The tragic murder of National Guard Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom in Washington, D.C., allegedly at the hands of Afghan national Rahmanullah Lakanwal, has sent shockwaves through America. It’s not just the brutality of the act that’s disturbing; it’s the fact that it highlights a much larger crisis. Her death serves as a stark reminder that our global immigration systems, built on outdated beliefs and misplaced priorities, are enabling the wrong people while leaving those who truly need protection out in the cold.

Beckstrom’s father referred to her death as “a horrible tragedy.” President Donald Trump called her “magnificent” and “outstanding in every way.” His outrage reflected a national sentiment: how could someone who came through a U.S. refugee program—later described by officials as radicalized, unstable, and unvetted—be free to commit such an act in our nation’s capital?

The uncomfortable truth is that immigration systems in many developed countries are no longer focused on identifying individuals who align with democratic values. Instead, they prioritize quick processing, reward wealth, and check off bureaucratic boxes—often after individuals have already entered the country.

Lakanwal’s entry under Operation Allies Welcome was part of a large-scale refugee resettlement initiative that followed the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. However, as both Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem pointed out, the Biden administration prioritized bringing tens of thousands into the country first and only checked backgrounds later—if they did so at all.

Biometric screenings were overlooked. Social media histories went unchecked. Former combatants were treated the same as civilians. Even those with known connections to CIA-backed “Zero Units”—forces infamous for their brutality—were allowed into the U.S. with minimal scrutiny.

The outcome? A series of violent incidents involving individuals who were supposedly “fully vetted.” This is not compassion. This is carelessness disguised as morality. 

Take refugees who advocate for women’s rights, secularism, democracy, or free expression—these are the people who align closely with Western values, yet they often encounter insurmountable obstacles. They lack financial resources, and their political beliefs make them targets in their home countries. Time and again, they hear that they don’t “qualify” under current immigration policies.

On the flip side, those with money, connections, or government backing can easily navigate the system—even if their beliefs starkly contradict the democratic principles of the nations they wish to enter.

This is how extremists manage to gain entry while reformers are left behind. And it’s a phenomenon occurring all over the globe.

In many Western countries, immigration systems increasingly favor financial wealth over democratic ideals. Investor visas, start-up visas, and point-based systems prioritize bank accounts over belief systems. A wealthy individual with regressive or extremist views can secure residency long before a secular journalist, human rights advocate, or dissident academic—people who pose no threat to society.

Countries operate under the assumption that wealth mitigates risk. However, in radicalised countries, extremist groups often have significant financial backing, while liberal and progressive voices are systematically marginalized. Those who uphold Western values—pluralism, freedom, democracy—are frequently the most impoverished, vulnerable, and at risk.

Yet they remain stuck behind closed doors, while wealthier, more dangerous individuals can simply buy their way in. In essence, Western borders are wide open to money but largely shut to progressive voices. Even Pakistan, which has long welcomed millions of Afghan refugees, has finally hit its limit. Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi has made it clear, citing a string of terror incidents: “Afghans were once our guests, but they are no longer our guests now… We cannot afford more explosions.”

If countries want to stay open, free, and secure, they need to rethink their immigration policies based on principles rather than just wealth:

Beckstrom’s death isn’t just a tragedy; it’s a wake-up call. It highlights the need for immigration policies that protect the vulnerable while also safeguarding the public. It serves as a reminder that compassion without discernment can lead to negligence. And it underscores that welcoming the wrong individuals can ultimately undermine the very values that Western nations strive to uphold.

The pressing question now is whether America—and the wider Western world—will take action before another life is lost to a system that favors the wrong people and fails those who truly need help.