The administration of President Donald Trump is trying to maintain a "maximum pressure" policy on Tehran while avoiding a full-scale military conflict. According to media reports, Trump has told aides in private that he does not intend to start a war with Iran unless Iranian attacks lead to the deaths of American soldiers. However, recurring clashes are increasing tension in the White House and call into question the durability of the current ceasefire.
One of Trump's key demands has become the complete absence of direct payments to Iran under any new agreement. The president fears that such a step would be perceived as a "capitulation," especially in light of criticism over the release of $1.7 billion under the 2015 deal. Tehran is now seeking nearly $12 billion, but Washington is adamant — Trump wants an agreement that places the US in a much stronger position than under Obama.
In search of a way out, US officials are considering alternative financial mechanisms that would avoid direct payments while satisfying Iranian demands. One option is to have third countries unfreeze Iranian assets so that these funds would not appear as direct US payments. It is emphasized that the money could be directed exclusively to humanitarian needs — medicines, food, and agricultural machinery via vetted suppliers.
The main condition for any sanctions relief remains Iran's relinquishment of its stocks of highly enriched uranium. The White House insists that economic incentives can be provided only after concrete steps to roll back the nuclear program. This approach is intended to demonstrate toughness to the American audience and prevent a repeat of past "concessions" to Tehran.
At a cabinet meeting Trump made his position clear: "We control their money and we won't give it up until they start behaving properly." Secretary of State Marco Rubio added that "there will be no advance payments," and any sanctions relief would be possible only after Iran meets all the demands. Thus, discussion of nuclear sanctions remains only part of the negotiations, not their starting point.
Comments on the story
Which countries could act as intermediaries for unfreezing Iranian assets and why is their involvement important to avoid direct payments? - Key intermediaries could include Qatar, Iraq, Oman, and Switzerland (through humanitarian channels). Their involvement is important because after the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal in 2018 and the imposition of secondary sanctions, direct financial transactions between the US and Iran became impossible. Intermediaries provide a "gray transfer" mechanism in which proceeds from Iranian oil (for example, held in Iraqi banks) are converted into humanitarian goods (food, medicine) without direct Iranian access to dollar accounts. Qatar has already acted as a financial "channel" in 2020–2023 to transfer $6 billion of Iranian funds in exchange for the release of hostages.
Why does the article mention the $1.7 billion released under the 2015 deal, and what is its background in the context of Iran–US disputes? - That sum is linked to Iran’s claim against the US at the International Court of Justice over frozen assets from a 1970s military contract (before the 1979 Islamic Revolution). In 2015, as part of preparations to implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the US agreed to unfreeze these funds to settle the dispute. However, in 2018 the Trump administration withdrew from the JCPOA and again blocked the payment, creating a precedent of "double freezing" that is often cited in debates about trust in American commitments.
What does the US "maximum pressure" policy on Iran include and what specific measures have been applied against Tehran in recent years? - The "maximum pressure" policy, launched by the Trump administration in 2018, includes: (1) unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA; (2) reinstatement and tightening of oil sanctions (aimed at reducing Iran's oil exports to zero); (3) imposition of secondary sanctions on foreign companies doing business with Iran (including banks, ports, shipping firms); (4) designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization; (5) targeting financial networks that evade sanctions (for example, through Chinese or Iraqi banks). In recent years (2020–2024), measures have been added against Iran’s UAV and missile programs, as well as cyberattacks on Iranian infrastructure (for example, the Bushehr nuclear power plant).
Full version: ضغط بلا حرب.. ما هي إستراتيجية ترمب الجديدة في مواجهة طهران؟