Did the US pay 'cash for hostages' to Iran?

In January, Tehran released five American prisoners in exchange for seven Iranians who had been detained in the US for violating sanctions. Now the transfer has been hit with accusations of President Barack Obama's administration paying "cash for hostages".

What happened?

On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that a US delivery of $400m (£304m) in cash - "wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies" - arrived at Tehran airport on 16 January - the same day Iran released five US prisoners. The report prompted hawks such as Republican senator Tom Cotton to accuse Obama of paying a "ransom to the ayatollahs for US hostages".

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

But the US doesn't pay hostage ransoms, does it?

Officially, no. Obama said precisely that at a news conference the day after the story broke. "This wasn't some nefarious deal," he told reporters.

US Secretary of State John Kerry had earlier said: "The United States [...] does not negotiate ransoms."

So the cash and the hostage release was just a coincidence?

You could say that. The payment was part of a $1.7bn (£1.29bn) settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran over a failed arms deal signed just before the fall of the Shah in 1979. It just happens that the weekend of the payment saw formal implementation of a landmark nuclear deal between Iran, the US and other global powers.

What's the problem, then?

With the US presidential election just three months away, the story has inevitably acquired additional political momentum. Republican contender Donald Trump tweeted that it was a "scandal" for Hillary Clinton, his Democratic rival, who started the talks that produced the nuclear deal - although the agreement was concluded under John Kerry.

Cotton said it "put a price on the head of Americans".

What else are critics saying?

As well as being a long-standing bete noire of the US, Iran is a regional power and a player in several conflicts in the Middle East. "Cash is an excellent way to pay terrorists, fund Hezbollah in Syria and the Houthis in Yemen, and buy dual-use, nuclear-related hardware," says the Wall Street Journal.