← Back to context

Comment by FrustratedMonky

10 hours ago

100B/Year

How are they spinning this, that it is not Reparations?

"10. Iran to use Hormuz fees for reconstruction instead of reparations"

What is the splitting of hairs here?

I think reparations could be spent as they see fit. Reconstruction implies the money is going to exactly that.

But I agree it's a weird nitpick at this stage, as it seems almost impossible to verify once in place

  • No, the point is that instead of the US paying reparations from their own pocket they will allow Iran to tax Gulf countries.

    That sentence is just worded badly, I would rewrite it as:

    10. Iran to use Hormuz fees for reconstruction instead of demanding reparations from the US.

    • I think you're right, it's a bracketing ambiguity.

      Rather than "Iran to use Hormuz fees for (reconstruction instead of reparations)" it's more likely to mean "Iran to use (Hormuz fees for reconstruction) instead of reparations"