Two Members of the National Guard Shot Near White House in Washington, DC
On November 26, 2025, two soldiers from the West Virginia National Guard were critically wounded in a brazen ambush just blocks from the White House, in what officials are calling a targeted attack. The shooting shocked the capital city, triggered massive security responses, and prompted a swift increase in the deployment of federal troops.
What Happened: Scene, Shootings, and Immediate Response
Eyewitness and law-enforcement accounts state that the two National Guard members were on “high-visibility patrols” near 17th Street and I Street NW, close to the Farragut West Metro Station — an area just two blocks from the White House.
At about 2:15 p.m. local time, a suspect — later identified — reportedly “came around the corner” and opened fire on the soldiers. The attacker used a handgun, discharging multiple shots in what authorities described as an ambush-style attack.
Responding soldiers returned fire, and the suspect was subdued. The suspect was shot during the confrontation and taken into custody. Meanwhile, emergency medical personnel transported all three wounded individuals — the two National Guard members and the suspect — to local hospitals.
Authorities quickly cordoned off the scene. Police, tactical units, and federal protective teams converged — with helicopters seen landing nearby — as the district underwent an abrupt lockdown to investigate and secure the area.
Who is the Suspect: Identity and Background
Law-enforcement sources and multiple media outlets have identified the suspect as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national. Lakanwal reportedly entered the U.S. in 2021 under the resettlement program Operation Allies Welcome, which brought many Afghan evacuees to the United States following the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Sources say Lakanwal had at some point lived in Washington state. As of now, the suspect has no publicly known violent criminal record.
Authorities have described the attack as a “lone gunman” incident; at present, there is no evidence of additional suspects.
Condition of the Guardsmen and Conflicting Reports
Initial reports by a public official indicated that both National Guard members were in critical condition. However, confusion emerged quickly. The governor of West Virginia, Patrick Morrisey, initially stated that both troops had died, then retracted that statement, citing “conflicting reports” about their condition.
As of the most recent updates, authorities have not publicly confirmed fatalities. The hospital treating the wounded has not released names or detailed status updates.
Official Reaction: Government, Security and Deployment Fallout
The shooting quickly escalated into a national security issue. The head of the local police, along with federal agents, described the attack as “targeted.”
In response, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Secretary of War, announced the deployment of an additional 500 members of the United States National Guard to Washington, D.C., at the request of Donald J. Trump. This reinforcement move comes even as a federal court had recently ruled that the broader Guard deployment in the capital was likely unlawful, ordering withdrawal by early December — a decision the administration is now appealing.
Local officials condemned the violence. Muriel Bowser, Mayor of Washington, D.C., called the shooting “a targeted attack” and vowed thorough support for investigation and prosecution.
Meanwhile, the federal investigation — led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) — treats the case as a potential act of terrorism. Agencies are reviewing surveillance footage, shell casings, and other evidence to determine motive, whether the suspect acted alone, and whether the weapon used was legally obtained.
Why This Shooting Deeply Resonates: Context of Guard Deployment and Security Risks
The incident cannot be seen in isolation. The injured troops were part of a large-scale National Guard deployment to Washington — ordered earlier in 2025 under the pretext of addressing rising crime and unrest in major cities.
But that deployment had already been challenged legally. A federal judge recently ruled that using out-of-state Guard troops for general law-enforcement tasks in D.C. likely violates federal law. Withdrawal was ordered by December 11 — a deadline the administration has appealed.
This shooting — an ambush near one of the most sensitive federal buildings in the U.S. — underscores the risks of placing military personnel on domestic patrols. Internal Pentagon memos (revealed during the lawsuit) had previously warned that such a mission “presents an opportunity for criminals, violent extremists, issue-motivated groups and lone actors” to exploit the high visibility and media coverage.
Indeed, critics of the deployment argue that the Guard — designed primarily for external defence and emergency response — is ill-suited for routine domestic policing, especially in high-risk, high-visibility zones like downtown Washington.
Ongoing Investigation: What We Still Don’t Know
Despite the flurry of public statements and troop movements, many vital questions remain unanswered:
- Motive: Authorities have not yet disclosed why the suspect opened fire. No confirmed ideological, political, or personal motive has emerged.
- Legal status of weapon: It is unclear whether the handgun used was legally obtained or previously documented.
- Exact sequence of events: While video and witness reports suggest one of the soldiers fired back, investigators have not publicly confirmed who fired the first shot, nor who shot the suspect.
- Status of the wounded: As of now, authorities have withheld the identities of the injured troops and refused to confirm whether either has died — even as rumours and conflicting local-government statements circulate.
The investigation remains active; law enforcement has urged the public not to speculate until findings are formally released.
Broader Implications: Policy, Security, Immigration, and Public Debate
The shooting’s fallout already extends far beyond the immediate tragedy. The identity of the suspect — an Afghan national admitted through an evacuation and resettlement program — has triggered renewed political debate over immigration, vetting practices, and national-security protocols. Reuters
For the administration, the decision to send 500 more guard troops risks deepening legal and political conflict. Critics argue that reinforcing the controversial deployment ignores the underlying legal ruling and may heighten tensions between federal and local authorities.
For Washington’s residents and daily commuters — particularly those who use the nearby Metro — the shooting has shattered a sense of safety in a zone long considered heavily guarded and secure. The presence of military personnel during routine patrols had already been controversial; now, many question whether such deployments create more risk than protection.
For law-enforcement and counterterrorism agencies, the incident is a stark public reminder: even visible deterrence does not guarantee security when motives, preparedness, and context remain uncertain.
What Comes Next: Key Questions & What to Watch
In the days and weeks ahead, the following developments will be critical:
- Will the government release the names and condition updates of the wounded Guard members, and when?
- Will investigators determine a motive — and will it be deemed an act of terrorism, a lone wolf attack, or something else?
- Will the weapon’s origin and legality be disclosed?
- How will public opinion and political pressure influence further Guard deployments in D.C. or other cities?
- Will federal and local authorities revise security protocols to avoid similar ambushes, especially given the high visibility of the Guard?
The answers to these questions will influence not only the immediate public safety response but the ongoing debate over using military forces for domestic security.
Conclusion: A Shooting That Echoes Beyond the Streets of D.C.
The November 26 shooting near the White House — targeting two members of the West Virginia National Guard — is far more than a tragic, isolated incident. It exposes the brittle intersection of national security, immigration policy, military deployment, and urban policing. The uncertainties still clouding the investigation highlight deeper systemic risks: questions about vetting, about the suitability of deploying military units for civilian patrols, and about whether high-visibility security truly deters or instead invites danger.
As authorities continue probing and the debate unfolds in public forums, one thing is clear: this incident will resonate far beyond the streets of Washington — influencing policy, public opinion, and perhaps the very role of military forces inside U.S. cities.
Subscribe to trusted news sites like USnewsSphere.com for continuous updates.
