The shooting in Washington D.C. that left one National Guard member dead and another critically wounded on November 26 quickly became a major focus of U.S. media. Yet, the full picture of what happened tells a very different story from the one now shaping federal policy. The suspect is an Afghan man who once served in a CIA-backed counterterrorism unit that fought the Taliban on behalf of the United States. His role in the “Zero Unit” placed him among the most heavily vetted partners the U.S. had in Afghanistan, and he arrived here only after multiple layers of screening and review.
In the days since the shooting, the national conversation has focused almost entirely on the suspect’s identity as an Afghan refugee. Yet those who knew him describe a man who appeared to be struggling long before he drove across the country to Washington D.C. One volunteer who worked closely with his family said he became increasingly withdrawn, isolated, and overwhelmed by the challenges of resettlement. They noted that his behavior reflected profound distress, not radicalization or hostility toward the United States.
Emails from early 2024 uncovered that he spent most of his time in a darkened bedroom and showed possible signs of PTSD after years of combat service. The suspect’s trajectory reflects a broader crisis facing many Afghan veterans who fought alongside U.S. forces. Legal limbo, lack of work authorization, and insufficient mental health support among others have left thousands struggling to survive despite the promises made to them during the war. Advocates have long warned that abandoning these allies to bureaucratic uncertainty causes deep psychological harm and places families in impossible conditions.
Despite these documented struggles, the current administration immediately cast the shooting as a failure of vetting by the Biden Administration and threatened to punish an entire community for the crime of one individual. That framing ignores the basic fact that the suspect had been vetted repeatedly. It also ignores the testimony of those who interacted with him in the United States and saw no signs of ideological motivation.
Instead of addressing the mental health and resettlement failures that shaped his decline, the Trump administration moved within days to impose sweeping immigration restrictions on the entire Afghan community. Asylum requests were halted, visa processing was frozen, and the administration ordered a review of all previously approved asylum cases.
Internal directives show ICE has begun targeting more than 1,800 Afghans with past deportation orders and is tracking arrests and removals in daily reports. Officials are also reassessing Afghan vetting programs created after the 2021 withdrawal, despite the fact that the suspect himself was granted asylum during the Trump administration after already receiving extensive screening.
Refugee advocates warn that these actions amount to collective punishment. One Navy veteran, Shawn VanDiver, who now heads AfghanEvac said the shooting was an isolated tragedy driven by mental health challenges, not by the suspect’s nationality or religion. He stressed that Afghans in the United States are overwhelmingly law-abiding individuals who supported U.S. personnel for two decades. He also noted that the new restrictions heightens fear and instability for families already facing suspended visas, shuttered pathways to safety, and the near collapse of refugee programs.
These decisions also run counter to the basic obligations the United States has under international and domestic law. For years, Afghans who stood by American forces were promised protection. Many arrived through programs designed specifically to safeguard them from Taliban reprisals. Others were evacuated because of their direct service to U.S. agencies, including the CIA.
The policies now unfolding signal a retreat from those commitments and send a dangerous message to future partners which is that support for the United States may not translate to safety when the United State’s needs are met.
The response to the shooting has also deepened harmful narratives that portray refugees as threats rather than contributors. This narrative ignores the reality that Afghans have built communities across the United States, filled essential workforce gaps, and enriched social and civic life. It also misrepresents the nature of violence by reducing a complex crisis of trauma, displacement, and unmet needs to a simplistic argument about national security.
As the policy landscape shifts, Afghan communities across the country now fear being defined by the actions of one individual instead of the service, sacrifice, and hope that brought them here. Advocates note that these broad restrictions will sever family reunification, punish those who followed every legal step, and destabilize long-standing resettlement efforts.
The tragedy in Washington stands as a devastating loss. It deserves a full investigation and a clear accounting of what shaped the suspect’s unraveling. But it must not be used to justify policies that abandon allies, ignore humanitarian obligations, and dehumanize an entire community. The shooter should be treated as an individual, not as a symbol of an entire population. Anything less risks rewriting our moral and legal responsibilities to those who trusted the United States with their lives.
