An extensive network of advocacy organizations, collectively known as #AfghanEvac, pulled together to support Afghan individuals who had collaborated with U.S. forces throughout the war. However, they find themselves in increasingly desperate straits as their pleas to the Trump administration fall on deaf ears. The president’s insensible decision has potentially doomed about 200,000 people who were anticipating a fresh start in America.
Amid rising fears, #AfghanEvac is encouraging war veterans worldwide to protest against the Trump administration’s unreasonably rigid stance towards Afghan refugees. Such a move not only endangers the lives of those Afghans who took extraordinary risks to assist the U.S. government but also belittles the sacrifice and dedication of those American troops who served alongside them.
Shawn VanDiver, a former Navy serviceman and the progenitor of #AfghanEvac, expressed his frustration in an open letter to veterans. His commentary, ‘It’s not an oversight. It’s a choice’ implies that it’s a calculated disavowal of our promises to those who risked everything to stand with us. A slap in the face of veterans who tirelessly fought this battle.
Trump wasted no time in implementing restrictive policies as he broke new ground. The president issued an executive order halting all refugee admissions and foreign aid, including cancelled flights for those Afghans who had undergone a thorough vetting process and were ready to travel.
Essentially, Trump’s unilateral actions blocked nearly all possible avenues for those Afghans who had lent their support to the U.S. military over the vast span of the two-decade-long conflict. The audacious plea in the letter urges veterans to voice their dissent and pressure their local representatives, with the hope of swaying the Trump administration’s rigid stance.
Shawn VanDiver points his accusatory finger at various top officials in the Trump administration. He singles out Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, suggesting that the blunt refusal might have stemmed from his office.
The reticence surrounding the decision leaves room for speculation. VanDiver questions whether key people in the administration, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio or even Trump himself, were fully aware of the far-reaching consequences of their choices.
He seems convinced, however, that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, a veteran himself, wouldn’t back such a draconian action. Waltz is known to hold strong views on the issue, thanks to the camaraderie he shared with Afghans during his service years in the war-stricken country.
Waltz, a Green Beret personage who was deployed twice in Afghanistan, has consistently endorsed the refugees’ right to settle in the U.S. He often warned of the treacherous fate that awaited Afghan allies once the Taliban regained control post-U.S. withdrawal.
Strangely enough, Stephen Miller, an advisor to Trump, staunchly supported dismantling the refugee system, right around the same time when Trump lambasted Joe Biden for the abrupt withdrawal from Afghanistan. Despite the obvious contradictions, the number of Afghans eligible for relocation either as refugees or via special immigration visas hovers around 200,000. This includes 3,000 dependents of serving U.S. military personnel.
Sadly, countless Afghans eager to start their new lives in the U.S. find themselves stuck in Kabul and Pakistan. Making matters worse, the Trump administration is mulling over plans to completely dismantle the State Department office overseeing the Afghan resettlement, officially known as the Office of the Coordinator for Afghan Relocation Efforts or CARE.
Such a move would result in a total cessation of official endeavors to protect and relocate Afghans who aided the U.S. government and their families. Despite the challenges, the efforts of this office, established in the aftermath of the hectic withdrawal under the Biden administration, were recognized and rewarded with three additional years of funding by Congress recently.
The letter sent by the initiative forewarns against common false claims such as ‘we don’t know who these people are’ or ‘this is just a temporary hiatus’. Discrediting such statements, VanDiver went on to accuse the State Department under Trump’s administration of making permanent plans to dismantle the resilient relocation infrastructure that they had so painstakingly built.
Processing special immigrant visas for thousands of Afghans waiting in places like Qatar or Albania is a hollow gesture if there’s no funding for flights, argues VanDiver. It is indeed a glaring fact that up until now, approximately 200,000 Afghans have resettled in America.
Dire predictions suggest that the State Department plans to close down the program entirely by April. This move would undoubtedly lead to about 200,000 Afghans being stranded and many more being separated from their loved ones.
While it is easy to critically view these actions in light of the current political landscape, it is crucial to reflect on the impact these choices will have on the lives of those on the ground. The Trump administration’s approach to the Afghan situation illuminates the importance of comprehensive, thoughtful, and compassionate policymaking in situations as delicate and complex as this one.