2026-06-22T10:30:25.751Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/22/politics/iran-agreement-trump-sanctions-relief
- 唐纳德·特朗普总统、国务卿马可·卢比奥和副总统JD·万斯多年来一直警告称，给伊朗资金会助长恐怖主义。
- 这份谅解备忘录采用了特朗普及其团队曾批评的、被称为会让危险政权变得更富有的相同财政宽松政策。
- 尽管特朗普坚称该协议比前总统巴拉克·奥巴马的伊朗核协议更强大，但多名共和党参议员已公开质疑该协议。
多年来，唐纳德·特朗普总统、国务卿马可·卢比奥和副总统JD·万斯一直反对向伊朗提供财政让步的协议，称给该政权资金会助长恐怖主义。但如今，他们为结束与德黑兰的战争达成的协议，准备向伊朗政权移交数十亿美元资金。
在近十年的时间里，特朗普对前总统巴拉克·奥巴马的伊朗核协议的核心指控很简单：让德黑兰获得冻结资产的使用权，会让危险政权变得更富有，却让美国几乎一无所获。
特朗普现任的国务卿和副总统走得更远，他们作为参议员共同发起立法，辩称伊朗的冻结资金即使有使用规则，也无法安全解冻，因为这些资金最终可能被用于危险用途。
如今，这三人都支持一项协议，该协议明确规定美国承诺有可能解冻这些资金并解除对德黑兰的制裁，但将伊朗核计划的具体细节留给未来的谈判。
政府官员淡化了这份书面文件的重要性，并表示任何资金的流动都将基于执行情况。他们还表示，此次协议的氛围与以往不同，因为美国已经削弱了伊朗的军事实力。
“我们非常有信心，我们将能够查明他们是否试图资助恐怖组织，”万斯周四表示。
然而，签署的谅解备忘录仍然采用了特朗普、卢比奥和万斯多年来一直警告会让他们称之为世界头号国家恐怖主义赞助国的国家变得更富有的相同类型的激励性财政宽松政策。
根据白宫周三正式签署并公布的14点谅解备忘录条款，美国“承诺在本谅解备忘录生效后，全面解冻伊朗伊斯兰共和国被冻结或限制使用的资金和资产”，“终止对伊朗伊斯兰共和国的所有类型的制裁，包括联合国安理会决议”，并立即豁免伊朗石油的销售。
特朗普政府强烈辩称，其协议比奥巴马的《联合全面行动计划》（JCPOA）更强大，尽管许多分析人士和批评人士认为，该协议似乎给了伊朗重大让步。
值得注意的是，包括通常保持沉默的议员在内的多名共和党参议员已公开质疑特朗普伊朗谈判的条款。
参议院军事委员会主席罗杰·威克表示，他“担心谅解备忘录谈判放弃了战争成果”，而3000亿美元重建基金的计划将让JCPOA中的财政激励措施“相比之下显得微不足道”。政府表示，美国不会为该基金出资。
特朗普长期以来一直批评JCPOA，并于2018年让美国退出该协议，其主要原因是该协议让德黑兰获得了制裁豁免和冻结资产的使用权。
在2015年9月——该协议实施前——当时还是总统候选人的特朗普抨击JCPOA，称其将解除“所有与核相关的制裁”，并向伊朗“提供1500亿美元的意外之财，这无疑将在全球范围内资助恐怖主义”。
“看起来我们不惜一切代价都要达成协议，”他写道。
早在2016年，特朗普就辩称，奥巴马在获得更有力的让步之前就解除了对德黑兰的压力，这是一个基本错误。“我们解除了制裁，却一无所获，”特朗普在丹佛的一次保守派峰会上表示，“这就像特朗普的《交易的艺术》第101课。”
“为什么奥巴马总统在谈判前就解除了对伊朗的制裁，而不是先完成成功的谈判再解除制裁？”特朗普在2014年的一条推特中写道。
特朗普还反复辩称，让伊朗获得冻结资产的使用权会让该政权变得更强大，并让他称之为恐怖主义赞助国的政府变得更富有。
在2016年的总统辩论中，特朗普称伊朗协议是“单方面交易”，美国正在“向一个恐怖主义国家——实际上是头号恐怖主义国家——返还1500亿美元”，并补充说，“我们把他们从一个非常弱小的国家变成了一个强大的国家”。
同年早些时候，他在美国以色列公共事务委员会表示，美国“奖励了世界头号国家恐怖主义赞助国1500亿美元，却一无所获”。特朗普反复提及这一主题，2015年他在CNN上表示“我们不应该归还他们的钱”，并在2019年辩称奥巴马“为一份短期协议支付了1500亿美元”。
“我不会在绝望中达成协议。我会加倍、三倍地加强制裁，然后达成一份好得多的协议，”特朗普补充道。
不仅是现任总统，他的内阁成员也批评了JCPOA，以及前总统乔·拜登时期达成的一项协议，该协议将让伊朗获得60亿美元的冻结资产用于人道主义采购，以换取释放五名被扣押的美国人。这些资产在美国人获释后不久被重新冻结，以回应2023年10月7日哈马斯对以色列的袭击。
2015年9月，时任参议员兼总统候选人的卢比奥谴责JCPOA，辩称“伊朗将立即利用其获得的制裁豁免资金开始增强常规战力”，并且“将建立美国以外该地区最强大的军事力量，并推高我们在该地区行动的成本”。
同月，他发布了“每个美国人都应该对伊朗协议感到担忧的十件事”清单。其中四点涉及制裁豁免，包括“获得数十亿美元的制裁豁免后，伊朗将推动恐怖主义并威胁中东地区”的论点。
2023年8月，包括时任参议员万斯在内的26名参议院共和党人致信时任国务卿安东尼·布林肯和时任财政部长珍妮特·耶伦，谴责在被扣押人员协议中使用资金，并表示担忧他们“试图绕过国会，寻求其他途径向伊朗提供财政补偿，试图重新谈判命运多舛的2015年核协议的后续协议”。
“任何与伊朗政权达成的、为其恶意行为提供经济奖励的协议都是完全不可接受的，”他们写道。
2023年12月，万斯和卢比奥共同发起了由参议员蒂姆·斯科特牵头的立法，冻结卡塔尔境内的伊朗资金。该法案辩称，“鉴于资金的可替代性，所谓用于人道主义目的的释放给伊朗的资金无法可靠地阻止其资助未来的恐怖袭击，特别是当伊朗政府明确承认愿意利用所有货币收益来支持其政权的意识形态时”。
一名高级政府官员表示，由于对伊朗的军事行动以及资金解冻的条件，“将这份谅解备忘录的条款与万斯和卢比奥发起的立法进行比较是愚蠢的”。国务院发言人汤米·皮戈特表示，“卢比奥和整个政府与特朗普总统完全保持一致”。
2024年7月，就在万斯被特朗普提名为副总统候选人后不久，他告诉福克斯新闻，如果想要“遏制伊朗”，其中一种方法是“收回他们的石油收入，而乔·拜登在这方面做得很糟糕”。
根据特朗普新谈判达成的谅解备忘录，美国将立即豁免伊朗石油的销售。
Trump’s Iran agreement embraces sanctions relief, a policy he and his team once denounced
2026-06-22T10:30:25.751Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/22/politics/iran-agreement-trump-sanctions-relief
- President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance spent years warning that giving Iran money fuels terrorism.
- The memorandum of understanding embraces the same financial relief approach Trump and his team once criticized as enriching a dangerous regime.
- Several Republican senators have openly questioned the agreement despite Trump’s insistence that it is stronger than former President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.
For years, President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance argued against deals that provided financial concessions to Iran, saying that giving the regime money fuels terror. But now the agreement they’ve reached to end the war with Tehran is poised to hand the regime billions.
For the better part of a decade, Trump’s central indictment of former President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal was simple: Giving Tehran access to frozen assets enriched a dangerous regime and got the United States little in return.
Trump’s current secretary of state and vice president went even further, co-sponsoring legislation as senators that argued Iranian frozen funds could not be safely released because the money, even with rules governing its use, could end up being utilized in a dangerous way.
Now, all three are backing an agreement that spells out US commitments to potentially release those funds and lift sanctions on Tehran but leaves specific details on Iran’s nuclear program to future negotiations.
Administration officials have downplayed the significance of the written document and said the movement of any money will be performance-based. They also have said the atmosphere of this deal is different from previous ones because the US has degraded Iran’s military.
“We have great confidence that we’re going to be able to see if they try to fund terrorist organizations,” Vance said Thursday.
However, the signed memorandum of understanding nevertheless embraces the same type of incentivized financial relief that Trump, Rubio and Vance spent years warning would enrich a nation they described as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
Under the terms of the 14-point memorandum of understanding formally signed and released by the White House on Wednesday, the US “undertakes to make fully available for use the frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon the implementation of this MOU,” “to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the United Nations Security Council resolutions,” and to immediately issue waivers for the sale of Iranian oil.
The Trump administration has vehemently argued that its agreement is stronger than Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, despite many analysts and critics arguing it appears to give Iran significant concessions.
Significantly, a number of Republican senators, including those who typically stay quiet, have openly questioned the terms of Trump’s Iran negotiations.
Roger Wicker, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “concerned that the memorandum of understanding negotiates away the victories” of the war and that the plan for a $300 billion reconstruction fund would make the financial incentives in the JCPOA “look like a pittance by comparison.” The administration said the US would not contribute to that fund.
Trump has long criticized the JCPOA, from which he withdrew the US in 2018, in large part because it gave Tehran sanctions relief and access to frozen assets.
In an op-ed in September 2015 — ahead of the deal’s implementation — then-candidate Trump castigated the JCPOA for the prospect of lifting “all nuclear related sanctions” and handing Iran “a windfall of $150 billion, which will no doubt fund terrorism around the world.”
“It appears we wanted a deal at any cost,” he wrote.
As recently as 2016, Trump argued that Obama had made a basic mistake by relieving pressure on Tehran before obtaining stronger concessions. “We took the sanctions off, we got nothing for that,” Trump said at a conservative summit in Denver. “It’s like 101, Trump, ‘The Art of the Deal.’”
“Why did Pres Obama remove sanctions against Iran prior to negotiating rather than completing successful negotiation & then remove sanctions?” Trump tweeted in 2014.
Trump also repeatedly argued that giving Iran access to frozen assets made the regime stronger and enriched a government he described as a sponsor of terrorism.
During a 2016 presidential debate, Trump called the Iran deal “a one-sided transaction” in which the United States was “giving back $150 billion to a terrorist state — really the No. 1 terrorist state,” adding that “we’ve made them a strong country from really a very weak country.”
Earlier that year, he told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that the United States had “rewarded the world’s leading state sponsor of terror with $150 billion and we received absolutely nothing in return.” Trump returned to the theme repeatedly, saying in 2015 on CNN that “we shouldn’t have given their money back” and arguing in 2019 that Obama had “paid $150 billion for a short-term agreement.”
“I would have made a deal not from desperation. I would have doubled and tripled up the sanctions and I would have made a much better deal,” Trump added.
It was not only the current president, but members of his Cabinet who criticized the JCPOA, as well as an agreement under former President Joe Biden that would have given Iran access to $6 billion in frozen assets for humanitarian purchases in exchange for the release of five detained Americans. Those assets were refrozen shortly after the release of the Americans, in response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel.
In September 2015, then-Sen. and presidential candidate Rubio condemned the JCPOA, arguing that “Iran will immediately use the money it is receiving in sanctions relief to begin to build up its conventional capabilities” and that it “will establish the most dominant military power in the region outside of the United States and it will raise the price of us operating in the region.”
That same month, he published a list of “Ten Things That Every American Should Be Concerned About In The Iran Deal.” Four of the points addressed sanctions relief, including the argument that “With Billions in Sanctions Relief, Iran Will Boost Terror and Threaten the Middle East.”
In August 2023, 26 Senate Republicans, including then-Sen. Vance, sent a letter to then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken and then-Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen denouncing the use of the funds in the detainee deal and expressing concern they were “attempting to sidestep Congress and pursue other pathways to financially compensate Iran in an attempt to renegotiate a successor to the ill-fated 2015 nuclear deal.”
“Any agreement with the Iranian regime that entails financial reward for malign behavior is wholly unacceptable,” they wrote.
In December 2023, Vance and Rubio co-sponsored legislation led by Sen. Tim Scott to freeze the Iranian funds in Qatar. That bill argued that “given the fungible nature of money, funds released to Iran for so-called humanitarian purposes cannot be reliably prevented from funding future terrorist attacks, especially when the Government of Iran has explicitly acknowledged their willingness to use any and all monetary gains to support the ideology of their regime.”
A senior administration official said “it would be moronic to compare terms” of the MOU to the legislation sponsored by Vance and Rubio because of the military action against Iran and the conditions on the release of the money. State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggott said that “Rubio and the entire administration is 100% in lockstep behind President Trump.”
In July 2024, just after becoming Trump’s pick for vice president, Vance told Fox News that “if you want to check Iran,” one way to do it is to “withdraw their oil money, which of course, Joe Biden’s been bad about.”
Under Trump’s newly negotiated MOU, the US will immediately issue waivers for the sale of Iranian oil.
