SAN ANTONIO: Some immigrant US Army reservists and recruits who enlisted in the military with a promised path to citizenship are being abruptly discharged, the Associated Press has learned.
The AP was unable to quantify how many men and women who enlisted through the special recruitment program have been booted from the Army, but immigration attorneys say they know of more than 40 who have been discharged or whose status has become questionable, jeopardizing their futures.
“It was my dream to serve in the military,” said reservist Lucas Calixto, a Brazilian immigrant who filed a lawsuit against the Army last week. “Since this country has been so good to me, I thought it was the least I could do to give back to my adopted country and serve in the United States military.”
Some of the service members say they were not told why they were being discharged. Others who pressed for answers said the Army informed them they’d been labeled as security risks because they have relatives abroad or because the Defense Department had not completed background checks on them.
Spokespeople for the Pentagon and the Army said that, due to the pending litigation, they were unable to explain the discharges or respond to questions about whether there have been policy changes in any of the military branches.
Eligible recruits are required to have legal status in the US, such as a student visa, before enlisting. More than 5,000 immigrants were recruited into the program in 2016, and an estimated 10,000 are currently serving. Most go the Army, but some also go to the other military branches.
To become citizens, the service members need an honorable service designation, which can come after even just a few days at boot camp. But the recently discharged service members have had their basic training delayed, so they can’t be naturalized.
Margaret Stock, an Alaska-based immigration attorney and a retired Army Reserve lieutenant colonel who helped create the immigrant recruitment program, said she’s been inundated over the past several days by recruits who have been abruptly discharged.
All had signed enlistment contracts and taken an Army oath, Stock said. Many were reservists who had been attending unit drills, receiving pay and undergoing training, while others had been in a “delayed entry” program, she said.
“Immigrants have been serving in the Army since 1775,” Stock said. “We wouldn’t have won the revolution without immigrants. And we’re not going to win the global war on terrorism today without immigrants.”
Stock said the service members she’s heard from had been told the Defense Department had not managed to put them through extensive background checks, which include CIA, FBI and National Intelligence Agency screenings and counterintelligence interviews. Therefore, by default, they do not meet the background check requirement.
“It’s a vicious cycle,” she said.
The AP interviewed Calixto and recruits from Pakistan and Iran, all of whom said they were devastated by their unexpected discharges.
“Now the great feeling I had when I enlisted is going down the drain,” said Calixto, 28. “I don’t understand why this is happening.”
In hopes of undoing the discharge, he filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., last week alleging the Defense Department hadn’t given him a chance to defend himself or appeal. He said he was given no specific grounds other than “personnel security.”
Calixto, who lives in Massachusetts and came to the US when he was 12, said in an email interview arranged through his attorney that he joined the Army out of patriotism.
In the suit, Calixto said he learned he was being kicked out soon after he was promoted to private second class.
The Pakistani service member who spoke to the AP said he learned in a phone call a few weeks ago that his military career was over.
“There were so many tears in my eyes that my hands couldn’t move fast enough to wipe them away,” he said. “I was devastated, because I love the US and was so honored to be able to serve this great country.”
He asked that his name be withheld because he fears he might be forced to return to Pakistan, where he could face danger as a former US Army enlistee.
Portions of the 22-year-old’s military file reviewed by the AP said he was so deeply loyal to the US that his relationships with his family and fiancee in Pakistan would not make him a security threat. Nonetheless, the documents show the Army cited those foreign ties as a concern.
The man had enlisted in April 2016 anticipating he’d be a citizen within months, but faced a series of delays. He had been slated to ship out to basic training in January 2017, but that also was delayed.
An Iranian citizen who came to the US for a graduate degree in engineering told the AP that he enlisted in the program hoping to gain medical training. He said he had felt proud that he was “pursuing everything legally and living an honorable life.”
In recent weeks, he said, he learned that he’d been discharged.
“It’s terrible because I put my life in the line for this country, but I feel like I’m being treated like trash,” he said. “If I am not eligible to become a US citizen, I am really scared to return to my country.”
He spoke on condition of anonymity because of those fears.
It’s unclear how the service members’ discharges could affect their status as legal immigrants.
In a statement, the Defense Department said: “All service members (i.e. contracted recruits, active duty, Guard and Reserve) and those with an honorable discharge are protected from deportation.”
However, immigration attorneys told the AP that many immigrants let go in recent weeks were an “uncharacterized discharge,” neither dishonorable nor honorable.
The service members affected by the recent discharges all enlisted in recent years under a special program aimed at bringing medical specialists and fluent speakers of 44 sought-after languages into the military. The idea, according to the Defense Department, was to “recognize their contribution and sacrifice.”
President George W. Bush ordered “expedited naturalization” for immigrant soldiers in 2002 in an effort to swell military ranks. Seven years later the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest program, known as MAVNI, became an official recruiting program.
It came under fire from conservatives when President Barack Obama added DACA recipients — young immigrants who were brought to the US illegally — to the list of eligible enlistees. In response, the military layered on additional security clearances for recruits to pass before heading to boot camp.
The Trump Administration added even more hurdles, creating a backlog within the Defense Department. Last fall, hundreds of recruits still in the enlistment process had their contracts canceled. A few months later, the military suspended MAVNI.
Republican Congressman Andy Harris of Maryland, who has supported legislation to limit the program, told the AP that MAVNI was established by executive order and never properly authorized by Congress.
“Our military must prioritize enlisting American citizens, and restore the MAVNI program to its specialized, limited scope,” he said.
Non-US citizens have served in the military since the Revolutionary War, when Continental soldiers included Irish, French and Germans. The US recruited Filipino nationals to serve in the Navy in the 1940s, and worked to enlist Eastern Europeans in the military over the next decade, according to the Defense Department.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly 110,000 members of the Armed Forces have gained citizenship by serving in the US military, according to the Defense Department.
Many service members recruited through the program have proven to be exemplary. In 2012, then-Sgt. Saral K. Shrestha, originally from Nepal, was named US Army Soldier of the Year.
In general, the immigrant recruits have been more cost-effective, outperforming their fellow soldiers in the areas of attrition, performance, education and promotions, according to a recently released review by the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research institution.
The AP spoke with a 26-year-old woman from Dominica who said she proudly enlisted in the immigrant recruitment program in 2016 while earning her nursing degree. She said she drilled each month with her reserve unit, which gave her an award, and had been awaiting a date to start basic training.
But in March, she said she looked up her profile on an Army portal and saw that the section about her security eligibility was marked “loss of jurisdiction,” with no further explanation. The next month, her attorney said she found the reservist’s name listed as “unsuitable” on a spreadsheet created by the Defense Department.
The reservist, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of concerns about her legal standing, said she received additional paperwork last month that indicated her case is awaiting a final decision.
“I have always been a good soldier and have always done what they ask me to do,” she said. “I got into debt when I joined the Army because I can’t work legally but, financially, I can’t survive anymore. I don’t want to give up because I genuinely like being in the Army. But I don’t know who to turn to.”
In recent years, a group of attorneys have been fighting to keep their recruited immigrant clients eligible for naturalization as delays have mounted. Some have been successful, including nearly 50 recruits who were granted a type of temporary status while their background investigations are being completed.
“Some of our clients have finally emerged through the system and at least are doing basic training,” said Donald Friedman, a Washington attorney with Perkins Coie.
US Army quietly discharging immigrant recruits
US Army quietly discharging immigrant recruits
France responsible for ‘extreme violence’ in Cameroon independence war, report says
- Between 1956 and 1961, France’s fight against Cameroonian independence claimed “tens of thousands of lives” and left hundreds of thousands displaced, the historians said
- A 2021 report concluded France bore “overwhelming responsibilities” in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, and a 2020 review examining France’s actions during Algeria’s war of independence called for a “truth commission” and other conciliatory actions
PARIS: France waged a war marked by “extreme violence” during Cameroon’s fight for independence in the late 1950s, historians said in the latest officially commissioned study grappling with Paris’s colonial past released on Tuesday.
The historians found that Paris implemented mass forced displacement, pushed hundreds of thousands of Cameroonians into internment camps and supported brutal militias to squash the central African country’s push for sovereignty.
The historical commission, whose creation was announced by President Emmanuel Macron during a 2022 trip to Yaounde, examined France’s role leading up to when Cameroon gained independence from France on January 1, 1960 and the following years.
Composed of both French and Cameroonian historians, the 14-person committee looked into France’s role in the country between 1945 and 1971 based on declassified archives, eyewitness accounts and field surveys.
Most of Cameroon came under French rule in 1918 after its previous colonial ruler, Germany, was defeated during World War I.
But a brutal conflict unfolded when the country began pushing for its independence following World War II, a move France violently repressed, according to the report’s findings.
Between 1956 and 1961, France’s fight against Cameroonian independence claimed “tens of thousands of lives” and left hundreds of thousands displaced, the historians said.
“It is undeniable that this violence was extreme because it violated human rights and the laws of war,” it said.
For many in France, the war in Cameroon went unnoticed because it mainly involved troops from colonies in Africa and was overshadowed by the French fight in Algeria’s 1954-1962 war of independence.
“But this invisibility should not create an illusion. France was indeed waging war in Cameroon,” the report said.
The formerly British Cameroons to the south gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1961 and became part of the newly independent state.
While the study aims to fill France’s “memory gap” on this period, for Cameroonians, “the profound trauma linked to repression remains,” it said.
The report comes as France has seen its influence wane among its former African colonies, which are reevaluating — and sometimes severing — their ties with Paris.
Even after Cameroon gained independence in 1960, Paris remained deeply involved in its governance, working closely with the “authoritarian and autocratic” regime of Ahmadou Ahidjo, who stayed in power until 1982.
France helped draft Cameroon’s post-independence constitution and defense agreements allowed French troops to “maintain order” in the newly independent state.
Ahidjo’s successor, current President Paul Biya, 91, in office since 1982, is only the second president in Cameroon’s history.
Receiving the report in Yaounde on Tuesday, Biya called it a “work of collective therapy” that would encourage the peoples of both countries to better accept their past relationship.
Ahead of its publication, former anti-colonial fighter Mathieu Njassep had told AFP he wanted France to admit to wrongdoing.
“If France does not recognize it was wrong, we won’t be able to forgive it,” said the 86-year-old who fought against Ahidjo’s government from 1960 and was thrown in jail for 14 years for “armed rebellion.”
Macron has taken tentative steps to come to terms with once-taboo aspects of the country’s historical record, though many argue he has not gone far enough.
A 2021 report concluded France bore “overwhelming responsibilities” in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, and a 2020 review examining France’s actions during Algeria’s war of independence called for a “truth commission” and other conciliatory actions.
But Macron has ruled out an official apology for torture and other abuses carried out by French troops in Algeria.
France is now reconfiguring its military presence in Africa after being driven out of three countries in the Sahel governed by juntas hostile to Paris — Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.
And Chad accused Macron of showing contempt after he said African leaders had “forgotten to say thank you” to France for helping to combat jihadist insurgencies in the Sahel.
Last week Macron said he was committed to “continuing the work of remembrance and truth initiated with Cameroon” after receiving the report.
Zelensky says Putin ‘afraid’ of negotiations on ending Ukraine war
“Today, Putin once again confirmed that he is afraid of negotiations, afraid of strong leaders, and does everything possible to prolong the war,” Zelensky posted on X.
Americans sour on some of Trump’s early moves, poll finds
- Poll shows mixed approval for Trump’s early executive orders
- Support for Trump’s immigration and hiring freeze policies remains strong
WASHINGTON: Americans have a dim view of some of President Donald Trump’s early barrage of executive orders, including his attempt to do away with so-called birthright citizenship and his decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found.
Since taking office on Jan. 20, the Republican president has moved quickly to crack down on immigration and scale back the size of government, efforts that respondents to the three-day poll that closed on Sunday look on more favorably.
Overall, the poll showed 45 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s performance as president, down slightly from 47 percent in a Jan. 20-21 poll. The share who disapproved was slightly larger at 46 percent, an increase from 39 percent in the prior poll.
The poll had a margin of error of about 4 percentage points.
“While it does seem Trump is getting a honeymoon to some extent, his numbers are still not impressive by historical standards,” said Kyle Kondik, an analyst with the University of Virginia Center for Politics. During Trump’s first term, his approval rating hit as high as 49 percent during his first weeks in office but he closed out his term at 34 percent approval following the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the US Capitol.
It may be too early to evaluate whether Trump is squandering his political capital by focusing on issues where he is not aligned with the public, Kondik said. But the poll shows that many of his early actions have been greeted warmly only by his hardcore base of supporters.
Voters more generally remain deeply concerned about the high price of food, housing and other necessities, the poll found.
Most Americans opposed ending the nation’s longstanding practice of granting citizenship to children born in the US even if neither parent has legal immigration status, the poll found. Some 59 percent of respondents — including 89 percent of Democrats and 36 percent of Republicans — said they opposed ending birthright citizenship. A federal judge last week temporarily blocked the Trump administration from making changes to birthright citizenship, but the White House has vowed to fight on.
Little support for ‘Gulf of America’
Seventy percent of respondents oppose renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, an action Trump ordered on his first day in office. Only 25 percent of respondents supported the idea, with the rest unsure.
Some 59 percent of respondents, including 30 percent of Republicans, opposed Trump’s moves to end federal efforts to promote the hiring of women and members of racial minority groups. When asked specifically about Trump’s order to close all federal diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, offices, respondents were more evenly divided, with 51 percent opposed and 44 percent in favor, largely along partisan lines.
Support for expanding fossil fuel drilling — another early policy change in the new administration — was highly concentrated in Trump’s party, with 76 percent of Republicans backing the easing of drilling restrictions and 81 percent of Democrats opposing it. Some 59 percent of respondents said they opposed the United States pulling out of the Paris climate accords.
Public views also split along partisan lines for billionaire businessman Elon Musk, one of Trump’s most prominent allies. While 75 percent of Republicans in the survey said they had a favorable view of Musk, 90 percent of Democrats said they had an unfavorable view.
One possible source of concern for Trump’s political team could be the still overwhelming sense that rising prices remain untamed. Some 50 percent of poll respondents said the country was on the wrong track when it came to the cost of living, compared to 25 percent who said it was moving in the right direction. The rest said they weren’t sure or didn’t answer the question.
Support on immigration, hiring freeze
There were positive indicators for Trump, as well. Some 48 percent Americans approve of Trump’s approach on immigration, compared to 41 percent who disapprove. And the poll showed Trump having significant levels of support on the hiring freeze he ordered at most federal offices, with 49 percent of respondents backing a freeze, including 80 percent of Republicans and 43 percent of Democrats.
Kondik said that Trump ultimately may be judged by the public on big-picture issues such as the economy and immigration and that opposition to smaller-scale policy measures may not be damaging.
“Trump was elected in large part because voters tended to side with him on the economy and immigration. To the extent he is viewed as doing positive things on that, it’s probably good for him,” Kondik said.
But, he added, if voters in the coming months perceive Trump’s immigration crackdown or his government downsizing efforts to be overly harsh, that could change.
Trump won’t be on the ballot again, but the backlash could be felt by congressional Republicans running for re-election next year, he said.
The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was conducted online and nationwide over Jan. 24-26, surveyed 1,034 adults.
Israeli PM says Trump has invited him to the White House on Feb. 4
- Trump teased the upcoming visit in a conversation with reporters aboard Air Force One on Monday, but didn’t provide details
- “I’m going to be speaking with Bibi Netanyahu in the not too distant future,” he said
WADI GAZA: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that President Donald Trump has invited him to visit the White House on Feb. 4, which would make him the first foreign leader to do so in Trump’s second term.
The announcement came as the United States pressures Israel and Hamas to continue a ceasefire that has paused a devastating 15-month war in Gaza. Talks about the ceasefire’s more difficult second phase, which aims to end the war, are set to begin on Feb. 3.
There was no immediate comment from the White House. Trump teased the upcoming visit in a conversation with reporters aboard Air Force One on Monday, but didn’t provide details. “I’m going to be speaking with Bibi Netanyahu in the not too distant future,” he said.
The meeting would be a chance for Netanyahu, under pressure at home, to remind the world of the support he has received from Trump over the years, and to defend Israel’s conduct of the war. Last year, the two men met face-to-face for the first time in nearly four years at Trump’s Florida Mar-a-Lago estate.
Israel is the largest recipient of US military aid, and Netanyahu is likely to encourage Trump not to hold up some weapons deliveries the way the Biden administration did, though it continued other deliveries and overall military support.
Even before taking office this month, Trump was sending his special Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, to the region to apply pressure along with the Biden administration to get the current Gaza ceasefire achieved.
But Netanyahu has vowed to renew the war if Hamas doesn’t meet his demands in negotiations over the ceasefire’s second phase of the ceasefire, meant to discuss a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and a “sustainable calm.”
Under the deal, more than 375,000 Palestinians have crossed into northern Gaza since Israel allowed their return on Monday morning, the United Nations said Tuesday. That represents over a third of the million people who fled in the war’s opening days.
Many of the Palestinians trudging along a seaside road or crossing in vehicles after security inspections were getting their first view of shattered northern Gaza under the fragile ceasefire, now in its second week.
They were determined, if homes were damaged or destroyed, to pitch makeshift shelters or sleep outdoors amid the vast piles of broken concrete or perilously leaning buildings. After months of crowding in squalid tent camps or former schools in Gaza’s south, they would finally be home.
“It’s still better for us to be on our land than to live on a land that’s not yours,” said Fayza Al-Nahal as she prepared to leave the southern city of Khan Younis for the north.
At least two Palestinians set off for the north by sea, crowding into a rowboat with a bicycle and other belongings.
Hani Al-Shanti, displaced from Gaza City, looked forward to feeling at peace in whatever he found, “even if it is a roof and walls without furniture, even if it is without a roof.” One newly returned woman hung laundry in the ruins of her home, its walls blown out.
Under the ceasefire, the next release of hostages held in Gaza, and Palestinian prisoners from Israeli custody, is set to occur on Thursday, followed by another exchange on Saturday.
Putin says there is a way to organize talks with Ukraine, but Kyiv not willing
- “Essentially, if they want to proceed, there is a legal way to do it. Let the chairman of the Rada handle it in accordance with the constitution,” Putin said
MOSCOW: Ukraine could find a legal way to hold peace talks with Russia on ending their nearly three-year-old war, but Moscow sees no willingness on Kyiv’s part to engage, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday.
Putin told Russian state television that negotiations with Ukraine were complicated by President Volodymyr Zelensky’s “illegitimacy” in remaining in power beyond his mandate with no authority to sign documents.
“But essentially, if they want to proceed, there is a legal way to do it. Let the chairman of the Rada (Ukraine’s parliament) handle it in accordance with the constitution,” Putin told top Kremlin reporter Pavel Zarubin.
“If there is a desire, we can resolve any legal issues. However, so far, we simply do not see such a desire.”
If Ukraine showed a desire to negotiate and seek compromises, Putin said, “let anyone suitable lead those talks. We will naturally secure what meets our interests.
“But in terms of signing documents, everything has to be done in a way that legal experts confirm the legitimacy of those who are authorized by the Ukrainian state to sign these agreements.”
Russia has long alleged that Zelensky no longer has legal authority as his term in office ran out in May 2024 and no presidential election has since been held.
Ukraine’s constitution empowers the speaker of parliament to act if the president is unable to do so.
But Ukrainian authorities say Zelensky remains the legitimate president on grounds that martial law has been in effect since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. They say wartime conditions do not allow for an election to be held.
In his comments, Putin said that if Ukraine’s Western allies backed the notion of talks it would be simple to find a legal way to proceed with them. Putin said he had sent “an appropriate signal” to this effect to former President Joe Biden.
In addition, Putin said, a legal means could be found to rescind a 2022 Ukrainian presidential decree that Moscow says barred any talks with the Russian leadership.
Zelensky said last week that the decree, signed after Russia unilaterally annexed four Ukrainian regions, only barred negotiations with Ukrainian groups outside his authority and was aimed at blocking talks with separatists.