Mediaboss Marketing

The Obama administration admitted Thursday that a $400 million cash payment to Iran in January was contingent on the release of American prisoners being held in the country while still denying that the payment was a ransom.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said that the negotiations to return the money originally from a 1979 failed military equipment deal made between Iran and the U.S. were conducted separately from negotiations to free the four prisoners.

The four detainees who were released on January 17 were Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian; former U.S. Marine Amir Hekmati; Christian pastor Saeed Abedini and Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari, whose case had not been publicized before the release.

However, Kirby said that the U.S. withheld the cash delivery until Iran made good on its promise to release the prisoners.

In basic English you are saying you wouldnt give [Iran] the 400 million in cash until the prisoners were released, correct? asked a reporter at Thursdays State Department briefing.

Thats correct, Kirby responded.

The new details, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, added to criticisms from Republicans that it was a ransom paid by the Obama administration. Kirbys admission only served to add fuel to the controversy.

What the State Department admitted today was the dictionary definition of a ransom payment and a complete contradiction of what they were saying just two weeks ago, RNC Spokesman Michael Short said in a statement. Its time for the Obama White House to drop the charade and admit it paid a ransom to the worlds leading state sponsor of terrorism.

"If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. If a cash payment is contingent on a hostage release, it's a ransom, said Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. The truth matters and the President owes the American people an explanation."

Earlier this month, after the revelation the U.S. delivered the money in pallets of cash, the administration flatly denied any connection between the payment and the prisoners.

"Reports of link between prisoner release & payment to Iran are completely false," Kirby tweeted at the time.

"This wasnt some nefarious deal," Obama said during an August 4 press conference. "We do not pay ransom for hostages."

The agreement was the return of the $400 million, plus an additional $1.3 billion in interest, terms that Obama described as favorable compared to what might have been expected from a tribunal set up in The Hague to rule on pending deals between the two countries.

Abedini has claimed that he and the other hostages were kept waiting at an Iranian airport for more than 20 hours before their departure. Abedini said he was told by a senior Iranian intelligence official that their departure was contingent on the movement of a second plane.

State Department officials denied Abedini's claims to the Journal, saying the delay was due to issues locating Rezaian's wife and mother, who accompanied him on the flight.

According to the Journal, GOP leaders say they plan to hold hearings on the payment next month, when Congress returns from its summer recess. Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wis., chair of the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, last week sent letters to the Justice and Treasury Departments, as well as the Federal Reserve, requesting more information the transaction.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Read the original:
US says $400M to Iran was contingent on release of prisoners

TEHRAN, Iran (AFP) It is Irans answer to the Academie Francaise, keeping the Farsi language safe from the corrupting influence of foreign words. Its latest, unlikely target: something called Nutella Bars.

The state-run Academy of Persian Language and Literature has imposed a number of changes in recent years, particularly aimed at curbing the intrusion of English.

Its success has been varied.

Most people now use the Farsi word balgard (meaning spinning wings) instead of helicopter.

But practically no one except perhaps newsreaders on state television calls their fax machine a durnegar (meaning distant message-receiver), or uses rayaneh (organizing machine) when they mean computer.

The Academys latest target has caused some bafflement: a popular chain of waffle and crepe cafes called Nutella Bars after the Italian hazelnut and cocoa spread in which they smother their snacks.

Nutella (Courtesy)

The authorities said the signs must change. They are very strict about it, said a staff member at one branch, asking not to be named.

To the amusement of many on social media, the Academy suggested the chain rename itself Hot Bread, Hot Chocolate in Farsi.

Unfortunately, places called Nutella Bar have recently been spreading in Tehran, wrote the head of the Academy, Golamali Hadad Adel, in a letter to police last month.

In these shops, chocolate is served with special bread and ice cream. The Academy proposes the use of Hot Bread, Hot Chocolate for these shops.

Several branches around Tehran have already taken down the original logos, although they do not appear keen on the Academys name suggestion.

One branchs half-hearted effort seemed somewhat tongue-in-cheek, opting for the meaningless Nubella Art.

Technically, shops in Iran are banned from using foreign names, though this is widely flouted and newcomers are often surprised about the amount of English used alongside Farsi in public spaces from street signs to billboards to shop fronts.

Given the many unlicensed Levis, Apple and IKEA stores in Iranian cities all operating without permission from the official companies in the isolated Islamic republic it is not clear why the Nutella Bar chain was targeted, though some have suggested the word bar may be part of the problem in a country where alcohol is illegal.

But despite a random and occasionally clumsy approach from the Academy, experts say its work is important.

Farsi has been under continuous pressure for centuries, including by Arabic, said Mohammad Ali Zamani, a historian at the Kharazmi University in Tehran.

At times, its decisions are not carefully considered but the Academy is seeking to preserve the creativity of our language, he added.

The Academy has its roots in the 1920s, when king Reza Shah ordered the replacement of many Arabic and French words that had entered common usage, although merci is still used today to express thanks.

The Arabic script came to Iran along with Muslim conquerors in the seventh century, but Iranians held firm to their distinctive Indo-European language, Farsi.

Many thank epic 10th century poem The Shahnameh (The Book of Kings) by master poet Ferdowsi who refused to use any Arabic words in the poems 60,000 verses for helping to preserve the language.

Arabic has become much more officially accepted since the Islamic revolution of 1979, with the countrys clerical leaders often proudly sprinkling their speeches with the language of the Quran.

But battling Western lingo has continued.

Fighting Westernization has deep historical roots, said Zamani.

It is vital to preserve the Persian language for its historical richness and the treasure of its literature.

Go here to read the rest:
Iran's language watchdog goes to war against 'Nutella Bars ...

Barack Obama's administration acknowledged for the first time today that a $400 million payment to Iran was used as "leverage" in the release of several American prisoners.

Earlier this year, when White House announced that Americans had been freed from Iran, it also said that a separate, decades-old financial dispute over the sale of U.S. weapons to Iran had been settled, resulting in a $1.7 billion payment.

The first installment of that payment came in a $400 million cash delivery made up of euros and Swiss francs. State Department spokesman John Kirby said today that payment was withheld on Jan. 17 until just after the five American prisoners were released, including Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian.

Because we had concerns that Iran may renege on the prisoner release ... we of course naturally ... sought to retain maximum leverage until after the Americans were released, Kirby said today. It would have been foolish, imprudent and irresponsible for us not to try to maintain maximum leverage. So if youre asking me Was there a connection in that regard in the endgame? Im not going to deny that.

But that statement appears to directly contradict previous lines from the administration early this month, after The Wall Street Journal broke the news that a cash payment coincided with the prisoner release. One of those statements came in the form of a tweet from Kirby saying explicitly the two actions were not linked.

On the same day, State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner also attempted to shoot down any suggestion of a link. The idea that this was all orchestrated as part of some kind of quid pro quo is just not accurate.

The White House, too, was issuing vigorous denials of any quid pro quo.

Despite this new description, the White House and State Department maintain that the payment does not amount to a ransom. The administration has argued that paying ransom is against U.S. policy and that the money already belonged to the Iranians, independent of the situation with the prisoners.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus isn't buying that.

Its time for the Obama White House to drop the charade and admit it paid a $400 million ransom to the worlds leading state sponsor of terrorism," Priebus said in a statement to ABC News. President Obama has foolishly put a price on the head of every American abroad, and it should be no surprise that Iran has since detained more U.S. citizens.

Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska also issued a statement today after the comments from the State Department. If it quacks like a duck, its a duck. If a cash payment is contingent on a hostage release, its a ransom. The truth matters, and the president owes the American people an explanation.

Read more:
$400M Iran Cash Payment Used as 'Leverage' in Prisoner ...

State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters on Aug. 18 that negotiators had deliberately leveraged Irans desire to get a $400 million payment from a decades-old arms deal to ensure authorities would not renege on freeing three Americans in January. (U.S. Department of State)

The State Department acknowledged Thursday that it delayed releasing a $400million cash payment to Iran in January until it was assured that a plane carrying three released American prisoners had left Tehran.

State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters that negotiators had deliberately leveraged Irans desire to get its money from a decades-old arms deal to make sure the authorities there would not renege on freeing three Americans. They were flown out Jan.16, the same day the nuclear agreement between Iran and six world powers was implemented.

We felt it would be imprudent not to consider that some leverage in trying to make sure our Americans got out, Kirby said, noting the deep mistrust between the countries.

Kirbys remarks marked the first time the administration has acknowledged there was any degree of linkage between separate negotiations for the release of five Americans, including two who left Iran independently, and money paid to Iran in foreign currency piled onto pallets aboard an Iran Air cargo plane in Geneva.

Kirby insisted, however, that there was no quid pro quo of money for prisoners.

We dont pay ransom, he said. Rather, he added, there were opportunities we took advantage of, and as a result we got American citizens back home.

Mark Dubowitz, executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a critic of the deal, called the State Departments admission the very definition of ransom.

They can continue holding Americans against their will until the next White House cash payment, he said. It is a dangerous precedent, and one that puts all Americans abroad in danger.

The $400million flown to Iran that day was the first installment in a $1.7billion settlement, part of a long-standing dispute over an arms deal that fell through when the shah was overthrown in 1979. The total, which has since been paid in full, represented money that Iran had paid for military equipment that was never delivered, plus interest and inflation over 37 years.

But critics have said the carefully choreographed payment was, in effect, a ransom paid in violation of U.S. policy intended to discourage hostage-taking.

Many Republicans in the House and Senate who opposed the nuclear deal with Iran initially suspected that the payment was ransom for the freed Americans, who included Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. But a firestorm over the trade was reignited this month when the Wall Street Journal reported that the money had been paid in cash around the time of the prisoner release.

On Aug.3, the day the news broke, Kirby tweeted: Reports of link between prisoner release & payment to Iran are completely false.

In an Aug. 4 news conference at the Pentagon, President Obama said the $400 million that the U.S. paid Iran in January 2016 was never a secret. (Reuters)

On Thursday, however, Kirby said, The events came together simultaneously.

Given the fact Iran had not proved completely trustworthy in the past, it would have been imprudent and irresponsible to not hold that money up, he said.

The State Department has not given a precise timeline of when the cash was delivered to the Iranians and when the flight bearing the money took off from Geneva. The flight carrying the freed Americans was delayed leaving Tehran, in large part because U.S. officials had trouble locating Rezaians wife and mother so that the women could also fly out of Iran with the freed men.

Kirby also announced yesterday that an internal review is inconclusive about what or who deleted an embarrassing chunk of video from a news briefing over the administrations talks with Iran.

Kirby said the Office of the Legal Adviser interviewed more than 30 current and former State Department officials trying to determine why there was a sudden flash of light and an eight-minute gap in the video of a 2013 news briefing. The State Department acknowledged this year that there was an unexplained cut made just at the point when a Fox News reporter asked whether the administration had lied about secret talks with Iran.

Initially, the State Department blamed the deletion on a technical glitch. Then, three weeks later, it said the excision had been deliberate. Now, after three months of investigation, Kirby said that it was not clear what happened, or how, and that it may have been a glitch after all.

Were not sure if it was done with intent to conceal or due to a technical problem, he said. Bottom line, it was inconclusive.

See the original post:
Money paid to Iran was leverage not ransom, State ...

Istanbul, Turkey Russian strategic bombers launched from Iran struck rebel positions in Syria on Wednesday, in a second day of attacks that multiply Russian firepower in the Middle East and underscore unprecedented military cooperation between the Islamic Republic and a foreign power.

The Kremlin says the Tu-22M3 bombers attacked targets of the so-called Islamic State (IS) and other factions in Syria that oppose President Bashar al-Assad, an ally of both Moscow and Tehran.

The closer cooperation serves both to target opponents of Mr. Assad some of them backed by the United States while also sending a sharp message to the US as fighting over the divided city of Aleppo reaches a critical point after five years of inconclusive civil war.

Irans decision to openly allow foreign troops on its soil for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the first Russians since World War II is testament to its desire to achieve strategic gains and ensure that the high cost of its involvement in the Syrian war, including the loss of more than 400 Revolutionary Guard troops and a number of generals, not be in vain.

For Russias part, its decision to use the Shahid Nojeh military airbase in western Iran underscores its calculation that bolstering its nearly year-long overt military intervention which began dramatically with Russia airstrikes launched from a base in the Syrian coastal town of Latakia can help tip the battlefield in Assad's favor.

Perhaps just as significantly, the high-profile move allows both nations to ease their isolation, imposed by the US and the West, while spreading their regional influence through the use of hard power.

It means that keeping Assad in power is very important for Iran, and for Iranian hardliners too, since they are allowing an infidel military on their sacred territory, says Pavel Felgenhauer, a defense columnist for Novaya Gazeta in Moscow.

The Iranian and Russian strategic intent in Syria seems much closer than the Russian and American strategic intent in Syria, says Mr. Felgenhauer, referring to an earlier agreement by the US and Russia to seek a negotiated solution. I was a bit surprised that the Russian defense ministry so promptly [acknowledged] that we are in Iran. The Russian military tends to be secretive, so that was a political decision to demonstrate to the world that Russia and Iran are militarily together.

Since last November, Russias strategic bombers have had to fly from an old Soviet airbase at Mozdok in southern Russia.The 650-mile distance to Aleppo from Mozdok is not much shorter from the western Iranian base near Hamedan, as the crow flies. But Russian planes must skirt Turkey, and targets in eastern Syria and also anywhere in Iraq, should Russia eventually choose to take on IS targets there are significantly closer from Iran.

Flying out of Iran, therefore, enables Russian jets to carry full payloads of 24 metric tons more than the maximum for the longer run from Russia, notes Mr. Felgenhauer.

That is of course significant, because since they are carpet bombing Syria, the more bombs you take, the more land you cover, he says. Right now at this pivotal point in the battle for Aleppo, it is very important that Russia has drastically increased bomb-carrying capability, to bring the bombs to the Syrian opposition.

A top Iranian official said the new arrangement was Syria-specific but also strategic, and a warning to terrorist-supporting countries an oblique reference to the US and its allies, which want to see Mr. Assad removed from power.

While Iran- and Russia-led cooperation had already made life very tough for terrorists, the new expansion will continue until they are completely wiped out, said Ali Shamkhani, the head of Irans Supreme National Security Council, on Tuesday.

Top Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi noted today that Russian planes were only refueling at the base, and that generally, there is no stationing of Russian forces in Iran.

Washington called the move unfortunate and said it pushes us farther away from a nationwide cease-fire and the UN-sponsored political process in Geneva that includes Russia. Earlier this week, Russian defense chief Sergei Shoigu was quoted saying the US and Russia were in a very active phase of talks about the surge of fighting in Aleppo, to start fighting together to bring peace.

US officials would say only that they are in close contact with Russia as they push for a negotiated solution to a war that has ravaged Syria, claimed more than 400,000 lives, and produced nearly 5 million refugees. The US-led air campaign against IS in Syria and Iraq has help reduce territory of the self-declared caliphate by 30 percent, according to the Pentagon.

But while Russian airstrikes have hit IS jihadists, US officials say that many more since last year have struck anti-Assad forces backed openly or clandestinely by the US and its allies. President Vladimir Putin ordered a Russian withdrawal last March, and troops were filmed returning home. But there has been little slowdown since, and on TuesdayRussias defense ministry said it eliminated five weapons depots in the first day of new strikes.

The Russian military presence is sensitive in Iran, where revolutionary ideology since 1979 opposed both US and Soviet influence during the cold war, and categorically, in rhetoric at least, rejects foreign meddling.

Ali Larijani, Irans speaker of parliament, reminded lawmakers on Wednesday that it was forbidden by the Constitution to create a foreign military base, and that Iran had not given the base over to Russia in military terms.

The Iran-Russia cooperation results from the crisis of terrorism that has been created by some destructive countries in the region and America, therefore we think that Russia has found the right treatment for the region, said Mr. Larijani. Top Iranian officials often accuse the US of creating and backing IS and other jihadists fighting Assad, claiming it is a bid to undermine their own Iran-led axis of resistance against US and Israeli influence in the region.

Indeed, the Iran-Russia cooperation is temporary, defined by mutual recognition of the threat of IS, and is not a coalition against a third-party state [such as] the US, Saudi Arabia, or Turkey, says Kayhan Barzegar, director of the Institute for Middle East Strategic Studies in Tehran.

It is true that taking the lead in battling and destroying Daesh [IS] in Syria and Iraq will have broader geopolitical consequences for rival states, but Moscow and Tehran have never wanted to exclude other actors from the Syrian scene, says Mr. Barzegar. Their military cooperation is only aimed at accelerating the political solution and not winning the war in a zero sum manner. Therefore, Washington and its allies, if determined to defeat IS, should not feel concerned [about] possible long-term strategic consequences.

Russia-Iran relations have varied, often pragmatically but sometimes capriciously, according to broader agendas and with an eye to the US. Russia built Irans only nuclear power plant at Bushehr, but finished it years late and with frequent disputes over payments that at times seemed to emerge only when Russia was trying to cozy up to the US.

In the 1990s, Iran refrained from backing Islamist Chechen rebels in their fight against Moscow in the 1990s, even as it supported similar militias elsewhere. Yet Russia repeatedly voted alongside the US to impose UN Security Council sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.

And earlier this year as sanctions over Irans nuclear program eased as part of a July 2015 accord with world powers Russia agreed to sell Iran its S-300 anti-missile system, among many other arms sales. Iranian media reports that substantial parts of the S-300, which is to defend Irans nuclear sites, have already been delivered.

But while both sides have downplayed any greater regional ambitions, others see a larger strategy at play.

There could be more, and the possibility of spreading the Russian air campaign to Iraq," says Felgenhauer. The thing is not about Syria per se. Syria is important, but there is more: Russia wants to spread its influence over the entire region, have bases all over, push the Americans out and become the dominant power in the region."

Please follow Scott Peterson on Twitter at @peterson__scott

See the article here:
Behind Russia-Iran cooperation over Syria, a larger goal ...