White House defends cash payment to Iran
Money was owed for arms never delivered
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Friday defended its decision to make a $400 million cash delivery to Iran contingent on the release of American prisoners, saying the payment wasn’t ransom because the Islamic Republic would have soon recouped the money one way or another.
In a conference call with reporters, senior administration officials said it made no sense not to use the money as leverage to ensure that four U.S. citizens were freed, especially as Washington was uncertain until their plane left that Iran would live up to its word.
The administration’s defense came after the State Department said the Jan. 17 repayment of money from a 1970s Iranian account to buy U.S. military equipment was connected to a U.S.-Iranian prisoner exchange on the same day. Previously, President Barack Obama and other officials had denied any such linkage.
The acknowledgment drew criticism from Republicans, who declared it evidence of a quid pro quo that undermined America’s long-standing opposition to ransom payments.
“He denied it was for the hostages, but it was,” Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said in a speech Thursday night in Charlotte, N.C. “He said we don’t pay ransom, but he did. He lied about the hostages, openly and blatantly.”
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Obama “owes the American people a full accounting of his actions and the dangerous precedent he has set.”
The money came from an account used by the Iranian government to buy American military equipment in the days of the U.S.-backed shah. The equipment was never delivered after the shah’s government was overthrown in 1979 and revolutionaries took American hostages at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
The Jan. 17 agreement involved the return of the $400 million, plus an additional $1.3 billion in interest, terms that Obama described as favorable compared with what might have been expected from a tribunal set up in The Hague to rule on claims between the two countries. U.S. officials have said they expected an imminent ruling on the claim and settled with Tehran instead.
In a conference call with reporters, two senior administration officials intimately involved with the financial and prisoner negotiations sought to refute what they described as false reports about what happened. They weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter and demanded anonymity.
There was no way Washington could have avoided repaying the money to Iran, one of the officials insisted.
The 1981 Algiers Accord between the U.S. and Iran that set up the tribunal made repayment mandatory and allowed for either claimant to seize assets in international courts if the other reneged on a ruling, the official said. Iran had lived up to its commitment by repaying $2.5 billion awarded for claims by U.S. citizens and companies.