The recent revelation that the U.S. government has expressed concerns about an American Marine retaining custody of an Afghan war orphan has ignited a debate surrounding the potential violation of international law and the perceived endorsement of an act of international child abduction.
The gravity of the situation has prompted the federal government to intervene in a local custody case, a move that is relatively uncommon.
The court records reviewed by The Associated Press indicate that the Justice Department has emphasized the wide-ranging implications of this dispute, extending far beyond the confines of the rural courthouse where the fate of the young girl hangs in the balance.
The failure to return the child, who is now four years old, to her Afghan relatives residing in the United States could have severe repercussions.
It might undermine American efforts to resettle Afghan refugees, jeopardize international security agreements, and potentially serve as a tool for propaganda by Islamic extremists, thereby endangering the lives of U.S. soldiers deployed overseas.
In light of these concerns, Justice Department attorneys and other U.S. officials have urgently sought to intervene in the case, recognizing the potential ramifications of their inaction.
The Justice Department’s assessment of Marine Maj. Joshua Mast and his wife’s actions in persuading a Virginia judge to approve the adoption of a girl who has been under their care since 2021 was nothing short of scathing.
The gravity of the situation cannot be overstated, as it raises serious concerns about the integrity of the adoption process and the potential exploitation of vulnerable children.
Such actions not only undermine the trust placed in the judicial system but also perpetuate a culture of deceit and manipulation.
The Justice Department’s condemnation of this incident serves as a stark reminder of the importance of upholding ethical standards and ensuring that the best interests of the child are always the primary consideration in adoption proceedings.
The implications of this case go beyond the immediate individuals involved; they serve as a wake-up call for the entire adoption community, highlighting the need for stricter regulations and thorough scrutiny to safeguard the well-being of children seeking a loving and stable home.
It is imperative that corrective measures be taken to prevent such egregious breaches of trust from recurring in the future.
In a scathing indictment, the Justice Department has condemned the court’s reliance on a series of falsehoods and intentional misrepresentations made by the Marine.
This failure to adhere to critical safeguards aimed at protecting children being brought to the United States has resulted in grave harm inflicted upon the Child, her family, and the United States, as the Justice Department lawyers assert in their court documents.
The most troubling aspect of this situation is that the child remains in the custody of the Masts, despite the ongoing harm being inflicted upon her.
These court documents, which were filed under seal during the summer, are part of a contentious custody battle over the child who was rescued by U.S. forces in 2019 from the wreckage of a military raid.
During his time as an attorney in Afghanistan, Mast, who was on a short assignment, encountered a baby in a U.S. military hospital and immediately felt compelled to bring her home.
However, the Masts and the baby’s Afghan relatives, who are currently engaged in a legal battle to regain custody, have been strictly prohibited from discussing the case publicly, and their lawyers have chosen not to comment on the matter.
Nevertheless, in previous court filings, Mast’s legal representatives have asserted that he and his wife acted in good faith, going to great lengths and making significant personal sacrifices to safeguard the baby and provide her with a nurturing and loving home.
Until now, the involvement of the federal government in this case has remained largely undisclosed, leaving much to speculation.
The government filings reviewed by the AP only offer a glimpse into the extensive collection of documents, transcripts, and exhibits that are currently sealed, leaving the public uncertain as to when they will be made accessible.
In January, the Associated Press (AP) took legal action to unseal a case that involved the adoption of a young girl by a couple named the Masts.
Despite the Virginia judge’s initial agreement to unseal the documents, nine months have passed and they still remain secret.
The response of the Masts to the court filings made by the Justice Department is unknown at this time. The Justice Department argued that the girl should be returned to her Afghan relatives, asserting that the Masts had convinced a local circuit court judge, Richard E. Moore, in 2019 that the child, who was thousands of miles away, was the “stateless” daughter of foreign fighters from an unknown neighboring country.
They also claimed that the Afghan government intended to waive jurisdiction over her. A year later, Moore, who has since retired, made the adoption permanent.
However, the Justice Department contended that the child was never truly “stateless” and that the Afghan government did not relinquish its claim over her.
They further alleged that the adoption orders were obtained fraudulently by the Masts, who knowingly made false representations before the Virginia courts.
According to Virginia law, anyone with physical custody of a child must be given an opportunity to be heard in an adoption case. However, the Virginia court failed to notify the U.S. government of Mast’s custody petition, as argued by the Justice Department.
At the time, the baby was in the custody of the U.S. government and receiving treatment at a military hospital in Kabul.
The Afghan government was actively searching for relatives, and they were able to locate an uncle who reported that the girl’s father, a farmer, had been killed in a raid, along with his wife and five other children.
The recently disclosed documents have shed light on the fact that concerns regarding Mast’s actions and the court’s decisions had reached the highest echelons of the Trump administration.
In February 2020, when the U.S. Embassy was collaborating with the Afghan government to reunite the child with her surviving relatives, Mast made unsuccessful attempts to impede the process by asserting that the Afghan family was not biologically related to the child.
Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signed a cable to the embassy in Kabul, highlighting the flaws in Mast’s custody order from Fluvanna County and questioning the jurisdiction of any American court over an Afghan child.
Pompeo’s cable expressed the State Department’s apprehension about the perception of the U.S. government detaining an Afghan child against the wishes of her extended family and the Afghan government.
According to a State Department declaration attached to the court filings, the Red Cross facilitated the child’s reunion with her Afghan family, who were overcome with emotion upon meeting her.
Over the following 18 months, the child was raised by a young newlywed couple, her cousin and his wife. The Justice Department declined to comment on the matter, while the State Department referred the Associated Press to a previous statement affirming that it had acted appropriately by supporting efforts to locate the girl’s surviving relatives and reunite the family in Afghanistan.
In a heart-wrenching tale that unfolded against the backdrop of a war-torn Afghanistan, the story of the Mast family and the Afghan child they took into their care has captivated the nation.
The Afghan family, who had nurtured and protected the child through her arduous journey of recovery from severe injuries, found themselves at odds with David Mast, a U.S. servicemember stationed in Afghanistan.
Mast, driven by his conviction that the child would receive better medical care in the United States, relentlessly pursued the family, offering promises of assistance and specialized treatment.
However, his actions were later revealed to be misleading, as he manipulated the chaos and confusion surrounding the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
With the Taliban taking control, Mast exploited the situation to orchestrate the evacuation of the Afghan family, falsely asserting that he had the clearance to bring the child to safety.
It was during this chaotic period that Mast managed to obtain custody of the girl, with the unwitting help of federal employees who were unaware of the flawed nature of his claim.
The child has remained in the custody of the Masts ever since, despite the subsequent voiding of the adoption by Fluvanna County Circuit Court Judge Claude Worrell.
The judge, while acknowledging the government’s complicity in the matter, expressed his frustration at the conflicting actions of various federal agencies.
The Marine Corps Special Operations Command, to which Mast is assigned, has fully cooperated with ongoing federal investigations, including those conducted by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.
The Biden administration, in its legal filings, has argued that the prolonged delays and the narrative surrounding the case have had a detrimental impact on America’s reputation on the global stage, particularly in Afghanistan, where the perception of the United States as a place where Afghan children can be forcibly separated from their families without recourse undermines U.S. foreign policy interests.
As the legal battle continues, the fate of the child hangs in the balance, while the repercussions of this complex and deeply troubling case reverberate both domestically and internationally.