ISLAMABAD – The recent decision by the Trump administration to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for over 10,000 Afghans and Cameroonians has sparked outrage across human rights circles.
On the surface, it appears to be yet another chapter in the administration’s hardline immigration stance. But behind closed doors, an unexpected discovery may have played a significant role in the policy shift.
According to reliable sources, U.S. authorities uncovered that a significant number of Afghans under TPS were also holders of Pakistani nationality. These revelations surfaced during the extended deep security verifications that are typically conducted in coordination with the Five Eyes intelligence alliance (US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand)—a process that often spans years. As part of this vetting, fingerprints of TPS recipients were shared with Pakistani authorities.
Astonishingly, many prints matched records in Pakistan’s NADRA database, confirming that these individuals were, in fact, Pakistani citizens. This raised serious concerns within U.S. security agencies: had some Afghan nationals misrepresented themselves to gain access to resettlement benefits?. In addition to those already in the U.S., a parallel situation unfolded with Afghans waiting in Pakistan for U.S. resettlement. Investigations revealed that many among them also held legal Pakistani identity documents, further complicating their eligibility under humanitarian programs.
Over the past few years, thousands of Afghans have sought asylum in the U.S., Europe, the UK, and Australia—often citing threats from the Taliban due to their work with NATO or Western NGOs. However, it now appears that some of these claims may have been embellished or strategically exaggerated. A senior Taliban figure reportedly told American officials that “the narrative of imminent danger for every Afghan who worked with foreigners is overblown.” Taliban representatives claimed that thousands of such individuals had already returned to Afghanistan after their asylum applications were rejected abroad, and they were living peacefully. They dismissed viral videos claiming persecution as “orchestrated drama aimed at gaining sympathy.”.
The Taliban’s stance has emboldened certain segments of the Trump administration. They argue that if the Taliban are willing to welcome back returnees, then continued protection in the U.S. is no longer justified—especially for those who hold dual nationalities and no longer face genuine risk. This episode has exposed a critical gap in international asylum screening procedures. Human rights organizations may have unknowingly advocated for individuals who held alternative citizenship and safe refuge options.
The implications are far-reaching—not just for Afghans, but for all asylum-seeking populations around the world. As legal challenges mount and humanitarian advocates push back, this emerging layer of complexity adds a new dimension to the TPS debate. It’s no longer just about protection from danger—it’s now about the credibility of claims, transparency in identity, and the future of global refugee policies.