Afghan Trump supporters feel abandoned as the administration revokes refugee protections, leaving thousands vulnerable to deportation and potential Taliban persecution.
At a Glance
- The Trump administration has ended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for over 9,000 Afghan refugees, citing “improved security” in Afghanistan
- “Afghans for Trump” leader Zoubair Sangi pleads with President Trump to reconsider, arguing Afghanistan remains dangerous under Taliban rule
- Veterans and advocates warn that deportations would betray promises to wartime allies and jeopardize future military cooperation
- TPS for Afghans expires May 20, with the program ending July 12, potentially affecting thousands who fled after the 2021 Taliban takeover
- Many affected Afghans worked with U.S. forces and face persecution if returned to Afghanistan
Afghan Trump Supporters Feel Betrayed by Protection Revocation
The leader of “Afghans for Trump” has made an urgent appeal to President Trump following the administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Afghan refugees. Zoubair Sangi, who continues to support Trump despite the policy shift, expressed profound disappointment with the Department of Homeland Security’s move to revoke protections for approximately 9,000 Afghans who fled their homeland after the Taliban seized control in 2021. The decision places these refugees at risk of deportation to a country where many face potential persecution for their work with American forces.
Sangi directly challenges DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s assertion that security in Afghanistan has improved, stating that conditions remain dire under Taliban rule. The administration announced that TPS for Afghans will expire on May 20, with the program terminating completely on July 12. This policy aligns with the administration’s broader immigration strategy focused on addressing what officials describe as fraud and national security threats in the immigration system, but contradicts veterans’ groups who view the move as abandoning allies.
Disputed Claims About Afghanistan’s Safety
Homeland Security officials justified ending TPS by claiming Afghanistan now has “improved security” and a stabilizing economy. However, this assessment has been strongly contested by Afghan refugees, veterans’ organizations, and even some Republican lawmakers. Former House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Mike McCaul has publicly disputed the improved security claim, urging continued protection for Afghans who assisted American forces. The stark contrast between official statements and on-the-ground reports highlights significant disagreement about the realities of life under Taliban control.
“The reality is that Afghanistan is not safe. Over the last three years, since the return of the Taliban, the country has been as dangerous as ever.”, said Zoubair Sangi.
Despite his frustration with the TPS decision, Sangi continues supporting Trump, praising the president for refusing to recognize the Taliban government and for ending foreign aid to Afghanistan. However, he remains adamant that sending Afghans back would put many lives at risk, particularly those who worked alongside U.S. forces during the two-decade military presence. The situation is especially precarious for women, who face severe restrictions under Taliban rule, including limited access to education and employment.
Complications in the Path to Permanent Residency
Many affected Afghans currently rely on TPS while navigating the complex process of seeking permanent residency in the United States. Their situation has been complicated by Afghanistan’s collapse and the chaotic evacuation in 2021, when many fled with minimal documentation at the urging of U.S. officials. Congress has faced criticism for failing to pass the Afghan Adjustment Act, which would have provided a clearer path to permanent residency for those who fled the Taliban takeover.
“The Taliban, at the end of the day, are a terrorist group. They target anyone who disagrees with them – anyone who worked with the U.S. government or allied forces. Their lives are in grave danger.”, added Sangi.
Veterans’ organizations have been particularly vocal in opposing the TPS revocation, arguing that deporting Afghans who supported American military efforts would not only betray a moral obligation but also damage future operational capabilities. Military leaders have long emphasized that local support in conflict zones becomes more difficult to secure when allies perceive the United States as abandoning those who risked their lives to help American forces. Legal challenges to the TPS revocation are expected, though recent Supreme Court precedents suggest such challenges may face significant hurdles.
The Broader Immigration Context
The decision to end TPS for Afghans fits within the administration’s wider approach to immigration policy, which has included significant restrictions on legal immigration pathways and refugee admissions. Critics have noted a contrast in treatment between different refugee groups, pointing to reports that the administration has prioritized Afrikaner South Africans for refugee status while restricting protections for those fleeing the Taliban. This disparity has raised questions about the consistent application of refugee protection standards.
Many Afghans in the United States also hold parole status, another temporary immigration protection that could potentially be revoked. As the July deadline approaches, affected Afghan refugees face mounting uncertainty about their future in America, with many having no safe option for return to their homeland. Their limbo status underscores ongoing challenges in America’s refugee and asylum systems, particularly for those caught in politically complex situations with international security implications.