logo
Afghans in US mark Taliban Kabul takeover amid Trump immigration crackdown

Afghans in US mark Taliban Kabul takeover amid Trump immigration crackdown

Al Jazeeraa day ago
Four years have passed since Hanifa Girowal fled Afghanistan on a US evacuation flight. But every August, her mind returns to the same place.
Like many Afghans evacuated amid the August 15 Taliban takeover of Kabul, Girowal, who worked in human rights under the former Afghan government, still remains stuck in 'legal limbo' in the United States. She is steadfastly pursuing a more stable status in the US, even as the political landscape surrounding her, and thousands of other Afghans in similar situations, shifts.
'I somehow feel like I'm still stuck in August 2021 and all the other Augusts in between, I can't remember anything about them,' Girowal told Al Jazeera.
She often recalls the mad dash amid a crush of bodies at the crowded Kabul International Airport: people shot in front of her, a week of hiding, a flight to Qatar, then Germany and then finally, the US state of Virginia.
Followed by the early days of trying to begin a new life from the fragments of the old.
'Everything just comes up again to the surface, and it's like reliving that trauma we went through, and we have been trying to heal from since that day,' she said.
The struggle may have become familiar, but her disquiet has been heightened since US President Donald Trump took office on January 20. His hardline immigration policies have touched nearly every immigrant community in the US, underscoring vulnerabilities for anyone on a precarious legal status.
There is a feeling that anything could happen, from one day to the next.
'I have an approved asylum case, which gives a certain level of protection, but we still don't know the future of certain policies on immigration,' Girowal said. 'I am very much fearful that I can be subjected to deportation at any time.'
Unheeded warnings
Four years after the US withdrawal, much remains unclear about how Trump's policies will affect Afghans who are already in the US, estimated to total about 180,000.
They arrived through a tangle of different avenues, including 75,000 flown in on evacuation flights in the immediate aftermath of the withdrawal, as the administration of US President Joe Biden undertook what it dubbed 'Operation Allies Welcome'. Thousands more have since sought asylum by making treacherous journeys across the world to traverse the US southern border.
Some have relocated via so-called Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs), reserved for individuals who worked directly with the US military in Afghanistan, under a notoriously backlogged programme.
Others have been resettled through a special State Department programme, known as Priority 1 (P1) and Priority 2 (P2), launched by the administration of President Biden, meant for Afghans who face persecution for having worked in various capacities on behalf of the US government or with a US-based organisation in Afghanistan.
Adam Bates, a supervisory policy counsel at the International Refugee Assistance Programme, explained that some of those pathways, most notably the SIV and refugee programmes, provide a clear course towards US residency and, eventually, citizenship.
But, he clarified, others do not – a fact that advocates have warned leaves members of the population subject to perpetual uncertainty and political whims.
'A lot of the advocacy to the Biden administration officials was about finding more permanent legal pathways for Afghans,' Bates told Al Jazeera. 'That was with one eye towards the potential of giving the Trump administration this opportunity to really double down and target this community.'
Pressure on Afghans in the US
During Trump's new term, his administration has taken several concrete – and at times contradictory – moves that affect Afghans living in the US.
It ended 'temporary protected status' (TPS) for Afghans already in the country at the time of the Taliban takeover, arguing the country shows 'an improved security situation' and 'stabilising economy', a claim contradicted by several human rights reports.
At the same time, the Trump administration added Afghanistan to a new travel ban list, restricting visas for Afghans, saying such admissions broadly run counter to US 'foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism'.
These actions underscore that 'the situation in Afghanistan seems to be whatever it needs to be, from the Trump administration's perspective,' according to Bates.
Trump has offered his contradictory messaging, criticising the Biden administration on the campaign trail for its handling of the withdrawal, and as recently as July, pledging to 'save' evacuated Afghans subject to deportation from the United Arab Emirates.
Meanwhile, the administration terminated a special status for those who entered the US via the CBP One app in April, potentially affecting thousands of Afghans who entered via the southern border.
Advocates warn that many more Afghans may soon be facing another legal cliff. After being evacuated in 2021, tens of thousands of Afghans were granted humanitarian parole, a temporary status that allowed them to legally live and work in the US for two years, with an extension granted in 2023. That programme is soon set to end.
While many granted the status have since sought other legal avenues, most often applying for asylum or SIVs, an unknown number could be rendered undocumented and subject to deportation when the extension ends. Legislation creating a clearer pathway to citizenship has languished in Congress for years.
The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has not publicly released how many evacuated Afghans remain in the US on humanitarian parole, and did not respond to Al Jazeera's request for the data.
Evacuated Afghans' unease has been compounded by Trump's aggressive approach to immigration enforcement, which has increasingly seen those without criminal histories targeted for deportations and permanent residents targeted for their political advocacy.
'It's just an escalation across the board and a compounding of fear and instability in this community,' Bates said. 'It's hard to make life decisions if you aren't sure what's going to happen tomorrow or next week or in a year'.
'Pulled the rug out'
Meanwhile, for the thousands of Afghans continuing to seek safety in the US from abroad, pathways have been severely constricted or have become completely blocked.
The Trump administration has paused asylum claims at the US southern border, citing a national emergency. It has almost completely suspended the US Refugee Program (USRAP), allowing only a trickle of new refugees in amid an ongoing legal challenge by rights groups.
Advocates say the special P1 and P2 programme created for Afghan refugees appears to have been completely halted under Trump. The administration has not published refugee admission numbers since taking office, and did not reply to Al Jazeera's request for data.
'It feels as if we have pulled the rug out from many of our Afghan allies through these policy changes that strip legal protection for many Afghans in the US and limit pathways for Afghans who are still abroad to come to the US safely,' Kristyn Peck, the chief executive officer of the Lutheran Social Services of the National Capital Area, told Al Jazeera.
She noted that the SIV pipeline has continued to operate under Trump, although there have been some limitations, including requiring those approved for relocation to pay for their own travel.
Meanwhile, resettlement agencies like Lutheran have been forced to seriously curtail their operations following a stop-work order from the administration on January 24. As of March, Peck said, the organisation has been forced to let go of about 120 of its staff.
Susan Antolin, the executive director of Women for Afghan Women, a non-profit organisation that offers mental health, legal and social support to Afghans in the US, said organisations like hers are also bracing for sustained uncertainty.
'We are diversifying our funding and trying very hard, as so many other organisations are, to find other avenues to bring in that funding to continue to support our programmes,' she told Al Jazeera. 'As organisations that deal with this kind of work, we have to step up. We have to do 10 times more, or 100 times more, of the work.'
'No more a priority for the world'
The unstable situation in the US reflects a broader global trend.
The Taliban government, despite promising reforms in a push for international recognition, has continued to be accused of widespread human rights abuses and revenge killings. Still, it has upgraded diplomatic ties with several governments in recent years, and in July, Russia became the first country to formally recognise the group as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
At the same time, the governments of Pakistan and Iran have accelerated expulsions of Afghans back to Afghanistan, with more than 1.4 million Afghans either being expelled or leaving Iran alone from January to July of 2025, according to UNHCR.
The Reuters news agency also reported in July that the UAE had notified Washington that it had begun returning evacuated Afghans.
Germany, too, has begun deporting Afghans back to Afghanistan, in July, it conducted its second deportation flight since the Taliban came to power, despite continuing not to recognise or maintain diplomatic ties with the group.
The collective moves send a clear message, evacuee Girowal said: 'We know that Afghanistan is no more a priority for the world.'
Still, she said she has not abandoned hope that the US under Trump's leadership will 'not forget its allies'.
'I know the resilience of our own Afghan community. We are trained to be resilient wherever we are and fight back as much as we can,' she said.
'That's one thing that gives me hope.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US suspends visas for Gaza residents after right-wing social media storm
US suspends visas for Gaza residents after right-wing social media storm

Al Jazeera

time13 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

US suspends visas for Gaza residents after right-wing social media storm

The United States has announced that it is halting all visitor visas for people from Gaza pending a 'a full and thorough' review, a day after social media posts about Palestinian refugees sparked furious reactions from right-wingers. The Department of State's move on Saturday came a day after far-right activist and Trump ally Laura Loomer posted on X that Palestinians 'who claim to be refugees from Gaza' entered the US via San Francisco and Houston this month. 'How is allowing for Islamic immigrants to come into the US America First policy?' she said on X in a later post, going on to report further Palestinian arrivals in Missouri and claiming that 'several US Senators and members of Congress' had texted her to express their fury. Republican lawmakers speaking publicly about the matter included Chip Roy of Texas, who said he would inquire about the matter, and Randy Fine of Florida, who described the alleged arrivals as a 'national security risk'. By Saturday, the State Department announced it was stopping visas for 'individuals from Gaza' while it conducted 'a full and thorough review of the process and procedures used to issue a small number of temporary medical-humanitarian visas in recent days'. It did not provide a figure. All visitor visas for individuals from Gaza are being stopped while we conduct a full and thorough review of the process and procedures used to issue a small number of temporary medical-humanitarian visas in recent days. — Department of State (@StateDept) August 16, 2025 The US issued 640 visas to holders of the Palestinian Authority travel document in May, according to the Reuters news agency. B1/B2 visitor visas permit Palestinians to seek medical treatment in the US. Loomer greeted Saturday's State Department announcement with glee. 'It's amazing how fast we can get results from the Trump administration,' she said on Saturday, though she later posted that more needed to be done to 'highlight the crisis of the invasion happening in our country'. While I appreciate the State Department and @marcorubio issuing this statement, I want to press even harder to highlight the crisis of the invasion happening in our country. The visas and arrivals of GAZANS to US airports isn't new. This has been drastically increasing in speed… — Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 16, 2025 The decision to cut visas comes as Israel intensifies its attacks on Gaza, where at least 61,827 people have been killed in the past 22 months, with the United Nations warning that 'widespread starvation, malnutrition and disease' are driving a rise in famine-related deaths. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing to seize Gaza City as part of a takeover of the Strip, forcibly displacing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to concentration zones.

African courts may pave the way for holding social media giants to account
African courts may pave the way for holding social media giants to account

Al Jazeera

time13 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

African courts may pave the way for holding social media giants to account

In April 2025, the Human Rights Court in Kenya issued an unprecedented ruling that it has the jurisdiction to hear a case about harmful content on one of Meta's platforms. The lawsuit was filed in 2022 by Abraham Meareg, the son of an Ethiopian academic who was murdered after he was doxxed and threatened on Facebook, Fisseha Tekle, an Ethiopian human rights activist, who was also doxxed and threatened on Facebook, and Katiba Institute, a Kenyan non-profit that defends constitutionalism. They maintain that Facebook's algorithm design and its content moderation decisions made in Kenya resulted in harm done to two of the claimants, fuelled the conflict in Ethiopia and led to widespread human rights violations within and outside Kenya. The content in question falls outside the protected categories of speech under Article 33 of the Constitution of Kenya and includes propaganda for war, incitement to violence, hate speech and advocacy of hatred that constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of others, incitement to cause harm and discrimination. Key to the Kenyan case is the question whether Meta, a US-based corporation, can financially benefit from unconstitutional content and whether there is a positive duty on the corporation to take down unconstitutional content that also violates its Community Standards. In affirming the Kenyan court's jurisdiction in the case, the judge was emphatic that the Constitution of Kenya allows a Kenyan court to adjudicate over Meta's acts or omissions regarding content posted on the Facebook platform that may impact the observance of human rights within and outside Kenya. The Kenyan decision signals a paradigm shift towards platform liability where judges determine liability by solely asking the question: Do platform decisions observe and uphold human rights? The ultimate goal of the Bill of Rights, a common feature in African constitutions, is to uphold and protect the inherent dignity of all people. Kenya's Bill of Rights, for example, has as its sole mission to preserve the dignity of individuals and communities and to promote social justice and the realisation of the potential of all human beings. The supremacy of the Constitution also guarantees that, should there be safe harbour provisions in the laws of that country, they would not be a sufficient liability shield for platforms if their business decisions do not ultimately uphold human rights. That a case on algorithm amplification has passed the jurisdiction hearing stage in Kenya is a testament that human rights law and constitutionality offer an opportunity for those who have suffered harm as a result of social media content to seek redress. Up to this point, the idea that a social media platform can be held accountable for content on its platform has been dissuaded by the blanket immunity offered under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the US, and to a lesser extent, the principle of non-liability in the European Union, with the necessary exceptions detailed in various laws. For example, Section 230 was one of the reasons a district judge in California cited in her ruling to dismiss a case filed by Myanmar refugees in a similar claim that Meta had failed to curb hate speech that fuelled the Rohingya genocide. The aspiration for platform accountability was further dampened by the US Supreme Court decision in Twitter v Taamneh, in which it ruled against plaintiffs who sought to establish that social media platforms carry responsibility for content posted on them. The immunity offered to platforms has come at a high cost, especially for victims of harm in places where platforms do not have physical offices. This is why a decision like the one by the Kenyan courts is a welcome development; it restores hope that victims of platform harm have an alternative route to recourse, one that refocuses human rights into the core of the discussion on platform accountability. The justification for safe harbour provisions like Section 230 has always been to protect 'nascent' technologies from being smothered by the multiplicity of suits. However, by now, the dominant social media platforms are neither nascent nor in need of protection. They have both the monetary and technical wherewithal to prioritise people over profits, but choose not to. As the Kenyan cases cascade through the judicial process, there is cautious optimism that constitutional and human rights law that has taken root in African countries can offer a necessary reprieve for platform arrogance. Mercy Mutemi represents Fisseha Tekle in the case outlined in the article. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.

‘Will I make it back alive?': Gaza journalists fear targeting by Israel
‘Will I make it back alive?': Gaza journalists fear targeting by Israel

Al Jazeera

time14 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

‘Will I make it back alive?': Gaza journalists fear targeting by Israel

Palestinian journalists have long known Gaza to be the most dangerous place on earth for media workers, but Israel's latest attack on a tent housing journalists in Gaza City has left many reeling from shock and fear. Four Al Jazeera staff were among seven people killed in an Israeli drone strike outside al-Shifa Hospital on August 10. The Israeli military has admitted to deliberately targeting the tent after making unsubstantiated accusations that one of those killed, Al Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif, was a member of Hamas. Israeli attacks in Gaza have killed at least 238 media workers since October 2023, according to Gaza's Government Media Office. This toll is higher than that of World Wars I and II, the Vietnam War, the war in Afghanistan and the Yugoslavia wars combined. Al Jazeera correspondent Hani Mahmoud said, 'Press vests and helmets, once considered a shield, now feel like a target.' 'The fear is constant — and justified,' Mahmoud said. 'Every assignment is accompanied by the same unspoken question: Will [I] make it back alive?' The US-based Committee to Protect Journalists has been among several organisations denouncing Israel's longstanding pattern of accusing journalists of being 'terrorists' without credible proof. 'It is no coincidence that the smears against al-Sharif — who has reported night and day for Al Jazeera since the start of the war — surfaced every time he reported on a major development in the war, most recently the starvation brought about by Israel's refusal to allow sufficient aid into the territory,' CPJ Regional Director Sara Qudah said in the aftermath of Israel's attack. In light of Israel's systematic targeting of journalists, media workers in Gaza are forced to make difficult choices. 'As a mother and a journalist, I go through this mental dissonance almost daily, whether to go to work or stay with my daughters and being afraid of the random shelling of the Israeli occupation army,' Palestinian journalist Sally Thabet told Al Jazeera. Across the street from the ruins of the School of Media Studies at al-Quds Open University in Gaza City, where he used to teach, Hussein Saad has been recovering from an injury he sustained while running to safety. 'The deliberate targeting of Palestinian journalists has a strong effect on the disappearance of the Palestinian story and the disappearance of the media narrative,' he said. Saad argued the Strip was witnessing 'the disappearance of the truth'. While journalists report on mass killings, human suffering and starvation, they also cope with their own losses and deprivation. Photographer and correspondent Amer al-Sultan said hunger was a major challenge. 'I used to go to work, and when I didn't find anything to eat, I would just drink water,' he said. 'I did this for two days. I had to live for two or three days on water. This is one of the most difficult challenges we face amid this war against our people: starvation.' Journalist and film director Hassan Abu Dan said reporters 'live in conditions that are more difficult than the mind can imagine.' 'You live in a tent. You drink water that is not good for drinking. You eat unhealthy food … We are all, as journalists, confused. There is a part of our lives that has been ruined and gone far away,' he said. Al Jazeera's Mahmoud said that despite the psychological trauma and the personal risks, Palestinian journalists continue to do their jobs, 'driven by a belief that documenting the truth is not just a profession, but a duty to their people and history'.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store