184

U.S. and Qatar agree to not release Iran's $6B (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The U.S. and Qatari governments have agreed to block Iran from accessing any of the $6 billion it gained access to as part of a prisoner swap deal between the Biden administration and Tehran last month, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo told House Democrats on Thursday, according to three sources familiar with his remarks, two of whom were in the room.

Punchbowl News was first to report on Adeyemo's comments.

The decision comes as the administration faced bipartisan pressure to block Iran’s access to the money as U.S. officials continue to investigate whether Iran had any direct involvement in Hamas' terrorist attack on Israel. The Biden administration has said the $6 billion in unfrozen Iranian oil assets could be used by Tehran only for humanitarian assistance.

The money was transferred last month from a South Korean bank to a bank in Qatar. Iran could only access the money through a series of steps, including oversight by the Treasury Department, administration officials have said.

all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago

Were the prisoners transferred?

[-] aegis_sum@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Yup

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago

While I understand the intent, it leaves me worried on goodwill for any future prisoners.

[-] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Yep, I'm betting Iran is going to take a "Pepperidge Farm remembers" approach to discussion in the future.

[-] DaMonsterKnees@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Both valid points and something not considered on my part. Thank you.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah that’ll go as well for us as them doing the inverse went for them

[-] brianorca@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

But what's to say they weren't waiting until the deal went through before giving Hamas the green light?

[-] steebo_jack@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Wouldn't go to Iran anytime soon cause i bet they looking for new prisoners...

[-] crawley@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Doesn't Qatar harbor Hamas leaders...??

[-] skozzii@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago

This seems like more of a Trump move. I don't like Iran, but a deal is a deal.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I bet that deal had generic terms in it like "all parties will promote peace through their actions" blah blah blah. If you violate the spirit of an agreement, it's off. It's not just the words that count.

Remember that this deal happened while both parties are supporting opposite sides in Russia's attack on Ukraine. Both Iran and the US are very careful to not be directly involved in the fighting, they just provide weapons.

A Hamas spokesman indicated that Iran was directly involved in planning this attack, further inflaming the situation in Palestine. That's why Iran is being investigated: because they are directly increasing the violence. Plus even providing weapons to non-state actors is a big no-no in international relations.

[-] Why9@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Plus even providing weapons to non-state actors is a big no-no in international relations.

Isn't the US the world's largest exporter of weapons? How is this different?

It just feels like next time they simply won't do prisoner swaps or will demand the payment upfront.

Once the prisoners are swapped, the deal should be done. That they took a while to hold the money in escrow and then were witness to the Israel incident should have no bearing on this deal since the deal was complete?

Genuinely curious here; I've no horse in this race!

[-] TigrisMorte@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Terms are in place and being followed.

[-] probablyaCat@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

This is why my pimp always makes me get paid up front.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hezbollah getting a phone call from the supreme leader. 😄

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. and Qatari governments have agreed to block Iran from accessing any of the $6 billion it gained access to as part of a prisoner swap deal between the Biden administration and Tehran last month, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo told House Democrats on Thursday, according to three sources familiar with his remarks, two of whom were in the room.

The two sources in the room said Adeyemo did not give any timeframe for how long the U.S. and Qatar agreed to block Iran’s access to the money.

The Biden administration has said the $6 billion in unfrozen Iranian oil assets could be used by Tehran only for humanitarian assistance.

Iran could only access the money through a series of steps, including oversight by the Treasury Department, administration officials have said.

But there was growing pressure on the White House to send a clearer message that Iran would not access the money.

It's unclear how halting Iran's access to the $6 billion may affect the administration’s efforts to negotiate future deals for the release of other wrongfully detained Americans.

The original article contains 321 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 44%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023

184 points (97.4% liked)

World News

38970 readers

2657 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.