As the third anniversary of the sudden and disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan has come and gone, the tragedy continues to play out. Hundreds of men and women who fought alongside American troops are stuck in legal limbo, living in America but still very far from stability and safety for their families. As they languish in immigration purgatory, their families are hunted by the soldiers of an extremist theocracy that they fought to defeat. The members of the Afghan National Army Special Operations Command were some of America’s staunchest allies in its longest war, and yet the U.S. government has failed to uphold its moral responsibility to the people who fought shoulder to shoulder with it. As a result, they are left with uncertain futures, separated from their families and facing possible deportation to unknown destinations. Besides moral or ethical considerations, the failure of the United States to protect its allies has grave consequences for its future interests on the world stage. This mistake can and should be rectified, for the security of America and for the warriors who fought alongside it.
The United States already has the programs and policies necessary to assist these allies. The eligibility requirements for Special Immigrant Visas, currently reserved for translators employed directly by the American government, should be expanded to include Afghan special operations veterans and their families. Passing the Afghan Adjustment Act, a bill already introduced in the Senate, would honor a long overdue promise and bring much needed clarity and continuity to these Afghan special operations partners.
Allies in Need
The special operations forces service members were the best of the Afghan army and were instrumental in the fight against the Taliban. It is estimated that Afghan special operations units conducted 80 percent of all Afghan National Army offensives in 2018 while only making up 6 percent of the force. A policy paper by the Corioli Institute, in partnership with Honor the Promise, reveals their extraordinary courage, with some members continuing to fight long after their commanders had abandoned them, living on only unsalted rice for weeks and holding their outpost alone against the Taliban. They were invaluable partners to America since their inception in 2011: truly partners. This elite fighting force was paid for and created by the U.S. military. They were trained by America’s finest warriors, to the standards of American and NATO special operations forces. Despite their impressive contributions to the American war effort, these veterans have been denied a reciprocal partnership.
The main reason for their predicament is a gap in current immigration law. The Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 provides Special Immigration Visas to any Afghan national who “was or is employed by or on behalf of the United States Government in Afghanistan.” While this may seem like a reasonable requirement, it excludes some of the most deserving and most at risk from the Taliban. Interpreters and translators paid directly by the U.S. government have been given this special status, though even they have faced bureaucratic hurdles and long delays. Afghan special operations veterans, though just as deserving and in similar danger, remain unrecognized.
Instead of rewarding these men and women for their service to the country, the United States has left Afghan special operations veterans to struggle through the asylum process alone. In the eyes of the law, they are indistinguishable from asylum seekers who have not made the same sacrifices for American interests. Thankfully, this oversight can be fixed. There is already a bill lying forgotten in the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Called the Afghan Adjustment Act, its main thrust is to designate members of Afghan special operations forces and other at-risk units of the Afghan defense forces as eligible for Special Immigration Visas. Not only would this bill give clarity and a path forward to those Afghan special operations partners already in the United States, it would also reunite them with their families and help save the lives of those who were left behind in Afghanistan. While the bill would certainly satisfy the moral argument, there are practical reasons for its passage as well, primarily in America’s foreign endeavors.
Strategic Considerations
International relations scholars have studied the effect of national reputations for years. The conduct of the United States towards its allies and partners has a direct bearing on its national security and broader goals around the globe. The importance of reputation extends to many areas of national concern including nuclear deterrence and even economics. The abandonment of America’s allies has hurt and continues to hurt its international reputation. However, this argument has its opponents. Immediately following the withdrawal and more recently, international relations scholars have written and commented on a lack of response from the international community. An article for Foreign Policy in August of 2021 argued that much of the concern over the “Afghan Debacle” was overblown and premature and, in fact, might actually be seen in a favorable light as evidence that the United States can make difficult but practical choices rather than continue to waste money on a costly and unwinnable war. Recent research also revealed that some international citizens were more confident in U. S. security commitments, though only after strong messaging, while American citizens continued to worry about their country’s reputation abroad.
Despite the recent challenges to reputation theory and the blasé response of some scholars to the Afghanistan withdrawal, the failure of the United States to uphold its commitments to its Afghan special operations partners is a serious problem for its future interests. One of the biggest challenges that America’s continued inaction causes is domestic. Though the research cited above may ease fears about foreign perceptions, the American public is still very much concerned with their nation’s reputation on the world stage. When Americans are reminded of the Afghanistan withdrawal they “become significantly more pessimistic about the credibility of U.S. security commitments abroad.” Furthermore, the Pew Research Center found that a majority of Americans supported admitting Afghan refugees. With trust in political institutions at an all-time low, the passage of the Afghan Adjustment Act would be a building block of trust that responds to the wishes of the American people and strengthens the reputation of the United States on the world stage.
Reputations still do matter, especially in the formation and maintenance of alliances. Two studies found that states that consistently uphold their commitments are more likely to be involved in alliance formation. Additionally, states seek out alliances with those that remain true to their word. Furthermore, reputations are not confined solely to alliance building. Another study in the field of reputation theory investigated how bilateral investment treaties affected the flow of foreign direct investment into a country. When countries adhered to treaty commitments, foreign direct investment grew. In contrast, those who stood before the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes saw a decline in their levels of foreign direct investment. These studies show that a nation’s reputation is crucial to achieving its foreign policy objectives.
With reputation playing such an important role in international affairs, America’s failure to provide for its Afghan special operations partners certainly hobbles its efforts around the globe. This is especially problematic as it faces renewed challenges from old foes like Iran and Russia as well as rising defiance from China. To face such a wide array of threats, the United States will need stalwart and eager allies from around the globe. These potential comrades will take note of how former partners were treated. To that end, the Afghan Adjustment Act, or similar legislation, would go a long way toward repairing America’s diminished reputation. It would signal commitment and compassion and reassure partner nations that they would not be abandoned.
Ensuring Afghan special operations veterans are given a new home in the United States not only aids its foreign policy but also its defense policy. The U.S. military is facing a serious manpower shortage that threatens the national security of the nation. This recruiting problem is also affecting the special forces community, as Congress considers cuts to special operations personnel numbers even as their operational tempo increases. Trained by U.S. special operations forces, Afghan special operations veterans represent a ready-made solution to the problem. While it would not provide a long-term fix, these battle-tested fighters would constitute a seriously needed boost to the beleaguered units without nearly as much expense and time usually associated with special forces recruitment. According to the Corioli Institute policy paper mentioned earlier, many Afghan special operations veterans feel a sense of kinship with their American counterparts, a warmth that is reciprocated. This loyalty is extended to the United States itself, with many former Afghan fighters expressing a desire to serve in the U.S. military. One interviewee stated, for example, that “I want to serve my country. I am eating here. I am drinking here. I am [wearing] clothes in this country. Then, I should defend this country. Anywhere they want me to go, I’ll go.” However, their precarious legal status prevents them from putting their skills to use, which are instead wasted on menial labor, providing yet another compelling reason to address the gap in immigration law. Though the above research was conducted among Afghan National Army special operations forces, it is recommended that others undertake similar studies among other potentially affected and equally valiant partner forces in this and other contexts.
Conclusion
By helping its Afghan special operations partners left behind, the United States could address multiple challenges simultaneously. The passage of the Afghan Adjustment Act would help heal the moral injury caused by the abandonment of its allies while also providing a crucial pool of manpower for the special operations units that so much of America’s national security rests upon. Additionally, it would prove to existing and potential allies that the United States stands by its friends in the face of adversity, furthering its interests around the globe. The Afghan Adjustment Act should be made law.
Sean M. Kingsland is a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and rising sophomore at the University of Chicago majoring in political science. He studied Pashtu at the Defense Language Institute and served as a cryptologic linguist and signals intelligence analyst with the Marine Corps’ 1st Radio Battalion. He is now an intern at the Corioli Institute, focusing on former Afghan special operations forces reintegration and working with the policy and advocacy team to promote impactful policies for formerly armed actors.
Dr. Erin K. McFee is a professor of practice at the William J. Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies at the National Defense University, where she focuses on climate security and the reintegration of formerly armed actors (e.g., military veterans, ex-guerrillas, former cartel members, ex-insurgents). She is also the president and chair of the Corioli Institute, a UKRI Future Leaders Fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science, an affiliated faculty at the Carter School for Peace and Conflict Resolution, and the lead researcher at the University of Chicago’s Office for Military Affiliated Communities. Her opinions do not represent those of the William J. Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies or the U.S. government.
Image: Staff Sgt. Victor Mancilla
Comments are closed.