Throughout these readings, I noticed that help for Afghans more often came from journalists, courts, and organizations than from the governments that had made commitments to them.<\/p>\n
Alissa Rubin describes The New York Times scrambling in August 2021 to protect both former and current Afghan staff, since the Taliban would not care that someone had left the paper years earlier. Abdul Wahid Wafa, whose family got out through a joint effort by the Times and the Mexican government, calls the U.S. withdrawal \u201chasty\u201d and \u201cirresponsible.\u201d He says Afghan journalists \u201cwere helped, finally, by these individuals, companies, and the civilian side. Not the American government.\u201d<\/p>\n
Germany\u2019s admission program fared little better. Reuters reports that fewer than 1,600 Afghans arrived through it in two years, and it was suspended in 2025 after Friedrich Merz took office, leaving about 2,400 approved Afghans waiting in Pakistan. Kimia, a 25-year-old artist in Islamabad, told Reuters, \u201cIt\u2019s like you just breathe, but you don\u2019t live.\u201d<\/p>\n
Politico explains the reasons behind the German suspension, including pressure from the AfD and a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment spurred by widely publicized attacks blamed partly on Afghan migrants. I was struck by the mixed messaging \u2013 Germany\u2019s foreign minister promising to keep \u201clegally binding admission commitments\u201d while a spokesperson from the interior ministry said they were trying to \u201cterminate voluntary admission programs to the degree possible.\u201d<\/p>\n
The U.S. had a much more robust evacuation and admissions program, enacted through Operations Allies Refuge, Allies Welcome, and Enduring Welcome, through which over 70,000 Afghans were initially evacuated from Kabul and nearly 200,000 in total were resettled in the U.S., compared to 36,400 in Germany.<\/p>\n
But as I witnessed first-hand working in military-run refugee camps during Operation Allies Welcome, there was a major gap between official process and reality \u2013 and particularly after reading Azmat Khan\u2019s series, I question how much credit should be given for a messy solution to a crisis the U.S. had a major hand in creating.<\/p>\n
Regardless, the U.S. has now sharply restricted Afghan migration, suspending refugee admissions and barring Afghan nationals from entry. In contrast, Germany\u2019s Constitutional Court ruled earlier this year that admission pledges cannot be revoked en masse.<\/p>\n
For me, these readings highlight the importance of watchdogs and third-party oversight. A government commitment, whether a casualty review process or an admission pledge, means little without journalists, advocates, and courts to hold officials accountable. Meanwhile, people like Kimia remain stuck in dangerous situations with their lives on hold.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Throughout these readings, I noticed that help for Afghans more often came from journalists, courts, and organizations than from the governments that had made commitments to them. Alissa Rubin describes The New York Times scrambling in August 2021 to protect both former and current Afghan staff, since the Taliban would not care that someone had<\/p>\n