Follow us on social

google cta
Trump's refugee ban is endangering US Afghan allies

Trump's refugee ban is endangering US Afghan allies

The legal situation is unclear but veterans say the freeze on resettlement ops has already caused life threatening delays

Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

Afghans who worked for the U.S. military are still fleeing the Taliban and trying to reach the United States- President Trump's ban on refugees has put their lives, literally, in limbo.

They got a hopeful sign Tuesday when a federal judge blocked President Trump’s executive order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), a federal program that processes and resettles people fleeing dangerous humanitarian crises abroad.

But a lawyer for the Justice Department has already asked U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead to refrain from enforcing his block while the administration considers appealing the case. Whitehead said he will decide on that later, when he issues a formal written order.

Meanwhile, in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, more than 1,600 former U.S. military allies are waiting for their sanctuary.

Despite the pleas of military veteran groups, Trump’s executive order did not explicitly offer protections for the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa (SIV), a resettlement program created by Congress for Afghan citizens who aided the U.S. mission in Afghanistan — including former military interpreters, contractors, and prosecutors who put Taliban members in prison. Now stranded, these SIV applicants (many of them already vetted for resettlement by the U.S. government) risk violent retribution from the Taliban.

Created in 2006, the Afghan SIV program initially allowed for just 50 visas to be granted per year. That number was increased to around 4,000 in 2009 and then to 26,500 in 2021 after the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan. The latest round of SIV authorizations is set to expire at the end of 2025 and will require reauthorization from Congress.

Trump’s refugee pause hasn’t stopped the processing of SIV applications, but it has cut off crucial pathways for applicants to reach the United States once approved.

Though SIV is technically a separate program from the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, its applicants rely on many of the same offices and funding pools that have since been frozen by Trump’s executive order. These include the U.N.’s International Office of Migration and the State Department’s Coordinator for Afghan Relocation Efforts, both of which arrange relocation flights for SIV applicants.

Recent cuts have also forced the closure of resettlement agencies in Qatar and Pakistan, where many Afghans are vetted before coming to the United States. In Pakistan, local authorities are now ramping up efforts to deport refugees back to Afghanistan, which for many would be a death sentence.

Trump made President Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal a central part of his foreign policy argument during his re-election campaign, calling Biden’s exit, “the most astonishing display of gross incompetence by a nation’s leader, perhaps at any time.” Republicans in Congress excoriated Biden for failing to ensure the safety of former military partners during the Afghanistan withdrawal process.

Now military veterans fear that Trump is now doing the same by failing to honor the SIV program.

“The word spreads and it damages our reputation overseas,” said retired Air Force Lieutenant General John Bradley, whose Lamia Afghan Foundation helps to resettle Afghan refugees.

President Trump has not made any public statements about the status of SIV since issuing his executive order, but pro-Afghan advocates hope that they can elevate the issue by raising bipartisan support. According to the bipartisan veterans PAC With Honor, 84% of Americans say they support resettling Afghan veterans in the U.S.

“Lots of members of congress understand that these people helped our military,” said General Bradley.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee expressed concern last week that former U.S. allies in Afghanistan are being impacted by the refugee pause.

“During its chaotic and deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Biden administration abandoned tens of thousands of our Afghan allies who fought and bled alongside our military,” McCaul said in a Feb. 20 press release on Trump’s cuts to the State Department.

“I urge Secretary Rubio to prioritize honoring the promises we made to those Afghan allies as he works to make State a more effective and efficient department.”

Earlier this month, a group of Democratic senators led by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) called on the administration to clarify the status of SIV applicants currently in limbo.

“We write with urgent concerns about potential impacts of the Administration’s recent immigration and foreign aid orders on Afghans who supported the U.S. mission in Afghanistan,” said the senators in a letter to key Trump cabinet officials on Feb. 20. “Standing by those who stood with us is a matter of national interest and national honor.”


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Top photo: U.S. Army Lt. Col. Timothy McGuire and his interpreter, right, speak with a recent Afghan National Army graduate, left, during a visit in Seghana, Afghanistan (U.S Army photo by Pfc. Michael Zuk)
google cta
Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025
Top image credit: Dabari CGI/Shutterstock

The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025

Media

I spent the last few weeks asking experts about the foreign policy books that stood out in 2025. My goal was to create a wide-ranging list, featuring volumes that shed light on the most important issues facing American policymakers today, from military spending to the war in Gaza and the competition with China. Here are the eight books that made the cut.

keep readingShow less
Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war
Top image credit: People walking on Red square in Moscow in winter. (Oleg Elkov/Shutterstock)

Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war

Europe

After its emergence from the Soviet collapse, the new Russia grappled with the complex issue of developing a national identity that could embrace the radical contradictions of Russia’s past and foster integration with the West while maintaining Russian distinctiveness.

The Ukraine War has significantly changed public attitudes toward this question, and led to a consolidation of most of the Russian population behind a set of national ideas. This has contributed to the resilience that Russia has shown in the war, and helped to frustrate Western hopes that economic pressure and heavy casualties would undermine support for the war and for President Vladimir Putin. To judge by the evidence to date, there is very little hope of these Western goals being achieved in the future.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.