U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

89–816PDF 2014

ISLAMIST FOREIGN FIGHTERS RETURNING HOME

AND THE THREAT TO EUROPE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND 

EMERGING THREATS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

SEPTEMBER 19, 2014

Serial No. 113–217

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

PAUL COOK, California 

GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

DOUG COLLINS, Georgia 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

SEAN DUFFY, Wisconsin 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND EMERGING THREATS

DANA ROHRABACHER, California, Chairman 

TED POE, Texas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

PAUL COOK, California 

GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Ms. Farah Pandith, Fisher Family fellow, Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy 

School of Government (former U.S. Special Representative to Muslim Communities) ............................................................................................................... 6

Mr. Thomas Joscelyn, senior fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies ... 15

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Ms. Farah Pandith: Prepared statement ............................................................... 9

Mr. Thomas Joscelyn: Prepared statement ........................................................... 18

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 38

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 39

(1)

ISLAMIST FOREIGN FIGHTERS RETURNING 

HOME AND THE THREAT TO EUROPE 

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2014

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND EMERGING THREATS,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:24 a.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dana Rohrabacher 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. I call this hearing to order. 

And this is the Subcommitteeq on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats. And today we will be discussing an emerging threat 

to Europe, which is an area that we are focused on, but it is also 

an emerging threat to the world. 

And I am going to handle things a little differently for this hearing. I am going to permit my—or ask my ranking member if he 

would move forward with his opening statement first. 

I will then have my opening statement as chairman of the subcommittee, and I will ask my colleagues if—to have short opening 

statements as well. 

I yield, then, to Mr. Keating. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important and timely hearing. 

I would like to also thank our esteemed witnesses, including Ms. 

Farah Pandith. And I am pleased that you are able to join us. Ms. 

Pandith’s uncle, Dr. Ashraf, and I have a long history in Massachusetts, and I am so happy to see his legacy live on through his niece, 

who is testifying before us today. 

Today’s hearing is particularly relevant, given the geographic 

proximity of Europe to the conflict zone. Social networking, the 

internet, the propaganda have become the premier recruitment 

tools for terrorist gangs expanding their reach far into Europe and 

to the United States. These tools are cheap and effective. Even for 

the group like ISIL, who seems to have plentiful resources, they 

are being used. For this reason, I think that the nexus of our counterterrorism strategy should focus on various facets of their recruitment and communication strategy. This has been the root of the 

problem for decades and this is what we must attack. 

Of course, we will need the cooperation of our transatlantic and 

regional partners to do this effectively. The National Counterterrorism Center estimates that as of this month, as many as 12,000 

individuals have traveled to Syria since 2011 in order to support 

2

the armed militants there. This figure includes well over 1,000 European citizens and more than 100 Americans. The other estimates, 

particularly from our allies overseas, expect these numbers to be 

even higher. 

Europe can serve as a barometer for what may come in the 

United States, and for this reason, we must continue to work closely with our European partners and find ways to facilitate better information-sharing and communication. The FBI and other intelligence agencies are already working with domestic and international partners to track foreign fighters traveling through the 

Mideast. 

As such, interagency cooperation and information-sharing will 

undoubtedly be put to a test as agencies seek to coordinate and respond to this threat, particularly across international boundaries. 

For this reason, I for one will continue to be a strong advocate for 

incorporating local law enforcement into this framework and utilizing their force multiplier effect. 

Yet as I mentioned earlier, there is a larger piece of the puzzle, 

and that is with the mindset and recruitment of these militants 

who come to their Western nations to join brutal gangs that go on 

to rape, kill and divide thousands, if not millions, comes into bear. 

As a transatlantic community, we can only fight the lure of terrorism by determining its causes and devising appropriate countermeasures. In particular, I feel the messages being promoted, the 

heritage and the varied cultural history of the Middle East and 

North Africa will be important to helping young people to find their 

true identities instead of listening to backwards propaganda seeking to destroy that history. 

Further, although controversial, I think it is important to reassess our partners in this fight. Are all the countries that have been 

affected and impacted by foreign fighter and this phenomenon 

doing what they can do to stem recruitment and financing? Are 

they protecting those in their own population and region from 

being coerced and harmed from these activities? A true partner in 

countering radicalism would not only do what they could do to curtail such activities from taking place abroad, but would have zero 

tolerance for extremism to go unchecked at home as well. 

These are important questions to weigh when evaluating the capabilities of our international partners, who in most cases are more 

prone to attacks by radical groups than we are. Yet radicalization 

is occurring across the world in rural and urban settings, wealthy 

and poor communities, and among all education levels. 

In the long-run, we must ensure that courses of action we pursue 

are not only targeting terrorist groups, but the polarizing policies 

that often lead to this kind of societal division. 

Further, this composition now must include both genders, for it 

is not only men who take up arms, but women who play an integral role in the stabilization and organization of society within ISIL 

and as well as other extremist groups. Muslim women are growing 

up in increasingly conservative, closed environments, and this will 

have an effect on future generations. 

The subject of today’s hearing is of utmost concern to our own 

national security, and I look forward to hearing each of our witnesses’ perspectives on this timely issue. 

3

And with that, I thank the chairman and yield back. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thanks very much. And this morning’s 

hear is on the merging threat of Islamist foreign fighters going to 

Syria and Iraq and the specific threat that they pose when they 

seek to return to Europe, and how does that impact us in the 

United States as well. 

In 2011, the Syrian people rose up in revolt against their government. Over 3 years later, Syria has been torn apart by ethnic and 

sectarian strife. It is in ab open civil war. Radical Islamic terrorist 

groups, including al-Qaeda, have taken full advantage of this 

chaos. Possibly as many as 15,000 foreign fighters have entered 

Syria from around, well, perhaps 80 different countries to take up 

arms in this fight. 

It appears that several thousand of those fighters came from Europe and hold passports from European countries. Many of these 

Islamists have joined ISIL, a heinous, brutal anti-Western terrorist 

organization that has grown to contest vast territory in both Syria 

and Iraq. 

In ISIL, we face a terrorist group which controls land and has 

proven its abilities on the battlefield. It is also one of the richest 

terrorist groups in the world. They profit from criminal activity, extortion, black market oil sales, and of course the easy capture, or 

you might say gift, of vast amounts of American military equipment that we had generously provided Iraq. This is a mega-milliondollar operation on their part. 

It is a nightmare to think about the kind of attacks ISIL could 

pull off, given their financial resources, their geographic safe havens and their access to so many recruits with Western passports. 

The filmed beheading of James Foley and Steven Sotloff and 

David Haines tells us all that we need to know, that is all we need 

to know about the intentions of this terrorist organization. The terrorist holding the knife, and let us remember, the terrorist holding 

the knife in the beheading videos spoke with a British accent. That 

indicates the magnitude of the security challenge that we face. 

We have already begun to see the threat of terrorism emanating 

from Syria. This week, a Yemen-born naturalized American citizen 

was indicted for attempting to provide support to ISIL in New York 

state. Dozens of people have also been arrested just this week in 

Australia and in the Balkans in connection to plots to aid ISIL and 

conduct terrorist attacks in the West. 

And the words ‘‘terrorist attacks in the West’’ perhaps is a little 

too soft. Maybe we should understand what a terrorist attack in 

the West means are the bodies, the brutal tearing apart of the bodies of women and children, civilians, people who just want to live 

their lives. And this group of other human beings, for whatever 

reason they have, will at random murder our fellow citizens and 

people who live in Western countries. Perhaps, as we will hear 

from our witnesses, I would like to hear about their—what motive 

we are talking about here perhaps to terrorize Western civilization 

out of a huge section of the globe. 

In May, a Muslim terrorist who held French citizenship and who 

had traveled to Syria, shot and killed four people in a Jewish museum in Brussels. Those victims, they were honest, ordinary people, could be related to any of us. 

4

And during our discussions this morning, I hope to learn from 

the panelists about why ISIL’s bloody message of hate and violence 

attracts far too many of European Muslims; what are the viable options for European countries in this situation to prevent terrorists 

from returning home; what attracts them to it, and how can we 

prevent them from coming back to their home countries and conducting this type of murder, horrible murder upon innocent people 

in our societies; how can we better work with our European allies; 

and, let me add, how can we better work with the European allies 

and Russia to defend ourselves against this shared threat? 

Finally, let me just note that I think we would do well to learn 

from Europe’s immigration experience as we talk about reforming 

our own laws. This problem is not only counterterrorism, but it is 

a question of how different people can fit together in a free society. 

We have a lot to cover, so with that, I turn to my—the ranking 

member has already been heard from. Other members perhaps 

have short opening statements, and I yield to Judge Poe. 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

ISIS, as you have said, is a threat that we need to understand 

has to be reckoned with. I fear the West, especially the United 

States, underestimates them. They have, unlike many of the terrorist groups, set up governance in northern Iraq and in Syria. 

They tax the people, they govern the community, they have oil, 

they have money, and they are determined fighters. And, as you 

said, they have a lot of American equipment already. 

The United States for years has supplied equipment to the Iraqis 

and tried to train them. In the first encounter with ISIS in northern Iraq, they cut and ran. A lot of Americans believe they just 

threw down some small arms and some MRE’s and some ammo 

and took off running. Not so. Here is an M1 tank that the Iraqi 

Government was given by the United States. Confronted with ISIS, 

they bailed, and now ISIS controls an M1 tank belonging to the 

American citizens. 

Here is the parade that they celebrated after capturing several 

Humvees abandoned by the Iraqis that we subsidized. And at the 

bottom, what to me is the most alarming: These are four Humvees, 

American-made, given to the Iraqi troops to fight ISIS, and after 

they cut and ran, they were abandoned, and now this is an ISIS 

truck headed to Syria to fight in Syria. I think we underestimate 

who these people are. 

Foreign fighters for ISIS are already coming back to Europe and 

launching attacks. Monday, Germany held its first trial of an alleged German-born Jihadist. In May 2014, a terrorist affiliated 

with ISIS killed three people at the Jewish museum in Brussels. 

British Prime Minister David Cameron said last week that there 

have already been at least six planned terrorist attacks in the EU 

countries from ISIS. And the threat won’t stay in Europe, as the 

Australians have already found out this week. Because they come 

from visa-waiver countries, many of these individuals are able to 

travel to the U.S. 

We have to work with European friends to identify and track foreign Jihadists fighting in Syria. We also must convince them that 

this is a group to be reckoned with. They are a threat to all civVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:07 Nov 06, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\091914\89816 SHIRL
5

ilized peoples. They cannot be allowed to return home to continue 

their Jihad. 

I have introduced H.R. 5406, the Foreign Terrorist Organization 

Passport Revocation Act, exactly for this purpose. This bill calls for 

the State Department to revoke U.S. passports for individuals who 

are fighters for any foreign terrorist organization or helping to support an FTO in any way. 

American citizens that fight for ISIS are traitors, they are Benedict Arnolds, and they are not welcome back in the U.S. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Yoho. 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Witnesses, I appreciate you being here. This is a very important 

topic. 

In lieu of what is going on in our world today, as Mr. Keating 

spoke, radical terrorist groups are growing around the world. It 

would be wise and prudent for us to address this before it gets any 

worse. And we have heard reports, suspected reports in this country of already things happening. You have got to worry about—or 

think about the Boston Marathon bombing. Is this the beginning 

of a way that is going to happen here that is unacceptable? 

In lieu of what is going on in the Middle East, we talk about 

ISIL coming over here, and they even said they were coming to 

America, we have to pay attention and not allow that to happen. 

And it is—as I think they have to be dealt with over in a foreign 

country, we need to do more here to secure our borders. And I 

would like to hear ideas from you on securing our borders; not just 

the southwest border, but all of our borders, in addition to the 

passports that—people that have Western passports that travel 

over there. 

In fact, we introduced a bill this week, it is called the Terrorist 

Nationality Act, that it sounds like other members have done too, 

that will strip citizenship away from people that have known affiliation with foreign terrorist groups or have picked up arms against 

American citizens or American military. 

So I look forward to hearing suggestions on what we can do to 

make our country safer. 

And with that, I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thank you all very much. 

We have two great witnesses with us, and we plan to have a 

great discussion with you after your testimony. 

First, Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow with the Foundation for 

Defense of Democracies, and senior editor, of course, of The Long 

War Journal, a publication which tracks counterterrorism issues. 

He is a widely respected expert on al-Qaeda and its related groups 

around the world. He writes and contributes often to The Weekly 

Standard and makes guest appearances on television and radio. He 

has appeared before other Foreign Affairs, House Foreign Affairs 

Committee hearings, and we are pleased to welcome him to this 

subcommittee. 

Also we have with us Ms. Farah Pandith, is the Fisher Family 

fellow at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. She was appointed in 2009 as the first ever Special RepresentVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:07 Nov 06, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\091914\89816 SHIRL
6

ative to the Muslim Communities by Secretary of State Clinton. 

She worked in that capacity to engage and communicate with Muslim communities around the world on behalf of the United States 

Government. For her achievement, she was awarded the Secretary’s Distinguished Honor Award in 2013. 

Prior to her appointment, she held senior positions in the U.S. 

Agency for International Development and the State Department’s 

Bureau of European and Euro-Asian Affairs. She has also worked 

as the Director of Middle East Regional Initiatives for the National 

Security Council. She has earned a master’s degree from Fletcher 

School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. 

And I appreciate the witnesses. And I guess first we will hear 

from—it is a toss-up here. How about—how about if we go with Ms. 

Farah Pandith. 

STATEMENT OF MS. FARAH PANDITH, FISHER FAMILY FELLOW, BELFER CENTER, HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL OF 

GOVERNMENT (FORMER U.S. SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE TO 

MUSLIM COMMUNITIES) 

Ms. PANDITH. Good morning. And thank you to the house—that 

would help. 

Good morning, and thank you to the House Foreign Affairs Committee for inviting me here today. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Europe, 

Eurasia, and Emerging Threats, it is my honor and pleasure to be 

here today for this important and timely hearing. 

My name is Farah Pandith. I am a senior fellow at the Kennedy 

School of Government at Harvard University. My opinions and my 

written and verbal testimony are my own. 

I have come before you today to talk about the threat of foreign 

fighters returning to Europe and what the United States could and 

should be doing about it. As a political appointee in the George W. 

Bush and Obama administrations, I spent a decade working on the 

impact of extremist ideologies on Muslim millenials, especially in 

Europe. I saw firsthand the complex processes by which extremists 

prey on young Muslims, tear apart local communities, and threaten 

stability worldwide. 

In January of this year, I left government with the intention of 

writing a book that would explain what I had seen and what we 

can do to win the ideological war against extremism. I firmly believe we can win. 

I am a proud American, and I know firsthand of the many men 

and women who serve our Nation with passion, commitment and 

steadfast determination to keep us safe from harm. I have been 

honored to work with and for them. 

I also know the respect our Presidents have for all faiths. Both 

administrations under which I have served have openly stated that 

the heinous acts of terrorists do not, by any means, represent the 

religion of Islam. 

My interest and involvement in the issue of extremism isn’t typical. Out of college, I served in the George H.W. Bush administration, but left to attend the Fletcher School of Law in Diplomacy. 

It was there in 1993 that I focused on national security and was 

awarded a grant to travel to Kashmir during a very delicate and 

7

unstable time. I conducted interviews with militants, and began to 

understand the power of ideologies and the impact they were having on an older culture, heritage and a way of life. 

I stayed in Massachusetts after graduate school, but felt called 

to serve after the events of 9/11. Al-Qaeda was trying to define my 

country and my religion. I could not sit back and watch. 

For more than a decade since, I have worked closely on the issue 

of extremist ideologies impacts on Muslims. During my tenure at 

the National Security Council, the Danish cartoon crisis broke out. 

And in 2006, we found ourselves unprepared for the reality that 

something that happened in Copenhagen could have an effect on a 

life in Kabul. 

Then Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, 

Dan Fried, asked me to serve as his senior advisor, to focus solely 

on Muslims in Europe and to help recalibrate the way our Embassies engaged with Muslims. Our country had never had that position, and Ambassador Fried understood how vital it was that we 

reach out more boldly to Muslims in Europe, gain an understanding of their diversity of experiences, and analyze the impact 

on them of extremist narratives. 

For 2 years I traveled across Europe and met with Muslim communities, getting to know what was happening within communities 

and between generations and ethnicities. To push back against extremist narratives, we seeded several path-breaking initiatives that 

directly addressed the idealogical threat posed by extremists. These 

initiatives identified credible Muslim voices within Muslim communities, and by partnering with and supporting them, helped them 

to wield greater influence among young Muslims susceptible to extremist messages. Several of these CVE initiatives, such as Sisters 

Against Violent Extremism, continue to operate today independent 

of the U.S. Government. 

The most vital fact I gleaned from thousands of conversations I 

had across Europe was that Muslim youths were having an identity crisis and that they were searching for answers. Extremist narratives were filling the intellectual vacuum created by this crisis, 

and governments were ill-equipped to deal with it. 

A similar dynamic continues to unfold before our eyes with evermore violent and gruesome implications. 

In order for ISIL or other extremist organizations to persuade 

someone to join its army, these groups must be able to appeal emotionally to a young person eager for meaning and a sense of belonging. 

This morning I want to make five points related to foreign fighters, their threat to us, and what America could be doing to fight 

back. 

First, both men and women are at risk today. Just yesterday we 

saw in a new report that an Austrian teenage girl, who joined ISIL, 

is now pregnant. The presence of female recruits represents a new 

and important change in the extremist landscape. 

Second, policymakers should be concerned not just with individuals who leave their home countries to fight in the Middle East or 

elsewhere, but with the ideology that continues to spread among 

those left behind. 

8

Third, European civilization does not construct national identities in a uniform way. As a result, we must be local and nuanced 

in our policy approaches. 

Fourth, we can win the ideological war with extremism by investing significantly in soft power. 

Fifth, free borders in Europe don’t represent the whole story. 

Free ideas bounce around the world online, keeping the cycle of hatred turning, but free ideas could also potentially feed a more virtuous cycle of peace and respect for others. With coordinated and 

comprehensive attention, we can dramatically change the patterns 

of discourse within Muslim communities, with positive consequences for Europe, the United States, and our allies. 

Extremist ideology is the greatest threat of our time. The generation at risk is massive, global, and digitally connected. It is time 

we address the ideological threat head on and stop the recruitment 

from happening. This is winnable if we behave smartly, 

proactively, and creatively. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thank you very much. That was very 

thoughtful testimony, and I am sure we will have some serious 

questions for you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pandith follows:]

9


89816b-1.eps
10


89816b-2.eps
11


89816b-3.eps
12


89816b-4.eps
13


89816b-5.eps
14


89816b-6.eps
15

Mr. ROHRBACHER. And now to our next witness, and senior fellow 

with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. You may proceed, 

Dr.—or Mr. Thompson. 

Mr. JOSCELYN. Thank you, Congressman. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Dr., but it is Mr. 

Mr. JOSCELYN. No. It is Mr. all the way. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Okay. Mr. Joscelyn. 

STATEMENT OF MR. THOMAS JOSCELYN, SENIOR FELLOW, 

FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES 

Mr. JOSCELYN. Well, thank you for having me here today to talk 

about this issue. 

We have been tracking the issue of foreign fighters going to Syria 

at The Long War Journal for a while now, a few years going back 

to really late 2011, early 2012. And it is really stunning to me that 

today we have more foreign fighters in Syria than were in Afghanistan during the height of the Jihad against the Soviets. That is 

really an incredible metric if you think about it. And this creates 

all sorts of security challenges, of course. 

I have a little bit of a nuanced view of this. We are right to be 

concerned about the threat the foreign fighters pose to the West 

and the possibility of using terrorist attacks. Most of them, however, will not come back our way. Most of them are going to remain 

invested in the fight in Iraq and Syria. Most of—some of them will 

even become disillusioned. And for those—some that become disillusioned, they can become partners for us in sort of counter-messaging to basically dispel the mythology that sort of the Jihad in 

Syria is some grandiose sort of quest, that they can actually become sort of our messengers in Europe and the West to tell people 

that going off to fight in Syria is not as great as the recruiters 

make it to sound out to be. 

However, I want to say this. As the number of foreign fighters 

increases, there are two main problems: One, you can have sort of 

these acts of violence like the shooting at the museum in Brussels 

that you mentioned, Congressman, where we don’t know if he was 

under direction of any senior terrorists or not, but it is still a serious threat that you can have somebody who is really known as a 

psychopath can basically go back to Europe. 

And to your point, Congressman Yoho, about identifying these individuals who are traveling around, he traveled all throughout Europe through multiple Nations before that attack, and he had been 

identified by French intelligence in 2013 as a risk, and was still 

able to move around quite freely up until that day of terror. So we 

have that sort of threat. 

The second level full threat is a more nuanced one that I think 

we really have to think about, which is if you think back to pre9/11 Afghanistan, between 10 and 20,000 recruits went through al 

Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan. What al-Qaeda was doing 

was they were trying to identify sort of the most talented and most 

dedicated recruits to re-purpose for attacks in the West, and that 

is what ultimately gave us, for example, the Hamburg cell that 

traveled from Germany to Afghanistan. These are individuals who 

are identified as being totally committed, skilled and somebody 

they could train up to basically fly planes into buildings. 

16

What is interesting about that is those recruits who traveled to 

Afghanistan were originally wanted to actually go wage Jihad in 

Chechnya against the Russian Government. They weren’t actually 

recruited originally to go fly planes into buildings in the U.S. This 

is how a Jihad in Afghanistan or elsewhere could be re-purposed 

very quickly and come back at us. 

And so as the talent level of foreign fighters increases, what happens is that the skilled professional terrorists, the guys who I am 

really worried about, are basically sifting through the pile to figure 

out who is really the best recruits for them to use in operations 

against us. 

U.S. officials say that the Islamic State doesn’t pose an imminent 

threat to the U.S. homeland in terms of catastrophic attacks. The 

consensus seems to be that they don’t—are not able to plan catastrophic terrorist attacks in the West at the moment. I would pause 

on that. History tells us that these threats evolve very, very quickly. Al-Qaeda in the Iranian peninsula went from a regional national insurgency to a direct threat against the U.S. homeland 

within a matter of basically 9 months, 9, 10 months, something 

along those lines. 

There is a lot we don’t know. We didn’t know that Khalid Sheikh 

Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11, was in fact an al-Qaeda operative until several months after 9/11. Okay? 

So what worries me is what we don’t about this group and its 

capabilities. We know the intent is there. And just because we 

don’t think they have the ability to attack us in a catastrophic way 

right now in the West doesn’t mean that they won’t be able to in 

the near future. 

But finally, I will say this: Everybody is rightfully concerned 

about ISIL, as we call it here right now, and the threat. It is sort 

of amazing to watch a rampage across two nation states. But, 

again, I have a slightly different view. I think the greater near 

term threat to us is actually—are actually the al-Qaeda operatives 

in Syria right now, who U.S. intelligence officials, European intelligence officials are very worried about planning catastrophic attacks against us. 

These are guys who are embedded within Jabhat al-Nusra, which 

is an initial branch of al-Qaeda, and is actually a rival of ISIL inside Syria today. This is how complicated this is. The threat 

streams are coming from multiple directions. It is not just ISIL. 

Within Jabhat al-Nusra, you have skilled operatives who are dispatched by Ayman al-Zawahir, the head of al-Qaeda, to Syria. And 

what they are doing is very carefully sorting through the pile of 

European and Western recruits to figure out who they can use, like 

the Hamburg cell for 9/11, something along those lines. That is a 

bigger near term concern, I think, in terms of big sort of spectacular terrorist attacks. 

A big problem there too is that Jabhat al-Nusra is deeply embedded within the Syrian insurgency against the Assad regime. They 

are very popular amongst other rebels. They are not—this is—I 

know—I realize that yesterday I think there was big vote, of 

course, on funding and training the rebels. I—my one caveat there 

is we have got to be worried about how these rebels interact with 

17

Jabhat al-Nusra. They are not ISIL. Okay. They are opposed to 

ISIL, they are opposed to Assad, and yet they are al-Qaeda. Right? 

So this is a very complicated game that we have to play here and 

be worried about, and I don’t hear a lot of discussion about that. 

And I am worried about that. That doesn’t mean I necessarily oppose what the administration wants to do; it is just my own sort 

of—you know, we have to be very careful about how we do it. And 

we can get into that a little bit more during questioning, maybe. 

Finally, back to your point, Congressman Yoho, about these recruits traveling. There was a suicide bomber for Jabhat al-Nusra 

earlier this year, who blew himself up, an American, known as Abu 

Salha, and he actually—this is, again, one of those things that worries me. He managed to travel to and from his home in Florida 

from the Jihad in Syria as he was basically being indoctrinated and 

recruited to blow himself up in Syria. 

Now, Jabhat al-Nusra decided not to try and use him in an attack against the West, but you can bet that they learned from how 

he got in and out of the country what they can try and—and try 

and use that information in the future. And that is really, I think, 

how we should be thinking about that. 

Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thank both of you for providing us that 

testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Joscelyn follows:]

18


89816a-1.eps
19


89816a-2.eps
20


89816a-3.eps
21


89816a-4.eps
22


89816a-5.eps
23


89816a-6.eps
24


89816a-7.eps
25


89816a-8.eps
26

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Again, I will yield to my ranking member, and 

I will just top things off after we give Congressman Yoho a chance 

to ask some questions as well. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you both for your testimony. I think we are seeing in a 

continuum, from the inception of ideology to how they are practically carrying many of these things out. That was very clear in 

both of your testimonies, and I appreciate that. 

I want to focus in for a moment on a shared commitment I have 

with the administration to strengthen women’s rights globally and 

to empower women and their families in transitional societies, such 

as Iraq. And part of that is stemming at this ideological flourishing 

that is occurring within families. And Chairman Royce and myself 

earlier this year held a hearing on the importance of women in battling violent extremism, and the name that you mentioned, Farah, 

in terms of Sisters Against Violent Extremism came up. I know you 

touched on it in your testimony. 

But women are the first educators of their children. They are in 

a unique position to spot signs of radicalization and extremism, 

and they are also in a very pivotal position to try and deal with 

that. And I think we have to empower women to recognize this, to 

recognize the signs, and give them tools as to how to deal with 

that. 

But could you comment on the Sisters Against Violent Extremism and the overall effort to try and use women more effectively 

and mothers more effectively in this fight against extremism, and 

to really, you know, quash this ideological growth? 

Ms. PANDITH. Thank you very much for that question. 

You know, I talked a lot about the ideology and where it stems, 

and I don’t need to explain to all of you how important family is. 

And as a young person grows up, this question of identity, the confusion, asking questions, these millenials are experiencing something that no other generation has experienced, and in the context 

of a post-9/11 world, that is why I said the numbers are massive. 

You know, one-fourth of the planet is Muslim; you know, 1.6 billion 

people. Sixty-two percent of that number is under the age of 30. 

These are millenials that have grown up looking at their life in a 

very different way. Everybody has an identity crisis, okay, it 

doesn’t matter what religion you are, but something specific is happening to a generation that has grown up in the context of 9/11, 

asking questions that their parents and their grandparents didn’t 

ask. 

And as they are dealing with this sense of identity and belonging, they are looking for answers, and the answers that they always go to are not traditional, necessarily. It isn’t the cleric, necessarily. It is not the elder person in the village town or city. It is 

Sheikh Google who answers a lot of these questions for them. 

The reason why women are important is for two reasons: One, 

as you said, the mothers are the child’s first teachers, they are seeing things with their children, they are beginning to see changes 

happening. If you are looking at some of the radicalization processes and you go back and you talk to the parents, they have seen 

signs, mothers talk about things that they have seen. They influence the ecosystem within the home. Very, very important. 

27

But there is another piece of this, and that other piece of this is 

how you use women to mobilize their perspective globally and connect those things. That is where we began to look at models that 

would work on a grassroots level that are very local and are inspired by regular people. It wasn’t Government coming in and saying something. 

In the Bush administration, we looked at the model of Mothers 

Against Drunk Driving here in America and said, how did that get 

off the ground? How do we begin—how do we build this? And we 

began to think about what would happen if we began to build a 

network of like-minded women who could push back against extremist ideologies, and seeded Sisters Against Violent Extremism 

with an incredible woman named Edith Schlafer in Vienna, and 

gave her a small seed grant to get this off the ground and asked 

her to move it forward. 

Right now, you know, all these years later, it is an independent 

organization that has chapters all over the world, but she has mobilized and built a network of women to push back, to talk about 

things, to put the lessons that she has learned on the table. 

That is one piece of the complexity with women and extremism. 

Okay. The other is what is happening to Muslim women. And that 

is the other piece, if you wouldn’t mind, I will just spend a moment 

on. 

Mr. KEATING. No. I think that was my second question, so you 

are heading the right direction. 

Ms. PANDITH. Okay. So in my role as Special Representative to 

Muslim Communities, one of the most impressive points to me was 

that what I thought had happened in Europe, this identity crisis, 

was not just minorities living in Europe, but, oh, my goodness, that 

was happening to Muslims in Muslim-majority countries as well. 

So this idea that identity crisis from Malaysia to, you know, Argentina with Muslims matters to us, and it matters very boldly, because as people are asking these questions, as I said, the vacuum 

is being filled by narratives that come from extremists. That 

doesn’t leave women out of the picture. These are digital natives, 

they are connected. With the swish of their finger on their, you 

know, smart phone, they are getting ideas that are bouncing 

around the world. 

And what did I see as special representative? I began to see a 

change in the way this generation of young Muslim women began 

to think about themselves, think about their role. And so you are 

seeing a two-pronged thing: One, you can absolutely use women, 

and you should, to stop the stem of radicalization, to understand 

what is happening in the home. 

The other point is we are beginning to see women getting 

radicalized in a——

Mr. KEATING. Oh, that was my question. 

Ms. PANDITH [continuing]. In a very big way, right. So——

Mr. KEATING. If I could for a second. There is an irony there, because in many of these groups, the place of women is anything but 

high in the level of authority and power; however, you are seeing 

ISIL and some of these other groups use women, not necessarily as 

soldiers, but you are seeing them used in the social networking and 

communication and in shaping people’s ideology in countries where 

28

some of the people—the average age of some of these countries, the 

average age is 25 years old. 

So that if you could just continue, I think that was the second 

point I wanted to make. 

Ms. PANDITH. Well, of course. You are correct. And that age 

group is really pivotal, because they are beginning to be mothers 

themselves, they are raising their children a particular way, they 

are thinking about their role in society in a particular way. Either 

you are going to be open and engage with the outside or you are 

going to retreat and come back in. So you are looking at data 

points across the board. 

You are also looking at what they are looking at online, what 

they are listening to, how they see themselves. It doesn’t take a lot 

of imagination. This summer, ISIS has an all women’s, you know, 

organization. We have AQ doing the same thing. If we use our 

imagination and think of what else comes down the pike, it is very 

scary. 

Mr. KEATING. Yeah. I will just bring one point home, Mr. Chairman, and that is the point that even in the Boston Marathon bombing——

Ms. PANDITH. Yes. 

Mr. KEATING [continuing]. It is very clear the effect that 

Tamerlan Tsarnaev mother had on his radicalization. I won’t comment on, since there is a trial pending, on the, you know, her other 

son, but I will say clearly with Tamerlan, that has been proved. 

So Mr. Chairman—thank you for your comments. Mr. Chairman, 

I yield back. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you. Yes. And thank you for your 

thoughtful questioning. 

And Mr. Yoho. 

Mr. YOHO. Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you both for 

your testimony. 

And, Mr. Joscelyn, I think you are right on. I mean, we are seeing this happening now. And you were saying most of the radicals 

don’t come back. We don’t need most of them. If you go back to 

9/11, we all know there were only 19 people, and they had, I think, 

it was $500,000, but they were able to change real quickly. 

And now we have these organizations that have become more 

coalesced. And what I have seen, and correct me if I am wrong, is 

an escalation of the amount of radical groups and I see them coalescing into a stronger force, well organized, well funded. With ISIL 

supposedly getting $3.5 million a day in the sale of oil on the black 

market, we are just going to see more and more of that. 

And in this meeting room here, it was about 6 months ago, we 

had a group that was representing Somalians that had come to the 

United States. Minnesota is where they are from. And I asked 

them why they came to Minnesota. I was born in Minnesota and 

I was glad—it is a great state, but it is a little bit too cold for me, 

so why would the Somalians choose Minnesota, and they said it 

was for education and jobs. But yet when I asked them what percentage of the male population were employed, he said it was very 

low, it was high unemployment in that group. What percentage 

graduated from high school? He said it is very low. And then I 

went into, you know, the questions of how many are practicing 

29

Muslim. I assume the majority. And he said yes. Then we moved 

on to do they follow Sharia law or U.S. constitutional. He says, we 

go with constitutional law, but, yes, Sharia. And then I asked him 

if they were assimilating and becoming Americans and adapting 

our ideologies. And he says, we are having a real hard time with 

that. 

That scares me, because we are growing that type of thing that 

we are seeing now, and as you brought out, the person from Florida 

and the person before Minnesota going over and becoming radical 

jihads. 

We have to have a way—and this goes back to a bigger problem, 

you know, with our immigration policy. I think we all want responsible immigration, but we have to do it right to bring the people 

over here. 

But going back to the ISIL threat, removing the passports from 

these people, one of the questions I had is if we remove these passports—I lost my train of thought here. How can the U.S. help our 

European allies to defend themselves from the threat of these returning foreign fighters? You know, they got a Western passport, 

they can go over there and they can come back if they are a U.S. 

citizen. And I think Britain has already started to take these passports away. Is that right? 

Mr. JOSCELYN. That sounds right. Yeah, they have—Britain has 

a number of security restrictions they can put in place. 

Mr. YOHO. Okay. With that, I am going to yield back. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your time. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thank you very much. 

A couple of questions. Are these the uneducated—overseas, are 

these the uneducated people of lower classes who can’t get jobs or 

are they like Bin Laden from the upper crust, who are actually 

very well educated and not necessarily just the product of 

Madrassa schools, but instead, people who know the choices and 

have made the choice that their religion is better than everybody 

else’s? 

Mr. JOSCELYN. It cuts across socioeconomic boundaries. It is not 

easy to typify sort of your recruit in that regard. You know, when 

you look at, again, the common example are the suicide hijack pilots on 9/11: Highly educated, come from good families. You know, 

Bin Laden came from a good family, Ayman al-Zawahiri came from 

a very influential family. You find this over and over and over 

again. 

It is really the strength of the idealogy that binds them together, 

and not necessarily any socioeconomic factors. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Uh-huh. Let me note it before we move on, 

and that is that it is vitally important that we do not try to lump 

all Muslims into the category of terrorists, otherwise, we are doing 

exactly what the terrorists want us to do, which is create a dichotomy between the Western world and all Muslims, and thus expand 

dramatically their strength and potential danger. 

So we should make sure we reach out—and again—and this is—

Ms. Pandith, how—you were talking about the Muslim community 

and perhaps an identity crisis going on with different people. Do 

you think that there is a real threat that we could have an overVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:07 Nov 06, 2014 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\091914\89816 SHIRL
30

reach here and push Muslims into the radical terrorism camp, and 

do you see that happening at all? 

Ms. PANDITH. So I think one of the things that is important for 

us to understand is what we have learned over 13 years of trying 

to look at the radicalization process, what is happening in communities, what Government can do, what communities can do, how 

the strengths and weaknesses have played out over the course of 

13 years. And you asked a really important question about, you 

know, who are these people, you know, how well educated are they, 

where do they come from. 

One of the things I was talking about in my testimony is the 

nuanced approach to understand the distinction within—certainly 

here today we are talking about Europe. Which generation are we 

talking about? Which ethnicities are we talking about? How are 

they looking at the particular issues that they are dealing with? 

The success is going to coming from the community level. And as 

you look at the responses across Europe and how governments are 

looking at the threat, there is a wide range of reactions to this 

growing problem, but when you are looking forward, when you are 

looking at the distant opportunities for recruitment, we have to 

start with the immediate family, we have to start with the communities, and we have to make sure that the communities are getting 

information about what we have learned about how recruitment 

happens, that we are looking very deep at all of these issues, and 

not sort of separating the immediate from, you know, just not having a threat now. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. You know, I will have to tell you, the world 

has faced many different challenges from murderous groups over 

the history of the plant. And Muslim extremism, or I should say, 

you know, and perhaps, I know a lot of Muslims don’t like the—

even the word ‘‘Islam’’ associated with radicalism, but a lot of us 

are having trouble with that. 

We want to be respectful of their faith, but we can’t help but notice that the people who are murdering people are doing so in the 

name of their faith, and it really pulls on a lot of us, because we 

know, I mean, I know many Muslim people who are wonderful people and would never dream of that, and I don’t think their faith 

is doing anything but adding to their life, but obviously those people whom we are fearing now identity the Islamic faith, Muslim 

faith as the motivator that is motivating them to do that. They are 

announcing that to the world. 

And I am not sure, and, again, after listening to your testimony, 

you know, 50 years ago and 60 years ago, the world was threatened 

by these Nazis, who had no Muslim connection at all, who were, 

basically came from a Christian country, and Japanese militarism, 

which had its own—you could identify the Shinto religion that they 

were part of that glorified their ancestors, especially, who were 

very military successful ancestors, you could see that direct line, 

but I don’t—to be fair about it, I don’t think that our—that the 

greatest generation that we call in the United States spent time 

trying to psychoanalyze why people became Nazis or why people of 

Japan backed up their militarist wing; we simply went out and had 

to defeat them. 

31

And I think maybe that is where we are at now, that we want 

to understand, as you were saying, these Muslim people who are 

involved with the radical terrorist elements, respecting the fact 

that most Muslims are not that way, but the job now is not some 

long-term analyst, but instead, to try to defeat this evil force that 

would murder our families. 

And maybe you both would have a comment on that? 

Ms. PANDITH. Mr. Chairman, may I just respond to what you 

were saying? 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Sure. 

Ms. PANDITH. In terms of the threats that our world have faced, 

you very nicely pointed out two ideological examples, but our country took it seriously, the ideological piece. We invested everything, 

both hard power and soft power, to defeat that threat. We have not 

done that now, sir. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. You know what? I don’t think that we actually 

put any effort into denouncification until after we defeated them 

and disarmed them, and that is when we—denouncification had an 

impact, but it wasn’t until then. 

And right now, I think we are in the battle mode, of this fight, 

you know. And maybe afterwards, we can—and that is why we 

have to support the President in his efforts as best we can, and 

other—and unite as a country against this, because I happen to believe it will—and I think we all agree, that, yes, our European 

friends are now going to bear the brunt, but we are just the very 

next step away from there, and our children, our families are going 

to be at stake. 

Mr. Joscelyn? 

Mr. JOSCELYN. Well, I don’t think it is necessarily an either/or. 

I agree with you that we need to defeat them militarily. I think the 

Jihadist ideology needs military successes in order to recruit, and 

so they need to be defeated militarily, otherwise they are going to 

deep saying that they are the strong horse people should side with. 

But just take a step back for a second. And what is going on here 

is, I find, as somebody who has studied Bin Laden and Zawahiri 

very carefully, we still don’t ever really understand what they were 

all about. You know, 9/11, these terrorist attacks, they weren’t an 

end in and of themselves; they were trying to seek to spark a political revolution within the Muslim world. And within the Jihadi 

camp, Bin Laden is known as the reviving sheikh. And what does 

that mean? It means that, according to al-Qaeda’s theory of the 

world, Muslims had—were no longer waging Jihad like they were 

supposed to, and he needed to revive the Jihadi spirit across the 

Muslim world. 

Now, this becomes—that—so it becomes very much an ideological 

battle, because if you look at what they were trying to do, and, in 

fact, Bin Laden was a great student of the Chinese game Go, where 

you can convert pieces on the board to your side. Once you surround them and they become your pieces, and then you can re-deploy them. That is a political revolutionary thinking about how to 

convert Muslims to his cause, which is what al-Qaeda’s always 

been about. 

And they have had many setbacks in that regard, mainly because 

most of their violence has actually killed their fellow Muslims. And 

32

this is a strategic liability, not just for al-Qaeda, but also for ISIL. 

ISIL is you know, we are talking about the threats to the West 

right now, and we should be, but ISIL, if you look at their body 

count, right now it is a lot of Muslims throughout Syria and Iraq 

and only a few Westerners, you know. 

And I have seen, you know, you talk about the beheading videos 

of James Foley and Steven Sotloff, which really galvanized us into 

action, I can tell you I watched probably hundreds of beheadings 

of Syrians and Iraqis before that, you know, Muslims on the 

ground who are our allies in this fight who were getting killed, you 

know. And so that is where the ideological battle is——

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Sure. 

Mr. JOSCELYN [continuing]. Because in the military battle, you 

are talking about, Congressman, we need to figure out who our allies are. And we have a lot of Muslim allies. We have to identify 

them as such in this greater contest. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. I think that is a—you have made a really—

well, both of you have made really good points today. And the idea 

about keeping in mind that there have been more Muslims murdered by these—by the people that threaten us today than have 

Anglos or European background people, although obviously we are 

concerned about the safety of our families. And that is our job here, 

is to make—ultimately to be concerned about our families. 

And hopefully our fellow Americans of the—and I would hope 

that we challenge, all of us challenge them to step up and back 

them up in their communities when they take a stand against 

these type of extremists that would murder their fellow human 

beings. 

I was shocked when several organizations that I read some fliers 

from them suggesting—from several Muslim organizations in the 

United States were suggesting that their people not cooperate with 

the FBI. I don’t know——

Mr. Keating, I don’t know if you have seen that or not, but I certainly saw a couple of handouts indicating—I won’t name the 

group, because maybe it is unfair to that group. Maybe that only 

reflected one or two people in the group who took advantage of a 

situation. 

But we challenge our fellow Americans who are Muslims to join 

us and help us win this battle, because, as we are learning today, 

it is a—what is happening in Syria is going to be a wave that hits 

us here in the United States and is already beginning to be felt in 

Europe. 

Let me ask Mr. Joscelyn about the shared threat that we have 

with our European allies, but do we not also share this threat, and 

I mentioned this in my opening statement. Do we not share this 

threat with Russia and should we not cooperate with Russia? Mr. 

Keating and I actually went to Moscow and met with their intelligence operatives and got a briefing on those people who were involved with the bombing in Boston, the Boston Marathon. 

Mr. JOSCELYN. Well, I will preface this by saying there are a lot 

of ways in which our interests in Russia obviously are not consistent. We have divergent interests across the board I would say. 

But, you know, to your point when you study who is in Syria 

right now, the Chechen Jihadists in Syria right now, these are not 

33

freedom fighters, you know. They are deeply opposed to the Russian Government. They are also hostile to us. They are very much 

on either ISIL’s side or al-Qaeda’s side in Syria. In fact, you know, 

this hearing is happening because of ISIL’s military gains on the 

ground in Iraq and Syria. 

One of the top military commanders in Syria is a Chechen for 

ISIL. His name is, he is known as Abu Omar al-Shishani. And he 

is actually the one who really gave them their military victories in 

eastern Syria, which has opened up the pathway into Iraq. And so 

the Chechen Jihadists are really the most committed, I would say, 

skilled and oftentimes tacticians in this fight. They are a threat to 

Russia, they are a threat to our interests, so in that sense there 

is a common threat there. 

You know, one of the interesting things we were talking about 

the radicalization of women, well one of the biggest examples of 

that is in fact the Chechen black widows who have committed terrorist attacks in Moscow. These are the widows of fallen Jihadists 

in the Chechen and groups in Dagestan and Chechnya who go on 

to become suicide bombers in operations there. So there is a common bond at least in that one narrow sense in terms of the threat 

of the Chechen Jihadists. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I notice our other witness shaking her head. 

Would you like to add to that? 

Ms. PANDITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I also wanted to say, I mean, you made a very good point about 

having everybody join to push back against the ideology of extremists, and what you have seen in the last 13 years since 9/11 is the 

increase of voices that are pushing back that are coming from Muslim communities, and you are seeing new networks, you are seeing 

networks of former extremists that have been built to push back, 

but that needs to be ramped up. Those are the voices that matter, 

those are the credible voices, and to your point about Russia and 

the black widow example that my colleague has just raised, that 

is, to me that is a great illustration of, you know, the worst case 

scenario, but what we ought to be looking at is not when it is the 

tip of the iceberg; what is actually percolating? What is actually 

happening to get them there? And that is where we have to stem 

and cut the radicalization process. If you don’t have recruits, you 

will not have armies. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. To be fair, I cannot understand why a religious extremist group that would, it appears on its surface to be 

so anti the freedom of women and so oppressive in terms of saying 

that women have to wear a garment and hide themselves and look 

out a little slit or can’t drive cars or can’t have regular jobs, I do 

not, I can’t comprehend how there would be women joining the 

ranks of people like who held those beliefs in order to try to create 

a society based on those standards. 

Ms. PANDITH. Mr. Chairman, there are lots of reasons why the 

women are joining the fight, and I know that there is not just one 

or two that are prominent. There are many, some of which include 

wanting, some of the married people who are there and want to be 

part of that ecosystem. 

Some want to raise children so that they are creating the next 

army. Some do it because they are ideological, they are so invested 

34

in the ideology of building a so-called caliphate that they want to 

be part of this and they want to live there. I mean, there are many 

reasons why, but their sense of belonging in terms of where they 

are. 

If you look at the two teenage girls from Austria who ran away 

from home to join Chechen Jihadis, I mean, this is an illustration 

of the kinds of things that are happening. How is it possible that 

two young girls who grew up in an open and free environment 

chose to do that? How did they get radicalized? What were they 

looking at online that moved them in that direction? 

And sir, the last point I would say is the other role that women 

are playing is that enticement role. So if you have somebody on the 

other end of a You-Tube video or a chat room that is eager to bring 

women on board and you are another woman and her voice calling 

them in, it is very persuasive. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, we obviously face a major challenge 

and not just with Democrats and Republicans uniting the face of 

foreign challenge, but also people of various religious faiths, including the Muslim community and the Christian community and Jewish community here in the United States and elsewhere. 

We need to have some unity behind this to help save mankind 

from the senseless murder of innocent people, and when we talk 

about people being terrorists, their purpose is to terrorize, and that 

means to win the battle through terrorizing a population, to letting 

them achieve their goal through that terror. 

We Americans are not going to be terrorized into giving up our 

rights and our freedom and our ability to be part of the world, and 

I don’t—I think we need to stand with our European allies in this 

and especially our allies in the Muslim world who are being killed 

and murdered at a much higher rate. 

Closing statement from Mr. Keating and Mr. Yoho? 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think what was interesting with this hearing, among many 

things, was how we were dealing with how this radicalization occurs, the stemming of it, how it is nurtured, and I think we don’t 

put enough emphasis on that, and we are going to have to, and we 

can’t just do it here in the U.S. We have to do it in Europe and 

we have to do it certainly through the Mideast. 

I look at the examples of what they are doing and how sophisticated they are doing things, they are actually making great efforts, 

whether it is ISIL or other radicalized groups associated with alQaeda. They are destroying Muslim history in many senses, not 

just orally and passing it on, but actually through the destruction 

of artifacts and the destruction of antiquities, and they are profiting actually from the sale of those to help fuel their cause. 

But in the process they are destroying it and they are creating 

a new narrative of their own that is not historical, is not traditional, it is not religious, so we touched on that, and as we go forward I think that is something we should put greater emphasis on. 

And I want to thank our two witnesses for touching on those 

things today in their testimony. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you, Mr. Keating. 

And Mr. Yoho? 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

35

Thank you both. 

As we were talking about, and I am sure you have read the book 

by Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations, talking about 

the majority of the conflict in the world is Muslim to Muslim, but 

when you insert the Westerner, they come together, and we become 

the common enemy. 

How much of the growth of radicalism comes from the hatred of 

the West ideals of liberties and freedoms versus the Western foreign policy or are they connected in your opinion? 

Mr. JOSCELYN. Well, I will say the ideology is deeply anti-Western. A lot of times they view our foreign policy through a very conspiratorial lens which doesn’t actually reflect reality. 

So, you know, for example, even though we were on the side of 

Bosnian Muslims during the conflict there in the 1990s, you know, 

Osama bin Laden was able to rationalize critique of U.S. policy because we didn’t deliver arms to Muslim forces quick enough. 

Mr. YOHO. Right. 

Mr. JOSCELYN. So it is deeply—it is more ideological than my 

view of being anti-Western than it is really foreign policy driven. 

Mr. YOHO. Is it Ms. Pandith, right? 

Ms. PANDITH. Yes. 

Mr. YOHO. The girls that were in Australia, were they Australian 

background? Were they born there or are they of Muslim descent? 

Ms. PANDITH. It was Austria. If I misspoke——

Mr. YOHO. I am sorry, Austria. 

Ms. PANDITH. No, no, no, it is all right. I believe that they were 

born there. I can double check for you and get back to you on that 

point. 

Mr. YOHO. Well, because what I see is the lone wolf starting to 

develop in this country like that Alvin—I think it was Ali Muhammad Brown who had supposedly murdered four American men in 

the name of Jihad against the West, and we just don’t want to see 

that over here, so I look forward to dealing with you in the future 

and I hope——

Ms. PANDITH. It would be my pleasure. 

Mr. YOHO [continuing]. To help design policies that will prevent 

this. 

Thank you both. Have a great weekend. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I want to thank the witnesses. 

Thank my fellow colleagues. 

The American people need to know that we are taking this very 

seriously and that there is a threat that is a merging threat with 

this battle that is raging in Syria, it will impact on our society and 

our safety. We have got to pay attention to it. 

What the people in Europe are now beginning to experience are 

those people coming back from this conflict we will experience as 

well. The wave will hit us, and it is—what we do about it, we have 

to use our heads, but we have to be courageous, and again we need 

to make sure that all Americans, including Muslim Americans, are 

recruited in this effort. So I want to thank the witnesses and this 

hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:28 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(37)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

38

f


89816n.eps
39

Æ


89816m.eps