The US allows banks to move $6bn from South Korea, paving the way for the release of five Americans.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken told Congress that the money would provide “limited benefit” to Iran as it could only be used for humanitarian trade.

He also confirmed that five Iranians detained in the US would be freed as part of the prisoner exchange deal.

Republicans condemned the transfer.

One senator accused President Joe Biden of paying a “ransom to the world’s worst state sponsor of terrorism”.

Last month, US officials said four American-Iranian dual nationals had been taken out of Evin prison in Tehran and moved to house arrest.

Three of the prisoners were named by a lawyer as Siamak Namazi, Emad Shargi and Morad Tahbaz, who also has British citizenship. The fourth was not identified, nor was the fifth, who was already under house arrest.

  • imPastaSyndrome
    186·
    10 months ago

    I was wondering that- so I read the fucking article

    Last month, he stressed that Qatar had agreed to ensure the funds were used by Iran “strictly for humanitarian purposes and in a strictly controlled way”. He also said Iran would not have direct access to the funds and there would be “significant oversight” from the US.

    Wasn’t that hard?

    • Alto@kbin.social
      111·
      10 months ago

      The notoriously unimpechable and not at all corrupt Qatar

      • imPastaSyndrome
        32·
        10 months ago

        With that attitude, I assume that no words will change your mind so why even bother posting other than being sarcastic and pitht and getting fake pats on the back?

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          16·
          10 months ago

          Nah, I just like being hilarious.

          You never bothered to answer my question. How are we guaranteeing that this money is used solely for humanitarian efforts?

          • imPastaSyndrome
            42·
            10 months ago

            You have a lot of work to do, then

            That’s what the “significant oversight” would be, I assume, but again, I don’t expect the words to actually mean anything to you. It’s not going to change your mind having an actual answer, You’re just going to say " yeah but how actually"

            • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
              32·
              10 months ago

              It’s literally the question. A serial human-rights abuser like Qatar and a two-word pinky promise don’t constitute any covenant. You’re being quite disingenuous.

              • SeaJ
                1·
                10 months ago

                Qatar and Iran don’t exactly have the closest of relations. Qatar may have terrible human rights abuses but I’m sure they will be perfectly happy to be strict with money for a country they do not like.