The legislation also reiterates USA policy not to pay ransom in exchange for hostages.
Advertisement
“Why did the administration go to such great lengths to hide it from the American people?” This was ostensibly done to ensure that the three American hostages in question were released on that self same day.
President Obama originally said there was no connection between the payments and the release of the hostages, but the State Department has since confirmed that it withheld the delivery of that cash until all the hostages were freed. The White House has rejected those claims repeatedly. “We shouldn’t have paid the ransom”.
Earlier Tuesday, officials from the State, Justice and Treasury departments held a closed-door briefing for congressional staff on the payments, according to a Capitol Hill aide familiar with the session. That is also the argument of Republicans, including Donald Trump, the party’s candidate for president. “But those families know that we have a policy that we don’t pay ransom”. He is calling on the Obama administration to be transparent with how American tax dollars are spent.
“If the White House could only send cash to Iran from the start of the JPOA period through the Tribunal payment that could amount to a grant total of 33.6 billion”, he said.
Backemeyer said the State Department’s assessment is that the vast majority of the money is being used to boost the Iranian economy, which has been devastated by the economic embargo by the US and other nations. “Doing so puts more Americans in danger, as President Obama himself admitted”.
The U.S. owed weapons to the Shah of Iran who signed the deal, not the revolutionary government.
The payments to Iran were announced in January alongside the official implementation of the Iran nuclear deal.
Republicans noted that it is unusual to make a payment in cash to another country and that it seemed as though the administration was trying to hide it.
Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short argued that what the Obama administration paid qualifies as a ransom, however. John Cornyn (R., Texas), Mark Kirk (R., Ill.), Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), and Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.).
On Feb. 3, Rep. Edward J. Royce (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, requested “all legal analyses. evaluating the likelihood of Iran prevailing in this dispute” and a “detailed explanation of how the interest payment to Iran of $1.3 billion was calculated”.
“But you know, we didn’t have to get our guys back”, Kirk replied. That forced the administration to admit the $400 million had in fact been used as “leverage” to get the hostages, but officials refused to clarify how the remaining $1.3 billion was transferred. “Kansans expect and demand better from their government”.
Advertisement
The move comes as new details are emerging about just how and when the Obama administration completed the transfer of $1.7 billion to settle claims related to the incomplete sale of military weapons before the Iranian Revolution in 1979.
