DC Guard Ambush Raises Questions on Afghan Evacuee Vetting After Two Troops Shot
The recent shooting of two members of the West Virginia National Guard in Washington, D.C., has spotlighted the vetting process for Afghan evacuees. On November 22, 2023, a lone gunman, identified as 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, launched a targeted ambush just blocks from the White House. The incident raises troubling questions about the efficacy of the Operation Allies Welcome (OAW) program, under which Lakanwal entered the United States in 2021. His illegal status, stemming from a visa overstay, compounds the situation.
The attack unfolded near the Farragut West Metro Station, where Lakanwal opened fire on uniformed National Guard members. Assistant Chief Jeffery Carroll of the Metropolitan Police Department described the event, emphasizing the courage shown by a fellow Guardsman who returned fire and subdued the shooter. “They were ambushed by a lone gunman outside a subway station downtown,” Carroll stated. One Guard member remains in critical condition, underscoring the violence that occurred.
Lakanwal’s trajectory from Afghan evacuee to alleged assailant is particularly alarming. After entering the U.S. on September 8, 2021, he eventually vacated his residence in Washington State without notifying authorities. His visa lapsed in September 2023, yet he was still able to travel thousands of miles to Washington, D.C., raising serious concerns about monitoring and tracking protocols for foreign nationals.
Federal officials, including FBI Director Kash Patel, termed the shooting a “cowardly act,” reflecting a collective outrage at the attack. The failure of vetting protocols has sparked political backlash against the Biden administration’s immigration policies. Former President Donald Trump called for urgent reviews of all Afghan evacuees, making a poignant statement: “If they can’t love our country, we don’t want them.” This situation highlights the threats posed by unchecked immigration and how such events can shift public sentiment regarding national security.
The response from law enforcement and security agencies is telling. An internal Justice Department report revealed that up to 55 Afghan evacuees entered on watchlists. Out of this number, nine are still flagged, with at least eight believed to be residing in the U.S. This suggests systemic issues in the rushed evacuation process, including lapses in background checks and biometric data collection—a reality that needs thorough investigation and rapid reform.
A Department of Homeland Security official expressed concern about the expedited nature of Operation Allies Welcome, stating that while the majority of evacuees posed no threat, “even one miss like this is unacceptable.” Officials have since paused new applications for Afghan nationals under similar programs due to public safety concerns, highlighting the seriousness of the ongoing evaluation of the immigration process.
The shooting has prompted increased security measures in the nation’s capital, including a new deployment of National Guard troops. While this action was described as precautionary, it reflects growing anxiety over potential security threats. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth emphasized a commitment to securing the United States by stating, “We will never back down.” Such statements signal determination to address the concerns raised by this incident and its implications for public safety.
On a broader scale, the ambush raises questions about the role of the National Guard in domestic affairs. Deployed to deal with heightened threats, the use of National Guard members in this capacity has sparked legal and constitutional debates regarding their involvement in policing local issues versus responding to natural disasters.
As investigations unfold, authorities have yet to disclose details about the firearm used in the attack or the legality of its acquisition. The cross-agency response involves the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Justice Department. With the suspect under medical care, expected federal charges include attempted murder and potential terrorism-related offenses. The focus is now firmly on how someone like Lakanwal could navigate the system, becoming a prominent case of failed vetting and accountability.
Families of the victims are receiving support amid this tragedy, marked by a community grappling with the implications of violence against those who serve. As public and political reactions intensify, further scrutiny of immigration processes could shape future policies and bolster demands for stronger national security measures.
The incident questions how an overstayed visa holder could execute such an attack and highlights the urgent need for comprehensive reform in how individuals are monitored once admitted into the United States. The heart of the matter remains clear: national security cannot be compromised. As investigations continue, each unanswered question deepens the urgency for reform in immigration and security practices.
"*" indicates required fields
