withdrawal

Afghans in US mark withdrawal anniversary amid Trump immigration crackdown | Donald Trump News

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.”

Source link

Marines to leave Los Angeles, Pentagon says

More than a month after President Trump made the fiercely contentious decision to send about 700 U.S. Marines to Los Angeles, those troops will begin withdrawing from the city, Pentagon officials said Monday.

The decision comes a week after the Pentagon announced that half of the almost 4,000 National Guard soldiers deployed to the Los Angeles area would be released from duty. The Marines and National Guard were sent to the city in early June amid widespread federal immigration raids and fiery protests against the raids, with the Trump administration vowing to crack down on “rioters, looters and thugs.”

While the president contended that he had “saved Los Angeles,” local and state officials ferociously denounced the extraordinary deployment of military troops to the streets of an American city.

Advocates and California politicians also argued that the heavy-handed spectacle would be incendiary, potentially putting both the troops and protesters at risk.

In recent days, the troops have been largely fighting tedium, without much to do.

The sometimes volatile protests, which erupted in downtown Los Angeles and other parts of the region in mid-June, have since wound down. The troops have been tasked with guarding federal buildings, and some have accompanied immigration agents on tense enforcement actions.

Speaking on behalf of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell seemed to acknowledge the quiet in a statement Monday.

“With stability returning to Los Angeles, the Secretary has directed the redeployment of the 700 Marines whose presence sent a clear message: lawlessness will not be tolerated,” Parnell said. “Their rapid response, unwavering discipline, and unmistakable presence were instrumental in restoring order and upholding the rule of law. We’re deeply grateful for their service, and for the strength and professionalism they brought to this mission.”

News of the Marines’ withdrawal, which was first reported by the New York Times, broke minutes after Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass finished a Monday morning public appearance with veterans’ groups, where she decried the “inappropriate” presence of military forces on L.A. streets.

“This is another win for Los Angeles. As we said this morning — the way to best support our troops is to have them do what they enlisted to do, not to protect two office buildings,” Bass said in response to the withdrawal.

Roughly 2,000 National Guard troops remain in the region, according to U.S. Northern Command.

Source link

UK MPs react to report alleging David Cameron ‘threatened’ ICC withdrawal | Israel-Palestine conflict News

Cameron told ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan that applying for arrest warrants for Israeli officials would be like ‘dropping hydrogen bomb’, media report says.

Several United Kingdom lawmakers have criticised the previous government over allegations in a recent media report that former Foreign Secretary David Cameron “privately threatened” to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) over its plans to issue arrest warrants for Israeli officials over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The report, published on Monday by the UK-based outlet Middle East Eye (MEE), cited sources with knowledge of a phone call Cameron allegedly made to ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan on April 23, 2024, after he had given advance notice of his intention to apply for the warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

MEE’s report cited unnamed sources, including former staff in Khan’s office, and had seen minutes of the conversation, claiming that Cameron warned the arrest warrants, which were issued in November that year, would be – in quotes reported by the sources – tantamount to “dropping a hydrogen bomb”, warning that if the ICC went ahead, the UK would “defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute”.

Khan reportedly stood his ground, with sources telling MEE that he said afterwards that he did not like “being pressurised”. “I won’t say if it rises to blackmail – I don’t like being threatened,” he reportedly said, adding that the government was “debasing” the UK with its clear attack on the independence of the court and the rule of international law.

Neither Khan nor Cameron, who was prime minister between 2010 and 2016, and now sits in the House of Lords as a life peer, has commented on the report.

Following the report’s publication, Labour Party MP Zarah Sultana said on X that Cameron “and every UK minister complicit in arming and enabling Israel’s genocide in Gaza” should be investigated.

Scottish National Party MP Chris Law said the allegations were “shocking”, but added the country was “not seeing much better under Labour”.

Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a Labour MP, called for an “independent inquiry into the UK’s role in the Gaza genocide”.

Zack Polanski, the deputy leader of the Green Party, was cited by MEE as saying: “It’s been clear for all to see that both the former and current government have stood with the oppressors, not the marginalised.”

When the ICC applied for the arrest warrants in May last year, the previous Conservative Party government, a strong backer of Israel, decried the move as “not helpful in relation to reaching a pause in the fighting, getting hostages out or getting humanitarian aid in”.

In July, the new Labour government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, dropped the previous Rishi Sunak-led government’s bid to challenge the ICC’s power to seek the warrants, which were issued for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders in November.



Source link

Lionesses: ‘A grim picture’ after two retirements and one withdrawal in 10 days

Each situation has come about in different circumstances but, combined, it makes for a grim picture.

Kirby’s choice felt like the right one after the 31-year-old’s efforts to move from the fringes into the final 23-player Euros squad ultimately did not pay off.

She had struggled with injury since starting every game at Euro 2022, missing the World Cup after knee surgery and withdrawing from recent squads with minor issues – her place in the squad was up for debate and Wiegman made her call.

Wiegman spoke highly of Kirby in the moments after she had informed her team-mates in the dressing room in Barcelona.

She had been left out of the squad for the 2-1 defeat by Spain and Wiegman addressed media, saying she was “proud” of Kirby’s career and calling her an “inspiration”.

Both Kirby and Wiegman said they had “honest conversations” and had communicated frequently in recent weeks. It ended on good terms, with full transparency.

There was also sympathy from Wiegman regarding Bright’s wellbeing, with the Dutchwoman saying last week the priority was “to take care of herself”.

“She has to take the time that will help her settle. We’ll stay in contact and I hope she feels better soon. We have people around who can give that support,” Wiegman added.

Captain Leah Williamson said Bright’s decision to speak out about her mental health was a “brave thing to do”.

“I think it encourages other people to do the same,” said Williamson.

“She’s leading by example. Anything that she needs from the team, we will be there to give it to her.”

There were mixed views when Earps’ retirement was announced two weeks ago – some among the media and fanbase calling it a “selfish” decision.

She was still a valuable member of Wiegman’s squad – the manager said so herself – and she wanted Earps to be in Switzerland, using her experience to aid Hampton.

Wiegman admitted she was “really disappointed and sad”, and that the news had come as a “shock” to the players.

She was hesitant to discuss details around the timing of Earps’ decision but it was clear Wiegman was emotional, stating: “I find it hard”.

Source link