US says it’s willing to lift certain sanctions Trump imposed on Iran

‘All’ 1,500 sanctions added by Trump must be lifted for Iran to resume compliance, the country said

<p>The Biden administration has opened the door to lifting Trump-imposed sanctions against Iran that are “inconsistent” with the 2015 nuclear deal</p>

The Biden administration has opened the door to lifting Trump-imposed sanctions against Iran that are “inconsistent” with the 2015 nuclear deal

The Biden administration has opened the door to lifting Trump-imposed sanctions against Iran that are “inconsistent” with the 2015 nuclear deal, but also those that prevent Iran from accessing broader economic benefits under the agreement, according to a senior State Department official.

The formulation, offered after a first round of indirect talks between Iran and the United States this week, is designed to break a roadblock between what Iran has demanded and what the administration is prepared to give for both to return to compliance with the accord.

The official described the talks as “businesslike” and the atmosphere as “very constructive.” Discussions are expected to resume in the middle of next week.

At Iran’s insistence, there was no direct communication between the Iranians and the US delegation headed by President Joe Biden’s special envoy Robert Malley. Messages were carried back and forth by other participants in the nuclear deal - Britain, Germany and France, as well as Russia and China.

“If they don’t want to sit down with us, too bad for them,” the official said. “It’s just going to be harder for them to get what they want.” The official briefed reporters on the talks on the condition of anonymity, under rules set by the State Department.

The official described the negotiations as “complicated,” and said the initial round had centred on the specifics of what each side is prepared to do to return to compliance with the agreement, from which president Donald Trump withdrew three years ago.

“We did not submit a list. We exchanged ideas about the principles that would guide any sanctions on the US side. Iran did not submit a list either,” the official said. Since the US withdrawal, Iran has increased the quantity and quality of its enriched uranium, far exceeding the limits imposed by the 2015 agreement. It has activated more sophisticated centrifuges, all of which would have to be decommissioned and placed under verifiable seal.

But the situation is far more complicated for the United States.

While the original text lifted specific sanctions that had been imposed related to Iran’s nuclear activity, it also broadly invited Iran back into the international economic community, so that it could trade and seek foreign investment without worry that the United States would threaten or impose sanctions on those conducting business with it.

Sanctions related to other aspects of Iran’s behaviour - alleged terrorism sponsorship, support of proxy wars and development of ballistic missiles - were not lifted by the original agreement, and not prohibited in the future.

But when Mr Trump withdrew from the agreement, he not only reimposed all the sanctions that had originally been lifted but also added over 1,500 more. Many were not labelled as nuclear-related but as punishment for terrorism or other activities.

Included among them were Iran’s Central Bank and other financial institutions, which were called terrorist entities. Trump administration officials were fairly open at the time that this was done to make it harder for a successor administration to simply return to the agreement by lifting “nuclear” sanctions.

“The United States retains the right to impose sanctions for non-nuclear reasons,” the official said. “We’ve made clear, publicly, to the Iranians indirectly, our view is that all sanctions inconsistent with the [deal] and benefits that Iran expects” from the agreement, “we are prepared to lift if Iran comes back into compliance.”

“That doesn’t mean fall of them,” the official. “There are some legitimate sanctions even under a very fair reading” of the accord.

The administration has undergone what the official said was a “painstaking effort to determine which need to be lifted. . . . The label itself doesn’t always give the answer. We have to keep in mind that there was a purposeful and self-avowed effort” by the previous administration “precisely with the political intent to make it hard for any successor that wanted to go back in to do so.”

Iran’s position heading into the new talks is that “all” sanctions imposed by Trump must be lifted before it will return to compliance. “If Iran sticks to the position that every sanction since 2017” must be removed, the talks will remain at an “impasse,” the official said.

“All Trump sanctions were anti-JCPOA” and “must be removed,” Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif tweeted Friday, using the initials for the nuclear pact.

Iran also said Friday that it had released a South Korean ship seized three months ago and released its captain, easing at least one source of tension between Tehran and Washington.

Iranian forces intercepted the South Korean tanker in the Persian Gulf in January, alleging it was captured for “technical” reasons related to environmental pollution, while also complaining that Seoul had frozen $7bn (£5.1bn) of its assets to comply with US sanctions.

It was unclear to what extent Iran’s move was linked to the talks in Vienna. But Iran’s demand for access to its frozen funds is part of broader negotiations over the revival of the nuclear deal between Tehran and six world powers.

Iran has in the past strongly hinted that access to its funds in South Korea might be the kind of goodwill gesture that would break the deadlock with the United States. The money would pass through Switzerland and be restricted to purchases of humanitarian goods such as medical devices, Iranian officials have said.

A South Korean Foreign Ministry official said Friday that “we firmly expressed our willpower to solve issues related to the frozen funds.” The official, who was not authorized to be named, said South Korea’s “efforts were communicated to Iran and could have positively influenced the final decision to release the seized vessel.”

But the State Department, while saying it was “pleased” with release of the ship, said in a statement that “the United States has not authorized the release of the Iranian funds frozen under sanctions and being held in South Korean banks.”

The European Union, which is hosting the talks, said in a statement that Iran and the other signatories to the deal - excluding the United States - held formal meetings Friday that “took stock of the discussions held at various levels” over the past days. It said that European coordinators would continue separate contacts with all participants until they reconvene next week.

Washington Post

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in