Brazil/Olympics Under Islamic State Threat

Posted on June 22, 2016November 21, 2017 by Denise Simon

Brazil threat

TRAC: South America has not historically been considered a high priority target for Islamic State for reasons ranging from practical to ideological. It has instead been used for remote finance and small-scale recruitment operations by Shia groups and IS’ predecessor, al-Qaeda. It would appear, however, that Islamic State has recognized that political and economic turmoil in countries like Brazil, Venezuela, and Mexico have presented opportunity in the Western Hemisphere.

A sample of recent activity documented by TRAC includes:

A small, but effective, Islamic State financing ringin Brazil • A new Portuguese-language Nashir IS-news Telegram channel • A former Guantanamo detainee, Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab, believed now to be in Brazil

Image: A map of the particularly vulnerable border region referred to as the Triple Frontier.

All of this activity, combined with the backdrop of border insecurity at the Triple Frontier, IS recruitment in Mexico, and an active cell in São Paulo present terrorists with copious soft targets in South America, highlighted by the 2016 Olympics.

*****

Threat Assessment

Based on the information currently available, the threat of an IS-directed attack on the Olympics remains low, though the possibility of an IS-inspired small scale assault always looms. Preventing such an attack will rely on security arrangements at the venue, hotels, and transportation facilities where crime has already been listed as a high risk concern.

Never a High Priority Target

South America has not historically been considered a high priority target for Islamic State or other Sunni jihadist groups for many reasons, ranging from the practical to the ideological. Unlike many European nations, some of whom have a long history of interests in in the Middle East, South American countries are not typically viewed by Sunni militants as potent allies of the US. Instead, Brazil (among others) has served as a place to base remote finance and small-scale recruitment operations.

Outside Historical Caliphate Lands

Central and South America are not part of the lands claimed by historic Islamic conquest and thus fall outside the scope of Islamic State’s ideological priority of extending the Caliphate to the lands that at one time or another were considered belonging to the Umma. (Even the world maps created for Islamic State propaganda don’t bother to identify South America.)

New Focus on Portuguese & Spanish Speakers

This de-emphasis of targets south of the US may be coming to an end, however, on the part of Islamic State. ISIS has recognized the importance of shifting focus from its loses and struggles to new frontiers and opening linguistic doors to recruitment candidates. Following the 11/13 Paris Attacks a tweet attributed to Maxime Hauchard named Brazil as “our next target,” although TRAC has not been able to find a primary source record of this threat. In Spring 2016, Dabiq announced ISIS’ desire to proselytize Mayas with an “anti-colonial” message. Additionally, the approaching 2016 Olympics present an opportunity for Islamic State focus its narrative in a South American nation where it has already seen some support: Brazil.

TRAC has documented a small, but effective, Islamic State financing ring out of Brazil
New all Portuguese Speaking Nashir Channel
Former Guantanamo detainee Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab

Images: Jihadi Jean Luc identified as Steve Duarte. A Luxemburger of Portuguese descent, Duarte was featured in major Islamic State video release as a French-Speaking executioner. In the video he refers to Andalusia and its Muslim cities, threatening Spain. For More on (Video) Islamic State : Filtering Apostates – Five Simultaneous Executions Featuring French Speaking Executioner Wilayat Nineveh

Political Context

In the final week of February 2016, Brazil’s legislature approved a controversial anti-terrorism law after months of debate.

President Rousseff signed to enact the law in the final week of March 2016.

Allows for sentences of 12-30 years.

Opponents consider it a tool for restraining and silencing Brazil’s political dissident movements.

With Brazil’s corruption rankings plummeting and successful Olympics on the line, there is reason to believe some in power seek to silence opposition groups.

The law’s advocates, however, seek not only to avoid sanction but to have additional tools ready to combat global jihad.

Specific wording: “the practice by one or more individuals of acts for the reason of xenophobia, discrimination or prejudice of race, color, ethnic group or religion with the aim to generate social or generalized terror, endangering people, assets, the public peace or safety.”

Israeli officials heralded the law citing years of exploitation of Brazil by Iran and Iranian proxy Hezbollah

Recruitment of Portuguese Speakers

Islamic State Messaging

On 03 June 2016 Telegram IS affiliated channel “Online Dawah Operations” shared a general post in English calling for Spanish and Portuguese speakers:

Reads: “Dear brothers and sisters, we are in need of brothers and sisters who can speak either Portuguese or Spanish to help us on our project in’shaa Allah. If you speak one of those languages and you are willing to join our translation team please Wickr me: ismailbrazili.”

Islamic State Nashir channel in Portuguese appeared on Telegram 29 May 2016:

Five days before Islamic State member Ismail Brazili called for Portuguese speakers on a general Telegram channel, a Nashir Portuguese channel appeared on Telegram. It was created 29 May 2016 but did not make its first post until 02 June 2016. Though the posts are merely reprints of the main Nashir Arabic Channel, its important to recognize the out-reach to get news from IS controlled areas and IS Wilayats to Portuguese speakers.

Important Hashtags

Islamic State relies on hashtags to spread news on both Telegram and Twitter. In almost all the Portuguese Telegram posts the following hashtags are used to spread the propaganda:

#ReportagemFotográfica
#EstadoIslâmico
#CalifadoPT

Plus the hashtag of the specific Wilayat that is being propagated.

Examples of Portuguese claims of credit

Posted 19 June 2016

Posted 20 June 2016

Posed 08 June 2016

The red over blue claims of credit (as well as light blue over darker blue) are very typical of traditional Islamic State claims, however the Portuguese are slightly different: the Wilayat appears to the left (opposed to the right) and each are marked “Urgente” which the Islamic State does not print on the claims of credit in Arabic or other languages.

Former GITMO detainee latest Lebanese immigrant to raise alarm in Brazil

The announcement that former Guantanamo detainee Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab may have legally traveled to Brazil has recently recast Brazil into the spotlight for concerns of jihadist activity. After being transferred to Uruguay in December 2014, Dhiab — whose mother is Argentine –reportedly attempted to travel legally to Brazil, but was denied entrance, according to the statement of an official in Uruguay. Contrary to these reports, another official responsible for working with the Uruguay resettlement, Christian Mirza, said Dhiab traveled legally first to Argentina (in 2015) and then to Brazil, but that his whereabouts are unknown. Dhiab also apparently walks with crutches as a result of poor health, making an undocumented, illegal border crossing more difficult, but not impossible with assistance. On the other hand, Uruguay did not agree to the US request to retain for two years the six resettled detainees.

Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab.

Dhiab is not the fist Lebanese Sunni to make headlines in Brazil. A suspected ISIS-finance cell associated with an Egyptian jihadist in São Paulo has been profiled by TRAC and is available here:

Islamic State Brazil : São Paulo Cell — (Islamic State / ISIS) — CELL PROFILE

In an operation called Menzad, 18 search warrants were issued to halt the Alameddine family’s fraudulent activity in money transfers suspected of supporting ISIS. It included the arrest of Egyptian Hesham Eltrabily, accused by Egypt of involvement in the 1997 Luxor Massacre.

Khaled Hussein Ali is yet another Lebanese transplant to Brazil of great concern in light of Islamic State’s growing influence. Although his affiliation with Al Qaeda reaches high into the organization, it is likely that his role in spreading propaganda and operating internet cafes in Vila Matilde has created fallow ground for Islamic State’s message in São Paulo and beyond.

Border Security and Soft Targets Concern

Border security has long been problematic for Brazil and its neighbors dealing with drug trafficking and militias. Additionally, the Rio Olympics present copious soft target opportunities for jihadist and other groups. Below are a map of the particularly vulnerable border region referred to as the Triple Frontier:

This area is relatively under-policed and concerns are that exploitation by Sunni jihadists would create fall-out with the Shia community, whose large mosques dot the Brazilian border facing Paraguay.

WH: Ben Rhodes is to Iran Deal ~ Valerie Jarrett is to Gun Control

Posted on June 21, 2016June 21, 2016 by Denise Simon

Ban the AR-15….heh….right Val Gal…. This is a White House full of ahem….experts that think AR stands for Automatic Rifle…sheesh…The Federal ‘Assault’ Weapons ban happened in 1994.

Valerie Jarrett’s war on guns

Loretta Lynch Fully Opposes Obama on Gitmo

Posted on June 21, 2016June 21, 2016 by Denise Simon

Say it isn’t so…pigs flying? Video calls between soccer or basketball games?

The Obama White House has a habit of altering assessments and reports especially noted by the CENTCOM scandal. The Obama regime also did the same with the assessment profiles of those forcibly released to other countries in an effort to close Gitmo. One such country that was betrayed by the Obama administration was Ghana.

What is mind boggling is whether we should trust our President or the external people who are proving him wrong. According to US pundits, the said description as given by our leaders isn’t true for either of the men. Bin Atef in particular is a cause of concern. Long before his transfer, the intelligence analysts at Joint Task Force Guantanamo assessed him as a ‘high risk’ and ‘likely to pose a threat to the US, its interest and allies’. Atef is actually a fighter in Usama bin Laden’s former 55^th Arab Brigade and an admitted member of the Taliban.

This is in sharp contrast to the claim by Mahama, who portrays the deal as an act of humanitarian assistance, likening the Yemeni men to non-threatening refugees who have been cleared of any involvement in terrorist activities. More here.

Those former detainees released to Uruguay were to be managed and controlled by the government under the Memorandum of Understanding and release. Well, at least one has fled, allegedly to Brazil.

Exclusive: Justice Department opposes new Obama proposal on Guantanamo

Reuters: President Barack Obama is again facing dissent from within his administration – this time from Attorney General Loretta Lynch – over his plans to shutter the Guantanamo Bay military prison, according to senior administration officials.

Lynch, a former federal prosecutor whom Obama appointed to head the Justice Department two years ago, is opposing a White House-backed proposal that would allow Guantanamo Bay prisoners to plead guilty to terrorism charges in federal court by videoconference, the officials said.

Over the past three months, Lynch has twice intervened to block administration proposals on the issue, objecting that they would violate longstanding rules of criminal-justice procedure.

In the first case, her last-minute opposition derailed a White House-initiated legislative proposal to allow video guilty pleas after nearly two months of interagency negotiations and law drafting. In the second case, Lynch blocked the administration from publicly supporting a Senate proposal to legalize video guilty pleas.

“It’s been a fierce interagency tussle,” said a senior Obama administration official, who supports the proposal and asked not to be identified.

White House officials confirmed that President Obama supports the proposal. But the president declined to overrule objections from Lynch, the administration’s top law-enforcement official.

“There were some frustrations,” said a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The top lawyer in the land has weighed in, and that was the DOJ’s purview to do that.”

If enacted into law, the Obama-backed plan would allow detained terrorism suspects who plead guilty to serve their sentences in a third-country prison, without setting foot on U.S. soil. The plan would thus sidestep a Congressional ban on transferring detainees to the United States, which has left dozens of prisoners in long-term judicial limbo in Guantanamo, the American military enclave in Cuba.

Obama has vowed to close the prison on his watch. But while he has overseen the release of some 160 men from the prison, the facility still holds 80 detainees.

The video plea plan has broad backing within the administration, including from senior State Department and Pentagon officials. A Defense Department spokesman declined to comment.

The most enthusiastic backers of the plan have been defense lawyers representing up to a dozen Guantanamo Bay detainees who are eager to extricate their clients from seemingly indefinite detention.

Republicans in Congress have opposed the president’s plans to empty the prison, on the grounds that many of the detainees are highly dangerous. But there is some bipartisan support for the proposal as well, a rarity in the Guantanamo debate.

Kevin Bishop, a spokesman for Senator Lindsey Graham, a leading Republican voice on defense and national security issues, said Graham was “intrigued” by the proposal.

While support from a Republican senator would by no means guarantee the votes needed to pass, it does give the proposal a better chance than schemes that would transfer detainees from the Cuban enclave to the United States.

Obama views the video feed proposal as a meaningful step toward closing the facility and making good on one of his earliest pledges as president, administration officials said.

Of the 80 prisoners remaining in Guantanamo, roughly 30 have been approved for transfer to third countries by an interagency review board. Most of those 30 men are expected to be released from Guantanamo in coming weeks, according to administration officials.

The officials said they think that as many as 10 more prisoners could be added to the approved-for-transfer list by the review board. Finally, another 10 detainees are standing trial in military commissions.

That leaves roughly 30 detainees whom the government deems too dangerous to release but unlikely to be successfully prosecuted in court. As a result, those men would likely have to be transferred to detention in the United States if the prison were closed.

Administration officials say that allowing video feeds could reduce that number to somewhere between 10 and 20. The administration believes that with such a small number of prisoners requiring transfer to the United States, it would be easier to win support for closing the facility, which is run by a staff of 2,000 military personnel.

“This is the group that gives the president the most heartburn,” said the senior administration official.

Lynch and her deputies at the Justice Department argued that the laws of criminal procedure do not allow defendants to plead guilty remotely by videoconference.

Even if Congress were to pass the law, Lynch and her aides have told the White House that federal judges may rule that such pleas are in effect involuntary, because Guantanamo detainees would not have the option of standing trial in a U.S. courtroom.

A defendant in federal court usually has the option to plead guilty or face a trial by jury. In the case of Guantanamo detainees, the only option they would likely face is to plead guilty or remain in indefinite detention.

“How would a judge assure himself that the plea is truly voluntary when if the plea is not entered, the alternative is you’re still in Gitmo?” said a person familiar with Lynch’s concerns about the proposal. “That’s the wrinkle.”

Lawyers for Guantanamo detainee Majid Khan, a 36-year-old Pakistani citizen, first proposed allowing Khan to plead guilty by videoconference in a legal memo submitted to the Department of Justice in November. In 2012, Khan confessed in military court to delivering $50,000 to Qaeda operatives who used it to carry out a truck bombing in Indonesia, and to plotting with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, on various planned strikes.

Senate investigators found internal CIA documents confirming that Khan’s CIA interrogators subjected him to forced rectal feedings. Khan’s lawyers say the experience amounted to rape. He was also water-boarded.

That treatment makes it difficult for the Department of Justice to successfully prosecute Khan in federal court, according to administration officials.

When White House officials learned that Khan and other detainees were ready to plead guilty to terrorism charges in federal court, they thought they had found a solution.

Efforts to try detainees, including Mohammed and other Sept. 11 suspects, in military tribunals at Guantanamo have bogged down over legal disputes. Only eight defendants have been fully prosecuted. Three verdicts have been overturned.

“The beauty of a guilty plea is you don’t need a trial,” said the senior administration official who supports the video plea proposal.

In February, senior Obama aides proposed pushing ahead with video guilty pleas at an interagency meeting at the White House on the closure of Guantanamo, according to officials briefed on the meeting.

Justice Department officials said they opposed video guilty pleas. Matthew Axelrod, the chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, said the proposal would violate laws of criminal procedure, according to the officials.

The meeting ended with an agreement to pursue new legislation allowing the guilty pleas, the officials said, which the Department of Justice supported.

One week later, President Obama rolled out his plan to close the prison in a nationally televised announcement from the Roosevelt Room. Obama’s plan included seeking “legislative changes … that might enable detainees who are interested in pleading guilty” in U.S. federal courts.

Administration officials spent much of the next two months drafting the new law. On a Friday afternoon in mid-April, White House staff emailed all the involved agencies with a final draft of the bill, according to the officials. The bill would be submitted to Congress the following Monday, the White House email said.

That weekend, Lynch intervened unexpectedly and said the Justice Department opposed the bill. The eleventh-hour move frustrated White House staff. Deciding again to not overrule Lynch, the White House shelved the bill.

In late May, White House officials found a sympathetic lawmaker who inserted language authorizing video pleas into the annual defense spending bill. The White House drafted a policy memo publicly supporting the proposal, which is known as a Statement of Administration Policy, or SAP.

Lynch opposed the idea, according to administration officials, sparking renewed tensions between the Justice Department and White House.

A SAP is the president’s public declaration on the substance of a bill, according to Samuel Kernell, a political science professor at the University of California at San Diego. Without one, it’s often more difficult to get lawmakers on the fence to vote the way the White House wants.

The White House again bowed to Lynch’s objections and declined to issue the SAP.

Here is One That Should Have Received a Visa, But…

Posted on June 20, 2016June 20, 2016 by Denise Simon

Athens, Greece – Working for the US Army in Afghanistan can get you killed, but there’s a silver lining.

The US Army offers its Afghan translators the right to request the Special Immigration Visa (SIV). It’s a program initiated by the US to help certain foreign employees leave their home countries and get on a path to permanent residency in the states—usually for protection from groups like the Taliban. For the last four years, the program has been renewed in the National Defense Authorization Act. This year, however, both the House of Representatives and the Senate failed to vote for the allocation of more visas, which could imperil remaining applicants.

Through that program, Muhammad, a former US Army translator in Afghanistan that I met in the port of Piraeus, Greece, should already be in the US. But like several other forgotten Afghan translators who served the United States, his visa has not come through. After being laid off by his army base in 2014, Muhammad fell into a bureaucratic gap between the United States’ promises to its employees in Afghanistan, and its rocky attempt to withdraw from the country.

Muhammad applied for the SIV in 2014. He was rejected in May 2015. According to the rejection email, his application was ruled invalid on the grounds of “Lack of faithful and valuable service.” Muhammad says that’s because he was fired—but not for lack of faithfulness or value. 2014 was simply the year that the Obama administration started closing army bases, in an early phase of withdrawal from Afghanistan. With fewer bases and fewer troops, fewer translators were needed. Muhammad was downsized by government contractor Mission Essential.

So in January 2016, he decided to make a go of it on his own. He paid $5,500 in smuggling fees to be trafficked from Afghanistan to Iran, from Iran to Turkey, and then from Turkey to Greece. By the time he arrived in the port of Piraeus in March, the 22-year-old’s life had been reduced to the phone in his pocket, the clothes on his back, and a sheaf of papers from his job with the United States Army.

His service and his perfect English together, in theory, put him in a better position than most refugees, but because he is Afghan, he isn’t even eligible for any of the expedited European relocation measures that the Syrian and Iraqi refugees sheltering in the port can claim.

Today he lives in limbo in a tent outside the port’s E1 terminal, where he can watch the Greek ferries come and go, bearing tourists to their summer holidays.

A life-threatening profession

Muhammad says that he was well aware his job translating between US and Afghan forces in the city of Khost came with a death sentence from Taliban insurgents, who oppose the current government and US intervention. He never told anyone, not even his family, what he did for a living.

“I was trying to keep a low profile,” he says, sitting cross-legged next to a ship bollard in the port. He forks a clump of rice from crinkled plastic tray on the ground in front of him. If anyone asked about his work in Afghanistan, he says, he told them he was going to school. These days, he’ll tell anyone who’ll listen.

In an Oct. 2014 episode of Last Week Tonight, US comedian John Oliver highlighted the bureaucratic nightmare that Iraqi and Afghan translators have to deal with in applying for an SIV—and the US system’s inability to take into account individual circumstances and dangers. One Afghan translator interviewed by Oliver had to wait three years and four months between applying for his SIV and arriving in the United States. In that time, the Taliban killed his father and kidnapped his younger brother.

In April 2016, Muhammad met someone who nearly met a similar fate: another former Afghan translator for the US army named Ahmad. Until Jan. this year, 25-year-old Ahmad worked for the US army in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. Knowing the dangers of his job, he applied for his SIV in 2014, but the paperwork moved slowly. He went back to work on the base.

In Dec. 2015, Ahmad’s family in Kabul received a letter from the Taliban, which threatened to kill his parents if he kept working for American troops. The next month, in January 2016, Ahmad decided he could not wait for a visa any longer, and decided to flee Afghanistan with his younger brother. They paid smugglers nearly $11,000, and got as far as Piraeus. Like Muhammad, the two brothers now camp in the port. Ahmad has not yet tried to restart his visa application process.

The SIV process has five basic steps, which include several phases of petition and permission before actually applying for the visa. The State Department estimates that this entire process takes 357 business days—but clearly, it can also take much longer.

“The single biggest cause for delay is security checks,” says Betsy Fisher, policy director at the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), which provides legal assistance to refugees. A puzzling problem, considering that anyone who has worked as a translator on a US army base in a conflict zone, has already undergone extensive security checks, including periodic polygraph tests.

Those who make it to the United States…

With patience, some Afghan translators do make it to the United States. Hamed, who asked to go by his first name only, is a former translator who worked for the US Army in the provinces of Khost and Paktika between 2010 and 2015. He began his SIV application in 2012. His application was approved the next year, but he did not receive his visa until early 2015. Luckily, he and his family survived the wait.

“I told them I want to leave as quick as possible,” Hamed told Quartz about the sense of urgency he felt after multiple threats due to his work for the Army. When he got word one night that he was finally cleared to leave, he says, he was so overcome with joy that he couldn’t sleep. In May 2015, he and his family boarded a plane to the United States.

But their departure has not had an entirely happy ending. In Afghanistan, Hamed’s wife was in her last semester of law school in Afghanistan, but they left before she could finish. Hamed has a degree in information technology, but in Woodbridge, Virginia, where they now reside, he has only been able to find a job in fast food.

…and those who don’t

Today, fewer than 4,000 SIV visas are still available, according to Fisher. Roughly 10,000 SIV applicants are currently waiting for a decision.

With the Balkan route that saw a million refugees work their way into Europe in 2015 effectively shut down, Muhammad and Ahmad’s only options are to wait, apply for asylum in Greece, or go home again. Asylum in Greece is not an option, says Muhammad. “This is not a country which can bear refugees,” he says of its record-high unemployment and the economically paralyzing effects of austerity. “Greeks already have too many problems.”

Despite being stonewalled by US immigration authorities, he carries with him at all times proof of his years of army service: copies of letters of recommendation from two sergeants he worked for, as well as certificates commending his work—just in case they might come in handy.

“I have no idea what to do,” he says.

WH Ignoring Law Banning Russian Arms to Iran

Posted on June 20, 2016June 20, 2016 by Denise Simon

Obama Admin Under Scrutiny for Ignoring U.S. Law Banning Russian Arms Sale to Iran

White House stalls congressional inquiry into its failure to invoke law

FreeBeacon: The Obama administration is stalling a congressional inquiry into its ongoing refusal to uphold a U.S. law that would sanction Russia for selling advanced missile systems to Iran, according to recent communications between the State Department and Congress exclusively obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

President Obama has the authority under U.S. law to designate as illegal Russia’s recent sale to Iran of the advanced S-300 missile system, a long-range weapon that would boost the Islamic Republic’s military capabilities.

The administration has so far declined to exercise its sanction authority under law and has been stalling attempts by Congress to discern the rationale behind this decision, prompting accusations that the administration is ignoring U.S. law and “acquiescing” to the sale in order to preserve last summer’s comprehensive nuclear deal.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R., Ohio), who first launched an inquiry challenging the administration’s reluctance to sanction the sale in early April, told the Free Beacon that the White House is continuing to punt questions from lawmakers, jeopardizing efforts by Western nations to block the arms sale.

The administration informed Chabot on June 8—more than two months after his initial request—that it has not reached a determination as to whether it will move forward with sanctions as specified under the law.

Obama administration officials reiterated this stance when contacted by the Free Beacon late last week.

“Frankly, I’m disappointed in the administration’s response to my letter requesting a quick determination that Russia’s transfer of the S-300 missile system to Iran is progressing their efforts to acquire advanced conventional weapons systems,” Chabot told the Free Beacon. “Unfortunately, the administration’s abysmal response indicates that they are more than reluctant to provide a determination on this case—which is exceptionally disconcerting considering the administration admits they have been trying to persuade Russia not to proceed with the weapon transfer.”

U.S. officials continue to avoid specifying whether the president will use current U.S. laws to designate the sale as illicit and place sanctions upon Russia.

This power, granted under the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of 1992, allows the president to sanction any sale of “advanced conventional weapons” to Iran by other nations.

Obama administration officials have not explained why the law is still not being followed months after Russia announced it had made good on the multi-million dollar arms sale to Iran.

“We regret the delay in responding to your inquiry,” the State Department informed Chabot in its most recent communication, according to a copy viewed by the Free Beacon.

While the administration remains “concerned” about the S-300 sale, it is not prepared to take action, according to the State Department, which was ordered by the White House to provide Chabot’s office with a response.

“We remain concerned about this and have strongly urged Russia not to proceed with the sale of an S-300 system to Iran, as the transfer of these surface-to-air weapons systems to Iran would add to tension in the region and be clearly inconsistent with our common nonproliferation goals,” the State Department wrote to Chabot.

“The Department will continue to implement, as required, the various sanctions authorities we have to support our non-proliferation priorities,” the letter adds.

A State Department official further told the Free Beacon it has not yet decided how to react to the sale.

“We’re continuing to closely follow reports concerning the delivery of the S-300 missile system from Russia to Iran,” said the official, who was not authorized to speak on record. “We have not yet made any determination as to whether this delivery, if and when complete, would trigger any actions under U.S. authorities.”

Lawmakers, as well as reporters, have been trying for months to obtain answers from the administration about the sale. So far, U.S. officials have declined to provide a rationale as to why the administration has not exercised its sanction authority.

“These systems would significantly bolster Iran’s offensive capabilities and introduce new obstacles to our efforts to eliminate the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon. I believe existing U.S. sanctions should be used to deter Russia from transferring this or other dangerous weapons systems to Iran,” Chabot wrote in his initial inquiry to the White House.

Obama administration officials are fighting against enforcing U.S. laws designating the sale in order to keep Iran from breaking its commitments under the nuclear agreement, according to one foreign policy adviser who works intimately with Congress on the issue.

“The Obama administration seems willing to let Iran get away with anything, up to and including acquiring destabilizing weapons that will remake the military balance in the Middle East, just to preserve the nuclear deal,” the source said. “It’s difficult to imagine what would ever trigger U.S. action, if importing these missiles that make Iran immune from outside pressure isn’t enough. Critics of the Iran deal predicted a lot of this, but the collapse on S-300s is worse than many of them imagined.”