The FATF, whose recommendations are strongly pursued by the Rouhani administration, is one such version. Over the past three decades, the political current within the Islamic Republic of Iran has always sought to coordinate its macroeconomic policies with economic-political institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in order to engage with the international community. Apart from the fact that the United States has an effective influence and will in the decision-making mechanism of these institutions, by examining the experience of other countries in implementing the recommendations of these institutions, it can be seen that these recommendations not only did not lead to progress and development, but also spread discrimination and gaps. Wealth and wealth among the strata of society have increased poverty in these countries. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is one of the economic-political institutions founded by the 7th Economic Group in Paris in 1989. The FATF’s mission is to provide policy and executive advice to countries’ financial constituencies and to classify countries according to their own standards in order to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The FATF divides countries into two countries with strategic weaknesses in the financial system (the so-called gray list) and non-cooperating countries against which countermeasures must be taken (the so-called black list). But the FATF came to the fore at a time when the United States was imposing a new generation of unilateral sanctions, which it called crippling, in 2009 and 2010. In fact, the FATF became one of the most important stages in the development of advanced banking against Iran, Russia, and North Korea.
FATF, a political entity
The politicization and politicization of this institution is due to the fact that among the 37 decision-making members of this institution, there are some countries that are themselves prominent sources of money laundering, financing, terrorism and dissemination. Although there is ample evidence that the Saudi government has funded ISIS, it is not only not on the blacklist, but is a member of its decision-making body. The Zionist regime, which the United Nations acknowledges has international gangs involved in human trafficking, drugs, prostitution and money laundering, is another member of the decision-making body. The United States is also a decision-maker and founder; According to UN definitions, the US action in the assassination of Martyr Haj Qassem Soleimani in Iraq is a sovereign terrorist act. In addition to these centers that are known in the world as money laundering centers; The UK and Canada are among the FATF decision-makers. Interestingly, the Pakistani military, as the country’s highest security body, has been identified by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the FATF as hostile institutions, given its political and political behavior. Another key issue that validates the FATF’s policy decisions is its decision-making process. According to the FATF, decision-making in this body is based on effective consensus, and this is why the output of FATF decisions is more often political than expert. As a proof in this regard, we can refer to the black list (countries of FATF action), in which Iran and North Korea have been present since the beginning of this list; Countries that are considered rebellious under the new US order.
The Rouhani government has tried to remove Iran from the blacklist by implementing the action plan recommended by the FATF, but the FATF decision-making mechanism prevented Iran from being removed from the body’s blacklist. The Iranian Ministry of Economy said in a statement regarding the FATF Summit dated February 1-8, 2018 in Paris: “In this summit, positive steps have been taken and despite the heavy atmosphere created by the United States and some of its regional allies, a few weeks before the summit “Returning the counter-action against Iran, the members of this group decided to extend the suspension of the counter-action against the country, which started on June 7.” The statement continued: “Although this decision is positive in general and is a remarkable success in the field of economic diplomacy for our country, but there is still the belief that with the measures taken, the name of the Islamic Republic of Iran should be completely “This list will be removed.” In a statement, the Ministry of Economy stated that with the measures taken by Iran, the FATF should have removed Iran from its blacklist, but this did not happen due to the sabotage of the United States and its regional allies (Israel and Arab countries). Nevertheless, it is questionable why the Rouhani government continues to insist on following the FATF recommendations. The FATF in its statements does not promise to remove Iran from the black or gray list and postpones the decision in this regard to the next step.
FATF and its ratio
With US sanctions
According to the President himself, the restrictions imposed by the sanctions are much greater than the FATF; These statements contradict the volume of the government’s persistent efforts to follow the FATF recommendations and do not seem logical; According to Laia Junidi, the Vice President for Legal Affairs, Hassan Rouhani recently received special permission from the Supreme Leader of the Revolution to extend the consideration of the FATF bills in the Expediency Council.
On the other hand, in the statement of the authorities, it seems that the FATF and its countermeasures are considered a parallel to the sanctions. The authorities think that by implementing the FATF demands to remove Iran from the blacklist of this institution, they can curb one of the currents of economic pressure on Iran. According to US Treasury officials responsible for enforcing the sanctions, the FATF is a coherent, convergent and complementary stream to US sanctions. In this regard, we can refer to several statements from both the Democratic and Republican factions.
“The FATF needs to be fully present to put Iran in a tight spot and make things more difficult for the country,” said Juan Zarate, deputy director of counterterrorism and financial crime at the Obama administration’s Treasury Department to better explain the FATF’s position on pressure on Iran. ».
“We, through the Financial Action Task Force (FATF),” We are working to raise awareness of the risks posed by Iran’s deceptive activities and the lack of transparency in Iran’s anti-money laundering and terrorism financing mechanisms. “In October 2009, the FATF issued its seventh statement on Iran, emphasizing its call on the territories to take effective countermeasures to protect their financial sectors from these risks.” “We constantly warn governments and corporations around the world that they need to strengthen their networks against illegal actors,” Seagal Mendelker, the Trump administration’s assistant secretary of the Treasury, told the FDD think tank on how the FATF requirements work.
“These warnings are either through strong action that we take, or through bilateral or multilateral government interaction, or through the FATF, or through interaction with the private sector.”
Asked by Sen. Williams what steps could be taken to prevent the IRGC from circumventing sanctions, Marshall Belangesley, the US Treasury Assistant Secretary of State for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, answered a question from Senator Williams in the fall of 1997: Pressure on the Iranian government One of the things they (Iranians) need to do is establish a legal framework and be accountable for stopping the financing of terrorism. They do not have enough laws and I do not know if they would have obeyed those laws or not? But they do not have this legal framework, and we insist so much that they pass and implement anti-money laundering laws. “We must take action against their financial sector.” Billingsley’s remarks came just days after the TF Convention acceded to the Tenth Assembly.
The Trump administration’s Treasury Secretary, Steven Manuchein, also stated in July 2017 that the United States was seeking through the FATF to find and block ways to circumvent sanctions.
The FATF recently (October 2020) added new amendments to its recommendations on diffusion financing. “We have seen North Korea and Iran establish networks and networks of shell companies in the territory of many FATF members to circumvent US and UN financial sanctions,” the US Treasury Department said in a statement on the new FATF amendments. And access financial assets and move them to advance their dangerous goals. While the United States has already issued a Prospective Financing Risk Assessment Guideline, and US financial institutions and other businesses generally assess and reduce the risk of circumventing sanctions on Iran and North Korea, identifying and disrupting these advanced networks is a global challenge. Is. With these new amendments to FATF standards, territories around the world, financial institutions and other affiliated institutions are arming themselves with targeted financing risk information that could identify cover companies and other individuals or entities on behalf of individuals. “They are acting prohibited, it should be used.”
A review of all these statements and declarations shows that FATF standards seek to prevent sanctions from being circumvented by creating transparency in the financial territories of countries and to act as a weapon in the service of the US Treasury Department as the economic war room against the Iranian nation. Therefore, the implementation of these standards inside the country means self-sanctions, and consequently has no result other than “American nobility and control over Iran’s foreign trade.” Statements made by government officials after Iran was blacklisted by the FATF in March 2017 show that they are aware of the FATF’s policy and the FATF’s low impact on Iran’s financial relations, but the problem is that government officials see a bigger picture in front of them. Where there is no path other than digestion in the neoliberal American order. The government is pursuing a project that, in the midst of an economic war, means surrendering war plans to the enemy. An action that is in clear contradiction with the independence and dignity of the country.