Rescuing Americans: Biden's Bold Move Takes a Political Toll
Biden's successful negotiation with Iran secures the release of five imprisoned Americans, despite facing political backlash The importance lies in prioritizing the freedom and safety of individuals over political considerations
President Joe Biden's agreement with Iran, which releases $6 billion of Tehran's frozen funds in exchange for the freedom of five imprisoned Americans, is generating negative perceptions and providing an opportunity for his opponents amid his diminishing political strength. However, it exemplifies the challenging predicaments that only presidents encounter while sitting in the solitude of the Oval Office, as they must navigate the delicate balance between humanitarian concerns, geopolitical complexities, and domestic considerations without any straightforward solutions.
The United States, in contrast to well-meaning friends, does not engage in deals to free hostages or Americans who are wrongly detained. Instead, US adversaries such as Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and the Taliban, whom Washington has negotiated with in recent years, drive hard bargains and effectively use political pressure to secure concessions. These concessions can be difficult to justify before a hostile domestic audience.
While there is no perfect solution to free imprisoned Americans, the agreement with Iran, in particular, has caused division. Nonetheless, a president must weigh whether they have the ability to protect detained citizens from the horrors of prisons in countries like Iran and Russia. They must also consider whether it would be negligent to not free these individuals for domestic political or geopolitical reasons or out of fear of empowering US adversaries. Consequently, engaging with US enemies can demonstrate political strength rather than weakness.
Siamak Namazi (R), Emad Sharqi (L), and Morad Tahbaz (C) from the United States arrived at Doha International Airport in Qatar on September 18, 2023. These individuals were among the five American detainees who were released by Iran as part of a prisoner swap. The other two detainees, who chose to remain anonymous, were also brought to Doha. This exchange took place after $6 billion in frozen funds were transferred to Iranian accounts in Qatar. The photograph above shows the moment of their arrival at the airport. (Photo by Karim JAAFAR / AFP) (Photo by KARIM JAAFAR/AFP via Getty Images)
Karim Jaafar/AFP/Getty Images
Five Americans freed from Iran are en route to the US
However, the cost that Biden has paid for bringing five Americans home through a deal facilitated by Qatar has generated a flood of claims from Republicans. These claims align with their narrative that he is weak, losing his critical thinking abilities, and being lenient towards a sworn enemy of the United States. For example, former Vice President Mike Pence plans to criticize the President for an initiative that he believes will "encourage terrorism in the Middle East" and show China that it can benefit from US appeasement, according to a senior campaign official. This criticism persists despite administration officials stating that the frozen Iranian funds used in the deal will only be used for humanitarian purposes.
Criticism from figures such as former President Donald Trump and Pence is politically motivated due to their own presidential campaigns. It conveniently ignores their previous deals that resulted in the freedom of Americans. In 2019, Trump orchestrated a prisoner exchange with Iran to release Xiyue Wang, a US citizen accused of espionage. Additionally, in 2018, Trump personally welcomed back three Americans from North Korea after a deal that seemed like a quid pro quo for a later summit with the dictator Kim Jong Un, which ultimately amounted to no more than a staged photo opportunity. Like Biden's deals, Trump's actions also resulted in the reunification of Americans with their families who had suffered for a long time.
Some critics of Joe Biden will exploit the latest agreement to create political chaos and hinder the administration's efforts to revive the nuclear deal with Tehran that was dismantled by Donald Trump. Republican lawmakers also raise valid concerns about the agreement.
Texas Representative Mike McCaul, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has expressed concerns about the agreement, suggesting that it "provides a direct incentive for America's adversaries to engage in future hostage-taking." While it may be challenging to prove, countries like Iran have historically seen such tactics as fair play in their long-standing confrontations with the US, most notably during the US embassy siege in 1979-80. Similar reservations have been expressed regarding prisoner swaps with Russia, like the one that involved the exchange of imprisoned arms dealer Viktor Bout for WNBA star Brittney Griner last year. Currently, Moscow is engaged in tough negotiations regarding the fate of imprisoned Americans Paul Whelan and Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich.
Whoever occupies the White House and successfully negotiates deals to repatriate American citizens will inevitably face criticism from political adversaries who believe they could have done a better job. This is a common occurrence for those who are not in power and do not bear the burden of leadership. Donald Trump, the leading candidate for the Republican Party, exemplifies this by quickly seizing the opportunity to label the president as "incompetent" and asserting that his agreement with Iran will support terrorism.
However, diplomatic agreements and exchange deals, such as the one made with Iran, raise a more fundamental issue that goes beyond immediate politics. Every agreement, whether it is facilitated by Joe Biden, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, or even Ronald Reagan, to secure the release of American citizens abroad serves as a catalyst for a political controversy. Nonetheless, it also demonstrates an act of benevolence and magnanimity from a president who is willing to endure political backlash while also hoping for a boost in public opinion by bringing Americans back home.
And would Americans prefer
Political considerations dont matter to those who are freed.
a commander-in-chief who rigidly insists on refusing any negotiations with US enemies for hostages or prisoners because such actions would only serve to encourage more seizures? Would they find solace in the knowledge that prioritizing hardline foreign policy considerations is essential? Or would they feel more secure overseas, knowing that a president from either party would go the extra mile to secure their release if they were unjustly imprisoned?"This is not just an abstract policy, but my own brother," stated Neda Sharghi, referring to Emad Sharghi, who was recently released from Iran. "We are discussing the lives of real human beings. Saving the innocent lives of Americans should not be a matter of partisanship, and today should serve as a moment of American unity as we embrace their return."
In recent years, the White House has faced an increasingly challenging prisoner dilemma due to families of detainees becoming more skilled at exerting political pressure on presidents, including through the use of social media. Previously, diplomats would advise families to stay out of the public eye to prevent raising the eventual price for securing their loved ones' freedom. Some presidents believed that their personal involvement could have the same effect. However, the landscape has shifted with the emergence of sophisticated pressure campaigns, such as the one carried out by Griner's supporters. The family of Paul Whelan, for example, has initiated a visible media campaign and has shared details of their meetings with President Biden and other officials.
Emad Sharghi, Morad Tahbaz, and Siamak Namazi, who had been imprisoned for over five years, were among three of those involved in Monday's deal. The identities of the other two Americans remain undisclosed to the public.
Officials from the Biden administration emphasized that the $6 billion released funds can only be utilized by Iran for humanitarian purchases. Additionally, each transaction will be closely monitored by the US Treasury Department.
But in the heat of the 2024 campaign, the nuances of the pact are already lost.
