The White House on Tuesday rejected the idea that the United States paid a ransom to free five Americans held hostage by Iran.
Washington did pay Tehran $1.7 billion on the same day the Islamic republic said it would finally free the hostages, but White House spokesman Josh Earnest said that was to settle a long-standing claim against the U.S.
Before Iran’s Islamic revolution in 1979, the U.S. accepted $400 million from its secular government as payment for military equipment, Earnest explained Tuesday. However, once students overran the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took scores of American diplomats hostage, Washington refused to ship the hardware, and also never returned the money.
Iran went to the International Court at The Hague to seek damages, and the two countries have haggled for years over how much Washington owes Tehran. Earnest said the U.S.-led agreement between Iran and six world powers to curb its nuclear weapons program opened a channel of communication between Washington and Tehran that allowed a settlement to be reached.
Implementation of the nuclear agreement is allowing the two nations to resolve outstanding issues, such as the monetary claim and the hostages, as well as avoid new flashpoints, such as could have flared up after Iran detained 10 American sailors, Earnest said.
“[T]he successful resolution of our concerns about Iran’s nuclear program created a series of diplomatic opportunities for the United States that we’ve had capitalized on,” he said.
The corresponding timing of the claims payment and hostage release “is not a coincidence” Earnest said, but also does not represent a ransom payment. It’s a sign of “deeper diplomatic engagement” that is allowing the two capitals to close the books on unresolved issues, Earnest said.
“And we used that opening, and we used that deeper diplomatic engagement to secure the release of five American citizens who were being unjustly held inside of Iran, and we used that diplomatic opening to resolve a long-standing financial claim,” he said.
Iran was seeking billions in interest payments but settled for roughly $1 billion, Earnest said.
“[T]his ends up being a very good deal for taxpayers,” Earnest said. “The Iranians were actually seeking $7 billion to $8 billion in interest payments. And I think that’s an indication of how the interests of taxpayers were very well served by reaching the summit.”
Earnest added that critics of the Obama administration’s willingness to resolve several issues at once are being myopic.
“[I]f our critics disagree with that, then they should have the courage to stand up and say so, and say that it would be better for the United States, for those individuals, those innocent Americans, to remain in an Iranian prison,” Earnest said. “If that’s what they believe, they should have the courage of their convictions to say so.”
As for those who said he wasn’t hard enough on Iran last week when it detained American sailors who had strayed into Iranian waters, tough talk instead of diplomacy wouldn’t have won them release anymore quickly, Earnest said.
“That has not prevented our critics from making rash claims about the president’s weakness,” Earnest said. “But I actually think that the president’s willingness to absorb those claims and pursue tough principled diplomacy is probably the strongest endorsement of his strength and toughness that you could look for.”
