Washington DC – When the United States withdrew its troops from Afghanistan in 2021, millions of Afghans faced the prospect of once again living under Taliban rule.
For thousands of them, the danger was particularly grave: They had worked with the departing Americans and, as a result, could be subject to retaliation from the Taliban.
But a long-running U.S. program offered the chance to live abroad: Afghan translators, contractors and other employees with direct ties to the U.S. military were eligible for a Special Immigrant Visa, or SIV.
Now, less than three years later, advocates fear that this narrow immigration route – a cornerstone of Washington's relief efforts – could quietly fall victim to a stalemate in the US Congress.
The legislature must pass a series of appropriations bills by March 22 to avoid a government shutdown. But critics fear the package will pass without authorization for more special immigrant visas for Afghans, leaving them with even fewer options to escape the threats they may face.
On Thursday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers sent a letter (PDF) to top Senate leaders urging them to include the Special Immigrant Visa provision in the final version of the appropriations bills.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen, one of the signatories of the letter, told Al Jazeera in a statement that Afghans connected to the US military remain “at serious risk, as the Taliban continues to hunt them.”
“For two decades, the US military mission in Afghanistan depended on trusted Afghan allies who stood shoulder to shoulder with US troops,” Shaheen said. “We promised to protect them, just as they did us.”
Protecting Afghan allies
Shaheen is one of 13 senators pushing to include 20,000 more special immigrant visas for Afghans in the 2024 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations (SFOPS) bill, part of the budget package due this month.
But immigration is a hot-button issue in the U.S. election year, and advocates fear that anti-immigrant sentiment could thwart attempts to increase access.
Revised drafts of the Afghan Allies Protection Act, which sets the parameters for special immigrant visas, were introduced in the House and Senate last year. But while the Senate Appropriations Committee authorized the additional 20,000 visas, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has not approved any more.
Because the Afghan visa program (first established in 2009) was considered temporary, Congress has to periodically extend its mandate and adjust the number of visas available.
Currently, only 7,000 special visas remain for primary applicants, but advocates say there are more than 140,000 applicants pending, with at least 20,000 approaching the final stages of the process.
The current processing rate is about 1,000 applicants per month, meaning visas will run out around August, the month that marks the third anniversary of the withdrawal of US troops. Without more legislation, it's unclear what would happen next.
“I'm just baffled by this whole thing,” Kim Staffieri, executive director of the Allies Wartime Association (AWA), told Al Jazeera. His organization helps Afghans associated with the U.S. military with their visa applications.
“I've been doing this for seven or eight years and I've never gotten to the point where I'm worried about running out. [SIVs] ever,” he said.
Few options for Afghans
The possibility of the program running out of visas has left Afghans like Abdulrahman Safi feeling betrayed.
Safi, 35, worked with both the US military and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in Afghanistan, before fleeing on an evacuation flight to the United States in 2021.
“We come here with all these promises: 'We will not leave you behind,'” Safi told Al Jazeera. “Now it seems like none of that matters.”
Safi is one of tens of thousands of Afghans who have applied for special immigrant visas. The shortage, however, only compounds existing problems with the program: Critics say it has been dysfunctional for years.
The surge in claims after troop withdrawals in 2021, advocates add, has only amplified the huge backlog of claims.
There are relatively few options outside of Special Immigrant Visas, and these also suffer from long wait times and strict limits on the number of applicants admitted.
Some Afghans who evacuated in 2021 were granted humanitarian parole, a temporary status with no path to permanent residency or citizenship. Others have applied for asylum, although that process is also delayed and can take years, with no guarantee of success.
A victim of partisanship
Support for the special visa program has historically been bipartisan in the United States, due in large part to widespread advocacy by veterans groups, according to Adam Bates, supervisory policy advisor at the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP).
In many ways, he said, the program has been “compartmentalized away from the broader debate about immigration.”
“The Afghan SIV program has existed since 2009. Throughout that period, it has enjoyed broad bipartisan support,” Bates said. “He had support in all presidential administrations, even during the [Donald] Trump administration.”
Bates is among advocates who fear the program could fall victim to partisanship in Congress, heightened by the looming general election in November. The immigration debate has so far played a prominent role in the campaigns.
Joseph Azam, a lawyer and board member of the Afghan American Foundation, told Al Jazeera that he fears other issues are overshadowing the Special Immigrant Visa program for Afghans.
“For whatever reason, because we're in an election year, other things are happening in the world or people just aren't paying attention, this program has gotten to the point of almost disappearing,” he said.
“That would be catastrophic for the tens of thousands of Afghans left behind, who are hiding with their families and were among the first on the Taliban's kill list when they took power.”
Azam noted that no legislator has spoken out against the Afghan program, but he fears visas could become a political tool during the election season.
President Joe Biden has been widely criticized for his handling of the chaotic troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, and Azam said the episode could be used as a “club” for his critics in Congress.
“Perhaps there is a feeling that, if they passed [the additional SIVs]it would sort of address some part of the wound,” he said.
Azam added that politicians may be trying to avoid the perception that they are lax on immigration. “Immigrant populations, particularly from that part of the world, are a very convenient bogeyman during an election year.”
'A stab in the back' to the Afghans
Helal Massomi, an Afghan policy adviser for the nonprofit group Global Refuge, is an evacuee who fled to safety in the United States. She previously held an advisory position in the US-backed Afghan government, helping to lead peace talks before the Taliban takeover.
He worried that Congress's apparent indifference toward Afghans working with the U.S. military could be a canary in the coal mine. If Congress does not act to protect those Afghans, he wondered, will it act to protect Afghans in vulnerable situations?
“This shows that with each passing day, the commitment that existed to support the allies, the Afghan allies, is fading,” he told Al Jazeera.
Massomi has recently led efforts to pass legislation that would create a path to residency for Afghans evacuated to the United States. But those bills have languished in Congress amid Republican opposition.
He has also pushed for more immigration pathways for vulnerable Afghans outside the United States. That includes an expansion of the Priority 2 (P-2) program, which was created to offer access to Afghans who worked with U.S.-based organizations but do not qualify for special immigrant visas.
He noted that some of the most vocal critics of Biden's Afghan policy have been silent on the issue of approving more SIVs.
“I fully support the criticism of the administration,” he said. “But you can't do it if you yourself are inactive.”
The message that inaction sends is chilling, he added. “I think it's a stab in the back to the Afghans who supported the military and American citizens in Afghanistan.”
