Immigration Remains Central to Trump, Even in National Guard Shooting

From the moment news emerged about the attack on two National Guardsmen in Washington, D C, public discussion overlooked key context. The incident has been widely described as a clear act of terrorism, yet the situation is more complex. Donald Trump reacted with his usual alarm and inflammatory rhetoric, immediately declaring the shooting a terrorist act and announcing the next day that he would permanently halt migration from all so called third world nations. Echoing his 2015 response to the San Bernardino attack, he insisted that the United States must reassess every Afghan who entered the country under Biden and remove any noncitizen who, in his words, does not belong here or provide benefit to the nation.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services soon announced that it had indefinitely suspended processing of all immigration requests involving Afghan nationals. Director Joseph Edlow escalated matters further, stating that the green cards of individuals from countries of concern would undergo a thorough reexamination. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appeared on Sunday news programs arguing that the Biden administration failed to properly vet Afghan immigrants. When asked why the suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, had received asylum under Trump, she suggested he was radicalized after arriving in the United States, seemingly unaware that this undermined her claim of insufficient vetting by Biden.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe repeated the administrations line, asserting that the suspect and many others should never have been allowed into the country. Meanwhile, officials and much of the media labeled the killing of Specialist Sarah Beckstrom and the wounding of Staff Sgt Andrew Wolfe as terrorism simply because the alleged shooter was Afghan. That may eventually prove accurate, but at present there is little evidence that the motive was primarily political. Reports that Lakanwal shouted a religious phrase during the attack stem from a single partisan aligned journalist, and early reviews of his social media activity show no signs of radicalization or extremist ties.

Available evidence instead portrays a desperate refugee facing deep financial strain and a severe mental health crisis. Lakanwal had served alongside US counterterrorism units in Afghanistan, repeatedly vetted, and regarded as a highly capable soldier. After receiving death threats from the Taliban, he was evacuated with his family to the United States following the American withdrawal. But when his humanitarian parole expired and his asylum status prevented him from working, his circumstances deteriorated sharply. Friends and acquaintances say his personality darkened in 2024 as he struggled to support his family and borrowed money from those around him.

None of this excuses his actions, but it does cast doubt on the narrative portraying him as an Islamist terrorist. Although it is possible that he experienced a sudden and extreme ideological shift, there is currently no evidence for that. Lakanwal reportedly felt abandoned by the CIA after resettling in the United States, suggesting that if he became radicalized, it may have stemmed from disillusionment rather than extremist indoctrination. Days before the shooting, the Trump administration had announced plans to review the status of all refugees admitted under Biden. Advocates called the move unprecedented and cruel, noting that Afghan evacuees had already undergone the most intensive vetting processes in the world.

Under Biden, the United States admitted two hundred thousand refugees, including seventy six thousand Afghans. Under Trump, that number had dropped to seventy five hundred, most of them white South Africans. Each Afghan refugee faces legitimate fear of being returned to Taliban rule, yet officials in the current administration show little empathy for those who escaped persecution and violence. Instead, they are using this crime to advance their broader anti immigrant agenda.

Trump has continued demonizing immigrants, claiming online that refugees are the primary cause of social dysfunction in the United States and complaining during a cabinet meeting that Somali immigrants contribute nothing. Such statements reflect open bigotry and disregard for basic facts. Refugees make up less than one percent of the population, and data shows that forty two percent of Somali immigrants receive food assistance compared to thirty percent of native born Americans, far from the exaggerated figures Trump cited.

The tragic killing of the two guardsmen is now being used as justification for long desired policies targeting immigrants on an ethnic basis. The incident, instead of being examined with nuance, has become a vehicle for sweeping political exploitation and fearmongering.