The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction was told it must reduce its staff in Kabul by 40%–an order that came directly from the State Department, the subject of numerous critical reports published by SIGAR.
Appearing on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal on Monday morning, the public investigatory body’s chief, John Sopko, said the staffing order threatens his office’s ability to conduct independent oversight.
“For the State Department, who we investigate, to tell me how many people we should have in Afghanistan is in direct contradiction to my independence,” he said, pointing to federal statutes that give inspectors general full control of their staffing decisions, and the power to report directly to Congress on budget matters.
“This is absurd. We are going to fight this cut,” Sopko said, adding that it would be like Wall Street telling bank regulators how many auditors they should have on staff.
During a House subcommittee hearing last week, Sopko informed lawmakers that he was told by the State Department that the staffing cuts, which will force SIGAR to reduce its Afghan workforce from 42 to 25 positions, was “non-negotiable,” and coincided with the declining US footprint in the country.
Sopko rejected the reasoning, however, saying during the hearing that the State Department’s staffing order was “arbitrary” and “developed without SIGAR’s input, and embassy officials did not provide any explanation for how they determined these cuts.”
He also noted that, despite a reduction in reconstruction aid from its high point, Afghanistan is still the largest recipient of foreign assistance, and will continue to be with between 6-8 billion US dollars flowing annually into the country, indefinitely.
The cost of Afghan reconstruction—an endeavor characterized by SIGAR as being plagued by waste, fraud, and abuse—has now surpassed the total spent on rebuilding Europe after World War 2 through the Marshall Plan, Sopko claimed claimed on Monday.
The State Department and the Pentagon have taken the lead on the hundred billion dollar plus effort, and have often been the subject of SIGAR’s ire in dozens of audits, and probes into how US tax dollars are spent in the so-called “Graveyard of Empires.”
“We spent too much money, too fast, in too small a country, with too little oversight. That’s the big problem in Afghanistan,” Sopko said.
Last December, SIGAR took on the State Department, and it’s development office, USAID, over its failure to keep track of millions of dollars spent to empower Afghan women. Sopko reported that the department’s numerous “reporting discrepancies” make it impossible to “show whether initiatives funded by State and USAID are responsible for improvements in the lives of Afghan women.”
USAID was also the subject of another critical inquiry by SIGAR last month, when the watchdog questioned its ability to guarantee an energy supply to Kandahar City—a major Afghan hub of industry, and a bedrock of Taliban support. Sopko’s office said that it is “unconvinced that there are plans in place to ensure there is a reliable and sustainable power source for this strategically important city.”
On Monday, the inspector general said that there might be staffing decisions coming down the pike in Kabul soon, but only if its necessary.
“We may cut our staff. If our staff has nothing to do we won’t be there,” Sopko remarked, adding, however, that, “it’s our decision, not the decision of the State Department.”
