More evidence has come to light of unfrozen Iranian funds going to terrorist organizations. In a candid address on June 24, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah made a number of admissions about his organization’s funding.

The comments came after a fresh batch of United States sanctions were implemented against the terrorist group. The U.S. Congress signed off on the sanctions in December 2015. The Lebanese Central Bank told smaller financial institutions around the country to comply with the ruling. Since then, many banks froze the assets of Hezbollah members and supporters.

But Nasrallah has belittled the move, saying that his funding doesn’t come through Lebanon’s banks.

“We say openly that our funds come directly from Iran. As long as Iran has money, so will Hezbollah have money,” he said, according to Arutz Sheva.

The comments are an embarrassment for the Obama administration, which fought vehemently to downplay the impact that unfrozen Iranian assets of the nuclear deal would have on Tehran’s terror network.

Nasrallah continued, “We are open about the fact that Hezbollah’s budget, its income, its expenses, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, are from the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

That Iran was instrumental in the founding and financing of Hezbollah is widely known. From its inception in 1985, Hezbollah has looked to Iran for help. Iranian leadership orchestrated the 1983 Beirut bombings, claiming more than 200 U.S. servicemen’s lives. It has established Hezbollah’s political influence within Lebanon and funded a military that easily overshadows Lebanon’s government forces. Nasrallah’s comments support and strengthen the overwhelming proof of Iran’s terrorist sponsorship.

Yet, despite obvious historical proof and clear comments from terrorist leaders like Nasrallah, Washington holds steadfast to the belief that aiding and supporting terrorism is not a key goal for Tehran. Instead, the Obama administration insists that the recently cash-injected Iran is going to focus on developing its ailing economy.

Hope for the Best

The hope is that Iran will do the “right thing” with the money. But Nasrallah’s comments highlight the disconnect between what the White House perceives as Iran’s priorities and what those priorities really are.

U.S. Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that it was “common sense” to expect Tehran to use the funds to prop up the economy rather than increase military expenditures. And yes, Iran has been spending money on deals with Europe and around the globe. But history, and terrorist leaders, suggest that those extensive finances are also going elsewhere.

Secretary of State John Kerry agrees. At the beginning of the year, Kerry admitted that some of the funds would likely go to terrorists: “I think that some of it will end up in the hands of the [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] or of other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists ….”

Yet Iran’s extensive and ongoing history of supporting terrorism was not enough to prevent the release of billions upon billions of dollars to Tehran.

Confusion on Capitol Hill

Kerry’s and Earnest’s optimism seem detached, not only from what Iran and Hezbollah have been saying, but also from the facts produced by their own State Department. The State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 names Iran as the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism: “Iran remained the foremost state sponsor of terrorism in 2015, providing a range of support, including financial, training and equipment, to groups around the world—particularly Hezbollah.”

The report speaks about Iran’s unabated support and how it has assisted in the stockpiling of more than 100,000 missiles in southern Lebanon. It also makes specific mention of Iran boasting that it had “armed Hezbollah with advanced long-range, Iranian-manufactured missiles, in violation of UN Security Council resolutions.” The report also acknowledged that through 2015—as the nuclear deal was being finalized—Hezbollah “accelerated its military role in the support of the Syrian regime.”

The report calls Hezbollah “Iran’s primary beneficiary and terrorist partner” and indicates that hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent in support of the organization.

The U.S. government talks of trust, while at the same time it presents overwhelming proof that Iran should never be trusted—let alone financed. But instead of heeding its own report, the State Department sends officials to foreign governments and banks to teach them how to legally give Iran its money.

In April, Obama administration officials disclosed that Iran had received $3 billion in unfrozen assets. When questioned on where the money went, State Department Spokesman John Kirby replied, “We don’t have perfect knowledge of how every dollar of that is going to be spent,” he said. “And we stand by what the secretary [of state] said, that it’s entirely possible that they can use some of this funding to support terrorist networks.”

Mixed Signals

The Obama White House and State Department are giving mixed signals. Both talk about Iran spending the money on the economy, then show proof that even when heavily sanctioned, Iran chose to invest money in terrorist groups when its economy desperately needed it!

Since the deal was signed, Iran has increased its military spending by more than $1.5 billion. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—which has historically worked alongside Hezbollah for operations such as the Beirut bombings—has been bolstered by the nuclear deal. This year, Iran has exerted enormous influence in Iraq through its Shiite militias. It has also weighed in on military conflicts in Yemen and threatened more action in Bahrain. It stands to reason that the more cash Iran has to play with, the more its terror networks will prosper.

Iranian actions perfectly match what Nasrallah has so clearly stated: Iran will continue to spend its money on terrorist networks throughout the Middle East and abroad. The mixed signals aren’t coming from the state-sponsor of terror or its proxies. The confusion lies in Washington.

And what has been the White House response to Nasrallah’s statements? White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz said, “[W]e know that Iran supports Hezbollah. … So we call on Iran to not only stop doing this because it’s not good for national security and they’re supporting terrorism. But we call on Iran to stop doing it because it’s not in their interest either.”

But he is wrong. Funding Hezbollah is entirely in Iran’s interests.

The Trumpet has long warned of Iran’s regional ambitions. In the August 2008 Trumpet magazine, editor in chief Gerald Flurry and managing editor Joel Hilliker cowrote an article titled “Iran Conquered Lebanon … Now What?” Written long before Iran was free of sanctions, the piece discussed Iran’s investments in Hezbollah and what Iran is planning next. Iran is still supporting Hezbollah because those goals have not yet been attained!

Iran has big plans for the Middle East—particularly Jerusalem. It is in Iran’s interests to keep Hezbollah, which is stationed just north of the Holy City, well funded and well armed.

Tehran has not invested millions annually, sent tens of thousands of missiles, trained troops and established the organization’s political presence for nothing. Nor would Hezbollah—“Iran’s primary beneficiary”—miss out on obtaining some of Tehran’s unfrozen cash.

To understand Hezbollah’s role and Iran’s interest in being the dominant power in the Middle East, be sure to read “Iran Conquered Lebanon … Now What?”