his team have yet to provide sufficiently detailed plans or explanations about their counterterrorism strategy to lawmakers conducting oversight.

Details: The so-called over-the-horizon capabilities Biden has repeatedly touted make identifying and striking terrorists with aerial surveillance and drones launched from outside the country the linchpin of America's post-withdrawal counterterrorism strategy. 

But some experts warn relying solely on such capabilities in the conditions that exist currently has never been done.

In every country where the U.S. has deployed elements of an over-the-horizon strategy, like in Yemen, Somalia, or Iraq and Syria, it's had an intelligence network, a nearby air base and some form of local partner on the ground.

In Taliban-controlled Afghanistan — where the CIA has evacuated its sources, the nearest air bases are in the Gulf and the local security partner is an FBI-wanted terrorist — it has none.

Behind the scenes: About 1pm on Aug. 27 — the day after the Kabul airport bombing that killed 13 American service members and dozens of Afghan civilians — some of Biden's top national security officials held a conference call with senators from both parties.

Briefers included Blinken, deputy secretary of defense Kathleen Hicks, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten, according to three sources on the call.

The sources, one who read aloud from notes taken during the call, said the conversation grew especially heated when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell asked: "Given the fuel poured on the fire of terrorism, what are your plans to conduct the war on terrorism? ... Even though we seem to have given up, they [the terrorists] have not."

Colin Kahl, the undersecretary of Defense for policy, told McConnell, "The intelligence community has assessed that what's left of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan does not pose an imminent threat to the homeland," according to the notes shared with Axios. That account was confirmed by two other sources.

"We have repositioned forces to the Gulf to provide an indicator and warning. We maintain strike aircraft and authorities to do so. We must maintain vigilance to the threat in Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere," Kahl added. The Biden team then moved on to the next question.

Republicans on the call said they were frustrated by the answer and what they saw as Kahl's dismissiveness, given the rapidly deteriorating security environment in Afghanistan and what had turned out to be incorrect recent assurances from the administration about the situation on the ground there.

Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said in a statement to Axios:  “While we won’t speak to details of our discussions with members of Congress or about internal deliberations, we absolutely maintain the capability to conduct over-the-horizon strikes against threats that may threaten the homeland or our interests.

"As Secretary Austin said, there isn’t a part of the Earth we can’t reach if required, and we do not always need a presence on the ground to effectively strike. It is more difficult, to be sure, but it is not impossible — as we have proven in other places," Kirby said.

"We will continue our work with the administration and with Congress to ensure the safety and security of the nation."

Even before the call, lawmakers were raising questions. 

What they're saying: On Aug. 26, Senate Intelligence vice chairman Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and two fellow committee members, Sens. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), sent Biden a letter demanding to know how the U.S. will rebuild lost intelligence and counterterrorism capabilities.

Rubio told Axios on Friday they hadn't gotten what they were seeking. "We have not heard anything from President Biden's team that resembles a real plan because over-the-horizon is rhetoric, not strategy," Rubio said. "Maybe that will change this week, but at this point, everything discussed has severe limitations."

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told Axios: "If over-the-horizon worked, there'd be no ISIS in Iraq and Syria. We were told the same thing then … we could use drones and over-the-horizon capability to stop terrorists building up." (After leaving Iraq in 2011, former President Obama sent troops back there in 2014 to fight ISIS, which had filled the vacuum left by the departed U.S. troops.)

The White House declined to comment on details of the Aug. 27 briefing. 

The National Security Council directed Axios to a speech on the administration's broader counterterrorism strategy delivered by Homeland Security adviser Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall last week.

Sherwood-Randall said the U.S. has "already established" and is adding to its over-the-horizon options, and emphasized the importance of "diplomacy, development and prevention efforts" in expanding the counterterrorism toolkit.

The speech did not directly address the concerns experts have raised about the unique challenges posed by an over-the-horizon strategy in Afghanistan.

Afghans hold funeral for civilians killed in US drone strike

Afghans hold a funeral for civilians killed in a U.S. drone strike in Kabul on Aug. 29. Photo: Marcus Yam/Los Angeles Times

Between the lines: It's not just Republican lawmakers who are skeptical that Biden's strategy can work. 

Gen. Frank McKenzie, who leads U.S. Central Command, told Congress in April: "I don’t want to make [over-the-horizon] sound easy. It’s going to be extremely difficult to do it, but it will not be impossible."

Seth Jones, a counterterrorism expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said it's "absolutely unrealistic" to think an over-the-horizon strategy could be sufficient for anything more than "pinprick strikes."

A Democratic aide on the House Foreign Affairs Committee pointed to an Aug. 27 drone strike in Afghanistan's Nangarhar Province, which the Pentagon says killed two ISIS militants, as an example of how over-the-horizon can be effective.

But two days later, another drone strike killed 10 civilians after overhead surveillance mistook water canisters for explosives, according to a New York Times investigation — tragically capturing the limitations of long-range intelligence in the final hours of the U.S. presence in Afghanistan.

"U.S. Central Command continues to assess the results of the 29 August airstrike," Kirby told Axios. "While we won’t get ahead of this assessment, the strike was taken to prevent an imminent threat to the airport. We do work very hard to avoid civilian casualties, and we would be deeply saddened by any loss of innocent life."

What we're watching: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, recently warned there's a "very good probability" Afghanistan will collapse into a broader civil war, which he said could "lead to a reconstitution of al-Qaeda or a growth of ISIS or other myriad terrorist groups."

"You could see a resurgence of terrorism coming out of that general region within 12, 24, 36 months," Milley told Fox News.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to add the intelligence community's derisive label for the strategy, and to clarify that Kahl's comments were the assessment of the intelligence community about al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not his opinion.

Red flags for Biden's "over-the-horizon" strategy

"Over the horizon" capabilities are untested in this kind of situation.

Illustration of a pattern of military drones.

Counterterrorism

Afghanistan

2024 will be an election year like no other, as President Biden seeks re-election amid economic uncertainty, two wars and questions about his age. His likely foe, former President Trump, faces felony charges and vows revenge on his political enemies. Meanwhile, Americans generally are dissatisfied with those choices and are divided over immigration, race, education and more.

Politics & Policy

Conflicts, policies and powers are intersecting and shaping the world. Breaking news and analysis of national security, foreign policy and global crises.

World

Secretary of State Antony Blinken can expect the most aggressive questioning of his career when he testifies Monday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and on Tuesday before Senate Foreign Relations.

Why it matters: Republicans see the hearings as their first chance to directly confront a top-ranking Biden official about the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Democrats see it as a moment in which they must reject GOP efforts to blame President Biden for 20 years of bipartisan mistakes.

The big picture: We spoke to lawmakers and staff about what they plan to ask. 

Republicans say they'll demand to know exactly how many Americans and allies remain stranded in Afghanistan, following the latest evacuations and persistent obstacles — and how specifically the U.S. plans to get them out.

They want to know the specific breakdown of those who have gotten out (special visa holders, "at risk" individuals, etc.) and the vetting process for the crush of evacuees who were airlifted.

Expect them to raise concerns about convicted criminals or members of terrorist watch lists among the evacuees — and to cite a particularly harrowing AP story about "child brides" trafficked to the U.S. during the chaos.

They'll use viral images of Taliban fighters donning U.S. military gear and flying Black Hawk helicopters to hammer Blinken on how the U.S. will deal with an arsenal now controlled by the Taliban. The Pentagon insists equipment left at Kabul airport was "demilitarized" and "unusable," but it's clear that's not the case across the country.

If and how the U.S. recognizes the Taliban government is a key question now that an acting Cabinet in Afghanistan has been formed — one with the leader of the al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network and an FBI-wanted terrorist as interior minister.

GOP members will highlight the administration's downplaying of the Taliban's links to terrorist networks and reliance on the Taliban for security cooperation. They will pressure Blinken to prevent the Taliban from ever accessing more than $9 billion in frozen Afghan assets in the U.S. financial system.

The other side: Democrats will point to the peace deal the Trump administration negotiated with the Taliban and cite Donald Trump's own boast in June: "I started the process, all the troops are coming home. [Biden] couldn’t stop the process."

"My No. 1 question for Secretary Blinken: Can you describe for us now the detailed and well-considered plan prepared by the Trump administration for how we would get out of Afghanistan in an orderly way?" Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) told Axios in an interview.

"Let's face it, this mission was fraught with peril, because there's no way to flee without causing a stampede, and there's no way to have a stampede that's orderly and meritorious," he added.

One Democratic source told Axios that Republicans "are making this as much of a Benghazi as they possibly can." The source said that as Democrats see it, "this is not Jan. 6. This is an examination into U.S. policy toward a country in a 20-year war."

For the record: State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a statement that Blinken "has prioritized engagement with Congress from his first days" in office, including in recent Afghanistan briefings and calls, and that he "appreciates the opportunity to testify."

Inside the preparations to grill Blinken on Afghanistan

"Republicans are going to turn this into a circus," Sen. Chris Murphy warned.

Secretary of State Tony Blinken looks down before speaking agains a dark curtained backdrop

Photo: Boris Roessler/picture alliance via Getty Images

Tony Blinken

Hill Leaders

Axios Hill Leaders

Ambassadors submitted and confirmed by <br>Sept. 12

Center for Presidential Transition via Congress.gov, historical data provided by the Partnership for Public Service; Chart: Will Chase/Axios 

The Senate has confirmed just two of President Biden's ambassadorial nominations, far behind the 56 confirmed envoys President Obama had at this stage, according to data compiled by the Partnership for Public Service.

The big picture: Just one in four other national security positions at the Pentagon and Departments of Justice and State are filled.

That compares with 57% of positions filled at the time of the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has been preventing most ambassadors from moving to the floor for a vote.

Why it matters: “Twenty years later, we only have 26% of key national security positions confirmed by the Senate," said Partnership for Public Service CEO and President Max Stier.

"The broken Senate confirmation process made our country less safe then, and it makes us even less safe now.”

Biden's empty embassies

Ted Cruz has been preventing most ambassadors from moving to the Senate floor for a vote.

Department of State

The next few weeks will be crucial to enacting President Biden's agenda — and determining how Democrats perform in next year's midterms.

Driving the news: The Senate's back from recess starting Monday, and deadlines over everything from infrastructure to a government shutdown to the U.S. debt ceiling are staring lawmakers in the face. These are creating tests for the president and his bare congressional majority as Democrats try to hang on.

Monday and Tuesday: Several House committees will drop big chunks of Biden's $3.5 trillion spending package and continue to mark up the bill in a series of legislative marathons.

Wednesday: Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer set this as a "soft" deadline for the Democrat-run committees to complete drafting their portions of the budget bill. As of now, it seems unlikely we'll have the full bill text by this date.

Saturday: Supporters of jailed Jan. 6 rioters will hold a "Justice for J6" rally on Capitol Hill. 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will host the "Big 4" congressional leaders in her office Monday morning for a security briefing from U.S. Capitol Police chief Tom Manger.

Sept. 27: The House has committed to voting on the Senate-passed $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill by this date. As of now, this deadline is in jeopardy.

Pelosi promised Democrats they will vote on the reconciliation bill — which is still subject to tense negotiations — before considering the $1.2 trillion bill. 

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) told CNN's Dana Bash on Sunday: “There’s no way we can get this done by the 27th if we do our job. … It makes no sense at all.” 

Sept. 30: The federal government runs out of money. Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said during a Friday caucus call that the House will consider a short-term spending bill when the chamber returns on Sept. 20. 

The continuing resolution will likely extend to Dec. 10, though that date may change. 

At some point in October: The government is expected to exhaust all its funds, according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. Congress is debating when, and by how much, to increase the debt ceiling.

Democrats' unofficial plan is to include this in their CR — something Republicans staunchly oppose. 

The GOP insists Democrats should instead tie the debt limit to their reconciliation package, which only needs a simple majority vote. Pelosi reiterated last week that strategy is off the table. 

Pelosi has also pledged to hold a vote on the Women’s Health Protection Act shortly after the House returns on Sept. 20, which would codify abortion rights into federal law, after the Supreme Court's Texas abortion ruling. 

The bill is expected to pass in the House in the coming weeks but has no chance in the 50-50 split Senate.

What we're watching: Expect more hearings by the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol — and a push by Democrats to pass voting rights protections after the Senate failed to advance their signature elections bill. 

What they're saying: Democratic consultant Stacy Kerr, a former senior aide to Pelosi, said Democrats have almost no room internally to maneuver.

“We've always had moderates versus progressives, we’ve always had vulnerables versus safe members. ... We’ve never had those dynamics with these numbers,” she said, adding, "If anyone can maneuver that, it’s Nancy Pelosi."

The other side: "Democrats just created a mess," Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told Axios. "We've got to fund the government at some point by the 30th. We got a debt ceiling issue that they've got to deal with. And then they've got all their crazy left-wing things they want to do."

"You got Americans stranded in Afghanistan, you have a wide-open border, you have crime surging, you have inflation at almost record highs. And what are Democrats getting ready to do? Spend a boatload of money."

Congress' September sprint

The next few weeks will be crucial for enacting President Biden's agenda.

Illustration of a hand holding a gavel with a checker print flag design on it

Congress

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) is warning that he could vote against the $3.5 trillion budget package if more money isn’t added for housing assistance to close the racial wealth gap in the current House version of the bill, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: Warner’s threat is another indication that the proposal will face a variety of obstacles before the House and Senate can agree to a top-line number, how that money is spent on specific programs — and how to pay for it all.

"As currently written, this proposal falls short,” Warner said in a statement to Axios about the House provisions on housing assistance.

Warner, a member of the Budget Committee who helped negotiate the $3.5 trillion number in the Senate, is taking issue with the amount of funding for first-time homebuyers in the House, which he thinks is around $600 million. 

“I will be working in the Senate to make the American dream of homeownership and wealth creation more accessible to historically disadvantaged communities.”

The big picture: House and Senate committees are drafting specific legislation to raise $1.5 trillion in new revenues and spend some $3.5 trillion to expand the social safety net, including a variety of new programs from universal preschool to free community college to new money for housing and rental assistance.  

The top line numbers could dramatically change, with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) telling CNN’s Dana Bash that the $3.5 trillion package will “not have my vote.”

Scoop: Warner warns he may vote against $3.5 trillion budget

Warner’s threat is another indication that the proposal will face a variety of obstacles ahead.

Axios

Sunday's top stories

Red flags for Biden's "over-the-horizon" strategy

Inside the preparations to grill Blinken on Afghanistan

Biden's empty embassies

Congress' September sprint

Scoop: Warner warns he may vote against $3.5 trillion budget

Sunday shows: Manchin vs. Sanders

Stephen Breyer says politics of potential replacement could factor into his retirement

Al-Qaeda leader appears in new video on 9/11 anniversary

Press freedoms crumble as authoritarianism spreads

FBI releases declassified document on 9/11 attacks