Recently, the United States Treasury Department has included Mir Rahman Rahmani, the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the previous government of Afghanistan, Ajmal Rahmani, a member of the House, and 44 related companies in several European and Asian countries in the sanctions list. The reason for this is the extensive cross-border corruption committed by the Rahmanis. The U.S. Treasury Department has claimed that the Rahmanis had a complex plan contaminated with corruption in the procurement department as they sold the fuel needed by the former Afghan army at a high price while refraining from paying taxes. They are also reported to have abused the special customs exemption for NATO forces. The ministry has also noted that Mir Rahman paid millions of dollars in bribes to other representatives to get the presidency. It was further stated that Ajmal Rahmani bribed the election commissions with nearly two million dollars to win the lawyer’s seat to increase the number of his votes. However, in response to the decision of the US Treasury Department, the Rahmanis called it against international standards and principles, stating, “The financial report of all the contracts, which definitely and completely rejects the accusations, is available and will be presented to the competent authorities immediately.”The dissemination of the news of Rahmani’s ban has brought about numerous reactions, both praise and criticism. Those who welcomed it argue that the previous government officials were allegedly corrupt and should be punished, no matter by which institution and government and in what way. Those who did not welcome it state that the action of the US government at this time is more political than a genuine effort to eliminate corruption. This faction hopes that corruption professionals should not be dealt with selectively and that everyone’s cases should be dealt with regardless of political considerations.
If, according to the US Treasury Department’s report, the Rahmanis have committed extensive cross-border corruption, it was at a time when NATO forces led by this country had a strong presence in Afghanistan. Therefore, the question that arises is Why has the US reopened the Rahmani case two years and several months after its withdrawal from Afghanistan?
- It seems that the decision of Joe Biden’s government was made more to deviate public opinion in this country and enter the election realm victoriously. This is because it is under severe pressure due to the hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan, with some of its officials constantly summoned by Congress, especially the House of Representatives. Even former and current US military officials have repeatedly criticized the hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan, which is considered a military defeat by the Taliban and Washington’s rival countries. Now Joe Biden’s government may intend to prove by sanctioning the Rahmanis that the withdrawal of America from Afghanistan is not the cause of the collapse of everything and the return of the Taliban to power, rather the financial corruption of the previous government officials played a more effective role. This means that Joe Biden wants to remove responsibility and declare the Taliban’s return to power to be affected by internal factors, not by the factors that his work team brings to the field. The reason why the Rahmanis were targeted in the beginning is because they have abundant capital and were involved in large contracts during NATO’s presence in Afghanistan.
- Earlier, the US Treasury Department also sanctioned two senior officials of the Taliban group: Mohammad Khaled Hanafi, the Taliban Minister for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, and Fariduddin Mahmood, President of the Academy of Sciences. The US has sanctioned these two important members of the Taliban because of human rights violations, resulting in the reaction of Zabihullah Mujahid, the Taliban Spokesperson, stating that pressure is not effective. The coincidence of these two events appears significant, and perhaps a special purpose is hidden behind it: maintaining the balance between the Taliban and non-Taliban forces, not necessarily opposing and anti-Taliban). It is explicit that the Taliban will be happy with the sanctioning of Rahmanis and will tell the people that the previous government officials were allegedly immersed in corruption and should not return to power. What indicates this claim is the good relationship between America and the Taliban. Washington has not only reopened its embassy in Kabul but has continued to provide indirect financial support to the Taliban. For example, in the last two years, this country has sent nearly two billion dollars in the name of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, which has inadvertently contributed to the strengthening of the Taliban.America’s dual policy is notable. On the one hand, it selectively sanctions two Taliban officials, regardless of whether it pays attention to its effectiveness or ineffectiveness, on the other hand, Thomas West, the US Special Representative for Afghanistan, engaged in talking with Suhail Shaheen, the Taliban Head of the Political Office in Qatar. Surprisingly, by publishing an article on X, Shaheen called the purpose of meeting with the American official an attempt to integrate Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule into the SWIFT banking system, which, if implemented, will be another privilege given to this group. If the US Treasury’s statement against the Rahmanis is true, public opinion will welcome it, but West’s collusion with Shaheen will make it infertile.
- Perhaps, some people and institutions may have influenced the US Treasury Department to make such a decision. For example, following the escape of Mohammad Ashraf Ghani, the former Afghan President, it was reported that he allegedly transferred the amount of 169 million dollars abroad with him. However, this has yet to be proven so far and even this has been investigated by the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). Ashraf Ghani and his lawyer did not answer the questions of this office. Perhaps, groups and institutions are involved in instigating the lawsuit against the Rahmanis, so that the case of Ashraf Ghani’s transfer of money out of Afghanistan will be sidelined and eventually forgotten.This does not mean that the Rahmanis are not corrupt. We are not talking about the authenticity of the Rahmani corruption case, we are talking about the time frame of its disclosure. More importantly, Ghani’s government did not have a good relationship with the House of Representatives, whose head was Mir Rahman Rahmani, having clashes on numerous occasions. For example, it was reported that the government at that time supported Rahmani’s rival to become Speaker of the Parliament. Additionally, Rahmani had repeatedly announced his support for the establishment of the interim government; something that Ghani never wanted to embrace, considering its supporters as his enemy. In this case, maybe the work on this case started years ago, and it has just come to light.The important thing about the decision of the US Treasury Department is that the sanctioning of Rahmanis is not the last stop, but a good beginning. The faces of those who destroyed the 20-year opportunity by looting people’s assets should be exposed regardless of political and ethnic considerations. This is what the people of Afghanistan want. If the sanctioning of the Rahmanis is the final action of Joe Biden’s government, it will undoubtedly be considered political. For example, had Rahmani spent millions of dollars to become the Speaker of the House of Representatives, his rival might have done the same, maybe even more. It is also reported that his opponent was supported by the government of the time. Major cases such as the Kabul Bank scandal, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Promote project, imaginary schools, and others require comprehensive, fair, and non-political investigation, which will be welcomed by the people of Afghanistan, and the culture of exemption will also fade over time.