Republicans are accusing President Obama of playing word games by refusing to give a straight answer on whether he's trying to provide more sanctions relief to Iran, a move lawmakers say is unlawful and violates commitments Obama made when he sold the Iran nuclear deal to Congress.
Both Obama and the State Department have denied that the administration wants to ease restrictions that keep Iran out of the U.S. financial market. But lawmakers and others say those denials aren't the whole truth, and that officials appear to be preparing steps aimed at helping Iran conduct some dollar-denominated transactions in order to boost its economy.
As long as Iran continues to capture American hostages, fire ballistic missiles and fund terrorism around the world, Pompeo said, the administration cannot be making additional concessions to Iran, including "those that put U.S. banks at risk and undermine the integrity of the international financial system."
"The American people are tired of the president's vague and empty words," he said. "President Obama must stop caving to Iran and start working with Congress to stand up to the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism."
The State Department offered strong hints Monday that the administration is looking for ways to give Iran access to dollar-dominated transactions through non-U.S. banks, and insisted that this step wouldn't open up the U.S. financial market to Iranian business transactions, which would violate U.S. sanctions law.
But officials haven't provided concrete details about what they're planning. As a result, critics argue the administration is intentionally misleading Congress, and is planning moves that will allow it to say it isn't technically violating the law.
Obama himself has created some of the discomfort Republicans are feeling. On Friday, Obama flatly denied reports of a new concession by saying, "The administration has not been and is not planning to grant Iran access to the U.S. financial system."
Other hints dropped in the last few days are giving some members reason to worry that Obama will make certain changes that they say go against the Iran agreement.
"Based on the president's track record of sidestepping Congress and failing to be honest about his Iran policy, there is still a strong fear that the Obama administration is being deceptive about its intentions to lift financial restrictions on Iran," Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, told the Washington Examiner Monday.
But seconds later in the same remarks, Obama said the U.S. and its allies are taking steps to help Iran benefit from the nuclear agreement, including facilitating business transactions for the Islamic Republic.
"Some of the concerns that Iran has expressed, we are going to work with them to address," he told reporters at a press conference following a nuclear security summit.
A spokesman for Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., dismissed the administration's series of explanations as verbal gymnastics that cover up the president's true intention of circumventing U.S. sanctions law to help Iran's economy.
"Actions speak louder than words. The administration has played the pied piper so many times it has lost all credibility on Iran in the eyes of Congress and the American people," spokesman David Pasch told the Examiner. "I wish President Obama spent half as much time encouraging companies to do business in the United States as he does shilling for Iran's IRGC-dominated economy."
"Western companies have to make the determination themselves whether or not they want to make their employees and shareholders complicit in funding terrorism," he added.
Since the Iran nuclear agreement's implementation, which started in January, Iranian officials have complained that the sanctions relief they were promised is not providing its economy a big enough boost because of the common international practice of trading in dollars and the U.S. trade embargo on Iran. Most major international transactions, especially in oil and gas, are conducted in U.S. dollars before being converted to another currency.
Opponents dead set against any effort to allow Tehran to do business in U.S. dollars say that allowing any foreign banks to engage with Iran would be a deceptive way to circumvent the law. They also argue the move would give Iran an illegal sanctions-relief windfall without Congress' approval.
"The administration is playing word games between 'the Iranians' and 'Iranian banks,' and between 'access' and 'direct access,' and so on," said Omri Ceren, managing director of the Israel Project. "But ultimately, this new concession gives Iranian firms the ability to chain their way to the dollar in order to boost their business, which is the opposite of how the deal was characterized to Congress, and lawmakers know it."
"This offshore dollar-clearing scheme is in direct conflict with the spirit of the explicit commitments made by Congress," added Mark Dubowitz, executive director of the non-partisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies. "It is a too-clever workaround to circumvent those commitments and to greenlight the greenback for the world's state sponsor of terrorism."
The critics point to statements administration officials made in the months leading up to the July deal and even after the ink was dry, promising not to allow Iran to engage in "U-turn" transactions involving U.S. dollars or have access to American banks in any way.
"Iran will not be able to open bank accounts with U.S. banks, nor will Iran be able to access the U.S. banking sector, even for that momentary transaction, to, what we call, dollarize a foreign payment," Adam Szubin, Obama's acting Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes, said Sept. 16 in a keynote address before the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"It was once referred to as a U-turn license, and Iran was allowed to make such offshore-to-offshore payments that cross U.S. banking sector thresholds, for just a second. That is not in the cards. That is not part of the relief offered under the [agreement]," he added.
A month earlier, in written testimony to the Senate Banking Committee, Szubin suggested that under the nuclear deal, Iran would still be isolated from all transactions involving U.S. dollars.
"For example, Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York, hold correspondent account relationships with U.S. financial institutions, or enter into financing arrangements with U.S. banks," he said. "Iran, in other words, will continue to be denied access to the world's largest financial and commercial market."
Szubin's predecessor, David Cohen, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee a year earlier that the trade embargo and other non-nuclear related sanctions would be left in place under the deal, and Tehran would continue to be precluded from using the dollar in any of its international business deals.
"Broad limitations on U.S. trade with Iran remain in place, meaning that Iran continues to be shut out of the world's largest and most vibrant economy and precluded from transacting in the dollar," he told the panel.
After the U.S. and other world powers forged the deal in July, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew tried to reassure the House Foreign Affairs Committee that punitive non-nuclear sanctions that fall outside the scope of the agreement, such as the trade embargo, would still remain in place, and spoke of a "broad prohibition" to denying Iran access to the U.S. market.
"Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York, hold correspondent account relationship with U.S. financial institutions, or enter into financing arrangements with U.S. banks," he said. "[In] short, Iran will continue to be denied access to the world's principal financial and commercial market. The [Iran nuclear agreement] provides only minor exceptions to this broad prohibition."