“We actually had diplomatic negotiations and conversations with Iran for the first time in several decades”, Obama said August 5, meaning “our ability to clear accounts on a number of different issues at the same time converged”.
Advertisement
Of course, the money was already due to Iran – at some point – for an expressly different reason than the prisoner exchange. The shipment of cash wasn’t ransom, in the sense of being a payment that had no objective other than to obtain the release of prisoners.
President Barack Obama first announced the settlement back in January, but Kirby said he could not comment about why Obama didn’t explain the decision about the money’s release back when it happened.
The Republicans are hammering away at what they see as the Democrats’ foreign policy failures with Donald Trump insisting candidate Hillary Clinton will just deliver more of the same, and insisting there are unsafe secrets behind that Iran deal.
“Paying $400 million in hard cash only incentivizes Iran to take more hostages”, Perdue said.
This, he said, was “the only way for the American people to fully known whether their tax dollars went directly to Iran’s terrorist Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps”.
The money comes from an account used by the Iranian government to buy U.S. military equipment in the days of Iran’s shah.
He said nowhere in the discussions about getting the US hostages was there talk about “paying ransom” to get them back.
“We were trying to get our Americans back and we were honest about the fact that it came together at the end of the nuclear deal”, said Kirby.
Last night on CNN, State Department Spokesman John Kirby argued the cash wasn’t a ransom payment because of the order in which the hostages were exchanged.
The Obama administration had earlier denied any connection between the payment and the prisoners. The the two senior administration officials on the call demanded anonymity.
The 1981 Algiers Accord between the US and Iran that set up the tribunal made repayment mandatory, and allowed for either claimant to seize assets in worldwide courts if the other reneged on a ruling, the official said.
However, he maintained that the United States withheld the delivery of the cash as leverage until Iran permitted the Americans to leave the country. Given that interest rates in the early years of the fund were as high as 20 percent, the official said Iran stood to receive a much more substantial award than $1.3 billion in interest.
Mr Kirby added the United States had “concerns” that Iran may recant on its pledge to return the prisoners, which is why it waited to release the payment.
I understand that Iran is holding four American citizens in custody.
“But to me, the real scandal is the Iran deal itself”, he continued.
Representative Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has asked current U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to appear at a committee hearing to discuss the payment.
Advertisement
Some observers, however, said Thursday they don’t see the distinction.
