Afghanistan’s Taliban and U.S. representatives have held six rounds of peace talks since October in the Gulf state of Qatar, where the group maintains a political office.

While there have been significant steps toward a deal to end the nearly 18 years of war, those diplomatic gains have come with some costs — namely travel costs for the Taliban, according to the spokesman for the Democratic chair of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

Kevin Spicer, the spokesman for Indiana Democrat Pete Visclosky, told Roll Call that the Trump administration asked Congress for funds to cover the Taliban’s costs for transportation, lodging, food and supplies.

“The Defense Department requested fiscal 2020 funding to support certain reconciliation activities, including logistic support for members of the Taliban and, in March 2019, they sent a notification letter to the Committee on using fiscal year 2019 funds for similar activities,” Spicer said. He added that the request “would implicate provisions of law concerning material support to terrorists... ."

Consequently, Visclosky’s committee approved a defense spending bill for fiscal 2020 on Wednesday that bars reimbursing the Taliban.

Longest US-Taliban peace talks see ‘progress,’ but agreement on withdrawal timeline still a sticking point The longest peace talks between the U.S. and the Taliban to end America’s 17-year war in Afghanistan concluded Tuesday night in Qatar, with both sides saying progress had been made.

And as noted in the Roll Call story, the Taliban is a well-funded organization that gets much of its money from opium sales.

Steve Ellis, executive vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, told Roll Call that the request for reimbursing the Taliban is like “life imitating The Onion.”

× Fear of missing out? Sign up for the Early Bird Brief - a daily roundup of military and defense news stories from around the globe. Thanks for signing up. By giving us your email, you are opting in to the Early Bird Brief.

“Even if you leave aside that they are still conducting operations against our interests and allies, having to pay for someone to be at the table undercuts our bargaining position and demonstrates their lack of enthusiasm for a deal,” Ellis told CQ Roll Call.