World

Afghanistan is a US election issue. Will its refugees’ voices be heard?

Published

1 year ago

August 30, 2024

Afghanistan is a US election issue. Will its refugees’ voices be heard?

Washington, DC – Nasrin will not be able to vote in the United States elections in November.

Still, the 27-year-old has a message for the presidential candidates, on behalf of Afghans like herself who fled as the US withdrew its troops from Afghanistan in August 2021.

“I really want them to hear us, especially to hear those voices that worked for the US,” Nasrin, who asked to use a pseudonym, told Al Jazeera.

Friday marks three years since the last American soldiers left Afghanistan, ending a two-decade military presence that began with the toppling of the Taliban government in 2001.

But the chaotic nature of the military withdrawal — and the swift reestablishment of Taliban rule — have cast a long shadow over US politics.

A source of ongoing bipartisan criticism, the withdrawal has become a prominent talking point in the 2024 presidential race, with Democrats and Republicans exchanging blame for the lives lost during the troops’ departure.

But Afghans like Nasrin say there is an important perspective lost in the election-year sparring: theirs.

“This election is not only important for America. It’s also important for Afghans,” said Nasrin, who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area in California.

“For Afghans who immigrated here and for Afghans in Afghanistan … especially the women, this election will have a huge impact.”

A 2021 protest in Los Angeles called for an ‘open door’ policy for Afghan evacuees and expedited processing of immigration cases [File: Ringo HW Chiu/Reuters]

Two parties, one controversy

What happened in 2021 is a story that embroils the central players in this year’s presidential race.

In 2020, the administration of Republican President Donald Trump reached a controversial agreement with the Taliban to withdraw all US forces from Afghanistan within 14 months.

A few months later, Trump lost his bid for re-election. His successor, Democratic President Joe Biden, oversaw a mad-dash evacuation of US citizens, coalition allies and tens of thousands of vulnerable Afghans as the deadline loomed.

By August 2021, the Taliban had swept across the country in a lightning offensive, reclaiming its former power. Its forces entered the Afghan capital Kabul on August 15. The last US plane flew out of the city on August 30.

In those final days, a bomb attack killed about 170 Afghans hoping to enter the airport, as well as 13 members of the US military.

Government investigators have blamed the administrations of both Biden and Trump for the chaotic situation: Trump for reaching an agreement seen as favouring the Taliban and Biden for moving forward with the plan without putting in safeguards to stop the Taliban.

Trump has also faced criticism for limiting the pathways for Afghans to escape to the US.

He is now, once again, the Republican candidate for president. Meanwhile, Biden’s vice president, Kamala Harris, is heading the Democratic ticket.

A lingering failure

But advocates say both parties must still confront an enduring dilemma: how to protect the hundreds of thousands of Afghans who fear repression under the Taliban.

Many who were left behind are considered likely targets for the Taliban, especially if they worked for the US military or the US-backed government.

Even among those who were evacuated, many have been left in perpetual uncertainty, with no clear path to US residency or citizenship. Others have found the legal pathways to the US too narrow and have sought more dangerous routes to enter the country.

For her part, Nasrin said she worked as an interpreter for the US embassy in Kabul.

After fleeing, she was able to become a US resident through a “Special Immigrant Visa” (SIV) programme designated for Afghans who worked for the US government.

Another evacuee, who asked to be identified only as Nazanin, fled Kabul on an evacuation flight with her 16-year-old sister following the Taliban’s rise.

She has since been granted asylum in the US, but she said she sees only broken promises from both parties as many other Afghans both in the US and in Afghanistan have been left in the lurch.

“I don’t think Afghan voices are being heard by politicians,” she told Al Jazeera.

“My message to the presidential candidates is that you do not represent the majority of the refugee society or Americans that I know or see their perspective on social media platforms and that your false promises are noted.”

Inadequate immigration pathways

Arash Azizzada — the executive director of Afghans for a Better Tomorrow, an advocacy group — said members of the Afghan community in the US, like him, feel a “sense of anger and disappointment” this election season “when we look at both candidates”.

“We are feeling pretty invisible this election season,” he added.

Azizzada’s group has spent the last three years pushing for more immigration pathways for those fleeing the Taliban, including an increase in special visas for Afghans who worked directly with the US and pathways to permanent residency for other evacuees.

But little progress has been made, Azizzada explained.

“It has been the hallmark of Biden’s presidency to consider anything related to Afghanistan radioactive,” Azizzada said. “And Democrats have gone through this election season with barely any mention of Afghanistan or the Afghan people.”

That includes not mentioning the 160,000 Afghans who have been successfully relocated to the US since the withdrawal, something Azizzada argues could be framed as a victory for Democrats.

The Biden administration has upscaled the processing of Special Immigrant Visa applications, which had all but ground to a halt under Trump.

Still, as of March, 60,230 applicants had submitted all the required paperwork and were awaiting initial approval to move ahead with the process, according to the US State Department. Another 75,000 were also in the process of applying.

The administration has also increased refugee processing for Afghans, with 11,168 refugees admitted so far in fiscal year 2024. That is up from approximately 6,500 admitted in fiscal year 2023 and just over 1,600 in the immediate wake of the withdrawal, in fiscal year 2022.

Critics nevertheless say legal pathways for vulnerable Afghans are still woefully inadequate.

Afghanistan as a ‘cudgel’

While Democrats have been largely silent on the subject of the Afghanistan withdrawal, Azizzada noted that Republicans have embraced the subject this election cycle — but only as a “partisan cudgel and tool”.

That was apparent on Monday, as Trump hosted a campaign event at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. He joined the families of several soldiers who were killed at the Kabul airport for a memorial ceremony there.

Hours later, Trump gave a speech to a conference of National Guard members in Detroit. Faced with military members and their families, he highlighted the Democrats’ role in the Afghanistan troop withdrawal.

“Caused by Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, the humiliation in Afghanistan set off the collapse of American credibility and respect all around the world,” Trump told the crowd.

He pledged to “get the resignations of every single senior official who touched the Afghanistan calamity, to be on my desk at noon on Inauguration Day”.

In a subsequent statement, Harris defended the withdrawal, saying the Biden administration “has demonstrated we can still eliminate terrorists, including the leaders of al-Qaeda and ISIS, without troops deployed into combat zones”.

For Azizzada, one word best describes the absence of any mention of Afghans in the election discourse: “dehumanising”.

A political opportunity?

Still, some advocates have seen reason for hope in the inclusion of Afghans in the Democratic National Committee’s policy platform, released earlier this month.

It calls for the “provisions to streamline applications of at-risk Afghan allies” through the US refugee programme and “a process for Afghan evacuees to have their status adjusted to lawful permanent resident”.

Many Afghans evacuated during the troop withdrawal were granted access to the US through the “humanitarian parole” programme, which allows them to live and work in the country. However, it offers no pathway to permanent residency.

Legislation known as the Afghan Adjustment Act, that would create that pathway — as well as other means of support for Afghans in the US — has continued to languish in Congress.

Joseph Azam, a lawyer and chair of the Afghan-American Foundation, said the legislation has stalled in the “headwinds” of a deep partisan divide over immigration.

Republicans, he explained, have largely opposed increasing immigration. Democrats, meanwhile, “have lurched to the right” on the issue.

“Any kind of signal that they have empathy — or there are carve-outs, or there are people to whom this increasingly extreme approach to immigration does not apply — is seen as politically wrong,” Azam said.

Nevertheless, Azam argued the candidates should view the issue as a political opportunity rather than an albatross.

He pointed out that influential veterans groups support increased immigration pathways for Afghans who worked alongside the US military, including through the Afghan Adjustment Act.

Veterans, he added, are also a powerful voting bloc in swing states like Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia.

“The five or six states that are probably going to decide this election happen to also have some of the largest populations of US veterans,” Azam said. “If you can move a couple thousand people and their families on this issue in a key state, that’s the election, right?”

‘Honours its pledges’

When asked about the issues they want to hear on the campaign trail, advocates for Afghan refugees named a myriad: from immigration reform to increased funding for resettlement services.

In her work, for instance, immigration lawyer Laila Ayub helps lead Project ANAR, a nonpartisan non-profit group that provides legal services to recently arrived Afghans.

She told Al Jazeera that, with few options to migrate legally, Afghans are making treacherous journeys across the southern US border. That leaves her concerned about the emphasis this election season on border and asylum restrictions.

“Afghan Americans, like myself, are voters, and we need to hear proactive support for our community, not just in terms of a national security framing,” she said.

“Our community was impacted by decades of US foreign policy and military presence, and that there’s historical precedent for enacting protections.”

Naheed Samadi Bahram, the US country director for the nonpartisan community group Women for Afghan Women, said she hopes for a presidential candidate who “cares about women’s rights, somebody who cares about the immigrants’ rights”.

She spoke to Al Jazeera just days after the Taliban published a new raft of “vice and virtue” laws, which bans women from being heard in public, among other restrictions.

Bahram added that she would like to see more funding for legal and mental health services for Afghans in the US. Many community groups rely mostly on donations from foundations and individuals, she explained.

“I’m hopeful for this election, and I hope that the election will bring a lot of life into the situation in Afghanistan and to the evacuation process,” she said. Still, she acknowledged, “it will be very difficult”.

Khalil Anwari, who works for the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, a nonpartisan non-profit, said candidates should view support for Afghans as sending a wider message to the world about the strength of US ideals.

“For many years, the US — when it comes to being a place of refuge — globally, it has been the leading country. However, in the past couple of years, based on policies that were undertaken, it has lost that status,” said Anwari, who also fled Afghanistan on an evacuation flight following the Taliban takeover.

Providing opportunities for Afghans to seek safety is a way the US can regain that status and bolster its standing on the world stage, he explained.

“This goes hand in hand with the understanding that the US honours its pledges to their allies,” Anwari said. “That is seen by people all over the world when the pledges that are made are honoured.”

Click to comment

World

Netflix Says No to Warner Bros. After Price War, Beltway Concerns

Published

9 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

Netflix Says No to Warner Bros. After Price War, Beltway Concerns

And just like that, Netflix has bowed out of its pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery’s streaming and studio assets.

Late Thursday, the streaming colossus announced that it has decided against raising its $82.7 billion bid for a big chunk of the WBD properties, leaving Paramount Skydance with what amounts to the winning offer. Under Paramount’s latest revision to its original proposal, David Ellison’s media conglomerate will fork over some $111 billion for everything under the WBD tent, including the sports-heavy cable networks division.

Among the backers of Paramount’s $31 per share, all-cash bid are Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Citi and Apollo, which are providing a $57.5 billion debt commitment, and Ellison’s father/Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, who has guaranteed a $45.7 billion equity commitment.

In a statement issued by co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, Netflix noted that Paramount’s latest escalation made any further attempt to claim the WBD assets a bad bit of business. “The transaction we negotiated would have created shareholder value with a clear path to regulatory approval,” Sarandos and Peters wrote. “However, we’ve always been disciplined, and at the price required to match Paramount Skydance’s latest offer, the deal is no longer financially attractive, so we are declining to match the Paramount Skydance bid.”

Netflix went on to thank the WBD brass for “running a fair and rigorous process” before going on to characterize the assets as “a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price.”

Meanwhile, as part of its sweetened offer, Paramount will foot the bill for the $2.8 billion termination fee WBD now owes Netflix.

Netflix’s announcement arrived just hours after Sarandos met with White House staffers to discuss his company’s bid for the WBD assets. President Donald Trump was not on hand for the meeting.

Paramount’s updated offer all but guarantees that it will walk away with the WBD spoils. While shareholders must vote to approve the deal, the amount of cash in play and the absence of a viable alternative suggest that the transaction will get the green flag.

Upon closing, the Paramount deal will bring CBS Sports and Turner Sports under one roof, thereby creating a massive rights portfolio that includes the NFL, NHL, Major League Baseball, college football, the Masters, the UFC and March Madness.

Uniting the rights to the marquee men’s college hoops tourney would effectively close the circle on the partnership forged in 2010 by former CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus and ex-Turner Sports president David Levy. After McManus determined that CBS could no longer afford to go it alone with its coverage of March Madness, the two execs hashed out a 14-year, $10.8 billion rights deal that would see the Turner networks share the burden—and the spoils—with CBS.

Ten years ago, the two partners extended the deal through 2032, tacking on another eight years of Madness for an additional $8.8 billion.

Having been subjected to a Beltway cross-examination and at least one disapproving social media salvo by the president, Netflix may have come to the conclusion that the regulatory fix was in. Earlier this month, Sarandos was grilled by a Senate committee in an antitrust hearing that often teetered on the edge of the profoundly unserious. In one heated exchange, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) asked why “so much of Netflix content for children promotes a transgender ideology?”

Hawley began his line of questioning by inquiring into relevant matters (labor concerns, theatrical windows), before veering into the culture war lane near the end of his allotted time. He concluded by expressing his concern that Sarandos and Netflix “don’t share my values or those of many other American parents,” a vibes-based assessment which the framers of the Sherman Act neglected to consider 136 years ago when they were going about the business of outlawing monopolistic practices.

Later in the hearing, Eric Schmitt, the junior senator from the Show Me State, told Sarandos that Netflix was responsible for creating the “wokest content in the history of the world.” Again, this was an antitrust hearing, not a meeting of a network standards and practices division.

Ellison turned down an invitation to testify at the hearing.

Netflix’s decision to bow out of the running was made shortly after the WBD board determined that Paramount’s latest bid was the “superior” offer. Paramount’s strategy to usurp Netflix as the front runner was reinforced by an aggressive campaign to assure WBD shareholders that it has a far better shot at successfully negotiating any potential regulatory hurdles.

Misgivings about Netflix’s chances were further amplified last weekend when President Donald Trump made a dig at a Netflix board member.

Trump on Saturday took to Truth Social to demand that Netflix bounce Susan Rice from its board of directors “IMMEDIATELY, or pay the consequences.” A former Obama and Biden administration official, Rice poked the bear during a podcast appearance in which she insinuated that “it is not going to end well” for corporations and news organizations that “bent the knee” to Trump.

When asked by the BBC about Trump’s anti-Rice salvo, Sarandos tried to shrug the whole thing off, saying of the president, “He likes to do a lot of things on social media.” Sarandos went on to assert that the executive branch has no say in the matter, and while that may be accurate from a legal standpoint, the Netflix co-CEO may want to take a gander at the big pile of nothing that used to be the East Wing of the White House. Stranger things (sorry) have happened.

“This is a business deal. It’s not a political deal,” Sarandos said. “This deal is run by the Department of Justice in the U.S. and regulators throughout Europe and around the world.”

The day after Sarandos brushed off Trump’s remarks, Paramount upped its offer to WBD to $31 a share, to be paid in all cash. This marked the 10th revision of Paramount’s original bid and included billions in additional financial incentives. Just hours after WBD acknowledged receipt of the beefed-up proposal, Ellison, the chairman and CEO of Paramount, attended the State of the Union Address as a guest of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

The Justice Department, which just two weeks ago dismissed Gail Slater, the head of its antitrust division, is said to be looking into Paramount’s proposal. Under federal law, antitrust enforcers are at liberty to scuttle any deal that poses a threat to fair and competitive business practices.

On Wednesday, House Democrats petitioned U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to provide a full accounting of why the DOJ ousted Slater, noting that her ejection has left a “leadership vacuum” at a time when “the antitrust division is handling historic cases.” Signed by Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House judiciary committee, and Jerry Nadler, a Democratic congressman from New York, the letter stated that Slater’s departure leaves the DOJ bereft of “any principled antitrust experts left to guard the antitrust division from [a] cascade of corruption.”

Hand-picked by Trump to lead the antitrust division, Slater was confirmed by the Senate last March by a 78-19 vote.

World

Tour guide arrested after drawing stick figure on 4,000-year-old pyramid

Published

11 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

Tour guide arrested after drawing stick figure on 4,000-year-old pyramid

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure onto the side of the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas while leading a group of tourists.

Video of the incident, which circulated widely on social media, shows the man leaning toward a lower section of the pyramid’s outer casing while tourists stand nearby listening. He is then seen attempting to wipe the markings away with his hand, though remnants remain visible in the footage.

In a post on X, Egypt’s Interior Ministry said the guide “damaged an antiquity by drawing on the outer casing of one of the pyramids” while explaining the site to tourists. Although the initial report mentioned the general Giza area.

The ministry said the investigation was launched after the video spread online, prompting an antiquities inspector to file a report with the Saqqara Tourism Police Station identifying the guide. Officials said the markings were later removed by specialists.

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

Authorities apprehended the suspect, who confessed to the act during questioning, according to the ministry.

“Legal measures have been taken,” the ministry added, noting that specialists have since removed the markings.

Local media outlets, citing the Interior Ministry’s investigation, identified the site as the Pyramid of Unas in the Saqqara necropolis south of Giza.

VANDALS HIT YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK WITH GRAFFITI ON BOULDER, MORE

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

B.C. for the Pharaoh Unas, is historically significant for containing the earliest Pyramid Texts. These religious inscriptions consist of more than 200 spells carved into the pyramid’s interior walls, forming what scholars consider the oldest known collection of funerary texts.

ARCHAEOLOGISTS FIND 1,600-YEAR-OLD CHURCHES AND MURAL OF JESUS IN EGYPTIAN DESERT SETTLEMENT

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

The pyramid is located within the vast Saqqara necropolis, part of ancient Memphis – Egypt’s first capital and now a UNESCO World Heritage Site that contains a sprawling complex of tombs, temples and pyramids.

Egypt has increased enforcement and preservation efforts at archaeological sites in recent years as officials seek to protect ancient monuments that attract millions of visitors annually.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Under Egypt’s Antiquities Protection Law, damaging actions such as writing on or damaging archaeological sites can carry prison sentences and fines, with the exact penalties varying by offense.

Greg Wehner is a breaking news reporter for Fox News Digital.

Story tips and ideas can be sent to Greg.Wehner@Fox.com and on Twitter @GregWehner.

World

Italy calls for suspension of EU carbon market

Published

12 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

Italy calls for suspension of EU carbon market

Italy’s Industry minister Adolfo Urso urged the European Union to suspend its carbon market until the bloc presents a revised proposal due this summer, citing the hardship faced by European businesses because of high power and carbon costs.

The Emissions Trading System (ETS) is the bloc’s mechanism for making companies pay for their pollution, with the dual aim of reducing emissions and encouraging industry to invest in more sustainable alternatives.

In Europe, the ETS currently covers heavy industries, power plants as well as airlines and shipping. Additional sectors such as international aviation, landfills and incinerators will be included in the upcoming review by the European Commission.

But Urso said the ETS is to blame for Europe’s competitiveness problems because the bloc’s climate policy tool has a “perverse effect” and is preventing European companies from competing with China and the United States.

“We are all aware that the mechanism of the ETS, as it is currently drafted, is only a tax, a tariff on the energy-intensive companies that struggle to remain competitive,” Urso told reporters on the sidelines of a gathering of industry ministers in Brussels on Thursday. “It is necessary – we are all aware – to review it in a substantive way.”

“To do this properly, it is necessary to suspend the ETS mechanism while awaiting a reform that must necessarily be comprehensive,” Urso added.

Urso added: “If we are in the face of the collapse of the European chemical industry and the crisis of European ideology, we cannot wait for the time of negotiations within the European Union to find a solution.”

The Italian minister said that in the meantime, “we are looking for an effective organic solution,” adding that he will ask the European Commission to suspend the ETS.

Italy’s plea joins that of industry leaders who have recently asked the EU to urgently act to reduce energy and carbon costs. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has recently touted the same idea, driving down carbon market prices, only to backtrack on it a few days later.

Nordic business leaders back ETS

In a letter sent to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, a group of Nordic industry associations representing Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway urged the EU to maintain the ETS, highlighting its role as a key European advantage and as a source of certainty for investments in clean technologies.

They backed the ETS as a “market-based and technology-neutral policy instrument” that helps reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

“Reforming the system must be done carefully, because it has such a significant impact on the economy and competitiveness, in addition to the climate,” the Nordic leaders suggested.

The four industry associations argued that future prosperity in the EU is linked to the ETS since its revenues can bring about decisive investments in clean energy production, critical infrastructure, electrification, and ultimately the decarbonisation of industry.

“Efficient use of the EU’s own resources is central to achieving almost all the Union’s major strategic aims, and these efforts require reliable access to both public and private financing,” reads the letter dated 23 February and seen by Euronews.

Since its inception in 2005, the ETS has slashed emissions by 39%, with revenues exceeding €260 billion, according to the EU data.

Hindering technological innovation

Carlo Carraro, President Emeritus and Professor of Economics at Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, criticised the Italian government’s stance on the ETS, saying the attack risks weakening a policy that has proven effective in reducing emissions in regulated sectors.

“Innovation and competitiveness are now inextricably linked to decarbonisation,” Carraro said. “Hindering the transition exposes businesses to increasing technological and financial risks and makes the country less competitive”.

Similar thoughts were voiced by Chiara di Mambro, Director of Strategy Italy and Europe at the environmental think tank ECCO.

“Suspending the ETS as proposed today or subsidising gas, as envisaged in the Government’s recent decree, would move Italy in the opposite direction (higher energy prices): weakening the price signal, increasing market uncertainty, and ultimately delaying the transition away from expensive fossil fuels,” di Mambro said.

Italy is already on track to overhaul its electricity market, which would strip carbon costs from power bills. Instead, Di Mambro suggests using fiscal revenues or dividends from energy companies to reduce the burden of levies on electricity bills.