logo
Takeaways from AP's reporting on U.S.-allied Afghan refugees struggling for basic support

Takeaways from AP's reporting on U.S.-allied Afghan refugees struggling for basic support

Independent18-03-2025
Rahmani worked for a U.S.-backed organization in Kabul, which put him at risk of Taliban retribution. Now, the father of two is among thousands of newly arrived refugees who lost financial assistance when the Trump administration cut off funding for the federal refugee program in January.
He moved here in November through the vetted form of legal migration. To fast-track self-sufficiency, it provides refugees with wraparound services for three months — help with housing, food and job placement — while other federal grants support their first five years.
Instead, Rahmani's relocation services were largely halted after only two months, when the Trump administration upended the refugee program. He otherwise would have qualified for extended rental assistance for up to six months.
He has spent weeks looking for work, with no luck. Unable to pay his rent, his anxiety mounts by the day. Here's a look at key elements of the plight he and his family face.
Resettlement agencies are reeling from disruption of funding
Rahmani is a client of Lutheran Social Services of the National Capital Area, a local faith-based resettlement agency that is waiting on $3.7 million in federal funding for work it has already provided.
LSSNCA has struggled to make payroll, and its support services have fallen like dominoes after it was forced to lay off 75 people and furlough seven others.
Two-thirds of its clients are Afghan allies, who were offered visas and protection in the United States after the Taliban returned to power. These Afghans worked alongside U.S. troops or, like Rahmani, were employed by U.S.-backed organizations. Rahmani is identified using only one of his names because he still fears for his family's safety.
The risk of widespread evictions
By early March, at least 42 households under LSSNCA's care had received eviction notices, putting nearly 170 people in Virginia and Maryland on the edge of homelessness, with more — like Rahmani's family — at risk. The staff has been fundraising and negotiating with landlords to stave off evictions.
The organization raised $500,000 in six weeks, but that doesn't fill the gap left by frozen government funds.
Global Refuge is the parent organization of LSSNCA and has long served as one of 10 national agencies partnering with the federal government to resettle refugees. It has received no federal reimbursements for work done since Inauguration Day and has laid off hundreds of staff. Nearly 6,000 refugees in its care were within 90 days of arrival, the initial aid window, when it received a stop-work order from the Trump administration.
Across resettlement agencies nationwide, support for at least 30,000 recent arrivals was affected. At LSSNCA, 369 people were within their first 90 days in the U.S., and another 850 clients were eligible for longer-term services.
'We're seeing the de facto wholesale destruction of a longstanding bipartisan program that saved millions of lives,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge.
Refugees fled instability, only to find more of it in the U.S.
LSSNCA's capacity has been stretched thin before. The chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 led to a surge of Afghans being resettled in the U.S.
LSSNCA went from serving 500 people a year to 500 people a month. They staffed up to deal with the influx of Afghans, with case managers working long hours. The quality of their work suffered: Federal reimbursements were often delayed, and they struggled to provide services. The difference then was they knew the federal government backed their work.
Marjila Badakhsh came to the U.S. in December of 2021. A journalist who worked for a U.S.-funded Afghan media organization, she was evacuated from Kabul and resettled in Virginia.
Once a LSSNCA client, she was later hired at the organization, only to be laid off in January when the agency received its stop-work order.
'After three years, with one policy I'm thinking that I'm back to the day that I came to the United States for the first time, and I should start again,' she said.
She stays busy applying to jobs in Virginia and California, where her brother — who worked as an interpreter for the U.S. military in Afghanistan — was recently resettled. But her dreams of one day welcoming their parents and sister to the U.S. are on hold after the suspension of the U.S. refugee program.
The courts are still weighing in
Lawsuits against the Trump administration have been filed over its immigration policies, with one judge ruling in favor of three faith-based resettlement agencies. In a recent court filing, administration lawyers argued that initial refugee benefits are 'not required by law.' They indicated it would take months to comply with a court order to restart the program.
This week, Global Refuge received some federal reimbursements for its work during the Biden administration. Those funds came through the Department of Health and Human Services. Global Refuge has not received federal payments for work done since late January, and it has not received reimbursements for the 90-day aid offered through the State Department, which did not respond to a request for comment.
___
___
Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Texas Republicans bring redistricting bill to house floor after finally reaching quorum
Texas Republicans bring redistricting bill to house floor after finally reaching quorum

The Guardian

time10 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Texas Republicans bring redistricting bill to house floor after finally reaching quorum

Texas Republicans brought a bill to the floor of the state legislature on Wednesday to redraw the state's congressional districts, making quick use of their regained quorum after the return of protesting Democratic legislators. Democratic state representatives filed a series of amendments to the bill which were voted down, but used the process to raise objections to taking up redistricting before flood relief, to house rules which require a police escort when leaving the chamber and to the proposal itself, a mid-decade change which they argue reduces the voting power of people of color in service to Republican political gains and further gerrymanders the state at the cost of democracy. 'We're ready to meet Trump where he is, which is on a dirt road,' said Democrat Nicole Collier, livestreaming from a bathroom off the legislative floor. 'We're ready to get down and dirty.' Collier refused to sign a pass and permit a police escort for leaving the House floor, and has been trapped in the chambers as a result. While on a Zoom call with the Democratic senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and the Democratic National Committee chair, Ken Martin, Collier said she was being told she had to end the live stream or face a felony charge, abruptly leaving the meeting. It is emblematic of the unusual resistance Democrats in Texas have put up to the redistricting bill, and the response of the Republican-controlled Texas government to that resistance. 'This bill intentionally discriminates against Black and Hispanic Texans and other Texans of color by cracking and packing minority communities across the state of Texas,' said Chris Turner, a Democratic representative from Arlington. 'It is a clear violation of the Voting Rights Act and the constitution.' Republican leaders rejected racial animus as an element of the redistricting, noting that it increases the number of districts with a Hispanic voting age majority from seven to eight. Based on voting results from 2024, five congressional seats would change party from Democratic to Republican under the new map, which they argue is legally allowed. 'You want transparency,' said representative Todd Hunter, the Corpus Christi Republican who drafted the redistricting bill. 'The underlying goal of this plan is straightforward: improve Republican political performance … We are allowed to draw congressional districts on the basis of political performance, as recognized by the US supreme court in Rucho v Common Cause. These districts were drawn primarily using political performance to guide the redrawing of districts.' The strong assertion that the genesis of the redistricting is about increasing the number of Republicans in Congress, and not to diminish the voting power of people of color, is an early defense to expected legal challenges to the proposal under the Voting Rights Act. 'When you say the word 'redistricting', I think you know there are going to be legal challenges,' Hunter said. Under the Voting Rights Act and longstanding court precedent, lawmakers needed to draw lines with great awareness of the racial composition of the electorate in order to avoid unconstitutionally packing them into single districts to reduce their influence on other districts, or to spread them across multiple districts – cracking – to dilute their voting strength as a group. Talk of a mid-decade redistricting began in Texas after the Department of Justice circulated a letter describing the use of race in the state's 2021 redistricting to be unconstitutional. Texas's governor, Greg Abbott, seized on this as a rationale to redraw district lines more advantageous to Republicans. Donald Trump has called for Texas and other states to redraw their lines for more partisan advantage, prompting California's governor, Gavin Newsom, and other Democratic governors to begin to counter with redistrictings of their own. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Democrats in the Texas house left the state last month, intent on denying a quorum to the legislature to block a vote on the redistricting bill. They abandoned their exile after the California legislature began advancing a redistricting bill of its own. In contentious discussion, state representative Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, ranking Democrat on the Texas house redistricting committee, pressed Hunter on the motivations behind the new map lines and on the absence of input from the Texas legislative into a map that would probably face a voting rights challenge. That drew a sharp response from Hunter. 'You left 17 to 18 days! You could have sat with me,' Hunter said. 'Now you're getting on the microphone saying why didn't I involve you? Well, I wasn't going to cross state lines to find ya! I was here … You own the walkout. You said you did that. But don't come into this body and say we didn't include you. You left us for 18 days.'

To Americans, Britain is no longer the free country we thought it was
To Americans, Britain is no longer the free country we thought it was

Telegraph

time43 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

To Americans, Britain is no longer the free country we thought it was

Every year, the US Department of State releases a report on human rights practices in other countries (CRHRP). One of my first assignments as a political officer at the US embassy was to coordinate and edit one country report. Not surprisingly, certain governments sometimes take issue with how their policies are characterised in the CRHRP. For example, South Africa claimed a recent CRHRP was 'inaccurate and deeply flawed' in criticising them for failing to 'investigate, prosecute and punish officials who committed human rights abuses … or violence against racial minorities'. President Cyril Ramaphosa seemed bewildered in May when President Trump took him to task for the murders of white farmers. His government's defence seems to be that South Africa's horrific levels of crime afflict everyone, not just white people, and that the motives are not racist but merely criminal. That is unlikely to mollify a country impoverished under an incompetent succession of ANC leaders, nor will Ramaphosa's explanation that they haven't actually used their sweeping new Land Expropriation Act inspire commercial farmers who feed the country to invest in their farms. But I digress. China doesn't just reject US criticism, they've cheekily published their own report criticising the US for 'the chronic disease of racism,' and 'basic rights and freedoms being disregarded'. Usually, the governments taking the most criticism in the CRHRP are repressive or feckless regimes, from China to Zimbabwe, that suppress free speech, stifle religious expression, or oppress women, minority groups, and political dissidents. That doesn't sound like the England in which I was born over half a century ago. But this year, the Country Report on the UK flags Britain as a risky place to speak your mind. The CRHRP claims that 'the human rights situation worsened in the United Kingdom during the year,' citing 'credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression, including enforcement of or threat of criminal or civil laws in order to limit expression; and crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by anti-Semitism'. The report notes restrictions on speech – even silent meditation – near abortion clinics, and the Online Safety Act's curtailment of internet speech, policed by Ofcom. It calls out government censorship of speech deemed misinformation or 'hate speech', including in relation to migrants and crimes committed by foreign nationals. It could have gone even further. In its section on Worker Rights, the CRHRP doesn't discuss the people who have been sacked or disciplined for refusing to accept the forced speech codes of gender ideology, like prison officer David Toshack or nurse Jennifer Melle; or for social media posters who have criticised government action, like teacher Simon Pearson. Like the proverbial frog in slowly heating water, perhaps Brits can't see what is happening to their freedoms. But looking from the outside, we can, and the State Department has called it out. In reaction, I expect the British Left to be as indignant and in denial as the establishment in Washington DC is about crime. Now Donald Trump has temporarily taken over local law enforcement in the city, the Leftist establishment and the national media are claiming that violent crime is lower than in recent years. This ignores some inconvenient realities. First, unreliable numbers. The city has reportedly just settled a lawsuit from a whistleblowing police officer who had alleged that her supervisors were re-classifying serious crimes as lesser offences, to flatter the city's crime statistics. Second, even the supposedly lower murder rate puts Washington among the most dangerous cities in the nation. Like the DC establishment, the British government and much of the media are happy to ignore Lucy Connolly, who is still in prison after she made an unwise online post (and then deleted it); Hamit Coskun, who was prosecuted after he burnt a book; and the thousands of ordinary Brits who have been accused of 'Non-Crime Hate Incidents,' which is at the very least an astonishing waste of police time. The Left likes to pretend that the real villains in the fight for free speech are people like Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, and JK Rowling, who courageously state objective truth, rather than the gender ideologues trying to force women to accept men in their changing rooms, prisons, and shelters. George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, and other writers of the early 20th century predicted a future where the populace was dumbed down, repressed, and fed information by an authoritarian state. In the dystopian futures they imagined in 1984 and Brave New World, independent, critical thinking was banned and speech violators were punished. That sounds like the logical destiny of Britain if it maintains its present course. There is already a semi-official dogma on gender ideology, immigration, and crime which it is costly to challenge. Censorship and group-think get worse if not disrupted. Instead of rejecting America's criticism in high dudgeon, I hope Britain will heed the warning of its Atlantic cousins and return to the people their right to speak their minds. For the land of Magna Carta to slowly sink into repression and state control would be a great injustice to Britain's present inhabitants, and an insult to our ancestors' work of centuries. 'The Ten Woke Commandments (You Must Not Obey)' from Academica Books.

Russian foreign minister warns West over excluding Moscow from Ukraine security discussions
Russian foreign minister warns West over excluding Moscow from Ukraine security discussions

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Russian foreign minister warns West over excluding Moscow from Ukraine security discussions

Russia 's foreign minister has sent the West a warning over excluding Moscow from security discussions on Ukraine. Speaking on Wednesday (20 August), two days after Donald Trump hosted Volodymyr Zelensky and other western leaders in the White House, Sergei Lavrov said alienating the Kremlin is a 'road to nowhere'. 'We cannot agree with the fact that now it is proposed to resolve questions of security, collective security, without the Russian Federation. This will not work,' he said. Lavrov said that Russia will continue to express its "legitimate interests fairly and harshly', and that the US must understand that excluding Moscow is futile.

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