Skip to main content

Victims of Iranian-sponsored terror want restitution as part of peace deal

▶ Watch Video: Victims of Iranian-sponsored terror urge Trump to demand restitution in possible Iran deal

Washington — Victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism and their families are in Washington this week to urge President Trump to demand Iran pay restitution as part of any potential peace deal.

The delegation of more than 100 people includes those who have successfully sued the Islamic Republic in U.S. federal court for tens of billions of dollars in damages for its role in either orchestrating, financing or providing other material support for major terror attacks around the world, including the 1983 Beirut Marine barracks bombing that killed 241 U.S. service members, and scores of suicide bombings that have killed American citizens in places like Israel.

“American victims have been entirely absent from the public and reported negotiating framework,” the group American Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism United wrote in a letter to Mr. Trump first obtained by CBS News. “Our request is clear and grounded in longstanding U.S. policy: no agreement, interim or long-term, should release, transfer, unfreeze, or return Iranian assets, or lift or relieve sanctions, before the outstanding terrorism judgments owed to American victims are resolved.”

Angela Mistrulli, who spearheaded the two-day gathering in Washington, told CBS News the letter speaks for a coalition of more than 20,000 American victims directly affected by Iran-backed terrorism. She plans to deliver the letter to the president in a meeting at the White House scheduled for Tuesday.

Mistrulli’s father, Joseph, was killed while working at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

“If we can bankrupt terrorists, then there will be less American blood spilled,” Mistrulli asserted. “There should not be any funds returned to the terrorism regime.”

Victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism and their families gathered in Washington
Victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism and their families gathered in Washington to urge President Trump to demand Iran pay restitution as part of any potential peace deal.

CBS News

In recent days, fighting with Iran has resumed and the initial push toward a peace agreement has largely stalled. But the group’s effort comes at what would be the midway point of the initial 60-day Memorandum of Understanding signed by Mr. Trump and Iran’s leaders on June 17. 

The MOU, negotiated in large part by Vice President JD Vance, offered Iran the prospect of receiving hundreds of billions of dollars in frozen assets and sanctions relief if it complied with terms that include opening maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz and eliminating any nuclear threat.

“If it doesn’t get done in 60 days, that’s all right. We go back to bombing,” Mr. Trump said after signing the agreement. “I don’t want to do that, because it’s so good, but we might have to, because we’re never going to let them have a nuclear weapon.”

Vance called the MOU “fundamentally a good deal for the American people” and said it offered Iran an opportunity to be “reinvited into the world economy.”

But there has been little progress toward a longer-term agreement, and the U.S. resumed military strikes on Iran more than a week ago.

Iranian terror from October 1983 to Oct. 7, 2023

According to Mistrulli, Iran and other regimes like Syria and North Korea have been ordered to pay up to $156 billion in judgments dating back to the 1990s after Congress passed a law allowing terror victims to sue U.S.-designated state sponsors of terrorism. Iran has been ordered to pay the most of any country since the law was enacted.

Plaintiffs have included victims and families harmed in attacks spanning decades and continents, including 9/11, which a federal judge found Iran liable for in 2018, saying it provided assistance to the hijackers. 

In one recent case, a U.S. District Court in Washington awarded $573 million to plaintiffs representing American service members killed or injured by Iranian-supported insurgencies in Iraq from 2003 to 2015.

A current pending case focuses on Iran’s alleged role in the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Hamas is one of a number of militant groups in the region backed by Iran.

“As a community, the judgments that we pursue are not pursued out of compensation,” Mistrulli added. “The compensation has been the only justice we can receive — and we don’t want another group to lose loved ones like we have.”

Although victims have won billions of dollars in judgments against Iran, collecting those awards has proved far more difficult, as state sponsors of terrorism rarely pay judgments voluntarily. To provide some relief, Congress created the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund to provide partial compensation to eligible victims using money from qualifying federal penalties, forfeitures and other congressionally authorized sources.

According to the fund’s website, more than $10 billion has been paid out since its inception in 2015 — less than 10% of what’s been awarded in terrorism cases.

“There has been some relief,” Aryeh Portnoy, an attorney who has represented thousands of victims in terrorism cases and is currently litigating on behalf of Oct. 7 victims, told CBS News. “But even those in the fund that have been in it the longest and have received the most from it have only received pennies on the dollars of their judgments.”

Portnoy also pointed to limited enforcement, legal disputes and chronic underfunding as reasons for the shortfall.

“So there’s more work that needs to be done, but it can be done,” he said. “There’s opportunities for the government, for Congress, for the administration to help these victims, to fill the promise that Congress made when it allowed the victims to come and pursue these terrorist states in court for the horrors that they committed.”

And no country owes more than Iran, Portnoy said. In many of the state-sponsored terrorism cases he has litigated, Iran has repeatedly emerged as the foreign government accused of supporting the terrorist groups responsible for the attacks.

“In each of those cases, the actors themselves could be a terrorist organization,” Portnoy explained to CBS News. “It could be Hezbollah, it could be ISIS, it could be Al Qaeda. But behind those actors is always a state sponsor — and Iran is by far the biggest state sponsor of terrorism and has been for the last four decades.”

A spokesperson for the Iranian Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

¿Por qué Irán está perdiendo el control del estrecho de Ormuz?

La batalla por el control del estrecho de Ormuz se convirtió en el eje central de la guerra de Irán. Durante los últimos meses, tanto Irán como Estados Unidos afirmó tener la ventaja, y la retórica en competencia ha causado considerable confusión y duda.Sin embargo, en este momento, la evidencia es clara: Estados Unidos, patrullando el estrecho con sus fuerzas de la marina, gana terreno, mientras Irán pierde gran parte de su control sobre la vía marítima clave.Más del 80 % del tránsito de embarcaciones a través del estrecho de Ormuz en las últimas dos semanas toman la ruta de Omán, un canal de envío autorizado por la ONU que Irán se opone vehementemente, según Kpler, que rastrea los barcos utilizando transpondedores y datos satelitales.Irán, declaró el estrecho bajo su control, atacó a decenas de barcos que intentaron viajar por la vía marítima a través de la costa norte de Omán. A pesar del riesgo, la mayoría de los barcos recientemente han optado por ignorar las demandas de Irán y cruzar el estrecho con la promesa de protección de las fuerzas navales de Estados Unidos.“Cada vez más parece que Irán ha perdido al menos parcialmente el control del estrecho”, dijo Homayoun Falakshahi, jefe de análisis de petróleo crudo en Kpler.Esto contrasta radicalmente con la situación de hace un mes, cuando Kpler no observó prácticamente ningún tráfico marítimo por la ruta de Omán. La fuerte reducción del tráfico alrededor de la ruta preferida de Irán impidió a Irán cobrar peajes en el tráfico de barcos a través del estrecho, como lo hizo en la primavera.La expiración del Memorándum de Entendimiento entre Estados Unidos e Irán esta semana en teoría permite a Irán comenzar a cobrar peajes nuevamente. Pero no parece que el país haya podido, según Kpler.“La solicitud de Irán para cobrar peajes es algo que la mayoría de la gente del Medio Oriente no quiere hacer y no ha estado haciendo”, dijo Dan Pickering, fundador y director de inversiones de Pickering Energy Partners. “Por lo tanto, la ruta de Omán definitivamente tiene más sentido”.Kuwait, Arabia Saudita y los Emiratos Árabes Unidos han fletado transportadores muy grandes de petróleo crudo (VLCCs) —los petroleros más grandes— para salir del golfo Pérsico a través del estrecho de Ormuz, y luego transferir el petróleo a los tanqueros de los clientes fuera de la zona de peligro en el Golfo de Omán, según Andy Lipow, presidente de Lipow Oil Associates.Para evadir los ataques de Irán, apagaron sus transpondedores, a menudo durante semanas. Ese llamado tráfico oscuro parece haber eludido algunos servicios de seguimiento de datos como Kpler también. Aunque algunos pueden ser capturados por satélite, es más difícil seguirlos por medios tradicionales.Pero Estados Unidos, que con una fuerza militar significativa en el mar, vigila todos los barcos que pasan por el estrecho y ha informado cifras de envío de petróleo significativamente más altas de lo que la mayoría de las estimaciones tradicionales habían sugerido anteriormente.El Secretario de Energía Chris Wright dijo la semana pasada que los tránsitos combinados de petróleo a través del estrecho y redirigidos alrededor de la vía marítima sumaron alrededor de 15 millones de barriles por día durante el transcurso de una semana, mucho más cercanos al promedio de 20 millones de barriles antes de la guerra.Eso llevó al presidente Donald Trump a declarar el lunes que Estados Unidos tiene “control total sobre el estrecho”, una afirmación cuestionable que ha reiterado a menudo durante el conflicto. Los continuos ataques de Irán y los flujos de petróleo aún muy por debajo de los niveles prebélicos sugieren que Estados Unidos no controla completamente el estrecho de Ormuz.Pero tampoco Irán.“Si su objetivo es estar “a cargo”, entonces diría que nunca estuvieron completamente en control para empezar”, dijo Pickering. “Parece que su objetivo es la disuasión, con el fin de ser validados como en control. Creo que todavía están disuadiendo”.Pero si los petroleros realmente están obteniendo tanto petróleo a través del estrecho como Estados Unidos afirma, entonces la disuasión y el control de Irán del estrecho de Ormuz se han reducido en comparación con lo que era hace un mes o dos.Para complicar aún más las cosas: Omán e Irán están entablando conversaciones para restaurar la libertad de navegación a través del estrecho, sin la participación de Estados Unidos, para consternación de Trump. No está claro cómo afectarán estas discusiones al tráfico de petróleo o al control de la vía marítima.“Tomaría toda la información y los titulares ‘bajo asesoramiento’”, dijo Lipow. “Pero es justo decir que Irán perdió parcialmente el control del estrecho”.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story