Iran’s Cuba and Latin American Tours and Trouble Ahead

Posted on August 23, 2016August 23, 2016 by Denise Simon

While the United States attempted to normalize relations with both Iran and Cuba, it appears the real result is a renewed friendliness between Iran and Cuba at the cost of the U.S. taxpayer, that $1.7 billion or more.

It also must be noted that Cuban refugees continue to appear on American shores but now we must question how many of them are terrorists and what are they bringing with them. Iceberg ahead.

It is also important to note that the Cuban military runs all tourism and the hospitality industry as the United States has opened those travel channels.

****

Related reading: Breaking Sanctions with Cuba?

Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism, that is until the White House decided it was no longer.

Cuba supports Iran’s nuclear ambitions and opposed IAEA rebukes of secret Iranian enrichment sites. The two countries have banking agreements (Islamic Republic News Agency), economic cooperation and lines of credit ( FNA), and three-way energy-focused treaties with Bolivia (CSMonitor). Cuba and Iran hold regular ‘Joint Economic Commission’ meetings; the latest, in November 2009, further expanded bilateral trade and economic ties.

One of Cuba’s largest and long-term industries is spying and selling intelligence and secrets globally.

**** Image result for javad zarif

Iran says will open new chapter in relations with Cuba

Reuters: Kicking off a six-day tour of Latin America, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Monday in Havana his visit would open a new chapter in the Islamic Republic’s relations with Communist-ruled Cuba.

Iran, which has long been friendly with Cuba, is on a drive to improve foreign commerce after the removal in January of international sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

“We will start a new chapter in the bilateral relations with Cuba on the basis of a big (business) delegation accompanying me on this visit,” Zarif said at a meeting with his Cuban counterpart, Bruno Rodriguez.

The international community lifted sanctions on Iran as part of the deal under which Tehran curbed its nuclear program.

Rodriguez congratulated Iran on the “success of its foreign policy” while reiterating its longstanding support for “all countries to develop nuclear energy with pacific ends”.

Cuba and Iran have in common a long stand-off with the United States. They were both on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorism sponsoring countries until Havana was removed last year as part of a detente with Washington.

“We have always been on the side of the great Cuban people in view of atrocities and unjust sanctions,” Zarif said.

“The government and Cuban people have also always shown us solidarity with regards to the atrocities committed by the empire.”

Zarif’s tour will also take him to Chile, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Venezuela.

Just last week, Cuba’s new Economy Minister Ricardo Cabrisas made a trip to Tehran where he met with President Hassan Rouhani.

German exports to Iran, mostly machines and equipment, jumped in the first half of the year following the removal of international sanctions against the Islamic Republic, official trade data showed on Monday

How and When the $1.7 Billion was Paid to Iran, Database Item

Posted on August 22, 2016August 22, 2016 by Denise Simon

Note the date and this money was assigned to the State Department Account in the graphic (screen-shot below the text)

Riddle of $1.3 Billion for Iran Might Relate to 13 Outlays Of Exactly $99,999,999.99

NYSun: Congressional investigators trying to uncover the trail of $1.3 billion in payments to Iran might want to focus on 13 large, identical sums that Treasury paid to the State Department under the generic heading of settling “Foreign Claims.”

The 13 payments when added to the $400 million that the administration now concedes it shipped to the Iranian regime in foreign cash would bring the payout to the $1.7 billion that President Obama and Secretary Kerry announced on January 17. That total was to settle a dispute pending for decades before the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in at The Hague.

Mr. Kerry told the press at the time that the settlement included $400 million that Iran under the Shah had paid into a U.S. trust fund for an arms deal that collapsed after Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution. Plus, said Kerry, the U.S. had agreed to pay “a roughly $1.3 billion compromise on the interest.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Jay Solomon and Carole E. Lee broke earlier this month the news that on the same day that Mr. Obama announced the settlement, his administration secretly sent Iran the $400 million payment in cash. Last week, the State Department finally confirmed that the January 17 cash shipment was used as “leverage” to ensure Iran’s release that same day of four American prisoners — fueling questions about whether the Obama administration, despite its denials, had paid ransom.

Yet more questions surround the administration’s handling of the remaining $1.3 billion. Could this have been drawn from a fund bankrolled by American taxpayers and housed at Treasury, called the Judgment Fund? And why were the 13 payments in amounts of one cent less than $100,000,000?

The Judgment Fund has long been a controversial vehicle for federal agencies to detour past one of the most pointed prohibitions in the Constitution: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”

The Judgment Fund, according to a Treasury Department Web site, is “a permanent, indefinite appropriation” used to pay monetary awards against U.S. government agencies in cases “where funds are not legally available to pay the award from the agency’s own appropriations.”

In March, in letters responding to questions about the Iran settlement sent weeks earlier by Representatives Edward Royce and Mike Pompeo, the State Department confirmed that the $1.3 billion “interest” portion of the Iran settlement had been paid out of the Judgment Fund. But State gave no information on the logistics.

The 13 payments that may explain what happened are found in an online database maintained by the Judgment Fund. A search for “Iran” since the beginning of this year turns up nothing. But a search for claims in which the defendant is the State Department turns up 13 payments for $99,999,999.99.

They were all made on the same day, all sharing the same file and control reference numbers, all certified by the U.S. Attorney General, but each assigned a different identification number. They add up to $1,299,999,999.87, or 13 cents less than the $1.3 billion Messrs. Clinton and Kerry announced in January.

Together with a 14th payment of just over $10 million, the grand total paid out by Treasury from the Judgment Fund on that single day, January 19, for claims pertaining to the State Department, comes to roughly $1.31 billion.

Treasury has provided no answers to my queries about whether these specific payments were for the Iran settlement. Nor why these transfers comprised 13 payments, each of which was a cent under $100,000,000. Nor whether the $10 million related to the same matter.

The Judgment Fund database contains over the past year no other payouts pertaining to State that come anywhere near the scale of $1.3 billion of the announced with Iran. And it contains no details on what the State Department might have done with the $1.3 billion.

It does say, as a general matter, that “Defendant Agency Name is the same as the Responsible Agency Name.” It leaves open the question of whether it was State rather than Treasury that determined by what route and in what form the funds would reach their final destination.

State has refused to disclose even such basic information as the date on which Iran took receipt of the $1.3 billion. As recently as August 4, a State spokesman told the press: “I don’t have a date of when that took place.”

Nor has the administration answered whether the $1.3 billion was transferred to Iran via the banking system, or, like the $400 million, in cash. According to the Judgment Fund web site, the “preferred method” for payments is “by electronic fund transfer,” approved by the relevant government agency, to the party receiving the award.

But, the Weekly Standard noted last week, President Obama recently defended his $400 million cash shipment to Iran on the grounds that “We don’t have a banking relationship with Iran… We could not wire the money.”

The Judgment Fund’s public database provides no information about where precisely the $1.31 billion in January payments went, or how. The Fund’s web site does provide blank “Voucher for Payment” forms, requiring administration officials to provide such details, and sign off on them.

These payouts from the Judgment Fund were made within days of the announcement of the Iran settlement. The Judgment Fund’s web site states that while its bureaucracy has recently become more efficient, “processing times” for payments still take “6 to 8 weeks.”

If the multiple 10-digit payments of January 19 do turn out to be connected to the Iran settlement announced January 17, that would suggest that the Judgment Fund completed its processing for Iran in a mere two days one of which — Monday, January 18 — was a federal holiday.

Ms. Rosett, a Foreign Policy Fellow with the Independent Women’s Forum, a columnist of Forbes and a blogger for PJMedia, is a contributing editor of The New York Sun.

That $1.3 Billion to Iran was Paid, How? Classified…

Posted on August 17, 2016August 17, 2016 by Denise Simon

How was it delivered? Classified. How do you put $1.3 billion on pallets and shrink wrap it and get it to Iran? Classified. We thought the $400 million was for ransom but now it appears it was ALL of it, $1.7 billion and Iran along with Russia coupled with the Iranian militia and Hezbollah will enjoy it all.

US paid Iran $1.3 billion in cash to settle old dispute

NYP: WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s $400 million payoff to Iran was followed by a second transfer of $1.3 billion, it was reported Tuesday.

President Obama took considerable flak for the first payment, which coincided with the release in January of four Americans being held by Tehran.

Critics charged that the move smacked of ransom, which the US has pledged never to pay.

The $400 million was the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement with Iran to resolve a dispute over a failed arms deal signed before the 1979 fall of the shah.

But there was no word about what happened to the rest of the debt — $1.3 billion.

On Tuesday, The Weekly Standard reported that the second payment was also quietly delivered.

Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Julia Frifield sent a letter to Congress on March 17, 2016, stating, “Iran received the balance of $400 million in the Trust Fund as well as roughly $1.3 billion representing a compromise on the interest,” according to the magazine.

This payment was likely made in cash, since the US has no banking relationship with Tehran.

Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran in an unmarked cargo plane to cover the first $400 million.

“The reason that we had to give them cash is precisely because we are so strict in maintaining sanctions — and we don’t have a banking relationship with Iran — that we couldn’t send them a check,” Obama said in an Aug. 4 press conference.

Although he insisted there was no connection to the hostages, one of them described waiting for “another plane” to land before being freed from Iran.

“I just remember the night at the airport sitting for hours and hours there, and I asked police, ‘Why are you not letting us go?’” former hostage Pastor Saeed Abedini told Fox Business.

“He said, ‘We are waiting for another plane, so if that plane doesn’t come, we never let [you] go.’”

In part from Reuters:

The White House announced on Jan. 17, a day after the prisoner exchange, it was releasing $400 million in funds frozen since 1981, plus $1.3 billion in interest owed to Iran. The remaining interest has since been fully paid from the U.S. Treasury-administered Judgment Fund, according to a U.S. official.

The funds were part of a trust fund Iran used before its 1979 Islamic Revolution to buy U.S. military equipment that was tied up for decades in litigation at the tribunal.

The Treasury Judgment Fund?

The Judgment Fund was established to pay court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government.

It is administered by the Judgment Fund Branch, which is a part of the United States Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Service. The Judgment Fund Internet Claims System (JFICS) is the application used to process all Judgment Fund claims.

The Judgment Fund is a permanent, indefinite appropriation available to pay judicially and administratively ordered monetary awards against the United States. The Judgment Fund is also available to pay amounts owed under compromise agreements negotiated by the U.S. Department of Justice in settlement of claims arising under actual or imminent litigation, if a judgment on the merits would be payable from the Judgment Fund. The statutory authority for the Judgment Fund is 31 U.S.C. 1304.

If funds for paying an award are otherwise provided for in the appropriations of the defendant agency, the Judgment Fund may not pay an award. A federal agency may request that payment of an award be made on its behalf from the Judgment Fund only in those instances where funds are not legally available to pay the award from the agency’s own appropriations.

Amounts paid vary significantly from year-to-year. Federal agencies are not required to reimburse the Judgment Fund except when cases are filed under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) or the No FEAR Act (Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act).

Liberating Mosul, Iraq is Great Until it Isn’t Due to Iran

Posted on August 16, 2016August 16, 2016 by Denise Simon

Did one ever consider that all those back-channels that Barack Obama opened early in 2008-2009 with Iran for an eventual deal on the nuclear program included a demand by Iran that the United States get out of Iraq, which we did in 2011 so Iran could annex the country and government? Signs are pointing for this to be true. The same goes with Russia annexing Syria and challenging the Baltics as well as Ukraine at the same time.

The United States has been forced to tolerate Iranian militia all over Iraq for many years…liberating Ramadi, Fallujah and soon to be Mosul is our work with the Kurds to hand it all over to Iran…really? Uh huh.

US officials: Up to 100,000 Iran-backed fighters now in Iraq

FNC: As many as 100,000 Iranian-backed Shiite militia are now fighting on the ground in Iraq, according to U.S. military officials — raising concerns that should the Islamic State be defeated, it may only be replaced by another anti-American force that fuels further sectarian violence in the region.

The ranks have swelled inside a network of Shiite militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Since the rise of Sunni-dominated ISIS fighters inside Iraq more than two years ago, the Shiite forces have grown to 100,000 fighters, Col. Chris Garver, a Baghdad-based U.S. military spokesman, confirmed in an email to Fox News. The fighters are mostly Iraqis.

Garver said not all the Shia militias in Iraq are backed by Iran, adding: “The [Iranian-backed] Shia militia are usually identified at around 80,000.”

According to some experts, this still is an alarmingly high number.

“The effect of the Obama administration’s policy has been to replace American boots on the ground with the Iranian’s. As Iran advances, one anti-American actor is being replaced with another,” Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said in a recent phone interview.

Garver said other Popular Mobilization fighters also consist of Sunni tribal fighters from Anbar and Nineveh provinces in Iraq.

Whether the force size is 80,000 or 100,000, the figures are the first-known estimates of the Iranian-backed fighters. The figure first surfaced in a recent Tampa Bay Times article and marks the latest evidence of Tehran’s deepening involvement in the war against ISIS, with the U.S. military also confirming that Russian bombers are now flying into Syria from a base in Iran. The growth also could create greater risk for Americans operating in the country, as at least one Iran-backed group vowed earlier this year to attack U.S. forces supporting the Iraqis.

Even more troubling to the U.S. military are reports that Qassem Soleimani, an Iranian general who commands the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force, is now on the ground outside Mosul ahead of an expected operation to retake Iraq’s second-largest city which has been under ISIS control for the past two years.

According to the Long War Journal, a spokesman for the Iranian-backed forces said earlier this month that Soleimani is expected to play a “major role” in the battle for Mosul.

When asked about Shia militias participating in the liberation of Sunni-dominated Mosul, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq said last week, “The government of Iraq is in charge of this war. We’re here to support them. So, who they [want in] the campaign is really their decision.”

A U.S. military official could not confirm Soleimani’s presence in Mosul, but said Soleimani had been seen throughout Iraq and Syria in the past two years coordinating activities.

Garver stressed Tuesday there is no coordination between the U.S. and Iranians. “We are not coordinating with the Iranians in any way, we are not working with them in any way,” he said during a press conference, adding: “However the government of Iraq comes up with the plan, we are supporting [their] plan for the seizure of Mosul.”

Last August, Fox News first reported Soleimani’s visit to Moscow 10 days after the landmark nuclear agreement in July to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin and top Russian officials to plan Russia’s upcoming deployment to Syria in late September.

Soleimani is banned from international travel through United Nations Security Council resolutions. He was first designated a terrorist and sanctioned by the U.S. in 2005. In October 2011, the U.S. Treasury Department tied Soleimani to the failed Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States at a popular restaurant in Washington, D.C. Soleimani’s Quds Force is the special forces external wing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, responsible for supporting terrorist proxies across the Middle East.

At his confirmation hearing last year, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford was asked how many Americans were killed by Iranian-backed forces under the command of Soleimani.

“The number has been recently quoted as about 500. We weren’t always able to attribute the casualties we had to Iranian activity, although many times we suspected it was Iranian activity even though we didn’t necessarily have the forensics to support that,” Dunford said.

The threat to American troops remains. Last month, firebrand Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr — responsible for attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq a decade ago – once again called for his supporters to kill American troops.

“[U.S. forces] are a target for us,” he said on his website.

In March, one Iranian-backed group said it would attack U.S. forces after the Pentagon announced that hundreds of U.S. Marines were supporting Iraqi forces with artillery fire.

“If the U.S. administration doesn’t withdraw its forces immediately, we will deal with them as forces of occupation,” Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH) said on its TV channel.

The Iranian-backed group has claimed responsibility for over 6,000 attacks against U.S. forces in Iraq since 2006 and operates under the supervision of Soleimani, according to a report by the Institute for the Study of War.

Meanwhile, there are more indications that Russia and Iran are expanding their military ties. The U.S. military has confirmed that Russian bombers flying from a base in Iran have bombed three areas in Syria.

In addition to the up to 100,000 Iranian-backed forces in Iraq, there are thousands of Iranian-backed forces in Syria as well in support of President Bashar al-Assad. Some of these Iranian-backed forces come from as far as Afghanistan and hundreds have recently died fighting Syrian rebels in the city of Aleppo, according to recent reports.

Russia Making More Aggressive Moves in Iran and Syria

Posted on August 15, 2016August 16, 2016 by Denise Simon

Shoigu Says Russia Prevented NATO Missile Strikes in Syria, Even as Russia Asks for Permission to Send Missiles Over Iran, Iraq

Pro-Assad Media Outlet: Russia Deploys Bombers To Iran

Interpreter: Al Masdar, a media outlet with close ties to the Syrian security apparatus which is widely considered to be pro-Assad, reports that Russian bombers are now operating out of the Hamedan Air Base in western Iran. The outlet says that they have received exclusive pictures from the base. Al Masdar reports:

Currently, the strategic TU-22M3 bombers take flight from southern Russia at Modzok airfield; however, this newly signed military agreement with Iran will allow Russia to reduce flight time by 60%, saving the Kremlin both money and improving airstrike effectiveness.

The distance of these flights equal roughly 2,150km to reach a target near Palmyra. From Hamedan Air Base in Iran the distance to reach a target near Palmyra equals roughly 900km.

The Khmeimim Airbase in Latakia province – which Russia was granted access to in late 2015 – is not suitable for the massive TU-22M3, the largest bomber jet in the world.

AMN – Al-Masdar News | المصدر نيوز

Russia deploys jets at Iranian Airbase to combat insurgents in Syria Al-Masdar News has obtained exclusive photos of Russian warplanes being deployed to the Hamedan Air Base in western Iran. Currently, the strategic TU-22M3 bombers take flight from southern Russia at Modzok airfield; however, this newly signed military agreement with Iran will allow Russia to reduce flight time by 60%, saving the Kremlin both money and improving airstrike effectiveness.

View full page →

Aug 16, 2016 00:40 (GMT)

The report has been circulated by several pro-Kremlin propagandists, adding credibility to the claims.

Just hours ago we reported that, according to Interfax, Russia has sought permission from Iran and Iraq to fire cruise missiles over their airspace.

— James Miller

*****

Tu-22M3 and Su-34 bombers flew from Iran’s Hamadan base Tuesday to attack Islamic State and Nusra Front targets in Syria’s Aleppo, Deir ez-Zor and Idlib provinces, the Russian Defense Ministry said in an e-mailed statement. They returned to the base after completing their missions, it said.

The bombers were supported by fighter jets from Syria’s Hmeimeem base that Russia’s used to carry out airstrikes in support of President Bashar al-Assad since September. Russia’s announcement that it’s using an Iranian base to carry out attacks in Syria comes after President Vladimir Putin discussed the fight against terrorism with Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani when they met in Azerbaijan last week. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Iranian defense officials agreed on expanded military cooperation at talks in Moscow this month, according to the Izvestia daily. Russia and Iran are backing Assad’s army against opposition groups in Syria’s civil war, which has killed more than 280,000 people and displaced millions.

Russia asked Iran and Iraq last week to allow cruise missiles to pass through their airspace, the Interfax news service reported Monday, citing an unidentified person with knowledge of the matter. Russian warships in the Caspian Sea fired 26 cruise missiles at targets in Syria in October, shortly after Putin ordered the military campaign to commence. More from Bloomberg.

*****

Russia Building New Underground Nuclear Command Posts

U.S. intelligence detects dozens of hardened bunkers for leaders

FreeBeacon: Russia is building large numbers of underground nuclear command bunkers in the latest sign Moscow is moving ahead with a major strategic forces modernization program.

U.S. intelligence officials said construction has been underway for several years on “dozens” of underground bunkers in Moscow and around the country.

Disclosure of the underground command bunkers comes as Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, commander of U.S. European Command, warned recently that Russia has adopted a nuclear use doctrine he called “alarming.”

“It is clear that Russia is modernizing its strategic forces,” Scaparrotti told a conference sponsored by the U.S. Strategic Command.

“Russian doctrine states that tactical nuclear weapons may be used in a conventional response scenario,” Scaparrotti said on July 27. “This is alarming and it underscores why our country’s nuclear forces and NATO’s continues to be a vital component of our deterrence.”

Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon nuclear policy official, said Russia’s new national security strategy, which was made public in December, discusses increasing civil defenses against nuclear attack, an indication Moscow is preparing for nuclear war.

“Russia is getting ready for a big war which they assume will go nuclear, with them launching the first attacks,” said Schneider, now with the National Institute for Public Policy, a Virginia-based think tank.

“We are not serious about preparing for a big war, much less a nuclear war,” he added.

Additionally, Russian officials have been issuing nuclear threats.

“A lot of things they say they are doing relate to nuclear threats and nuclear warfighting,” he said. “Active and passive defense were a major Soviet priority and [current Russian leaders] are Soviets in everything but name.”

Russia is engaged in a major buildup of strategic nuclear forces, building new missiles, submarines, and bombers. A State Department report on Russian activities under the New START arms treaty stated in the spring that Moscow added 153 strategic nuclear warheads to its arsenal under the treaty.

The increase in warheads is said to be the result of the deployment of new SS-27 Mod 2 intercontinental ballistic missiles with multiple warheads and SS-N-32 submarine-launched missiles.

In addition to new missiles, Russia is building a drone submarine, code-named “Kanyon,” which is said to be designed to carry a megaton-class warhead. Moscow also is moving ahead with a hypersonic strike vehicle designed to deliver nuclear warheads through advanced missile defense systems.

A report by the National Institute for Public Policy concludes that one reason for the Russian nuclear expansion is to sow fear of Moscow.

“Russian leaders appear to view nuclear weapons as the ultimate way to make the world ‘fear,’ or at least respect Russia, and provide a political lever to intimidate, coerce, and deter Western states from attempting to interfere militarily against Russian expansionism,” the report said.

Military analysts say possible U.S. responses to Russia’s underground nuclear complexes include the development of deep-penetrating nuclear bombs capable of placing Russia’s command structure at risk.

Another option proposed by nuclear experts is to develop low-yield nuclear arms that could be used in precision strikes.

Few details about the new nuclear underground bunkers were disclosed. State-run Russian press reports have said underground bunkers are being built in Moscow as part of the strategic forces buildup.

Russia’s Defense Ministry revealed in January that a modernized command and control system will be delivered to strategic forces this year.

The system was described by RIA-Novosti as a fifth-generation advanced command and control system.

Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Dmitri Andreyev stated that the new system, known by its Russian acronym IASBU, will use digital signals to send combat orders and control strategic forces.

“The fifth-generation advanced integrated automated combat control system is being tested at industry enterprises,” Andreyev said, adding that by the end of the year missile units will be equipped with the “modernized control posts and advanced strategic missile systems under development with IASBU sections.”

The new system is being used with new SS-27 intercontinental missile units and will provide greater security so that orders will reach those units.

“This will enable use of missile systems without limiting distances while carrying out maneuvering and broadening of options in choosing their combat patrol routes,” the spokesman said.

The new underground nuclear facilities appear similar to earlier construction for command and control complexes during the Cold War, one official said. Russia also continued building underground nuclear facilities after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

The CIA reported through classified channels in March 1997 that construction included an underground subway system from the residence of then-President Boris Yeltsin outside Moscow to a leadership command center.

“The underground construction appears larger than previously assessed,” a CIA report on the facilities stated. “Three decrees last year [1996] on an emergency planning authority under Yeltsin with oversight of underground facility construction suggest that the purpose of the Moscow-area projects is to maintain continuity of leadership during nuclear war.”

Construction work was underway on what the report described as a “nuclear-survivable, strategic command post at Kosvinsky Mountain,” located deep in the Ural Mountains about 850 miles east of Moscow.

Satellite photographs of Yamantau Mountain, also located about 850 miles east of Moscow in the Urals near the town of Beloretsk, revealed development of a “deep underground complex” and new construction at each of the site’s above-ground support areas. Yamantau Mountain means “Evil Mountain” in the local Bashkir language.

“The command post at Kosvinsky appears to provide the Russians with the means to retaliate against a nuclear attack,” the CIA report said, adding that the Russians were building or renovating four complexes within Moscow that would be used to house senior Russian government leaders during a nuclear conflict.

The CIA identified a bunker to be used by Russian leaders at Voronovo, about 46 miles south of Moscow. A second bunker located at Sharapovo, some 34 miles from Moscow, was equipped with a special subway running directly to it.

The nuclear war preparations are estimated to cost billions of dollars, and raise questions about past U.S. aid to Moscow that was aimed at helping secure Russian nuclear facilities.