Experts skeptical of Tehran's claim US will unfreeze $12 billion before talks begin

Experts are casting doubt on claims made by Iranian media that the United States has agreed to release $12 billion in frozen assets to Iran before negotiations commence. Mehr News Agency, a semi-official outlet, alleged that Washington would provide this sum, plus an additional $12 billion over a 60-day negotiation period, citing a purported 14-point memorandum of understanding.

However, Maj. (res.) Alexander Grinberg, an Iran expert at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, expressed little confidence in the Iranian report. He suggested that while he might consider reports of the US conceding more favorable terms after Israel's recent strike on Beirut, the initial claim about asset release lacked credibility. The strike targeted a Hezbollah command center following aerial attacks by the Iran-backed group, an event that reportedly threatened the ongoing negotiations.

Dr. Shany Mor, a senior research fellow at the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, noted that it aligns with the Islamic regime's typical behavior to use Washington's discretion on deal terms to publicize their "wish list" as if they were agreed-upon conditions. Mor emphasized that any favorable terms offered by the US would likely be quickly retractable if Iran fails to uphold its promises or engage in negotiations in good faith.

The timing and conditions of any asset unfreezing are critical, Mor explained. She differentiated between assets being unfrozen at the beginning of a ceasefire before a nuclear agreement is concluded, which she described as "quite a bit graver," versus a partial unfreezing conditional upon reaching agreements within 60 days. Mor also pointed out that the US is not under sufficient pressure to justify agreeing to the terms published by the Iranian regime, noting that the disruption to the Strait of Hormuz had only lightly impacted inflation. While Iran inflicted some costly damage on US interests, the overall pressure may not warrant such concessions.

“

It's important if it's (the deal’s terms) entirely separate or comes with sanctions relief, and it's important at what stage of an agreement it comes. So if the US is, for example, agreeing to unfreeze assets at the beginning of this ceasefire before even concluding a nuclear agreement that's quite a bit graver than, for example, something that would be a partial unfreezing of assets conditional upon reaching agreements in 60 days.