The Attack by an Afghan in Washington and the Hidden Arenas of Politics
(Translated)

News:

The armed attack in Washington, D.C. one week ago—in which Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan citizen, is accused of opening fire on two members of the U.S. National Guard—occurred near the Farragut West Metro station, only a few hundred meters from the White House, an area typically protected by some of the strictest security layers. As a result of the shooting, Sarah Bäckström, a 20-year-old National Guard soldier, was killed and Andrew Wolf was seriously wounded.

Comment:

Media reports indicate that he previously served in Afghanistan as part of a CIA-affiliated operational unit, and that after being transferred to the United States he struggled with psychological issues, isolation, and financial pressure—problems that have also been reported among other American intelligence assets. However, deeper ambiguities remain: How did he, despite lacking authorization to carry a weapon, manage to transport a firearm from the state of Washington to the capital? Who—or what mechanism—enabled him to travel for more than 30 hours while armed, in one of the most secure environments in the United States? And why did the attack occur not in his state of residence, but precisely in the political heart of the country? These questions form a significant part of the ongoing debate.

1. The Possibility of Redeploying U.S. Intelligence Assets to Afghanistan Under the Cover of “Deporting Illegal Migrants”

The crisis stemming from this attack could provide the United States with a pretext to recalibrate its intelligence activities concerning Afghanistan. Since losing direct access to human sources inside the country after 2021, any escalation of security concerns related to Afghan migrants could justify initiatives that outwardly appear to involve “managing illegal migrants,” but whose hidden purpose is to send back cooperative or exploitable intelligence assets into Afghanistan.

This pattern has precedent: in the past, the United States has used immigration files, “voluntary returns,” or targeted deportations to rebuild its intelligence networks. Today, the political and media climate is such that a similar scenario—implemented quietly and without formal announcement—seems plausible, especially considering Lakanwal’s background and the sensitivity of comparable cases. The political groundwork for such measures appears to be taking shape.

2. Possible Exploitation of the Incident’s Aftermath by the Jewish State

Amid global protests over the conduct of the Jewish state in the Gaza war, it stands to benefit from any incident involving migrants or Muslims that can be used to intensify anti-immigration policies in the West. Reducing the presence or influence of migrant and Muslim communities in Europe and the United States would ease political pressure on the Jewish state. It believes that widespread protests in the West against the genocide in Gaza are driven by Muslims and migrant populations. In this context, Israel could have a role in such incidents, as the Lakanwal case and its consequences—stricter immigration environments and heightened fear of Muslim refugees—align with its interests.

3. Trump’s Explicit Political Use of the Incident

The response of Donald Trump and the conservative movement in the United States has been direct and unmistakable. He immediately framed the attack as evidence of the “danger of immigration” and called for an urgent reassessment of refugee admissions. Meanwhile, the immigration authorities, citing security considerations, further restricted the review of asylum cases for Afghans and other nationalities.

Facing declining popularity, Trump is using this event to revive a security-focused narrative, mobilize his conservative base, and once again justify anti-immigration policies.

For many in the United States, the incident is being reduced solely to a migration issue, and certain groups have turned it into a tool for Islamophobia. Yet the reality is that Lakanwal is the product of years of participation in deadly and clandestine CIA-linked missions in Afghanistan—missions that shaped him into a war-scarred and violence-affected individual long before he ever became a migrant.

Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by
Saifullah Mustanir
Head of the Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in Wilayah Afghanistan