On November 26, 2025, two members of the West Virginia National Guard, deployed in Washington, D.C., were shot near the White House. The shooter, identified as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national who entered the U.S. under the 2021 evacuation program, was taken into custody and is now facing charges including assault with intent to kill and firearm possession.
President Donald J. Trump condemned the attack as a “terrorist act,” announced the deployment of additional National Guard troops in Washington, and ordered a sweeping re-examination of all Afghan evacuees admitted during the previous administration.
As the nation reels from shock, the incident has reopened a deeply divisive debate over immigration vetting, national security, and the moral obligations toward Afghan partners who aided U.S. troops during the war.
Are US Sanctions Saving Sovereignty—or Sabotaging Justice?
Background: The 2021 Evacuation and Its Aftermath
In August 2021, as the U.S. pulled out of Afghanistan, the administration launched Operation Allies Welcome, evacuating and resettling tens of thousands of Afghan allies, interpreters, and staffers—many of whom had worked alongside U.S. forces.
Due to the chaotic withdrawal and urgency of the evacuation, vetting processes were compressed. According to internal oversight reports cited at the time, some evacuees lacked full biometric or background checks; a minority were later flagged for further scrutiny. Yet the majority integrated into U.S. society without incident.
Critics of the evacuation warned that the rapid intake generated security risks. Supporters countered that abandoning Afghan allies would betray those who risked their lives for U.S. interests.
What the D.C. Attack Revealed — and Triggered
The attack by Lakanwal — an Afghan evacuee who reportedly worked with U.S.-backed forces in Afghanistan — has become a flashpoint. Federal prosecutors describe it as an “ambush-style shooting” in which the suspect is accused of firing on uniformed National Guard personnel unprovoked.
In the aftermath:
- Immigration processing for Afghan nationals was paused indefinitely.
- The administration called for a full review of all Afghan arrivals under the Biden-era evacuation program.
- Additional National Guard troops were deployed to Washington, ostensibly for security and border-control operations.
Supporters of the review argue that it is an essential security reset — one justified by oversight reports showing weaknesses in 2021 vetting, coupled now with real violence. For them, the risk is no longer theoretical.
But for many others — Afghan-American communities, human-rights groups, and U.S. allies — the response feels like collective punishment. They warn this could erode trust in the U.S. among vulnerable refugees who helped American forces, and fuel fear, stigma, and reprisal against all Afghans.
Reactions — Divided, Intense, and Emotional
✅ Those supporting the crackdown say:
- The attack validates long-standing concerns about rushed vetting under evacuation.
- Public safety demands strong, immediate measures even if unpopular.
- The government must prioritize Americans’ security over leniency.
⚠️ Those warning against sweeping re-vetting argue:
- The shooter is an exception — not representative of thousands of Afghan evacuees who are law-abiding and grateful.
- Collective retribution undermines America’s moral standing and breaks promises to people who risked everything for the U.S.
- Mass deportations or status reviews violate due process and may endanger lives of genuine refugees — especially those still under threat in Afghanistan.
Veterans who served in Afghanistan, many with personal ties to interpreters and local partners, have expressed alarm that the U.S. might abandon the very people who once saved American lives.
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro speaks to the press Thursday about the investigation into the shooting of two West Virginia National Guard members. Looking on are Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser (from left), D.C. Executive Assistant Police Chief Jeffery Carroll and FBI Director Kash Patel.Andrew Leyden/Getty Images
Bigger Picture — More Than One Shooting
This incident does not exist in isolation. It comes as the U.S. grapples with:
- A major domestic deployment of military forces across multiple cities.
- National anxieties over immigration, crime, and terrorism.
- Ongoing tension over the legacy of the Afghan war and America’s responsibility to former allies.
- A polarized political climate ahead of 2026 midterm elections.
The manner in which the government responds may reshape immigration law, asylum policy, refugee integration, and how future allies abroad perceive America’s reliability.
Conclusion: Security Reset or Collective Retaliation?
The D.C. attack is a tragic wake-up call for a nation already under deep strain. It highlights real vulnerabilities in how fast mass evacuations were conducted, and exposes the heavy risks of under-vetting in emergency situations. But using one violent act to cast suspicion over an entire community of evacuees — many of whom served the U.S. faithfully — is a dangerous trajectory.
Whether the re-vetting becomes a measured review aimed at closing security gaps — or morphs into a sweeping crackdown rooted in fear and prejudice — will define America’s character in the coming years.
One thing is certain: the shock of this attack has reopened America’s deepest questions about who it protects, who it lets in — and at what cost.
