Averting Loss of Life and Injury By Expediting Sivs Act of 2021

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 535, I call up the bill (H.R. 3985) to amend the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 to expedite the special immigrant visa process for certain Afghan allies, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. 3985.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3985, the Averting Loss of Life and Injury by Expediting SIVs Act of 2021, or the ALLIES Act, makes essential changes to the Afghan special immigrant visa program to ensure that the lives of those who served faithfully alongside American troops in Afghanistan are protected.

The special immigrant visa program allows those individuals who worked for or on behalf of the U.S. Government in Afghanistan, or for the NATO International Security Assistance Force in support of the American mission, to seek lawful permanent residence in the United States.

To be eligible, applicants must establish qualifying employment in Afghanistan for 2 years, receive approval from the Chief of Mission, and undergo rigorous background checks and national security vetting, a process that, on average, takes 3 years.

Our 20-year mission in Afghanistan will formally come to an end in just a few short weeks. Each day that we continue to draw down our military presence in Afghanistan, threats to the lives of Afghans who supported our cause are increasing exponentially.

The Biden administration has committed to relocating certain applicants to a third country. Some who have passed the national security vetting process will be transferred to the United States to complete visa processing.

These evacuations, which are scheduled to begin at the end of this month, are a critical component of our withdrawal strategy. But evacuations alone are not enough. Congress must do our part to protect those whose lives are at risk because of their support and service to our Nation.

First and foremost, we must ensure that enough visas are available for eligible applicants. H.R. 3985 increases the number of visas that may be issued to qualifying Afghans by 8,000, which would ensure that all qualified applicants who are currently undergoing processing can immediately receive a visa if they are approved.

Second, we must streamline visa processing to the greatest extent possible, without compromising national security or program integrity.

H.R. 3985 does this by reducing duplicative paperwork requirements and modifying the requirement that applicants prove the existence of an ongoing serious threat to their lives; to reflect the fact that Afghans who worked in support of the U.S. mission now face an obvious threat as a direct result of their work.

Third, the bill strengthens protections for certain groups of Afghan nationals, including surviving spouses, and children of deceased principal applicants, individuals employed by NATO in support of the U.S. mission, and individuals whose work was funded by a U.S. Government cooperative agreement or grant.

Collectively, these changes will ensure that no one whose lives are at risk because of their support to the American mission are abandoned or forced to wait for Congress to act to authorize more visas.

Mr. Speaker, I am a proud cosponsor of this important bill. I thank Representative Crow for championing the cause of our Afghan allies and working across the aisle to build consensus and support for this legislation. We must keep our promises to these brave men and women. Their lives depend on it.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 3985, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Lofgren).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Garcia).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Dean).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Jackson Lee).

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to add my appreciation to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee for his leadership in moving this bill forward and certainly to our friend and one who has served this Nation in many ways, Congressman Crow, for his continued consideration of our friends in Afghanistan.

As the co-chair and founder of the Afghanistan Caucus, I have gone to Afghanistan many, many times in the early years. I know the people in Afghanistan truly love democracy. I know the women and children want education, and I know that in the midst of our decision on the longest- serving war, we must find that pathway to be able to ensure democracy prevails, both in terms of the democratic leadership of government but also in the lives of the people.

I hesitate to read this language: ``Gunfire erupts. At least a dozen men are seen shot to death amid cries of `Allahu Akbar', God is great.

``The victims were members of an Afghan Special Forces unit: their executioners, the Taliban. The summary killings took place on June 16 in the town of Dawlat Abad in Faryab Province, close to Afghanistan's border with Turkmenistan.'' It is, of course, a difficult thing to read and to understand.

But as we begin to write the democratic principles of a constitution so many years ago--prior to this Nation going to Iraq--people were interested and excited about their life. Women were elected as parliamentarians. In fact, they prided themselves on a number of parliamentarians who happened to be women.

In the instance of that leaving Afghanistan the first time, we found that those women, many going to their districts, were killed. Schools for children that girls were in, schools that I took books to, were actually burned to the ground.

So those who stood by us, those who guided our troops, those who translated for us, and those who took us into the villages--because many of you know the stories of our soldiers going in with money. That was the policy at that time--this bill specifically acknowledges their leadership.

I include in the Record three articles referencing this important issue. [From Human Rights Watch, Apr. 1, 2021] Afghanistan: Taliban Target Journalists, Women in Media

New York.--Taliban forces are deliberately targeting journalists and other media workers, including women, in, Human Rights Watch said today. Threats and attacks against journalists across the country have increased sharply since talks began between the Afghan government and the Taliban, heightening concerns about preserving freedom of expression and the media in any peace settlement.

Human Rights Watch found that Taliban commanders and fighters have engaged in a pattern of threats, intimidation, and violence against members of the media in areas where the Taliban have significant influence, as well as in Kabul. Those making the threats often have an intimate knowledge of a journalist's work, family, and movements and use this information to either compel them to self-censor, leave their work altogether, or face violent consequences. Provincial and district-level Taliban commanders and fighters also make oral and written threats against journalists beyond the areas they control. Journalists say that the widespread nature of the threats has meant that no media workers feel safe.

``A wave of threats and killings has sent a chilling message to the Afghan media at a precarious moment as Afghans on all sides get set to negotiate free speech protections in a future Afghanistan,'' said Patricia Gossman, associate Asia director. ``By silencing critics through threats and violence, the Taliban have undermined hopes for preserving an open society in Afghanistan.''

Human Rights Watch interviewed 46 members of the Afghan media between November 2020 and March 2021, seeking information on the conditions under which they work, including threats of physical harm. Those interviewed included 42 journalists in Badghis, Ghazni, Ghor, Helmand, Kabul, Kandahar, Khost, Wardak, and Zabul provinces and four who had left Afghanistan due to threats.

In a number of cases that Human Rights Watch documented, Taliban forces detained journalists for a few hours or overnight. In several cases they or their colleagues were able to contact senior Taliban officials to intercede with provincial and district-level commanders to secure their release, indicating that local commanders are able to take decisions to target journalists on their own without approval from senior Taliban military or political officials.

Taliban officials at their political office in Doha, Qatar, have denied that their forces threaten the media and say that they require only that journalists respect Islamic values. But Taliban commanders throughout Afghanistan have threatened journalists specifically for their reporting. The commanders have considerable autonomy to carry out punishments, including targeted killings.

Women journalists, especially those appearing on television and radio, face particular threats. The recent wave of violent attacks has driven several prominent women journalists to give up their profession or leave Afghanistan altogether. Female reporters may be targeted not only for issues they cover but also for challenging perceived social norms prohibiting women from being in a public role and working outside the home.

Journalists outside the country's main cities are especially vulnerable to attacks because they are more exposed and lack even the minimal protection that a larger Afghan media, government, and international presence provides. However, as the fighting has increasingly encroached on major cities, these have offered decreasing protection to journalists seeking safety from the violence in their home districts.

A journalist covering the fighting in Helmand province said that one of his sources told him the Taliban were looking for him and he should lie low. ``The majority of Afghan journalists feel intimidated and threatened,'' he said. ``All the journalists are scared because everyone feels like they could be next.''

Residents of Taliban-held areas have long expressed fear of retaliation if they complain about the way Taliban forces carry out military operations or enforce restrictions. In a June 2020 report, Human Rights Watch documented severe restrictions in areas under Taliban control, including limits on freedom of expression and the media.

The Taliban leadership should immediately cease intimidation, threats, and attacks against journalists and other media workers, Human Rights Watch said. They should urgently provide clear, public directives to all Taliban members to end all forms of violence against journalists and other media workers, and intimidation, harassment, and punishment of Afghans who have criticized Taliban policies. The Taliban leadership should also explicitly reject violence against women in the media.

The United Nations and governments supporting the Intra- Afghan Negotiations should publicly press the Taliban leadership to adopt these recommendations, and provide increased support, including protection, to independent media organizations and journalists in Afghanistan, especially those facing threats.

``It's not enough for Taliban officials in Doha to issue blanket denials that they're targeting journalists when Taliban forces on the ground continue to intimidate, harass, and attack reporters for doing their jobs,'' Gossman said. ``Countries supporting the peace process should press for firm commitments from all parties to protect journalists, including women, and uphold the right to free expression in Afghanistan.'' Taliban Threats to Afghan Media

Although the Taliban routinely deny responsibility for attacks on journalists, the Afghan Journalists Security Committee (AJSC) has said:

Since the beginning of the spike in targeted killings in early November [2020], supporters of the group [Taliban] have welcomed the killings of journalists on social media, calling these killings in many cases a religious duty. Taliban supporters accuse journalists of being agents of Western countries, and corrupted by Western values, thereby legitimizing any violence against journalists and the media as not only being permissible but a key part of their war. Taliban Threats Related to Reporting on the War

Taliban commanders and fighters have long targeted the media, accusing them of being aligned with the Afghan government or international military forces. If journalists report unfavorably about Taliban actions or military operations, the Taliban often accuse them of being spies. District and provincial-level Taliban commanders have also criticized journalists for not reporting incidents such as civilian casualties from government airstrikes. Journalists have said that the role some of them play as influential and prominent figures in many communities has made them targets of the Taliban. By attacking them the Taliban effectively threaten all local media. A journalist in Helmand said:

If the more prominent journalists are targeted first, the other journalists, who might be less influential or prominent, are automatically intimidated and fear for their lives . . . . Pro-Taliban accounts on social media . . . explicitly issue warnings to other journalists, along the lines of ``learn something from the death of this journalist''--you can be next.

The effect on Afghan media has been profound. The killings and threats have generated fear among journalists and media workers, many of whom have altered their work patterns in an effort to mitigate the danger or try to be less visible.

Taliban pressure on the media is an apparent part of an effort to shape public debate about the war at a time of heightened political tensions surrounding the peace talks. Local journalists said Taliban commanders and fighters call them to complain about published reports, questioning why a certain issue was covered in a certain way. A journalist in Kandahar said:

The Taliban warned me about reporting on casualties related to a suicide attack. They wanted me to say that a lot of people got killed but I just reported the attacker dying . . . The Taliban threatened a couple of journalists over the last couple years for not reporting on assassinations. They say, 'Why don't you report the actual number?' When we argue with them that it is the correct number, they threaten us.

When one journalist reported a Taliban attack on a civilian facility in Kandahar, he said that within minutes he received death threats and other warnings on his phone. The Taliban called him to say that they had not targeted civilians but a nearby government checkpost. The journalist said that he lives in fear that the Taliban might still come after him. Other journalists in Kandahar have reported being followed by Taliban fighters. Because of such confrontations, journalists often self-censor their stories.

In Helmand, Taliban commanders targeted journalists who reported on military operations during a Taliban offensive in October. Taliban forces attacked the outskirts of Lashkargah city, overrunning Afghan government checkpoints until US airstrikes drove them back. In the months before he was killed by an improvised explosive device (IED) on November 11, Elyas Dayee, a journalist, had received multiple threats from Taliban commanders in Helmand, warning him to stop his reporting on their military operations. Another reporter covering the fighting said that the morning after his report came out, a Taliban commander called and accused him of publishing reports against the Islamic Emirates and warned that he would face consequences. The Nature of the Threats

In Taliban-controlled provinces, threats often come from local commanders with knowledge of the journalist's family, work habits, and movements. These commanders maintain individual contact with journalists and editors, and usually communicate these threats by phone or through social media.

A radio presenter in Zabul province said that he and his colleagues routinely receive threats from the Taliban accusing them of giving the government publicity. The callers always know details about the journalists they call, including their jobs, family members' names, and often their addresses. One caller told him that he should either leave the area or work for the Taliban. When he refused the caller told him he should ``count down to his death.'' He said his relatives also receive these threats and are told to communicate them to him.

In Ghazni province, reporters say that they have been threatened and intimidated by various groups and do not know who is behind every attack. However, despite official denials from the Taliban leadership, comments by Taliban commanders and fighters on social media have led journalists to suspect that the Taliban are responsible for many attacks. These commanders generally have considerable autonomy to plan and carry out military operations independently.

The Afghanistan Journalists Safety Committee said that in Ghazni province, the Taliban had instructed the majority of the local media outlets that they would only be permitted to continue media activities if they followed Taliban directives. Another journalist in Ghazni said that the Taliban commanders in the province object to any content that is negative or critical about them. Journalists whose reporting is perceived as favorable to the Afghan government may immediately become a target. Leaving their jobs is often their only recourse.

On December 21, Rahmatullah Nekzad, head of the Ghazni journalists' union, was fatally shot as he walked from his home to a local mosque. Although the Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, denied that the group was responsible for the attack, Nekzad had been receiving threats from local Taliban commanders since at least 2019. He said in early December, that the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS), the country's intelligence agency, informed him that he and 15 other journalists in Ghazni were at risk of a Taliban attack. He described the threats he received:

I use a social media account to upload daily news. Some local Taliban called me to accuse me of running social media pages that post anti-Taliban news . . . Their argument was that every time you post something on your wall, these . . . are also your accounts. They also threatened people who commented on the post.

In another case in mid-December, Taliban forces stopped the vehicle in which a local journalist was traveling. He called a contact, who then contacted a Taliban official. As a result of this intervention, the local Taliban released him. While he was in their custody, the Taliban accused him of working for the government's intelligence agency and for ``foreigners.''

Journalists have also been threatened for reporting on Taliban abuses. A radio correspondent from Badghis province said that after he and his colleagues broadcast a report about the Taliban extorting payments from highway drivers, the journalists began to receive threats:

In addition to the radio, we have a Facebook page where we publish the news of the day. After I posted this story, one of the comments read: ``The martyrs of the Islamic Emirate will soon kill the employees of this media station.'' The same message came in [Facebook] Messenger. Since then, we report less news on Facebook now. Badghis's capital is a very small city. Everyone knows each other and I have no doubt that they also know the address of our office.

Another journalist from Badghis said that in November, as he was traveling from Herat to Badghis province, Taliban fighters stopped him and forced him out of his car. They interrogated him about whether he had cooperated with government security forces and threatened to kill him. He said that his family was aware that he was on the road. He was finally released after local and ethnic Taliban elders who knew them mediated his release. ``I am still in fear and . . . shock from this incident,'' he said. ``Now I publish less news of the war. Whenever I go to a press conference, I am fearful and cautious. I only cover news from the capital now.''

Local Taliban fighters have assaulted journalists who have traveled into Taliban-controlled districts. A journalist from Wardak province said that a group of Taliban fighters stopped and beat him and another reporter, accusing them of spying and ``going around without the Taliban's permission to take pictures, record videos, and talk to people.'' The journalists showed their press identification but were not released until after they called a contact, who then informed senior Taliban officials, who ordered them released.

Threats also come in writing. A journalist in Ghazni said that a letter was dropped by his house ordering him to meet with the local Taliban because his reports were not ``neutral.'' It warned him that if he did not change, his death was ``close.'' After the warning, he left his home district and stayed in Kabul for a few months. Eventually he returned home but avoided his office out of fear.

The Taliban also send cell phone text messages to comment on media coverage, often chiding reporters that they should have included the Taliban point of view. While criticism of media reporting is not in itself problematic, when it comes from an armed group with a history of killing journalists, the messages are intimidating and create fear. ``Being a journalist is something that can put your life in danger without even doing anything specific to antagonize the Taliban,'' one journalist in Ghazni said.

Journalists also receive threats when they share their political views on social media. Taliban commanders also use Facebook to issue threats. A journalist in Ghazni said that shortly after he posted a government statement on a military offensive that resulted in Taliban casualties, he received a message from a Taliban commander demanding to speak with him:

He told me not to listen to what [government officials] say and ordered me to come see him. I had to comply. He came with his men in a Toyota vehicle. He threatened me and told me not to post anything more on Facebook.

Another journalist in Ghazni had a similar experience after using Facebook to post his report on the police killing a suspected Taliban bomber. He received a call from a man who said he was with the Taliban and asked him why he was publishing inaccurate information. The man warned him that they would watch out for what he published and that he should not publish such reports anymore.

Local Taliban commanders issue warnings about radio and television stations airing music programs, which they consider prohibited, and blame journalists for this practice. One journalist described the threats he received:

Whenever the Taliban hears about music on local radio channels, they immediately start calling you, threatening to kill you. They told me many times that they held court sessions about me, proving that I am guilty of broadcasting music. They threatened to kill me. I left this job because of these threats.

The journalist said that local Taliban officials had also told him not to broadcast election-related news because elections were ``US-instigated.'' He said: ``I argued with them for a couple of months that this is not my personal choice but the station's editorial decision. Then the Taliban asked for my boss' number and threatened him until he left.'' Another Ghazni reporter said he had received at least six threats in which callers warned him of vague consequences if he did not remove music or make other changes to the programs.

Threatening to harm relatives is a common tactic to spread fear. A journalist in Khost said that he received threatening calls from unknown numbers, some accusing him of working for Christians, others accusing him of being a foreign spy. Some specifically warn him that they know his relatives and where he lives:

I am terrified but cannot do anything about it . . . One of my relatives said that I should leave [journalism] because he is scared . . . I cannot carry on with my work. I cannot go outside freely. A caller shared a lot of information about me as proof that they have been watching me--he told me my name, my father's name, where I work, and the address of my house . . . after a few days, I got a message saying ``the path you have chosen is not the right path, so you should move on from it or else we will decide what to do with you.''

For the time being, the journalist has changed his phone hoping to prevent further threats. Taliban Threats to Women in the Media

The Afghan Journalists Safety Committee reported that 14 women working for media outlets in Afghanistan were threatened or violently attacked in 2020. An increasing number of Afghan women in journalism have left the profession because of worsening security and threats, a trend that emerged after 2015 and has accelerated.

The Islamic State of Khorasan Province (ISKP), an armed group affiliated with the Islamic State (also known as ISIS), took responsibility for killing four women journalists and media workers, including Malala Maiwand, the first woman TV presenter for Enikass News, on December 10, and the March 2 killings of Mursal Waheedi, Saadia Sadat, and Shahnaz Raufi, who worked at Enikass News dubbing foreign language news reports.

It is often not clear whether the ISKP, the Taliban, or other groups are responsible for some threats and attacks against women. In Ghazni province, the Taliban have instructed media outlets that the hosts of entertainment programs should not be women, and that no music should be broadcasted.

Farahnaz Forotan, one of Afghanistan's best-known journalists noted for her hard-hitting interviews on Tolo News, left the country in November after hearing that she was on a Taliban blacklist and would soon be killed.

She said that the Taliban:

do not accept free media, and, in many events, they had rejected being interviewed by women. The reason they wanted to kill me, was because as a woman I am not accepted according to their values . . . The situation in Kabul is very scary. I know four journalists in Kandahar who left their jobs. The local media does not reflect it because they cannot. They are being threatened and the government cannot provide protection . . . Every morning I check messages to make sure that everyone is safe. I live with fear--it is very difficult to live with the fear of losing a loved one.

Another Kabul-based journalist had worked as a producer for a television news outlet but left her job in mid-2020 after receiving threats. She said:

The Taliban threatened me a couple of times on the phone, and they told me to leave my job. I also found a letter from the Taliban in a hole in our door. The letter repeated that I must not work anymore for news agencies because this job doesn't suit me morally. If you continue, then you have no right to complain [about the consequences]. ____ [From the New York Times, July 22, 2021] U.S. Scrambles To Move Translators From Afghanistan While Leaving Many in Limbo An additional 4,000 Afghans who worked with American forces, many of them interpreters, had been approved to relocate to the United States with their families in light of the withdrawal of U.S. troops, State Department officials said on Wednesday.

But officials added that evacuations were only taking place out of Kabul, the capital, and any eligible Afghans in remote areas were on their own in figuring out how to make the difficult, and likely dangerous, journey if they wanted to take advantage of the offer.

``In order to come on an evacuation flight, they would have to get themselves to Kabul,'' a senior official, who requested anonymity in order to discuss the plan in detail, said on a call with reporters. ``Obviously, we don't have extensive U.S. military presence. We don't have the ability to provide transportation for them.''

``If they're staying in the north of the country and they don't feel safe staying in Afghanistan, they could go to a neighboring country'' and finish their application process there, the official added.

The United States also will not provide security to applicants outside Kabul, many of whom are under direct threat from the Taliban for cooperating with coalition forces during the war.

With the American military in the final phases of withdrawing from Afghanistan, the White House has come under pressure to protect Afghan allies and speed up the process of providing them with special immigrant visas, and President Biden has vowed to do so. There have been about 20,000 applicants for the special visa program.

This month, 2,500 Afghans will be sent in stages to an Army base in Fort Lee, Va., south of Richmond, where they will wait roughly 10 days for final processing. The next 4,000 applicants, who need further approvals, will go with their families to other countries to complete the visa process before coming to the United States, the senior official said.

The official did not indicate which countries those applicants would be sent to complete the visa process.

The House is expected to pass legislation this week increasing the number of State Department special immigrant visas and streamlining the application process. ____ [From Time Magazine, June 15, 2021] We Must Help the Afghan Interpreters Who Helped Us (By Florent Groberg)

Groberg received the Medal of Honor during combat operations in Afghanistan, and is on the Advisory Board of With Honor Action.

I lived by these words. That includes the day a suicide bomber hit and killed four men in my patrol in Asadabad, Afghanistan: Sergeant Major Kevin J. Griffin, Major Thomas E. Kennedy, Major Walter D. Gray, and USAID Foreign Service Officer Mr. Ragaei Abdelfattah. I think about them every day.

The blast knocked me out. I woke up as my medic strapped a tourniquet to my leg and turned to my Afghan interpreter to assist with bandages. Patrol after patrol, year after year, for twenty years, our Afghan interpreters have stood by our side in harm's way. Now we have a choice to stand by them.

Taliban militants and terrorists have long targeted our interpreters, including their wives and children. By the time the U.S. withdraws from Afghanistan in September 2021, there will be little defense left for these loyal allies.

Another one of my Afghan interpreters reached out to me last week. He made it out of Afghanistan but his wife and kids are trapped and targeted. ``The situation is getting worse day by day in Afghanistan. I am worried for my wife and kids,'' he wrote, ``Please help.''

More than 17,000 Afghans who worked with U.S. forces, not to mention their family members, are still waiting for a decision from the U.S. Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program. The process is mired in a maddening bureaucracy. Many have waited for years after going through security checks with practically every U.S. government agency imaginable, often at their own expense for health screenings and other requirements. The situation has only become more dire of late with the U.S. Embassy in Kabul halting visa applicant interviews because of an escalating COVID-19 outbreak in Afghanistan.

Every soldier I have spoken with who served in Afghanistan supports granting asylum for loyal Afghan interpreters who have taken all the necessary security steps and are seeking this emergency asylum. Not only is granting asylum the right thing to do, it also benefits the U.S. by accepting talented and hardworking people, many of whom have already put it all on the line for our country.

Members of the For Country Caucus in the U.S. House are leading the charge, including Democratic Representatives Jason Crow, Jared Golden, and Seth Moulton, and Republicans Don Bacon, Adam Kinzinger, Peter Meijer, and Michael Waltz. These veterans have formed a task force and called on the White House, State Department, and Defense Department to immediately create a plan that can be executed before the final withdrawal of U.S. forces this September. Senator Jeanne Shaheen and U.S. Army veterans Senator Joni Ernst and Senator Jack Reed are forming a bipartisan coalition in the Senate.

``My concern is very simple,'' Representative Crow said, ``And that is if we pull out and don't protect our Afghan partners, many of them will be killed.''

Earlier this year, The Atlantic reported that Taliban militants hunted down and killed ``Mohammad,'' an interpreter who worked with U.S. forces for a decade and then spent nearly another decade trying to get through the SIV process with his wife and kids. Mohammad's family just learned they finally have been approved for humanitarian parole. They are scheduled to be resettled in Texas shortly. My hope is we will hear many more stories of brave Afghan families, including that of my own interpreter, who will be granted asylum and can begin the next chapter of their lives in peace and shared prosperity.

This will only happen if the U.S. steps up and protects the interpreters and families under threat. Our history points us to solutions. The Ford Administration evacuated over 130,000 Vietnamese to Guam at the end of the Vietnam War. The Clinton Administration did the same for Iraqi Kurds during Saddam Hussein's regime.

Whether through an emergency evacuation, an expedited SIV process, an expansion of other refugee and humanitarian programs, or a combination of all of these, the Biden administration should urgently make a plan and execute it.

I am blessed to be a first-generation American and U.S. Army veteran who served with patriots, some of whom made the ultimate sacrifice. Our Afghan interpreters are patriots, too. Now is the time to open our arms and stand by them, their wives, and their children.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I support the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program, and I support its increased numbers. I ask my colleagues: Don't stop here. Let's keep going. These are our friends, and democracy must prevail.

Mr. Speaker, against the backdrop of a war that has demanded sacrifice and summoned patriotism, I rise in unequivocal support of H.R. 3985, ``The Allies Act of 2021,'' which honors the contributions of our allies in Afghanistan by strengthening the Afghan Special Immigration Visa (SIV) Program.

I wish to recognize my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Colorado, Congressman Crow, who valiantly served three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, for leading this bipartisan effort to uphold our commitment to our partners in Afghanistan.

This piece of legislation, which I am proud to co-sponsor, comes as we conclude a multigenerational war that has accomplished its principle objectives: rendering justice to those responsible for 9/11 and making sure that no attack on the homeland ever emerges from Afghanistan.

Over the course of achieving this mission, we found critical allies and made invaluable friends, among them those who leveraged their skills and knowledge to protect our troops from harm.

The Afghan Special Immigrant (SIV) Program, created in 2009 to provide safety for Afghan interpreters, contractors, and security personnel assisting U.S. efforts in the country, is more than a program.

It is a promise--a promise to our allies that when they have our back, we have theirs.

Specifically, the bill improves the SIV application process by:

amending the credible threat requirement;

aligning applicant standards;

clarifying eligibility for certain Afghans;

streamlining duplicative procedures, and,

increasing protections for surviving spouses.

Reports on the ground indicate those Afghan nationals who worked on behalf of the U.S. Government face extreme danger.

Time is of the essence, and this bill removes our friends and allies from the bureaucratic barriers of additional lengthy paperwork to establish a credible threat, when we already know that such a threat exists for individuals with verified ties to the U.S. government.

Additionally, to qualify for the Afghan SIV Program under the current law, Afghan nationals who were employed by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) or Resolute Support (RS) must have performed ``sensitive and trusted'' work.

This employment requirement was removed for U.S. Government employees in the FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act, but it remains for individuals employed under ISAF and RS.

All current applicants must also submit an I-360 petition to USCIS after completing the State Department's Chief of Mission process.

This redundancy creates duplicative applications and introduces a gap in the process that allows for fraudulent petitions, ultimately slowing down the processing time for all applicants.

The Allies Act of 2021 aligns standards across all types of employment and gives the Department of Homeland Security the flexibility to not require I-360 petitions in cases where applicants have already proven eligibility through the Chief of Mission Process.

By making standards uniform, clear, and nonduplicative for all applicants, this bill streamlines application processing and ensures a more efficient safety plan for all our allies.

The bill also expands the types of individuals eligible for the SIV.

In practice, the original Afghan SIV statute only includes Afghan nationals who worked under U.S. government contracts.

Yet we received support from many Afghan nationals under nongovernmental cooperative agreements and grants, including many key contacts working on critical democracy, human rights, and governance work to assist the U.S. mission in Afghanistan.

This bill makes clear that Afghan nationals that worked under such non-governmental agreements to advance the U.S. mission are eligible for the Afghan SIV program.

In addition to previously excluded contractors, we must also acknowledge the danger surviving spouses face and place them at the front and center in our migration support efforts as well.

Currently, surviving spouses of deceased SIV applicants are not allowed to continue through the process if the primary SIV applicant died before visa approval.

The immediate families of our allies are also our allies and we must remove this dangerous obstacle for them to reach safety.

The Allies Act of 2021 allows family members of deceased primary applicants to continue through the process if their spouse had applied for Chief of Mission approval.

We cannot leave our Afghan allies and their spouses vulnerable to the imminent threat of revenge from the Taliban.

They simply are not safe at home and they need our help.

The adaptations and amendments that this act offers would facilitate a path to safety and freedom for nearly 20,000 of on-the-ground partners whose work made possible all our advancements in that country.

Madam Speaker, I urge us to act with compassion and honor our core American value of promoting freedom for all, for it was our reverence for this value that characterized our extended presence in Afghanistan in the first place.

It is time for us to ensure the safety and lives of our friends and allies in Afghanistan.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER.

Mr. Speaker, I am heartened to see Members on both sides of the aisle speak in support of this important bill. It is vital that we pass this legislation and it is vital that we do so quickly. As we speak, nearly 20,000 of our Afghan allies are facing increasing threats from the Taliban and insurgent groups. The administration will begin evacuating some individuals at the end of this month.

As Members of Congress, we must also do our part to honor the sacrifices made by these brave men and women and pass the Allies Act. It is much too bad that we cannot do more, but this is the least that we can do. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source