EU Lands More Sanctions On Iranian Officials

In his weekly media briefing, spokesman Nasser Kanaani repeated the Iranian regime’s narrative of “decades of crimes” by the United States.

“Iran’s approach to America emanates from their hostile behavior, and as long as America’s behavior does not fundamentally change, it is natural that Iran’s attitude toward America remains the same,” Kanaani announced.

He was speaking in the context of improving relations with neighboring countries and reports of secret talks and even an ‘understanding’ with the United States.

The reality that Tehran and Washington have been holding mediated talks in Oman, Qatar and even having direct contacts in New York is all but certain. Numerous media reports and statements by Israeli officials have pointed to a possible unwritten deal, whereby the US would allow the release of Iran’s frozen funds in exchange for some temporary restraint in uranium enrichment.

The Biden administration has denied any such “interim deal” but few believe that some kind negotiation is not taking place behind the scenes.

Kanaani also added that Tehran does not link its foreign policy and pursuit of national interests to relations with any one country or one issue, referring to the United States and the dispute over its nuclear program.

However, Kanaani also spoke about exchanging prisoners, an issue that Washington has hinted is a subject of talks and can reduce tensions and possibly open the way for more agreements.

The Iranian spokesman said that the United States should free Iranian citizens that “the American regime has jailed based on various false excuses related to violating sanctions.” Kanaani said that US sanctions in essence are illegal, and Iran has been trying for years to free these prisoners.

The Iranian regime is currently holding three American dual-nationals hostage based on trumped-up charges of spying and after bogus trials without due process of law. On the other hand, individuals arrested in the US for violating sanctions have received the benefits of full and transparent trials.

Kanaani claimed that in the past and in different periods certain agreements were reached with Washington through intermediaries but when it came to implementation the US was not ready to make decisions. He confirmed that currently talks are taking place with the help of parties that have “goodwill” in this regard, but “we need to see if America is ready to make decisions or not.”

Earlier this month, the Biden administration allowed Iraq to release $2.7 billion it owed Iran for energy imports – part of a larger amount in Iraqi banks. This was seen as a gesture to reach a deal on prisoners, but so far nothing has been finalized.

It is not clear if the released funds will be made available to Tehran in cash US dollars or in credits that Iran can use to import food and medicine. No details were announced about the $2.7 billion released by Iraq. South Korea holds another $7 billion and apparently the unresolved issues in prisoner exchange revolves around these funds and how Iran can access the money.

At the same time, it is perhaps inevitable that release of the frozen funds and exchange of prisoners become entangled with the nuclear issue, especially if an interim deal is being discussed.

Secretary General of Germany's Liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP) Bijan Djir-Sarai criticized the meeting of European Union foreign policy official Enrique Mora with Iranian Deputy Foreign minister Ali Bagheri-Kani, who is also Tehran’s chief nuclear negotiator.

The two met this week in Qatar and discussed the chances of reviving the 2015 JCPOA nuclear agreement. Iran’s nuclear program is fast advancing with a high level of uranium enrichment.

In a tweet on Friday, Djir-Sarai called the meeting “wrong and shameful”, saying there is a need to adopt a new strategy in this regard, not to stabilize the Islamic Republic.

There have been reports of an intention on the part of the United States to offer financial incentives to the Islamic Republic in return for a freeze on uranium enrichment at 60-percent purity. Critics argue that a partial agreement, not totally limiting Iran's enrichment, but giving billion of dollars to the regime is abad idea, because it will enable further adventures and strengthen its military.

His reaction was to Enrique Mora's tweet, in which he referred to intensive discussions with Bagheri-Kani in Doha, saying that “For the EU, JCPOA is the best possible, if not the only, framework to address the legitimate non-proliferation concerns of the international community on the Iranian nuclear program.”

Before Djir-Sarai, Norbert Röttgen, a member of the German Parliament, criticized the government for negotiating with the authorities of the Islamic Republic in Abu Dhabi.

By publishing the answer of the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs to his question about this meeting, Röttgen said "Now we can see why the inclusion of the IRGC in the list of terrorist groups is not progressing."

“What do you think it was about when the E3 [UK, France, Germany] and the regime [officials] came together? My tip: The atomic program and the JCPOA,” he said in a tweet.

Iranian activists and their supporters in the West have been campaigning for months to convince European countries to designate the Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. The United States took that step in 2019.

In a letter, the German Foreign Ministry said the representatives of the three European countries that are JCPOA signatories met with Ali Bagheri-Kani in Abu Dhabi on June 12, but the federal government does not comment on the details of the confidential talks.

Earlier, Stephanie Liechtenstein, an independent Vienna-based journalist, quoted her sources as saying that this conversation focused on issues such as the Islamic Republic's nuclear program, military support for Russia's war in Ukraine, and the situation of foreign prisoners.

Recently, in an exclusive report, the Washington Post revealed the three demands of the Biden administration from the Islamic Republic, which were raised during the indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran, claiming that such demands do not include the "revival of the JCPOA".

Negotiations on restoring the nuclear deal signed in 2015 between Iran and world powers (JCPOA) stalled last year. The US officials have repeatedly said their focus is not on the JCPOA negotiations any longer, but Washington is rather focused on the Islamic Republic’s suppression of its people and Tehran’s military support for Russia in the invasion of Ukraine.

The move by the Financial Action Task Force will further isolate the Islamic Republic from international financial markets and banking system.

“In June 2016, Iran committed to address its strategic deficiencies. Iran’s action plan expired in January 2018. In February 2020, the FATF noted Iran had not completed the action plan,” said the watchdog in a statement.

In October 2019, the FATF called upon its members and urged all jurisdictions to require increased supervisory examination for financial institutions based in Iran; introduce enhanced reporting of financial transactions.

“Now, given Iran’s failure to enact the Palermo and Terrorist Financing Conventions in line with the FATF Standards, the FATF fully lifts the suspension of counter-measures and calls on its members and urges all jurisdictions to apply effective counter-measures,” the group’s 39 members said in a statement after a week-long plenary session.

Iran’s previous government submitted legislation to parliament in 2017 to adopt laws to implement FATF’s standards, but the hardliners have since prevented the final approval of the laws.

Opponents argue that if Iran accedes to FATF demands it will not be able to provide financial help to allied groups in the region that are part of Tehran’s “axis of resistance”.

These groups, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah and some Palestinian militant organizations, are designated as terrorists by some countries and act as proxy forces to help the Islamic Republic spread its influence in other countries.

Masoud Daneshmand, member of the board of directors of the Center of Transport Institutions said Saturday that most of Iran's shipping vessels are sanctioned and as a result they are inactive.

“The Shipping Company of the Islamic Republic of Iran is under sanctions, and all ports must obtain permission from the US Treasury to accept Iranian ships. If a port does not receive permission from the OFAC, they will be subject to secondary sanctions,” noted Daneshmand.

He further added that some countries like India and South Africa have obtained licenses to accept the Iranian ships, but it should be noted that they cannot berth in all the ports.

In March, the United States imposed new sanctions on Iran-linked shipping and petrochemical companies, including two shipping firms based in China.

The sanctions also targeted 20 shipping vessels linked to firms in China, Vietnam and the United Arab Emirates, the Treasury Department's website showed.

The sanctions were issued under a 2018 US executive order that restored sanctions targeting Iran's oil, banking and transportation sectors.

In 2019, OFAC issued an advisory to alert persons around the world that are involved in shipping petroleum or petroleum products from Iran.

“These shipments create significant sanctions risk for entities and individuals in the shipping industry, including shipping companies, vessel owners, managers, operators, insurers, and financial institutions,” read the advisory.

In December 2021, the head of Iran’s Trade Promotion Organization, Alireza Peyman-Pak, signed an agreement with Sri Lankan Minister of Plantation, Ramesh Pathirana, according to which Colombo would barter tea in monthly instalments of $5 million to settle a $251 million debt to Iran because it cannot transfer money to Iran due to the US sanctions on Iranian banking.

"This is very timely for us because we get access to an important market and both Iran and Sri Lanka can trade without relying on dollars," Sri Lanka's Tea Board Chairman Niraj de Mel told Reuters.

"The agreement was to send $5 million worth of tea each month for 48 months but we plan to start with about $2 million per month."

According to the agreement, Sri Lanka’s Treasury will release equivalent of $5 million in rupees every month to the Sri Lanka Tea Board - a state-run industry regulator– that will then pay individual exporters in rupees at the central bank’s exchange rate.

“This scheme will not violate any UN or US sanctions since tea has been categorized as a food item on humanitarian grounds while none of the blacklisted Iranian banks will be involved in the equation,” read a statement by Sri Lanka’s plantation ministry.

Iran is among the top 10 importers of Ceylon Tea for the past several decades although purchases have declined following US sanctions.

Iran has been trying to increase barter deals amid sanctions. “We have the lower hand, and we have to make concessions, which means we have to accept any goods at any price”, Hamidreza Salehi, a member of Tehran’s Chamber of Commerce, has said.