Five Years Later, Abbey Gate Questions Remain

Five years after Abbey Gate, the Pentagon says the blast was not tactically preventable, but families still cannot find who is accountable.

Story Snapshot

The military reaffirmed a lone Islamic State bomber caused the Kabul airport attack and said troops could not have stopped it.
A State Department review faulted choices under both Trump and Biden, and said some Biden decisions made conditions worse.
The White House’s 2023 summary cast its review as “lessons learned,” not an accountability process.
A 2025 Defense Department review pledged a fuller accounting to the American people.

What the latest Pentagon review concluded

United States Central Command’s supplemental review, briefed in April 2024, affirmed that a single Islamic State Khorasan suicide bomber carried out the Abbey Gate attack at Kabul’s airport on August 26, 2021. The review said the bombing was not preventable at the tactical level based on what troops knew and saw that day. Reporters said the review also rejected claims that Marines had the bomber in their sights before the blast, stating service members had not encountered him earlier.

Naming the attacker added one concrete detail, but it did not change the bottom line. The reviews emphasized that the chaos at the gate, the crush of civilians, and the split-second timing made a stop unlikely with the tools at hand. That operational finding answered one narrow question. It did not address the wider choices that led to thousands of people at one urban gate with limited screening, nor why other options were not ready in time.

How official reviews split operation from strategy

The White House in 2023 framed its review as a “lessons learned” exercise. It said President Biden’s options were restricted by decisions under President Trump, but it also conceded evacuations should have started earlier. A PBS summary quoted the spokesperson saying the effort was not about assigning blame. That stance frustrated many on the right and left who wanted clear names, timelines, and consequences rather than a general note that “we will do better next time.”

The State Department’s after-action review added balance. It said decisions by both Trump and Biden to end the military mission created major problems for diplomats. It also found some Biden choices made conditions worse, including the speed of the pullout and handing over Bagram Air Base. These findings matched a pattern seen after past setbacks: agencies separate a narrow operational call from bigger policy decisions, which are then debated in Congress and in public for years.

Why accountability remains unsettled

Families and lawmakers argue the real failure began well before the bomb. They point to slow evacuations, poor interagency planning, and a risky gate setup. The Pentagon’s 2025 departmental review said a comprehensive look was needed to ensure accountability and to give the public a full picture. That promise keeps the door open. Yet each passing year without named responsibility feeds a wider belief that government protects itself while citizens bear the cost.

Americans across parties share that concern. Conservatives see proof of a bureaucracy that dodges blame and buries hard truths. Liberals see leaders avoiding scrutiny while vulnerable allies were left behind. Both sides see elites arguing over memos while military families carry grief. When official findings stress what could not be done on the ground, without equal clarity on who set the ground rules, trust drops further. That loss of trust is the deeper national risk.

What changes to watch next

Defense officials say future evacuations will start earlier in worsening security and that risk messages will be stronger and sooner. If those steps are real, drills, timelines, and routes should be public enough to measure. Congress is also pressing for names tied to key decisions during the withdrawal window. If the new Defense Department review delivers a timeline with specific calls and owners, it could mark a shift from general lessons to concrete accountability.