Are immigration programs responsible for the Washington National Guard incident? | policy

Analysts’ opinions differed regarding the diagnosis of the motives of the Afghan defendant, Rahmanullah Lucknow, who entered the United States in 2021 after working with American security services in Afghanistan.

In this context, Rob Arlett, a former US Navy officer, confirms that the presence of the National Guard on the streets of Washington was to “reduce criminal acts,” citing data that, he said, indicate a decline in crime rates after the deployment of these forces.

According to Arlette’s interview with the “From Washington” program, many Americans “welcome the presence of the National Guard because it gives them a greater sense of security.”

Yesterday, the American capital witnessed a serious incident near the White House after two members of the West Virginia National Guard were shot, in an attack that officials described as an “ambush” targeting a specific target.

The incident comes in light of the widespread deployment of National Guard members in the capital since the beginning of the year based on presidential orders, which prompted Defense Minister Pete Hegseth to announce the deployment of 500 additional members in light of recent security developments.

On the other hand, political activist in the Republican Party, Rina Shah, believed that the deployment of the National Guard had no actual impact on crime rates, considering that the roots of the problem were related to “unauthorized real estate and weapons.”

According to Rina Shah, the deployment of forces was not a “politically responsible” decision because it made the Guard members seen as an extension of the president, considering that the recent attack was “violence of a political nature,” but its motives remain unknown.

She stressed the need to “focus on the young man’s motives, as they are not yet known,” pointing to the complexities of the relationship between Washington and Afghan collaborators, especially after a chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan that “was disastrous.”

US President Donald Trump held the administration of his predecessor, Joe Biden, responsible for Lucknow’s entry into the country, and went on to describe him as an “animal,” but Reena Shah refused to “include Biden’s name,” referring to reports that the man was originally granted asylum during the Trump administration.

This attack highlights the Afghan resettlement program, as the United States brought more than 70,000 Afghans in 2021, while between 9,000 and 11,000 of them face the risk of losing temporary protected status after the Trump administration’s decision to end it last May.

What are the motives?

As for Rob Arlett, who is also a former Trump campaign director in Delaware, he considered the debate about the origin of immigrants irrelevant, but stressed the need for “better scrutiny” of refugee reception policies to know who is allowed to enter the country.

For his part, Steve Camarota, director of research at the Institute for Migration Studies, presented a more technical approach, noting that the authorities “do not yet know whether the immigration system has failed them.”

Camarota raised the possibility that the accused had turned toward violence “either before he left Afghanistan or after his arrival,” stressing that the large wave of Afghan refugees in 2021 made scrutiny more difficult.

Likewise, President Trump justified the freeze on immigration transactions for Afghans by saying that it was aimed “to find out if there was a glitch that allowed cases like this to leak.”

In turn, political analyst Khaled Safouri stressed that linking the incident to immigration “may be premature,” pointing out that shooting incidents are “usual in American society,” and that recent days have witnessed incidents in Delaware and Houston that “did not receive any media coverage.”

Safouri confirmed that the man previously worked with the US Intelligence Agency (CIA) and with US special military units, and was married with children, which makes the motives “unclear and perhaps mental or personal.”

While Camarota believed that the debate over immigration in the United States “is no longer resolvable,” Saffuri noted that the country “will remain a country of immigrants” despite polarization, citing the broad positive impact of immigrant labor in the economy, science, and medicine.

What are the causes of disagreement within the right wing in America?.. Right-wing journalist and political analyst Owen Shroyer answers#News pic.twitter.com/2gaM8UQ6FP

– Al Jazeera Channel (@AJArabic) November 27, 2025

Right division

In the midst of the repercussions of the Washington attack, the American right faces increasing challenges with the emergence of divisions within this movement.

Last week, Representative Margery Greene, who is considered the member of the House of Representatives most supportive of Trump, resigned, which heralds additional resignations and deeper divisions among Republicans.

Greene’s resignation opened the door to questions about the possibility of the “America First” movement beginning to disintegrate, and whether this rift will fuel the wave of anger in the American street against the current administration’s policies.

The Republican representative submitted her resignation after she launched a violent attack on President Donald Trump’s agenda in his second term and the Republican leadership, which she accused of deceiving voters.

In an interview with Al Jazeera as part of the “From Washington” program, American right-wing activist Owen Shroyer reviews the nature of the divisions within the “MAGA” movement that pushed President Trump to the White House.

In reference to the growing differences within the right-wing movement, Schroyer says that the only people who support the current administration’s direction are those who began supporting Trump after the 2024 elections, explaining that there are increasing objections to the current administration’s foreign policies, whether it comes to the Middle East or Ukraine.