Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1153073096-scaled

Ashraf Ghani was an American mistake with a high price for Afghans

A former parliamentarian says his brother was just one casualty in a corrupt government abetted by Washington for years.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

Following U.S. withdrawal in Afghanistan, on August 31, a group of US-based organizations  — including the Quincy Institute — called for a Congressional inquiry into “the deeper issues that plagued the whole 20 years of America’s war effort and which were at the heart of the rapid collapse of the U.S.-supported government in Afghanistan.”   

This call for a congressional investigation follows requests from Republican lawmakers demanding answers from Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding reports that Afghanistan’s former president fled the country with more than $169 million. The lawmakers note:

It is unclear how President Ghani obtained such a large sum of cash, but the amount and nature of his flight from Afghanistan raises the specter that President Ghani illegally and corruptly embezzled these funds from U.S. assistance intended for the Afghan people’s welfare and defense…It is imperative that corrupt foreign government officials not be permitted to personally enrich themselves with U.S. taxpayer money intended to safeguard the welfare and security of the Afghan people.

U.S. withdrawal has intensified these calls for accountability. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is testifying this week before the House and Senate. But Congressional investigations should be the first step in a complete overhaul of U.S. foreign policy in Afghanistan, one that places accountability at the center of its future efforts — particularly as the U.S. will ostensibly remain an indispensable donor for the Afghans. 

During the last seven years, Washington gave legitimacy to the unconstitutional governments led by Ashraf Ghani, with an agreement initially brokered by former Secretary of State John Kerry. In the last two electionsWashington played a crucial role in backing Ghani, with former principal deputy special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan (SRAP) and acting SRAP Jarret Blanc, noting that “Every Afghan presidential election has been brokered or mediated by U.S. diplomats, though Washington seems to ride in later and later each time.”

Ghani spent his formative years in the United States as both a student and professor. His children still live in the States; in fact his son is a top aide to Sen. Elizabeth Warren and his daughter-in-law worked for now-Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign. But more often than not, U.S. support for Ghani came at the cost of accountability, leading to laxed oversight of Ghani and his administration’s misdoings. Despite the massive leverage that Washington had over the regime due to critical U.S. assistance — funding the majority of the  government’s budget —  it failed to hold Ghani and his administration to task. 

Ironically, Ghani was often at odds with the basic principles and values the United States were trying to promote in Afghanistan, including democracy, human rights, and a free press. His government and the strongmen linked to him pursued abuses with impunity. The targeted killing in November 2020 of my brother Yama Siawash, who was a prominent journalist and a staunch  critic of Ghani and his strongmen, highlights this impunity.

Yama was consistently threatened by Ghani’s supporters as he engaged in heated debates with senior officials on live television, seeking to hold his government to account through his journalism. The car bomb, which killed my brother, occurred in a vehicle owned by the Afghan government and was parked in the government’s parking lot in Kabul’s green zone, a heavily-surveilled premises with footage accessible to the U.S. government via the American army’s surveillance blimps. Following the attack, Ghani’s people showed no interest in conducting a genuine investigation despite the plethora of CCTV footage available there at the time. 

On National Journalists Day, Ghani fled the stage without responding when a local reporter questioned him about Yama’s assassination and the increased targeted killing of journalists. By avoiding a response to the journalist’s question, the president demonstrated his lack of interest in holding his government and other strongmen to account for targeted violence. For this reason, my family and I submitted a complaint to the United Nations to investigate Yama’s killing.

American engagement in Afghanistan does not end with withdrawal. Following the U.S. exit, a much-needed assessment of its foreign policy in Afghanistan is required. It can start by launching an investigation into the large sums of American taxpayer dollars Ghani allegedly embezzled as he fled the country (which he denies). Subsequent actions should include cooperating with the United Nations to work towards justice for victims in Afghanistan. This can be done through sharing the information Washington currently has access to via its surveillance blimp in the green zone to assist with investigating Yama’s killing and others. 

Should the U.S. and the international community continue to fund 80 percent of Kabul’s budget, Washington as a key actor must ensure that any future policy in Afghanistan is based on the lessons learned in the last two decades, with diplomatic engagement hinged on accountability.


Ashraf Ghani, President of Afganistan, during NATO SUMMIT in 2018. (Gints Ivuskans/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means
Top image credit: FILE PHOTO: Afghan Taliban fighters patrol near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border in Spin Boldak, Kandahar Province, following exchanges of fire between Pakistani and Afghan forces in Afghanistan, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Stringer

What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means

QiOSK

Pakistan’s airstrikes on Kabul and Kandahar over the last 24 hours are nothing new. Islamabad has carried out strikes inside Afghanistan several times since the Taliban’s return to power. Pakistan claimed that the Afghan Taliban used drones to conduct strikes in Pakistan.

What distinguishes this latest episode is the rhetorical escalation, with Pakistani officials openly referring to the action as “open war.” While the language grabbed international headlines, it is best understood as part of a managed escalation designed to signal resolve without crossing red lines that would make de-escalation impossible.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.