Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Bitcoin

Iran Cheerfully Admits Using Cryptocurrency To Pay For Imports (theregister.com) 65

Posted by BeauHD from the confirming-suspicions dept.
Iran has announced it used cryptocurrency to pay for imports, raising the prospect that the nation is using digital assets to evade sanctions. The Register reports: Trade minister Alireza Peyman Pak revealed the transaction with the tweet [here], which translates as "This week, the first official import order was successfully placed with cryptocurrency worth ten million dollars. By the end of September, the use of cryptocurrencies and smart contracts will be widespread in foreign trade with target countries."

It is unclear what Peman Pak referred to with his mention of widespread use of crypto for foreign trade, and the identity of the foreign countries he mentioned is also obscure. But the intent of the announcement appears clear: Iran will use cryptocurrency to settle cross-border trades.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Iran Cheerfully Admits Using Cryptocurrency To Pay For Imports More

Iran Cheerfully Admits Using Cryptocurrency To Pay For Imports

Comments Filter:

  • “Using digital assets to evade sanctions&rdq (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @08:42PM (#62778800)

    That always makes it sound like Iran is doing something unlawful or bad - it has no obligation to honour US or international sanctions against it, so it isnt evading anything, its doing business.

    • The US and EU companies selling the goods do have such obligation. Iran also has a long history of evading or ignoring treaties on nucllear weaposns: purchasing the equipment, or even the ore, to manufacture such weapons is not inconceivable. Iran has a long history of buying weaponry on the black market, even engaging in hostage trades and drug dealing to fund weapons. This was at the core of the Iran Contra controversy.

      • Wow. That's some strong Kool-aid.
      • US has a history of invading a country based on lies about weapons of mass destruction. Result: no sanctions. Why? If you want to play world police, you must have clean hands.
      • Yes, and America has a history of seeking biological and chemical weapons to Iraq so they would invade Iran. So who cares if they want some nukes for self defence?

        • Israel cares a great deal, they are the most likely targets of such weapons even if delivered via backpack. So do the nations selling them nuclear technologies, particularly Pakistan.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

            Israel keeps inflaming the Muslim world by bombing the Palestinians. Maybe they should stop doing that first. Someone has to make the first move towards peace and it's not the countries being bombed.

            • Israel inflames the Muslim world by merely _existing_. It's not clear that failing to surrender utterly to Palestine will ever satisfy more than a few of of their Muslim neighbors. "The countries being bombed" include Israel itself, with rocket propelled grenades, bazookas, and suicide bombs rather than air strikes.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

                Israel inflames the Muslim world by merely _existing_.

                Indonesia, a Muslim country, seems to have no problems with Israel existing. I wonder why they don't have full diplomatic relations? Well look at that, they are unhappy that Israel is still indiscriminately killing Palestinians.

                "The countries being bombed" include Israel itself, with rocket propelled grenades, bazookas, and suicide bombs rather than air strikes.

                Terrorist attacks should be handled by police action, not military action. One or two people shooting an RPG at you is no excuse to bomb the entire settlement.

                • Indonesia is not "the Muslim world". The word "inflames" also does not mean "is at war", it means "provokes anger". Concern for the handling of Palestine aggravates the Muslim world further, But Muslim antipathy towards Jews dates back at least to when Mohammed turned away from Jerusalem to pray, and we've seen it echoed for centuries, and intensified as Israel was created and now exists as a target for that rage. Whether the ongoing warfare with the Palestinian guerrillas inflames that anger further, simp

      • I always thought the core of the Iran-Contra affair was that the CIA circumvented sanctions against the Iran to fund insurgents in South America?

      • The US and EU companies selling the goods do have such obligation. Iran also has a long history of evading or ignoring treaties on nucllear weaposns: purchasing the equipment, or even the ore, to manufacture such weapons is not inconceivable. Iran has a long history of buying weaponry on the black market, even engaging in hostage trades and drug dealing to fund weapons. This was at the core of the Iran Contra controversy.

        The thing is, a lot of the companies doing this will not be based in the EU, US or even any NATO aligned country. So the EU/US/UK/et al. companies are making sales to legitimate buyers that are 100% legal. Some of these buyers will be in other countries not covered by treaties or obligations to enforce the Iran sanctions... or will on sell to buyers in those countries.

        So it ends up being a long chain of resellers, culminating in some dodgy company operating out of Lebanon that is 4 or 5 parties removed f

        • > So the EU/US/UK/et al. companies are making sales to legitimate buyers that are 100% legal. S

          Please, name any such companies. Keep in mind that the UN has many such sanctions today, and alll UN members are bound to such sanctions, especially including their major source of rebranded French nuclear technologies, Pakistan.

    • Re:“Using digital assets to evade sanctions& (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MacMann ( 7518492 ) on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @10:01PM (#62778932)

      Correct, Iran is not obligated to trade with the USA. However Iran is in negotiations with the USA for trade. Clearly Iran wants what the USA has but they are not willing to pay the price the USA stated they must pay. In an honest business deal that would be the end. By using cryptocurrency Iran is trying to get what the USA has offered by means that are not by an honest business agreement. Here's a bit of news on how it is going recently:
      https://www.nytimes.com/2022/0... [nytimes.com]

      If this was how someone tried to buy a firearm in the USA then it would be a crime. Iran failed the background check on buying a weapon so the USA says they won't go through on the deal. But this is more complicated than that because the sale isn't for a weapon exactly, but things that could be used to make weapons. So the USA says they are putting conditions on the deal, we will sell you something that might become a weapon if you let us look around to make sure you aren't making weapons. Iran doesn't like that so they try to hide who they are to buy things from the USA. That is evasion. Perhaps that is not illegal but it is dishonest. If Iran wanted what the USA has to sell bad enough then they'd agree to the terms of the trade. Iran believes they can hide who they are to get different terms on the deal. The USA is free to raise or lower the price that Iran pays, and Iran is free to make a counter offer or walk away. It appears that so far every counter offer from Iran has been refused so far, and Iran has refused to move as well. Since this negotiation appears to be failing Iran chose to try making a deal under false pretenses to try to negotiate better terms.

      I believe evasion is an accurate description of what is happening. Calling this "doing business" implies an honest negotiation of the terms of trade. Some entity not being honest on who they and what they plan to do after the sale is evading the questions being asked in the negotiations for a trade.

      • "The US" isn't selling anything. Various companies based in the US are the ones doing the selling.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          Various companies based in the US are the ones doing the selling.

          Exactly. It's not Iran evading sanctions, it's various US companies selling to Iran, either directly or indirectly.

          Depending on the item Iran might be evading sanctions by using a web of intermediaries so they're paying 2-3x or more retail price because all those middlemen want a cut.

          On the other hand, if you have knowledge of such things happening, I believe the state department has a tip line that pays quite well

      • > Since this negotiation ... implies an honest negotiation of the terms of trade ... I believe evasion is an accurate description of what is happening.

        Depends on context. The US can say they get to decide what's honest and what's not but that doesn't make it so.

        • I believe you read too much into the word "evade". A football player can evade a tackle and have no illegality involved. That's playing by the rules with skill. Iran can play by the rules and still "evade" something.

          • > I believe you read too much into the word "evade".

            My focus is on your mentions of things like dishonesty and how it's only the way you contextualize your arguments that supports it.

            It's not about taking sides here, that would be an unproductive reproach. We'd rather avoid perpetuating the situation, and a basic tenet of conflict resolution is putting yourself in the others shoes, understanding the overall situation deeply enough so change is possible for everyone.

    • That always makes it sound like Iran is doing something unlawful or bad - it has no obligation to honour US or international sanctions against it, so it isnt evading anything, its doing business.

      I don't think you understand what the word "evade" means.

  • Choice of word "cheerfully" is an interesting one; not "readily" or "openly" but they are cheerfully. I wonder if all the victims Iranian state sanctioned terrorism are so "cheerfully" dead, maimed, wounded. ???

    JoshK.

    • I wonder if all the victims Iranian state sanctioned terrorism are so "cheerfully" dead, maimed, wounded. ???

      Maybe you should ask some Iraqis how they feel about being dead, maimed, wounded?

      Or you could talk to some of those Yemenis the Saudis keep murdering. The Saudis are our friends though so that's a different kind of killing, maiming and wounding I suppose.

      • Irrelevant. You've missed the point, my comment was about Iran, not other Middle Eastern nations.

        JoshK.

      • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        Try not being lazy in your debating. What other countries do and do not do does not matter. If you think that other countries are doing things that are wrong, you can also work against those things without impeding this thing.

        • Quite right.
          We when we invade countries and overthrow their government it's fine because we're the good guys. When the neighbours of those countries try to defend themselves they're criminals.

    • If the United States had fucked with them (Score:4, Informative)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @09:21PM (#62778874)
      In the 60s and overthrown their democracy we wouldn't have to worry about them. There's a real easy way to deal with State sanctioned terrorism, get America to stop sticking their nose where it doesn't belong. As an added benefit it'll stabilize the world economy while reducing all those scary caravans you see on Fox News. Nobody walks 2000 Miles because they want to they're fleeing the violence we caused.

      And honestly none of this would be an issue if we had just honored the agreements we had with them instead of putting a lunatic in charge of the White House who reneged on everything

      • Irrelevant. You've missed the point, my comment was about Iran, not the geopolitical history of the Middle East.

        JoshK.

  • should be fun to see the comments from avid fiaters here on how crypto is a scam and has no real use-case.

    • Crypto has real use cases. Wherever you have to pay for stuff that the powers that are don't want you to have (from uranium to hitmen to drugs), that's where it is very useful.

  • What Trump did to JCOPA in 2018 was completely unwarranted and against all international norms. They were abiding by the terms and Trump didn't like the terms his predecessor had agreed to, so he unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the agreement. Furthermore, the U.S. plainly gave warning to anybody who was ready to do anything to circumvent its decision the big finger via raw muscle, in that "if you don't want us to sanction you, you'll do as we say." That is how bullies behave. In the aftermath, Biden

  • There are a lot of people out there that don't think that the US can weaponize cryptocurrency.

  • I believe the problem is that the US is trying to stop Iran from doing business with other countries by blocking the US controlled payment networks. Regardless of how you feel about US or Iran policy it doesn't seem reasonable that a third party can block transactions between two willing parties. Bitcoin (and it's offspring) seems a reasonable way to get around this because of its censorship resistance.

  • Or is it just some statement to get everyone hunting thru crypto transactions to try to identify iranian transactions / create fear in the crypto "market" of further actions by other governments / create general chaos?

    It doesn't seem smart to announce to the world that you are using crypto (assuming that it is true) if you are Iran.

    Especially if you are the counterparty, you may not like the additional scrutiny.

  • Sanctions imposed on entire countries are deeply unjust and troubling because most people living in any country haven't done anything wrong, not to mention that such sanctions also hurt people in other countries. They should not be used as an instrument of international politics. They should be banned like chemical weapons are banned. In the meantime, using cryptocurrencies to evade such sanctions is a bona fide example how good and nice cryptocurrencies are, not any worse than using them to donate to opres

Slashdot Top Deals

"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian

Close