Washington, DC – The US administration has categorically denied Iranian claims that Tehran will receive billions of dollars of its frozen assets abroad before the start of the planned 60-day negotiation phase. This denial came after the signing of a memorandum of understanding with the United States last Friday.
In comments to CNN on Sunday, a senior US official asserted that Iranian claims regarding the unconditional release of $12 billion in Iranian assets were “completely false.” He described the account as a “fabrication” with no basis in reality.
The principle of “action for action”
The official emphasized that the agreement reached by both sides is strictly based on the principle of “action for action” or “payment for implementation.” He explained, “No frozen funds will be released unless the Iranians fulfill their specific obligations under the agreement.” The official also affirmed that any move toward releasing Iranian financial resources is contingent upon Tehran’s full and precise compliance with all the signed terms. He indicated that the US administration will not offer any advance financial concessions.
Conflicting statements
This American denial comes as a direct response to statements by Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who claimed that the next phase of talks depends primarily on Washington fulfilling its commitments. He also emphasized that releasing frozen assets is a key part of these commitments.
These conflicting statements reflect a state of mutual caution between the two sides, each seeking to impose its vision regarding the mechanisms for implementing the agreement. While Tehran promotes the idea of immediate financial gains as part of its understandings, Washington insists on maintaining the financial aspect as leverage. Washington is using this to ensure Iran’s adherence to the negotiating process and its nuclear and security commitments during the next sixty days.
These developments confirm that the diplomatic path between the two countries remains fraught with challenges. Furthermore, the conflicting narratives surrounding the terms of implementation may prove to be the biggest obstacle to translating the initial understandings into concrete action that would end the months-long crisis.
