CENTCOM documents related to support of Taliban

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request the following records:

Any and all documents related to direct or indirect U.S. military support of the Taliban in Afghanistan between Oct. 1, 2019 and March 10, 2020. For the FOIA analyst's context and understanding, on March 10, 2020, Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie, commanding general of U.S. Central Command, testified to the House Armed Services Committee that the military had provided "limited support" to the Taliban in eastern Afghanistan. Below is the full quote:

Q: Does the Taliban have the military capability, even partnered with the Afghan army … to keep that sufficient pressure on half the world’s terrorist organizations in one of the most difficult places in the world? … Does the Taliban have the military capability along with the Afghan army to keep sufficient pressure?

GEN. MCKENZIE: Over the last several months in eastern Afghanistan, we’ve watched the Taliban compress and crush ISIS presence on the ground in southern Nangarhar province, and they’ve been very effective doing that. That’s some of the worst terrain in the world. They’ve paid a very steep price in their own fighters.

Q: Was that independent of our support?

GEN. MCKENZIE: There was very limited support from us. And I would characterize that as very limited support. So they’ve demonstrated a capability to do it. It was a bloody mess, but they did it. In fact, ISIS really now no longer holds ground in Nangarhar province. They’re trying to reestablish themselves up to the north in other provinces, and it remains yet to be seen whether they’re gonna be successful doing that, and we’ll know over time if they are.

I request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be processed by a representative of the news media/press from Task & Purpose and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage. I also request expedited processing. The records I am requesting relate to the ongoing war in Afghanistan and ongoing peace negotiations. They are urgently needed to inform the public about actual or perceived government activity — namely, the admission that the United States is offering support to a group that is actively targeting against American troops and U.S. interests. The news value of these records will be lost without expedited processing.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Paul Szoldra
Editor in Chief, Task & Purpose

Hello,

I see my request has been acknowledged and I've been given my station in the queue. However, I requested expedited processing of this FOIA request. I would like confirmation that this request to expedite has been considered and either allowed, or denied. Thank you.

I hereby appeal the decision by USCENTCOM to not grant expedited processing.

In its letter dated March 19, 2020, USCENTCOM stated the following: "the requester must demonstrate a compelling need for that information. Under the FOIA, compelling need means that: (1) failure to obtain records on an expedited basis could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual; or, (2) the information is currently newsworthy, such as information urgently needed by an individual primarily engaged in disseminating information in order to inform the public concerning federal government involvement; (3) failure to obtain records on an expedited basis would create an imminent loss of due process rights; or (4) failure to obtain records could reasonably be expected to harm substantial humanitarian interests. Your request does not satisfy the requirement for compelling need. Therefore, I cannot approve your request for expedited processing."

As the USCENTCOM response shows, the second of four possible "compelling needs" is that, "the information is currently newsworthy, such as information urgently needed by an individual primarily engaged in disseminating information in order to inform the public concerning federal government involvement." This requester fully satisfies this requirement. The information requested is currently newsworthy and seeks additional information in regards to sworn testimony offered by an American military officer. Additionally, this requester is and has been a journalist since 2012, and is currently employed full-time as the editor in chief of Task & Purpose, an American military news website.

Though the FOIA does not define the phrase “a person primarily engaged in disseminating information,” a “representative of the news media” will generally meet this element, a label that applies to this requester. For example, Department of Justice regulations require a requester to “establish that he or she is a person whose main professional activity or occupation is information dissemination” only if the person is “not a full-time member of the news media.” (28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(3)). Similarly, Department of Defense regulations state that “[r]epresentatives of the news media would normally qualify.” (32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3)(ii)).

Agencies and courts usually rely on the definition of “representative of the news media” that appears in the fee waiver provisions of the FOIA. (Am. Civil Liberties Union, 321 F.Supp.2d at 29 n.5; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3)(ii)). For example, a court held that a public interest research center was a “representative of the news media” for expedited review purposes, as it had been found to be a “representative of the news media” for purposes of its fee waiver request in an earlier case. (Am. Civil Liberties Union, 321 F.Supp.2d at 29 n.5).

Thank you.

Paul Szoldra
Task & Purpose