White House: No Cyber Danger, Really?

Posted on May 31, 2016May 31, 2016 by Denise Simon

White House Fails to Detect a Single Cyber Threat

After ordering ‘national emergency,’ Obama admin finds no cyber danger

FreeBeacon: The White House has been unable to detect a single cyber security threat more than six months after issuing a “national emergency” to deal with what the administration identified as growing and immediate danger, according to a new government report.

Six months after President Barack Obama invoked emergency powers to block the assets of any person caught engaging in “malicious cyber-enabled activities,” the administration has not identified a single qualifying target, according to the Treasury Department, which disclosed in a report that “no entities or individuals have been designated.”

Related: Iranians Hacked From Wall Street to New York Dam, U.S. Says

The April 2015 directive issued by the White House identified an “increasing prevalence and severity of malicious cyber-enabled activities” among individuals living outside the United States.

Related: Map of Government Hack Activists

These activities were said to constitute “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States,” prompting Obama to declare “a national emergency to deal with this threat.”

A half a year later, the White House still has not invoked this power to combat growing cyber threats, despite a rise in such activity among rogue nations such as Iran, North Korea, and China.

Related: White House Cyber Security Initiative

“The Department of the Treasury took no punitive licensing actions, and it assessed no monetary penalties,” according to the department’s first periodic review of the president’s emergency order.

The White House has not explained why it has not yet invoked its powers, even following reports that Russian hackers penetrated the State Department and “sensitive parts” of the White House’s computer networks last year.

Related: Cyber attacks against our critical infrastructure are likely to increase

The Pentagon and other branches of the U.S. government also have been the targets of these types of attacks, which officials have traced back to the Russians, North Koreans, and others.

Military organizations tied to the Iranian government also have been identified as hacking into the email and social media accounts of White House officials.

The emergency powers invoked by Obama could be used to sanction individuals tied to these attacks if the administration agrees that such a determination should be made.

Those responsible for the cyber attacks already reported by the media and currently being investigated by federal authorities could quality for designation under these emergency powers.

The cyber threat posed by other nations and foreign criminals continues to grow, according to the White House, which moved to take further action on this front in February.

“Criminals, terrorists, and countries who wish to do us harm have all realized that attacking us online is often easier than attacking us in person,” the White House disclosed in announcing the creation of national plan of action to combat cyber terrorists. “As more and more sensitive data is stored online, the consequences of those attacks grow more significant each year.”

A month after Obama invoked the emergency powers, Congress launched a probe into data breaches at the White House. Some lawmakers suspected that the White House had attempted to downplay the extent of these attacks by Russians and others.

Fighting on the Same Side of Iranian Militias

Posted on May 31, 2016May 31, 2016 by Denise Simon

BAGHDAD – American commandos are on the front lines in Syria in a new push toward the Islamic State group’s de facto capital in Raqqa, but in Iraq it is an entirely different story: Iran, not the United States, has become the face of an operation to retake the jihadi stronghold of Fallujah from the militant group.

On the outskirts of Fallujah, tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers, police officers and Shiite militiamen backed by Iran are preparing for an assault on the Sunni city, raising fears of a sectarian bloodbath. Iran has placed advisers, including its top spymaster, Qassim Suleimani, on the ground to assist in the operation.

The battle over Fallujah has evolved into yet another example of how United States and Iranian interests seemingly converge and clash at the same time in Iraq. Both want to defeat the Islamic State. But the United States has long believed that Iran’s role, which relies on militias accused of sectarian abuses, can make matters worse by angering Sunnis and making them more sympathetic to the militants. More here from HoustonChronicle

Armoured vehicle modified by Hashd engineers carries AAH emblem during the operations to move toward Fallujah

Rafsanjani Admits Iran’s Involvement in Region’s Crises

London-Chairman of the Expediency Discernment Council Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said that Iran is involved in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Afghanistan to defend national interests.

Rafsanjani explained during an interview with Aftab News that Iran cannot leave these countries easily, adding that continuing what they have started with there is not an easy mission.

He considered Iran’s intervention in regional crises as one of the international challenges his country is facing.

He added by saying, “Arab and Islamic countries are united against Iran in Syria and now want to control things in Iraq.”

Moreover, Rafsanjani admitted that Iran is facing troubles in the region; adding that these problems should be solved by proper management in order to reach a suitable solution.

On the other hand, Rafsanjani called for Americans to be “flexible” with Iran for a few years in order to gain the confidence of the Iranian officials; thus normalizing U.S.-Iranian relations.

He also implicitly pointed out that Rouhani wants to meet U.S. President Barack Obama. But “Khamenei’s pressure exerted on the Iranian president,” in addition to the unsuitable circumstances, “prevents such meeting from taking place.”

Rafsanjani acknowledged the existence of profound differences in the Iranian leadership, accusing some officials of deceiving public opinion.

Three days ago, Commander of Iranian Quds Force Qassem Soleimani pointed out implicitly to the existence of negotiations between Iran and the U.S. on the crises in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the Expediency Discernment Council defended Hassan Rouhani by explaining that one of his major political pledges, regarding ending the house arrest of Green Movement leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, has not been met yet because it is out of the government’s powers.

Notably, Rouhani is passing through very critical times due to the increased pressure exerted on him and as a result of the long list of accusations directed by his allies and rivals.

In addition, Rafsanjani mentioned that Iran is facing great internal challenges because of the political disputes, unemployment, and inflation.

Iranian websites circulated news on Rafsanjani’s statements at the time when former Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Mohsen Rezaee attacked the Saudi foreign minister with racist terms.

Furthermore, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African Affairs Amir Abdullahian said that Tehran is determined to continue playing its advisory role in the region, reiterating Iran’s continuous presence in Syria, according to IRNA official agency.

He explained on Monday that Iran, with pride and determination, continues its advisory support in the region, pointing out to Iran’s crucial role to guarantee security and stability in regional countries and the world.

Iran justifies its military presence in Syria and Iraq by considering itself playing an advisory role, yet it names its militants in these areas with ideological titles such as “Defending Shi’ite Shrines,” showing contradiction between the official speeches given in Iran and the involved institutions that are sending armed militants to Arab countries.

In a common matter, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran Ali Shamkhani defended Iran’s decision to intervene in Syria and Iraq.

Meanwhile:

Turkey plans to install computerized automatic weapons to secure border with Syria: report

Turkey is stepping security measures on its border with Syria, including plans to install computerized automated firing systems, Yeni Şafak newspaper reported Monday.

IHA Photo

The weapons would be part of “smart towers” equipped with thermal imaging systems to prevent illegal crossings over the border.

If anyone gets within 300 metres of the border a warning will be sounded in three languages, which if not heeded, will trigger the weapons system, according to the report in the pro-government daily. The Ministry of Defence has yet to comment on the reports.

Securing the border with Syria plays a crucial role in Ankara’s foreign policy. Faced with a grave threat from across the border, Ankara has repeatedly asserted that any threat from Syria will receive retaliation in kind.

Around two dozen people have been killed in the Turkish border town of Kilis by rocket fire from DAESH terrorists since January, which has prompting the Turkish military to respond with artillery, and Turkish Special Forces carried out an operation within northern Syria earlier this month to take out DAESH teams which were launching these rockets.

Turkey, although a member of the U.S.-led coalition battling DAESH, has received almost none of the support requested from its allies in the fight against the extremist group, and has increasingly indicated Ankara is prepared to take unilateral action. The Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have stepped up attacks on DAESH in Syria in recent weeks, after rockets fired by the group repeatedly landed in Kilis, in what appeared to be a sustained and deliberate assault. More than a dozen rockets hit the town in just the last week.

Gunfire and occasional explosions from across the border could be heard on Wednesday from a hill in Kilis, which is home to more than 100,000 Syrian refugees.

Is My Daddy an Angel?

Posted on May 30, 2016May 30, 2016 by Denise Simon

Here’s how a little girl who lost her Marine dad taught the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff the full cost of war

by Ward Carroll by – May 29, 2016 2:08:13 pm Memorial Day

General Dempsey talking to the troops in Iraq. (Photo: CBS News)

Mighty: Like most general officers commissioned right after the Vietnam War ended, Gen. Martin Dempsey’s firsthand experience of dealing with combat losses came relatively late in his career. During the summer of 2003, then-Major General Dempsey was commanding “Task Force Iron” in Iraq when the post-invasion lull ended and the insurgency began going after American troops.

“We started taking casualties,” Gen. Dempsey recounted. “And during the morning briefing, after we talked about the high-level mission items and what we called ‘significant incidents,’ we’d flash up the names of the fallen and have a moment of silence.

“The names were up there on the screen and then, whoosh, they were gone,” he said. “After about two or three weeks of the same thing, I became really uncomfortable with that. One minute it was there and real, and then the next minute it was somebody else’s problem.”

Gen. Dempsey attended a number of the memorial services held at the forward operating bases downrange for those killed in action.

“They were both heart wrenching and inspirational,” the general said about the services. “To see the love that these soldiers had for each other made me take my responsibilities that much more seriously.”

But as he greeted the battle buddies of the fallen, Gen. Dempsey wasn’t sure what to say to them that would help at those moments. “I had nothing,” he said. “I mean, I’d say, ‘hang in there’ or ‘we’re really sorry about what happened’ . . . I felt so superficial.”

Then it hit him one morning after he was just waking up in his quarters in Baghdad. “A phrase was echoing in my head,” he remembered. “Make it matter.”

He did two things immediately after that: First, he had laminated cards made for every soldier who had been killed to that point. The cards were carried by all the general officers in theater as a constant physical reminder of the human cost of the war. In time the number of casualties became so great that it was impractical to carry the cards at all times, so he had a mahogany box engraved with “Make it Matter” on the top and put all but three of the cards inside of it. He would constantly rotate the three he carried in his pocket with the ones in the box.

Second, from that point forward when he would address the soldiers in units that had experienced losses, he’d simply say, “Make it matter.”

“They knew exactly what I meant,” Gen. Dempsey said.

****

Five years after Gen. Dempsey’s introduction to the challenges a two-star leader faces during periods of significant combat losses, Marine Corps Major David Yaggy, a veteran of three combat deployments, was an instructor flying in the rear cockpit of a Navy T-34C trainer on a cross-country flight between Florida and South Carolina when the airplane went down in the hills of Alabama. Yaggy and his flight student at the controls in the front cockpit were both killed in the crash.

The day of that crash is burned into the memory of Maj. Yaggy’s widow, Erin. She first heard from a realtor friend that a helicopter had gone down, and she immediately went online and saw a report that, in fact, a T-34 had crashed in Alabama. Fearing the worst, she put her 18-month-old daughter Lizzy in a stroller and went for a walk, in denial and hoping to avoid any officials who might show up to tell her that her husband had been killed.

During the walk, she received a phone call from her cousin. “Where are you?” she asked.

“I’m at your house,” he replied. That was all he said.

Erin ran home pushing the stroller, in her words, “like a crazy person.” When she arrived she caught a glimpse of a uniform, and she broke down, hysterical. “That didn’t go so well,” she said.

She had a long period of vacillating between shock, anger, and sorrow. “I felt like other people wanted me to cry,” she said. “I was like, ‘I don’t want permission to cry, I just want him here.”

Lizzy Yaggy visiting the Arlington National Cemetery gravesite of her father. (Photo: Erin Yaggy)

The sister of the flight student killed with Erin’s husband convinced her to get involved with Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, and she wound up making the short trip from Baltimore to Washington DC to attend her first Good Grief Camp — the organization’s signature gathering — when Lizzy was four years old.

****

General Dempsey had just taken over as Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army when his aide briefed him that he was scheduled to address the TAPS Good Grief Camp attendees gathered in a hotel ballroom across the interstate from the Pentagon. Although the general had heard of TAPS and was armed with the requisite three-by-five cards filled with talking points provided by his staff, when he got there he realized he wasn’t fully ready for what he was walking into.

“I walked into this room with 600 kids all wearing big round buttons with images of their parents, and I knew I was ill-prepared,” Gen. Dempsey said. “It was emotionally overwhelming. It’s hard enough meeting a single family that’s had a loss. It’s another thing altogether meeting 600 families.”

Gen. Dempsey started his appearance with a question-and-answer session, and after a couple of innocent ones like “do you have your own airplane?” and “do you like pizza?” a little girl dramatically shifted the mood by asking, “Is my daddy an angel?”

“I was stunned,” Gen. Dempsey recalled. “How do you answer that question?”

Lizzy Yaggy greets Gen. Dempsey during TAPS Good Grief Camp. (Photo: Erin Yaggy)

The general thought for a few moments before calling an audible of sorts. Fearing that he could well break down if he tried to talk he decided to attempt something else.

“I knew I could sing through emotion instead of trying to speak,” he said.

So he answered that, of course, her father was an angel — like the fathers of everyone there — and that the entire group should sing together because singing is joyful and the fact that their fathers were angels should bring them great joy.

Then he launched into the Irish classic, “The Unicorn Song,” including a lesson in the proper hand gestures required during the chorus. Soon the entire room was singing.

After his appearance, General Dempsey asked Bonnie Carroll, the founder of TAPS, if he could meet the little girl who’d asked the question and her family, so Bonnie introduced him to the Yaggys. The general was immediately struck by Lizzy’s spark, and, as Erin put it, Lizzy was drawn to the man with lots of silver stars on his Army uniform who’d raised her spirits by singing with all of the kids.

“His timing was perfect,” Erin said. “Before [General Dempsey’s singalong], Lizzy had just said, ‘I don’t want to talk about daddy being dead anymore.’ Her attitude changed after she met General Dempsey.”

****

At the following year’s Good Grief Camp, they began what blossomed into a tradition: Lizzy introduced him as the keynote speaker.

“She stood up and said, ‘this is General Dempsey. We love him, and he loves to sing, and he makes us feel good,’” the general recalled. “And she finished with, ‘and now my friend, General Dempsey.’” With that, once again, General Dempsey had to fight back tears as he faced hundreds of military survivors.

Lizzy introducing Gen. Dempsey at the TAPS Gala for the first time. (Photo: Erin Yaggy)

General Dempsey and his wife Deanie stayed in touch with the Yaggys, exchanging email updates and Christmas cards. The third year Lizzy introduced the general he’d taken over as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon’s senior-most position. Before they got on stage together she gave him a little box with an angel-shaped medallion in it, saying, “You’re my guardian angel.”

The general was deeply moved and wanted to return the gesture, but all his aide had in his possession was a ballcap with the numeral “18” on the front of it, signifying the 18th CJCS. He wrote in black ink on the bill: “To Lizzy — From your chairman friend. Martin E. Dempsey.”

“It was so cute to see her wearing that hat for the rest of the night,” Deanie Dempsey said. “Here was this little girl in this long green dress with a ballcap on.”

“She wore that hat all the time after that,” Erin said. “She even took it to bed with her.”

Lizzy wearing her favorite hat, a gift from the 18th CJCS. (Photo: Erin Yaggy)

The entire time General Dempsey served as the chairman he only had two things on his desk in the Pentagon: The mahogany “Make it Matter” box full of the laminated cards that profiled those who were killed under his command in Iraq and the guardian angel medallion Lizzy gave him.

****

When it came time for the general to retire, the Pentagon’s protocol apparatus sprang into action — after all, a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff change of command is like the Super Bowl of military ceremonies. As the officials were coordinating all the moving parts, including the details surrounding President Obama’s attendance, they were surprised to learn who the outgoing chairman wanted to introduce him. They pushed back, but the general was insistent.

The day arrived and at the appropriate moment in the event, a little girl on the dais confidently strode by the dignitaries and political appointees and the President of the United States and stood on the box positioned behind the podium just for her.

And without any hesitation, Lizzy Yaggy delivered her remarks to the thousands in attendance, and finished with, “Please welcome my friend, General Dempsey . . .”

Lizzy hugging now-retired Gen. Dempsey at this year’s TAPS Good Grief Camp in DC. (Photo: TAPS.org)

Chemical Weapons in Iraq and Beyond

Posted on May 29, 2016May 29, 2016 by Denise Simon

During the first Gulf War, distribution was made to our soldiers for the protection of chemical weapons.

U.S. troops were frequently ordered to don their gas masks and protective suits. The term Mission Oriented Protective Posture (MOPP) refers to the amount of protective gear that troops are ordered to wear in response to an assessed chemical-warfare threat, and ranges from MOPP-0 (no protection) to MOPP-4 (the entire protective ensemble).

The incidents are recorded here by date, location and the type of chemical weapon. The Veterans Administration noted the types of risks and was careful omitting admission of chemical weapons, yet did include them on the website.

There was also congressional testimony in 1992/1993. One cannot ignore the in depth report the New York Times did about two years ago.

Soldiers Exposed to “Chemical Unknown” in Iraq not Getting Adequate FOIA Responses from DOD, and More: FRINFORMSUM 5/19/2016

May 19, 2016

The two-page 2003 Camp Taji Incident report — released a dozen years after the dangerous exposure.

The Defense Department is telling soldiers that were exposed in 2003 to a “chemical unknown” in Taji, Iraq that it has no documents on the incident – after a decade of saying that documents on the event were classified.

C. J. Chivers of the The New York Times reported in May 2015 that, for over a decade, the US military denied FOIA requests on the chemicals soldiers were exposed to, resulting in chronic illnesses. The Army only released the two-page 2003 Camp Taji Incident report, written by the multinational Iraq Survey Group, after years of FOIA requests; the report found that the chemical soldiers came in contact with was a potentially fatal “carcinogen and poisonous chemical.” The Archive’s Director Tom Blanton told the Times in 2015 that, in addition to the secrecy trumping common sense, that “the outrage here is extraordinary.” Blanton noted, “Soldiers exposed to something really dangerous cannot find out what it was because ‘Sorry it’s classified’?” he said. “It’s creepy and it’s crazy.”

Now, according to reporting by Samantha Foster at the Topeka Capital-Journal, the Army is telling soldiers like Army Spc. Sparky Edwards and former Sgt. First Class Dennis Marcello that there are no documents on the chemical they were exposed to or the incident. Nate Jones, the Archive’s FOIA project director, notes that the DOD may be claiming to have no documents because they were possibly destroyed or misfiled during the war – or because the large, decentralized Defense Department genuinely doesn’t know where to look to find the records. Jones identifies this as a prime example of why FOIA requesters “must specify exactly where they want to search or risk the agency not going the extra mile” to find them, and that it is always a good idea to appeal a “no records” response.

According to Department of Justice statistics, last fiscal year an obscenely high 130,113 FOIA requests (16.9 percent of requests processed) were deemed to result in “no records” responses. As the Archive has learned, more often than not, appealing a “no records” response and explaining why you think the records exist and even suggesting which records (including the Washington Records Center –control f) the agency should search leads to more records being found. Link for citation is here.

As recently as last month, it was found that Islamic State had taken cached and reserve chemical weapons and made a new factory at Mosul University.

Just last week:

ISIS testing chemical weapons on prisoners and animals in grisly laboratories

VILE Islamic State (ISIS) jihadis are testing chemical weapons on its prisoners in grisly suburban laboratories, terrified Iraqi citizens have claimed.

ExpressUK: The sick militants are testing chlorine and mustard gas on its captives, in direct opposition to the Geneva Protocol’s war crime guidelines.

ISIS’s laboratories are located deep within its territory in the city of Mosul in northern Iraq.

The lunatic extremists are understood to be working frantically to improve its chemical and nuclear weapon capabilities, with plans to launch attacks in Iraq, Syria and on the West.

Abu Shaima, the head of ISIS’s chemical warfare unit, has now moved the operation away from the city’s university to residential areas like al-Mohandseen, which are surrounded by innocent civilian homes.

Concerned residents have reported several houses in the area have now been taken over by ISIS researchers, according to The Telegraph.

Chillingly, dozens of dead dogs and rabbits have also been found nearby, hinting at the cruel experiments taking place within, while nearby residents are suffering from breathing difficulties and rashes.

The extremists are believed to have seized chemicals and weapons from Syrian forces, with which they have already launched a devastating chemical attack on the Iraqi town of Taza.

That attack this March killed a three-year-old girl and injured 600 others, as well as highlighting the terror group’s chemical warfare intentions.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, formerly of the UK Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment, said: “ISIL’s chemical weapons operation has been heavily targeted – as is detailed in this report – and moving into residential areas is exactly what you would expect them to do now.

“Now we know the extent of the ISIL chemical and dirty bomb aspirations we must make doubly sure that our security in the UK is absolutely water-tight against this threat.”

Iraqi forces uncover an Islamic State weapon hideaway including gas canisters used to make homemade bombs. For the slide show on photos, go here.

*****

Chemical Agents as Weapons of Terror Rather Than as Weapons of Mass Destruction

In February 2012, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency identified that “terrorist organizations are working to acquire and employ chemical, biological, and radiological materials.”43 Many experts believe that it would be difficult for terrorist groups to use chemical agents as weapons of mass destruction. In 1993, the Office of Technology Assessment estimated that VX, the most lethal of nerve agents, spread uniformly and efficiently would require tons of material to kill 50% of the people in a 100 km2 area.44 On the other hand, chemical agents might be effectively used as weapons of terror in situations where limited or enclosed space might decrease the required amounts of chemical. That is, the use of the weapon itself, even if casualties are few, could cause fear that would magnify the attack’s effect beyond what would be expected based solely on the number of casualties. Full summary here.

Obama Concession to Iran: Russian Arms?

Posted on May 26, 2016May 26, 2016 by Denise Simon

Obama Admin Considers Permitting Advanced Russian Arms Sales to Iran

White House might not invoke laws triggering new sanctions

FreeBeacon: The Obama administration has the power to sanction key Russian arms sales to Iran, but has so far abstained from exercising this right under U.S. law, prompting some in Congress to question whether the administration is “acquiescing” to the arms sales in order to appease Iran, according to conversations with sources and recent congressional correspondence to the White House exclusively obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

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

However, the administration has declined for weeks to clarify its stance on new sanctions, despite expressing opposition to the sale. Administration officials have further declined to answer questions from the Free Beacon and other outlets about whether the president will consider taking action in the future.

The administration’s hesitance to act has prompted a new congressional inquiry, the Free Beacon has learned, and has sparked accusations that the White House is not exercising its sanction authority in order to prevent Iran from walking away from last summer’s nuclear deal.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R., Ohio) sent an inquiry to the White House about the matter more than a month ago. The White House has not responded.

“Given the series implications for the United States and our allies in the region, I respectfully request that you quickly determine that Russia’s transfer of S-300 surface-to-air missile systems advance Iran’s efforts to acquire ‘destabilizing numbers and types of advances conventional weapons’ and impose the necessary U.S. sanctions once the Russian delivery takes place,” Chabot wrote to the White House on April 7, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Free Beacon.

Chabot outlined concern “that without such a determination the United States may be viewed as acquiescing to this transfer” of a major defensive weapons system to Iran.

Chabot told the Free Beacon on Thursday the administration has not responded to multiple inquiries about the potential designation.

“Despite multiple inquires to the U.S. Department of State, I still have not received a response on Russia’s S300 surface-to-air missile system transfer to Iran,” Chabot said. “This apparent dismissal leaves me wondering what exactly the Administration is hiding. I am really asking a simple question – is the introduction of a sophisticated weapon system into Iran, that has not been there previously, going to illicit the appropriate U.S. sanctions response? I am not sure why the Administration has found it so hard to come to a determination. The S300 is one of the most advanced anti-aircraft missile system’s in the world and significantly bolsters Iran’s offensive capabilities and stands as a serious hurdle to our efforts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear armed state. This is absolutely a destabilizing conventional weapon system.”

When contacted for comment, a State Department official told the Free Beacon that the administration has not made a final determination about whether the S-300 sale would trigger additional U.S. sanctions.

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

“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 said.

The sale is technically permitted under current United Nations resolutions governing weapons sales. However, the Obama administration has the right to veto the sale at the U.N. Security Council. The administration has not committed to doing so.

U.S. law also grants the president the right to designate such sales as illicit and therefore open to sanctions.

The Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of 1992 grants the president authority to sanction the sale of “advanced conventional weapons” to Iran by any nation.

“U.S. law provides your administration with the authority to apply U.S. sanctions in response” to the sale, Chabot explains in his letter. “For example, the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act and the Iran Sanctions Act provide authority for you to sanction individuals or countries that you determine are aiding Iran’s efforts to acquire or develop ‘destabilizing numbers and types of advanced conventional weapons.’”

Sanctions would kick in if the president decides that such a sale would destabilize the Middle East and shift regional balance.

“Iran’s acquisition of these systems would embolden Tehran to adopt a more threatening regional posture and to pursue offensive activities detrimental to regional stability in the belief that the systems would deter retaliation,” according to Chabot.

Reporters as well as lawmakers have attempted for weeks to get an answer from the administration about whether the president would make such a determination.

One foreign policy adviser who works closely with Congress on the Iran issue told the Free Beacon that the administration can no longer waffle on the issue.

“The administration tried to look the other way, but got called out for it by Congress. Then they spent a month and a half hoping that the whole thing would go away,” the source said. “Now I don’t know what they’re going to do, since it’s obvious that they’re letting Iran import advanced weapons in violation of U.S. law just to preserve the nuclear deal.”