Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that the temporary lifting of sanctions on Iranian oil is a political “jiu-jitsu” move against the Islamic Republic.

KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Let me talk about your announcement this past week. On Friday the Treasury Department lifted sanctions on Iranian oil stored on tankers, a move that would effectively allow Iran to get more than $ 14 billion of oil revenue. Hold on. Why is the U.S. helping to fund a country that it’s currently at war with– SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Kristen, why don’t we have good facts here? That Iranian oil was always going to be sold to the Chinese. It was going to be sold at a discount. So, which is better, Kristen? Which is better? If oil prices spike to $ 150 and they were getting 70% of that? Or oil price is below $ 100? It’s better to have them where they are now. And to be clear, we had always planned for this contingency. About 140 million barrels are out on the water. In essence, we are Jiu-Jitsu-ing the Iranians. We are using their own oil against them. We have a much better line of sight, to be clear, at Treasury when this oil goes to– if it goes to Indonesia, if it goes to Japan, if it goes to Korea, we have a much better line of sight and are able to block accounts that the oil goes into. When it goes into China it completely gets recycled. So, to be clear, that $ 14 billion number is grossly overstated. KRISTEN WELKER: Let me unpack what you’re just saying. First of all, how much is it? And second of all, I don’t hear you disputing that Iran will get some of the money. SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Iran already gets a huge amount of the money because Iran is the largest sponsor of state terrorism and China has been funding them. KRISTEN WELKER: So, it was always part of the plan to un-sanction Iranian oil? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, at Treasury we plan for all contingencies. We have break-the-glass plans. And this oil is floating out in Asia, and it is mostly our Asian allies– the U.S. gets virtually no oil from the Gulf. We are energy sufficient. So, when we un-sanction this, rather than the oil going to China, it can go to Japan. It can go to Korea. It can go to Indonesia. It can go to Malaysia– KRISTEN WELKER: And it can go to Iran too. I mean, isn’t the point that the sanctions were in place to prevent Iran from getting any of the money. They will have access to some of the money now— SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: No, again — Kristen, you’re missing the point. So, please listen to me. They were getting it from China anyway. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Let me talk about the real-world impact of this because you’re talking about $ 140 million barrels of Iranian oil, and that’s just a little bit more than what the world uses in one day. How much can that really change prices here at home–how much can it change prices here at home? Talk to consumers. How much will it change prices here at home. SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, Kristen, terrible framing, terrible framing. Let me explain. 140 million barrels, about 20 million barrels a day comes out of the Gulf. About five million has been repurposed by the Saudis, by the UAE. So, we’re at a 15 deficit. About 1.5 is Iranian oil that comes out. So, we are at between a 10 and 14 million deficit on a daily basis. So, if you think about 140 million barrels, that’s between 10 days and two weeks of supply. And one of the reasons that prices in the U.S. of West Texas crude are below $ 100 and we have not seen this massive spike (as we did during the beginning of Russia/Ukraine), is because we are well supplied in the market, whether it is the Russian oil, whether it is the Iranian oil, or it is the largest SPR release in history done by a coalition of 32 countries, 400 million barrels. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Let’s talk about the Russian oil, which you just raised. The administration did ease oil sanctions on Russia earlier this month. You had initially defended imposing those sanctions, calling Russian exports, quote, “Oil that funds the Russian war machine.” If the point of the sanctions was to stop funding the Russian war machine, why is the administration effectively rewarding Russia now? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, Kristen, you’re missing the point. Which is better? Does Russia get more money if oil goes to $ 150 and they get 70% of that (that’s $ 105), or if oil stays below $ 100, so they’re getting less money? Our analysis shows that the maximum extra amount that Russia could get would be $ 2 billion, which is one day of the Russian Federation’s budget. KRISTEN WELKER: Understood. But they wouldn’t have gotten any of that with the sanctions in place– But would they have gotten any of that in place– SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: No, no, no. Kristen, whoever does your research you should get rid of because they were getting it. It was going into China. China was buying over 90% of the Russian oil, and it was (INAUDIBLE)– KRISTEN WELKER: But what’s the point of sanctions if not to punish Russia, if not to punish countries? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, we had no ability to do that to China if China wants to be a bad actor. But we were substantially able to degrade their exports. Their exports have dropped about 25% when the rest of the world isn’t buying it. So, exports are down, but there was a lifeline into China. Now we’ve opened that to everyone else. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. Just to be clear though. You did defend imposing those sanctions in the first place. Let me ask– SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Just to be clear, it is a maximum of $ 2 billion. So, let’s have good framing on this. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. Let’s talk about the overall cost of this war. The administration’s asking Congress poised to an additional $ 200 billion in additional funding for this war. Some Republicans who could cast key votes on this are expressing hesitation or outright opposition. Take a listen to them and then I want to get your reaction on the other side. FEMALE REPORTER (ON TAPE): Are there any initial red flags for you? MALE LAWMAKER (ON TAPE): No. Mainly it’s a lot of money. I’ll go through it, see what they need. FEMALE LAWMAKER (ON TAPE): I am a no. I’ve already told leadership I am a no on any war supplementals. I am so tired of spending money elsewhere. KRISTEN WELKER: Should President Trump have gone to Congress on the front end of this war if he was going to ask for Congress’s help now for more funding? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, President Trump was within his authorities under the War Powers Act to initiate this action. And actually now we have plenty of money to fund this war. What we are doing is this is supplemental. President Trump has built up the military, as he did in his first term, as he is now doing in his second term. And he wants to make sure that the military is well supplied going forward. KRISTEN WELKER: Would the administration ever raise taxes in order to fund this war? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Again, Kristen, terrible framing. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, it’s just simple question that I think a lot of people have– SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: No, no. It’s a ridiculous question. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, can you answer it? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Why would we do that? We have plenty. We have a trillion dollars in this year’s budget for the military. And President Trump, even before the conflict started, had said that he would like to further build out the military. KRISTEN WELKER: So, is raising taxes under consideration at all if you’re saying you have plenty of money? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Not at all. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. Let’s turn to how all of this is impacting consumers. United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby is now planning he says to cut flights and is planning for oil to go as high as $ 175 a barrel with prices potentially staying above $ 100 a barrel through 2027. This is according to him. All of this could potentially mean higher prices for consumers. What do you say to Americans who feel they were promised lower costs and now they’re getting the opposite? SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Kristen, I think the American people understand that any– I’m not going to put a time on it but let’s just pick 50 days of temporary elevated prices, prices will come off on the other side, for 50 years of not having an Iranian regime with a nuclear weapon. The American people are beginning to understand, thanks to President Trump, that there is no prosperity without security. KRISTEN WELKER: I heard you say 50 days. Are you saying that prices could start to come down. What’s the time-frame– SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: No, no, no, no. I was just picking a point. I don’t know whether it’s going to be 30 days, I don’t know whether it’s going to be 50 days, I don’t know whether it’s going to be 100 days. But to have 50 years of peace in the Middle East and know that the Iranian regime is de-fanged because, Kristen, what we had before was the illusion of security. Imagine this regime if they had had another year or two years to build out their missile capabilities. They would’ve built a shield around themselves and it would’ve been impossible to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon.

RealClearPolitics Videos