Issues of US foreign policy traditionally become one of the key factors during US presidential races. Such a fixation on global politics is quite natural for the only superpower. Both the election camp of the Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton, and supporters of the Republican candidate Donald Trump actively use foreign policy topics to discredit their political opponents.
For example, Trump accuses Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton of creating the Daesh terrorist group, and strongly criticizes the nuclear deal with Iran and the Middle East policy as a whole, for which the former US Secretary of State Clinton is largely responsible. The Democrats, in turn, strongly criticize Trump for his friendly remarks about the Russian President, for the time when he jokingly appealed to Russia with a request to find the 30 thousand missing emails of Clinton, as well as for his readiness to consider the abolition of the anti-Russian sanctions. However, the focus of the election battles has been shifting from Russia to Iran over the past days.
In January of this year, Iran transferred four American citizens (including Washington Post reporter Jason Rezayan), who were in Iranian prisons, to the US. This event became a diplomatic victory for Barack Obama and allowed to strengthen the Democratic administration's positions on the Iranian issue. However, as it turned out later, the situation is not so clear. As the Wall Street Journal reported, a few hours after the release of US citizens a private plane with $400 million on board landed in Iran. The US authorities had to confirm this information. Officially, this is money that the US government had to return to Iran. When Shah Reza Pahlavi ruled in Iran, the country ordered and paid for US weapons in advance. The Iranians did not receive it even after the Islamic Revolution. After that, the international court in The Hague ordered the United States to return all the money to Iran. But this is just the legal side of the issue. In the heat of the American presidential race it is easy to present this as even "a ransom for hostages", paid to the country, which, according to the classification of American foreign policy, is a part of "the axis of evil". Republican candidate Donald Trump did not miss his chance to attack the Democratic administration, presenting it as the side that showed weakness, succumbed to blackmail and paid a ransom.
The press-service of the US State Department dealt with this situation quite clumsily. In the beginning of August, the US Secretary of State John Kerry himself has categorically denied the assumption that there is connection between the release of Americans and return of $400 million to Iran. However on August 19, State Department spokesman John Kirby has acknowledged the connection between these two events. According to Kirby, it would be "foolish and irresponsible" to return money to Iranians before the release of American citizens.
Of course, this situation can also be reviewed from Iranian perspective. Is it legal to demand the release of Iranian citizens (all four prisoners had dual citizenship), arrested for spying, as a leverage, using the issue of return of $400 million? After all, the US had to return money either way, due to the verdict of international tribunal. It seems that Americans made an excellent deal, returning the money that they already had to return, while achieving the release of four civilians. Iranians became "victims" of blackmail in this case due to difficult economic situation, which required money as soon as possible. In fact, it was Tehran that made a concession, by transferring people, condemned for espionage on behalf of the US, to get its own money back. And it is high likely that ultra-conservative circles of Iran will blame "reformer" Hassan Rouhani for this deal again and again.
