U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

22–475 PDF 2017

S. Hrg. 114–543 

THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND AND 

REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOVEMBER 19, 2015 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

BEN SASSE, Nebraska 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

KEITH B. ASHDOWN, Staff Director 

BROOKE N. ERICSON, Deputy Chief Counsel for Homeland Security 

ELIZABETH MCWHORTER, Professional Staff Member 

JOSE J. BAUTISTA, Professional Staff Member 

GABRIELLE A. BATKIN, Minority Staff Director 

JOHN P. KILVINGTON, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

HARLAN C. GEER, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member 

HOLLY A. IDELSON, Minority Senior Counsel 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

BENJAMIN C. GRAZDA, Hearing Clerk 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 1 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 3 

Senator McCaskill ............................................................................................ 14 

Senator Ayotte .................................................................................................. 15 

Senator Tester .................................................................................................. 17 

Senator Baldwin ............................................................................................... 19 

Senator Heitkamp ............................................................................................ 21 

Senator Peters .................................................................................................. 23 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 55 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 57 

WITNESS 

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2015 

Hon. Anne C. Richard, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and 

Migration, U.S. Department of State ................................................................. 6 

Hon. Leon Rodriguez, Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security ............................................................. 7 

Peter Bergen, Director, National Security Studies Program, New America 

Foundation ............................................................................................................ 28 

Brian Michael Jenkins, Senior Advisor to the President, RAND Corporation ... 30 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies ..................................................................................................................... 32 

Eric P. Schwartz, Dean, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of 

Minnesota, and Former Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and 

Migration at the U.S. Department of State (2009–2011) .................................. 34 

Lavinia Limo ́n, President and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Committee for 

Refugees and Immigrants .................................................................................... 35 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Bergen, Peter: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 28 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 73 

Gartenstein-Ross, Daveed: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 32 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 101 

Jenkins, Brian Michael: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 30 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 90 

Limo ́n, Lavinia: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 35 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 117 

Richard, Hon. Anne C.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 60 

Rodriguez, Hon. Leon: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 64 

Schwartz, Eric P.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 34 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 110 
Page

IV 

APPENDIX 

13-Step Vetting Process .......................................................................................... 122 

Acronym List submitted by Senator Johnson ....................................................... 124 

Statements submitted for the Record from: 

Asian Americans Advancing Justice ............................................................... 126 

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimmination Committee ................................. 129 

American Immigration Council ....................................................................... 135 

American Immigration Lawyers Association ................................................. 143 

Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach ............................................... 146 

Christian Reformed Church ............................................................................. 148 

The Center for Victims of Torture ................................................................... 149 

Church World Service ...................................................................................... 152 

Disciples Home Missions .................................................................................. 153 

Franciscan Action Network ............................................................................. 154 

Human Rights First ......................................................................................... 155 

Gainesville Florida Interfaith Alliance for Immigrant Justice ..................... 161 

International Rescue Committee ..................................................................... 162 

Jesuit Refugee Service/USA ............................................................................. 165 

Leadership Conference of Women Religious .................................................. 167 

Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service .................................................. 168 

National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd .................. 173 

NAFSA Association of International Educators ............................................. 174 

National Council of Jewish Women ................................................................ 177 

Niskanen Center ............................................................................................... 178 

OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates ......................................................... 183 

Presbyterian Church ........................................................................................ 186 

Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism .................................................. 188 

Refugee Solidarity Network ............................................................................. 189 

Shoulder to Shoulder Campaign ..................................................................... 190 

Syrian American Medical Society ................................................................... 192 

Southeast Asia Resource Action Center ......................................................... 195 

T’ruah: the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights ................................................. 198 

United Methodist Church ................................................................................ 200 

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Migration .... 202 

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee .................................................... 214 

We Belong Together ......................................................................................... 216 

Welcoming America .......................................................................................... 217 

Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record from: 

Ms. Richard ....................................................................................................... 218 

Mr. Rodriguez ................................................................................................... 227 

Mr. Bergen ........................................................................................................ 233 
(1) 

THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND 

AND REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2015 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:14 p.m., in room 

342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson, Chairman 

of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Johnson, Portman, Ayotte, Ernst, Sasse, Carper, McCaskill, Tester, Baldwin, Heitkamp, Booker, and Peters. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHNSON 

Chairman JOHNSON. This hearing will come to order. 

I think it is appropriate that we begin today with a moment of 

silence out of respect for those individuals that have lost their lives 

in Paris and in Beirut and in Egypt, over just the last 3 weeks, as 

the result of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) barbaric activities. So, a moment of silence, please. 

[A moment of silence was observed.] 

Thank you. 

I welcome our Ranking Member. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. When I took over as Chairman of this Committee, working with Senator Carper, we developed a rather simple 

mission statement for the Committee. It is, simply, to enhance the 

economic and national security of America. We have committed 

ourselves to that. 

The threat of ISIS, of Islamic terror, threatens both. I mean, we 

have seen the tragic loss of life repeatedly. Obviously, that threatens national security. But think of the economic harm, as well, that 

these acts of terror result in. So, it is fitting and appropriate that 

this Committee, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, take up this very serious issue of the threats 

that ISIS poses across the board. 

Now, in speaking with Ms. Richard earlier, she acknowledged 

that the topic, the primary topic, is really about the administration’s plan to allow about 10,000 refugees in from Syria. We are a 

compassionate, humane society. And, so, we are going to lay out 

the reality in terms of what the vetting process will be to make 

sure that we maintain a secure Nation, that we minimize, if not 

eliminate, the risk that any of those refugees may cause America. 
2 

So, from our secure briefings I think we are going to hear of a 

pretty robust vetting process, and so I really do appreciate not only 

the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), with Mr. Rodriguez, but 

also the State Department (DOS) sending Ms. Richard here. I know 

this is very short notice, but I truly do appreciate and I think everybody on this Committee appreciates the fact that you are taking 

the time to lay out that reality for the American public. 

Refugees could pose a risk. But, I think, when we take a look at 

what the vetting process will be and we consider all the risks that 

ISIS poses to America, we may find there are far greater risks. I 

think in our briefings, we have had questions by members of our 

visa programs, whether it is the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) or 

student visas or the whole panoply of visas that we offer. What are 

the types of controls? What are the types of vulnerabilities? How 

are we exposed because of the openness of our society? I think all 

of these things are very appropriate questions and I think they 

definitely need to be explored. 

But, if you really want to take a look at where we are most vulnerable, this Committee has dedicated border security as one of the 

priorities on the homeland security side of our Committee. We have 

held 12 separate hearings on that problem, trying to lay out the 

complexity, the difficult nature of that problem. And the conclusion 

that certainly I have come to, I think most Committee members 

have come to, is our borders are not secure. 

A few members, including Senator Carper and I, made a trip 

down to Honduras and Guatemala a couple of weekends ago and 

there was a new—apparently, it is not new, but it is the first time 

I had heard this. I had always heard ‘‘other than Mexico’’ (OTM), 

and frequently described in our Committee hearings, this would be 

frequently people from Central America. 

But when we were down in, I believe it was Guatemala, I heard 

a new term, Special Interest Aliens (SIAs). Now, currently, most of 

those are Cubans coming in through Central America, taking advantage of the dry foot policy in terms of immigration law. But, we 

were also told that this includes Syrians and Somalis and Pakistanis. This is a concern to us. I believe there were five Syrians 

just apprehended in, it was Honduras. We had some Syrians apprehended at the border. Now, again, we do not know what threat 

level. I think it is being reported that they were not a threat. But 

this is a serious concern. 

We have heard now the new government in Canada is going to 

open up and potentially streamline their refugee program to allow 

25,000 Syrian refugees. We have certainly discovered in this Committee that our border with Canada is far from secure. Again, our 

border on the Southwest is very, very far from secure. The one metric that stands out in my head proving how unsecure our border 

is, General Barry McCaffrey testified that we are only interdicting 

somewhere between five and 10 percent of drugs coming in through 

our Southern border. 

So, again, we have to look at all the vulnerabilities. We will talk 

about the refugee and the vetting process, and it is fitting and appropriate we do so. But, we really do need to understand the threat 

that we face. It is real. It is growing. 
3 

1The prepared statement of Senator Carper appears in the Appendix on page 57. 

And coming from a manufacturing background, I have done a lot 

of problem solving, and the first step in solving any problem is first 

laying out the reality, acknowledging that reality, looking for the 

root cause. And let us be honest. The root cause of this problem is 

that ISIS exists, that it was able to rise from the ashes of what was 

a defeated al-Qaeda in Iraq. And, so, what we need to do is address 

the root cause—the refugee crisis, the flow into Europe, the fact 

that we are even here today considering bringing in, on the basis 

of compassion, refugees from Syria. That is a symptom of the problem. 

The root cause is ISIS, and so the solution is committing this Nation, together with a coalition of the willing, of the civilized world, 

to destroying, to defeating ISIS. That is a goal that President 

Obama stated, degrade and ultimately defeat ISIS. I would argue, 

‘‘ultimately’’ ought to be very soon. 

So, again, I want to thank the witnesses, not only this panel but 

also the next panel for taking the time to testify and for your 

thoughtful testimony. I look forward to the questions. 

Chairman JOHNSON. With that, I will turn it over to Senator 

Carper. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Senator CARPER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me just set aside my prepared remarks—I would ask consent 

that they be submitted for the record1—and make a couple of comments, if I can. 

A lot of attention paid to refugees coming from Syria to the 

United States. In the last year, there have been about 2,000 refugees. It is not an easy process to go through, as my colleagues 

know. It is a process that can take as much as 2 years. And, it 

starts with vetting by the United Nations (U.N.), one of their high 

commands, and if folks make the cut to get to the next step, then 

they go through a bunch of screens, such as personal interviews 

and in-person interviews. Data, to the extent that we have data 

files to check, we do all those. The Department of Homeland Security does some of them. We work with other countries with whom 

we are allied. 

Out of the 2,000 that have come in as refugees in the last year 

or two, about 2 percent were military-aged males—2 percent. And 

of the folks that have come to our country so far, I am told, out 

of those 2,000, not one person has been arrested. Not one person 

has been arrested. 

It takes 2 years, and it is a process that if I were a bad guy trying to get in, that is the last place I would try, the last way I would 

try to get in. If I were a bad guy trying to get in, I might try a 

Visa Waiver Program, a Visa Waiver Program, and I might try just 

coming over as a student or as a tourist. 

The good news, I understand out of the four French nationals 

who were killed in Paris, either three or all four of them were folks 

who never would have been allowed to get on a plane because we 

had them suitcased in terms of who they were. They would never 

get on a plane to come to the United States. 
4 

One of the things, the challenges for us, I think, is to—understand, we have had a hearing already this year on visa waivers, 

I recall, and we need to go back and dust off the books, see what 

we learned in terms of how we are strengthening that program. A 

lot has been done. What started off as a travel facilitation program 

has now become an information sharing program with 38 other nations. In order for them to participate in this program with us, they 

have to agree to provide access to every kind of data file, intelligence file, that we ask for, and if they do not, then they are not 

included as one of the visa waiver countries. 

One of the latest, one of the other developments not too long ago, 

was if you want to be a Visa Waiver Country, of these 38 countries, 

you have to make sure that if somebody’s passport is stolen or lost, 

it is reported to Interpol. And that way, when somebody shows up 

using, trying to use that passport to come to the United States or 

some other place, they can be stopped in their tracks. 

The Preamble to our Constitution says, ‘‘In order to form a more 

perfect union.’’ My guess is that as much as we are trying to make 

the Visa Waiver Program better, it still is not perfect and our goal 

should be perfection. We are going to work on it every day, and I 

think there are some things we can do legislatively, hopefully in 

this Committee, and to work with some of our other colleagues in 

Committees of jurisdiction. 

The last thing that I would say, we face a moral dilemma here. 

The Pope was in town 2 months ago, spoke to all of us, invoked 

the golden rule, treat other people the way we want to be treated, 

invoked Matthew 25, the least of these, when I was a stranger in 

your land, did you take me in, and everybody stood up and applauded in our joint session—you may recall that—when he said 

those words. And now, we are not so sure we believe those words. 

And the question is, we have a moral imperative to the least of 

these, to treat other people the way we want to be treated. We 

have an equally strong moral imperative, and I think a duty by virtue of our oath of office, to make sure that we do not meet the 

moral imperative, to the least of these, by putting at risk the citizens of this country. 

And the question for us is, can we do both? Can we do both? I 

think we can, and I think, morally and just by common sense, we 

need to do both, and our challenge is to figure out how to do that 

and to thread the needle, build on the good work that has been 

done, and to continue to go for it. 

The last thing I will say is this: The Department of Homeland 

Security is doing good work in communities where there is heavy, 

a large Muslim population in this country, just to try to make sure 

that we inoculate, we are inoculating, help those communities 

inoculate against the success—and the Chairman has mentioned 

this—the success of efforts to use social media to radicalize our 

own people. And, there is a request by the administration to increase the funding for that program. It seems to be working. And, 

I think as we consider the appropriations bills in the near future, 

I hope we will keep in mind what works and do more of that, including in this regard. 

And, lastly, there is a fellow named Adam Szubin—Adam 

Szubin—who was heavily involved in a leadership role when we 
5 

1The prepared statement of Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 55. 

2The acronym list referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 124. 

3The 13-step vetting process provided by U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants appears in the Appendix on page 122. 

were trying to cutoff Iran’s access to international financial markets, when we were trying to cut off North Korea and their access 

to international financial markets. And, I understand he has been 

nominated at a very senior position within Treasury to do that 

work, to lead that effort, including cutting off ISIS financially, and 

there is obviously work that still needs to be done. 

Senator Heitkamp, is that nomination still pending in the Banking Committee? 

Senator HEITKAMP. It is still pending. We held his hearing, so 

the hearing has been completed, pending a vote in the Banking 

Committee. 

Senator CARPER. Yes. This Committee has done great work in 

making sure that the senior level of leadership in the Department 

of Homeland Security, all those vacant positions a year and a half 

ago, they have been filled, and we have done very good work in 

that regard. This is another nomination that could be very helpful 

in terms of the root cause, cutting off ISIS’s money. It is all well 

and good if we crush them on the battlefield, but in terms of making sure that their money is gone, this is a good way to do it, and 

we have a good guy who is willing to serve. We need to get him 

done. 

Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator Carper. I also have an 

opening statement that I would enter in the record,1 without objection. 

A couple of housekeeping items. It is great we have such strong 

attendance, so we are going to limit questions to 5 minutes. 

I thought there might be a few acronyms being thrown around, 

so I did have our staff publish a little acronym glossary2 here to 

speed things along, as well as a 13-step vetting process3 put out 

by the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, again, just to 

help the Committee as we are asking questions. 

Chairman JOHNSON. With that, it is the tradition of this Committee to swear in witnesses, so if you will both rise and raise your 

right hand. 

Do you swear the testimony you will give before this Committee 

will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 

help you, God? 

Ms. RICHARD. I do. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I do. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you. Please be seated. 

Our first witness is Ann Richard. Ms. Richard is the Assistant 

Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration at the U.S. Department of State. Prior to her appointment, 

Ms. Richard was the Vice President of Government Relations and 

Advocacy for the International Rescue Committee (IRC), an international aid agency that helps refugees, internally displaced, and 

other victims of conflict. Ms. Richard. 
6 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Richard appears in the Appendix on page 60. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ANNE C. RICHARD,1 ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POPULATION, REFUGEES, AND MIGRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ms. RICHARD. Thank you very much, Senator Johnson, Senator 

Carper, all the Senators on this important Committee, for holding 

this hearing today on the impact of ISIS on the homeland and refugee resettlement. I have provided some testimony that talks about 

the humanitarian assistance we provide overseas, that talks about 

our diplomacy in the humanitarian area, working with other countries, but what I would like to focus on right away is the refugee 

resettlement process. 

I know the murderous attacks in Paris last Friday evening have 

raised many questions about the spillover of not just migrants to 

Europe, but also the spread of violence from war zones in the Middle East to the streets of a major European capital. Let me assure 

you that the entire executive branch, and the State Department 

that I represent here today, has the safety and security of Americans as our highest priority. 

As an essential, fundamental part of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), we screen applicants rigorously and carefully in an effort to ensure that no one who poses a threat to the 

safety and security of Americans is able to enter our country. All 

refugees of all nationalities considered for admission to the United 

States undergo intensive security screening involving multiple Federal agencies. These are intelligence, security, and law enforcement 

agencies, including the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), 

the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI’s) Terrorist Screening 

Center (TSC), and the Departments of Homeland Security, State, 

and Defense (DOD). Consequently, resettlement is a deliberate 

process that can take 18 to 24 months, as you mentioned earlier. 

Applicants to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) are 

currently subject to the highest level of security checks of any category of traveler to the United States. These safeguards include biometric, or fingerprint, and biographic checks and lengthy in-person overseas interviews by specially trained DHS officers, who 

scrutinize the applicant’s explanation of individual circumstances 

to ensure the applicant is a bona fide refugee and is not known to 

present security concerns to the United States. These DHS interviewers report to Director Rodriguez as part of his leadership of 

USCIS, so he is really the expert on this. 

What I would like to say is that the vast majority of the three 

million refugees who have been admitted to the United States, including from some of the most troubled regions in the world, have 

proven to be hardworking and productive residents. They pay 

taxes, send their children to school, and after 5 years, many take 

the test to become citizens. Some serve in the U.S. military and undertake other forms of service for their communities and our country. 

I am happy to answer any questions you have about any part of 

my testimony that I did not get into, but I think the hot issue 

today is the security aspects of our program and, therefore, I am 

very pleased to be here today to answer any questions. Thank you. 
7 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Rodriguez appears in the Appendix on page 64. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Ms. Richard. 

Our next witness is Leon Rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez is the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which plays a key role in the U.S. 

Refugee Admissions Program. Prior to this position, Mr. Rodriguez 

served as the Director of the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Deputy Assistant 

Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice 

(DOJ). Mr. Rodriguez. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE LEON RODRIGUEZ,1 DIRECTOR, U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking 

Member. Thank you, Members of the Committee. And thank you 

in particular for convening this very timely hearing. 

I am going to use the time that I have to do something which 

I think is really critical at this juncture, which is to lay out with 

some care how the refugee screening process works, what its structure is, what its redundancies are, and what the resources are that 

are utilized as part of that process. 

Most refugees, the overwhelming majority in the case of Syrians 

who enter the U.S. screening process, are first encountered in refugee camps. In the case of Syrians, the majority of those will be 

either in Turkey, Jordan, or Lebanon. Their first encounter is with 

the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 

where they register their claim for refugee status. Some are referred to the United States. Others are referred to other countries 

that have also expressed a willingness to the United Nations to receive refugees. 

The United Nations conducts an interview. It explores possible 

inadmissibilities that may apply, either in the case of the United 

States or in other countries. It also makes a determination of priority based on particular vulnerabilities of populations. 

Once those determinations are made, if, in fact, there is a cognizable claim and there do not appear to be significant inadmissibilities, at that point, the U.N. refers that individual or that 

case—because very typically, these come to us not as single individuals, but rather as family units that are traveling together—to 

whatever country it is, in our case, to the State Department, where 

a series of things occur. 

At that point, a second interview is conducted by Ms. Richard’s 

staff and a set of biographic checks, and this is a very important 

element of the process, are conducted at that point. The checks conducted include query holdings, State Department holdings, including databases that are of an intelligence nature, Security Advisory 

Opinions (SAOs) in a large number of the cases, which is a database hosted by the FBI, and very critically for our discussion here, 

what is called the interagency check, which is a network of queries 

hosted by the National Counterterrorism Center of a broad swath 

of intelligence and law enforcement holdings. 
8 

I know we have talked a lot about the comparison between this 

case and Iraq. The fact is, when we talk about Syria, we are talking about the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), we are 

talking about al-Nusra, we are talking about the Syrian government itself, all of which have interests and desires very much adverse to those of the United States. 

There is a constant process of gathering information about what 

is going on in those places, and as a result, in several cases, or in 

a number of cases, our queries of those databases, at that phase, 

have registered hits. Those hits have been the basis either to deny 

outright admission to individuals or to place people on hold. 

If the individual clears the State Department process, they are 

then referred to USCIS. We have the benefit of all the work that 

has been done prior—the State Department interview, the U.N. 

interview, and the fruits of those background checks. We place in 

particular those officers who work in environments like Syria or 

others through a particularly rigorous battery of both training and 

pre-deployment briefing, as well as apprenticeship while they are 

out in the field. With that briefing, they then conduct very intensive interviews of the individuals to identify credibility issues, possible inadmissibility issues, or possible other derogatory admission. 

At the same time, the individuals are fingerprinted, and those 

fingerprints are run against U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) 

holdings, FBI holdings, and Department of Defense holdings. 

Only after they clear that process and after their cases are carefully analyzed, do they move on. If there are concerns identified, 

then, at that point, they move into what is called the Controlled 

Application Resolution and Review Process, which is a joint undertaking of my Refugee Affairs Division and my Fraud Detection and 

National Security Directorate, in which those cases are subjected 

to an even more intense analysis of what is going on. In fact, the 

number of cases—going back a while now, hundreds of them, in 

fact—are on hold because of concerns identified during the process. 

Only after an individual or a family unit has cleared that entire 

process is the decision made, in fact, to have stamped approved on 

that file, which allows that individual then to make plans for both 

cultural orientation, medical examination, and then planning to 

move to the United States. 

I also underscore that when I talked about the biographic checks 

earlier, that is a recurrent process, meaning that even though we 

do it before the interview that system is constantly queried now. 

That is a recent improvement to the manner in which we do our 

work, which means that if new derogatory information arises about 

that individual, then we will be notified of that information in 

order to take appropriate action with respect to that case. 

I look forward to the questions, which I think will give me further opportunity to elucidate this process. Thank you, Chairman 

and Ranking Member. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez. 

I want to start out, because we have been told this in briefings, 

the fact that only 2 percent of the 1,869 Syrian refugees that have 

been allowed into the country over the last year were men of military age, 21 to 30. But that is a little more narrow than that, is 

it not, because I am looking at figures that there really were 994 
9 

men and 875 women out of that 1,869. So, Ms. Richard, can you 

tell us the difference, the distinction there? 

Ms. RICHARD. Yes. Thanks for bringing that up. There have been 

2,000 Syrians resettled to the United States since the start of the 

crisis 41⁄2 years ago, and 1,700 came last year. And of all the ones 

that have come, 2 percent are young, single, military-age males 

who are not with a family or do not have a family connection in 

the United States, so truly on their own. The number of males, the 

percentage of males is a little over half. But that includes boys to 

grandpas. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Right. OK. I just kind of want to set the 

record straight there. 

My concern is where are the vulnerabilities? Where are the holes 

in the system? And in briefings, I think what people are very concerned about, OK, you are checking databases, watchlists. My first 

question is, what does it take to get in a database or on a 

watchlist, and how do you avoid it? I mean, what people would not 

be on there that then you are going to completely rely on interviews? 

So, let us first start here. How do you get on a watchlist and how 

do you stay off it? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Some of the specifics about how that works are 

things that we would need to address in a classified briefing—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. But suffice it to say, if there is a 

heightened level of concern that somebody is a terrorist or otherwise an actor who would be seeking to harm the United States, 

that would be the basis of either nomination to one of the databases I described before, watchlisting. Again, I think in a classified 

briefing, we could probably go into detail as to how that happens. 

Chairman JOHNSON. So they would have had to do something or 

be associated with somebody that is nefarious, correct? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Those are at least two ways—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. So, let us say they are a citizen of Syria or 

a citizen of France that really did not travel, or maybe a citizen of 

France that snuck into Syria, never had the passport stamped, was 

able to sneak back. There would be no reason for them to be on 

a watchlist or in a database, correct? And then during the interview process, they would really be able to answer all the questions 

and not come across as particularly suspicious, right? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I go back to what I said at the beginning. There 

is no question that ISIL, al-Nusra, the Syrian government, itself, 

are our enemies. There is, therefore, a constant process of looking 

for information about those entities, about their activities, about 

where they operate, about who they are, that, in turn, becomes— 

and, again, without describing the techniques as to how that occurs—information that is available to us through these various 

databases that I described. Therefore, this can become a reason either directly or through association, in some cases, to, at a minimum, hold a case and subject that case to further scrutiny. 

Chairman JOHNSON. But, again, if you had a clean record and 

you are from Syria or you are one of those citizens from Europe, 

you may not be in those databases and you would have to have a 

pretty good interviewer to potentially catch that. 
10 

What is the current—and, hopefully, you can talk about this in 

open session—what is the current estimate of the number of foreign fighters that are European citizens or citizens—let us put it 

this way—citizens of a country that has the Visa Waiver Program 

in place with the United States? How many of those foreign fighters are we aware of that have gone to Syria, possibly come back? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I apologize, Chairman. I believe that that sort 

of analysis exists. I do not have it at my fingertips. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Ms. Richard, do you know? 

Ms. RICHARD. No, sir. 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK, because I think that is, I think, one of 

our greater vulnerabilities. So, I think as other people ask questions, we are going to see a pretty robust vetting process for refugees and probably a less robust process for other forms of visa 

waivers or visas coming into this country, and I think that is part 

of the vulnerabilities we need to explore. 

With that, I will turn it over to Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks. Again, we appreciate very much your 

being here with us today. 

Just given what we have talked about here today and what we 

have learned in the last several days about the rigor of the refugee 

program, the screening process in the refugee program, if—these 

guys are not stupid that we are dealing with, the bad guys. I cannot imagine why they would want to spend 2 years going through 

a refugee screening process when they could try to get to this country, or any other country, with a tourist waiver, tourist visa, rather, with a student visa, come through the visa waiver process we 

have with 38 other countries. 

So, we are going to continue to focus on the refugee process for 

folks to get over here, whether it is 2,000 this year, 10,000 next 

year. It is hard to imagine, if I am trying to get over here to do 

mischief, I am going to wait 2 years to go through that process, 

knowing that at any step of the way, I could be bumped out and 

probably would be detected. OK. 

I think where we need to, as a Committee, focus our attention 

is on the Visa Waiver Program, and I might be mistaken. We have 

a lot of hearings in this Committee, as my colleagues know, but I 

believe we had one in the last year or so on the visa waiver situation and it was good. And we learned there had been—was it perfect? No, it was not. Has it been made better? Yes, it has. And are 

there things that we can do to make it better still? There probably 

are. 

And, I do not know, Mr. Rodriguez, if you could just talk to us 

about—this may be outside of your lane, the Visa Waiver Program, 

but we need to hear from somebody who can talk to us—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes—— 

Senator CARPER [continuing]. And give us some advice as to what 

legislatively we can do to strengthen it further. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. I confess that it is outside of my lane, although the individual that runs that lane does not sit too far away 

from me, and that would be the Customs and Border—— 

Senator CARPER. Is there anybody here with you from DHS? 
11 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, but we certainly could work with the Committee to arrange a briefing or a hearing, as the case might be, to 

discuss those issues. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Good. 

You said something in your testimony, Mr. Rodriguez, about I 

think the term you used was recurring process, going over, monitoring and reexamining as new information comes to the fore, and 

that could be used in terms of either denying or revisiting someone’s ability to come here, to stay here. Would you talk a little bit 

more about that. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. So, I talked before about the interagency 

check, which is essentially an electronic query of a number of different law enforcement and intelligence databases. We have now 

upgraded our approach to those checks to have the system advise 

us if further information is entered into that system about an individual about who there has been previously a query. 

So, if we had queried during the initial phases of the—rather, 

sort of the intermediate phases of the screening process, an individual, and if new information arises about that individual, then 

we would be notified about the existence of that new information, 

and that occurs right up until the very moment of arrival in the 

United States. That query process continues to occur right up until 

that point. 

The other thing that I might say, if I may, Senator, about the 

interview process, my training is as a State and Federal prosecutor. I have spent a lot of my life around law enforcement of all 

types: State, local, and Federal. And I have conducted and observed 

thousands of interviews. I have taken the opportunity to observe 

my officers in action. I was with them in Turkey this June. And 

I can tell you that the quality of the interviewing that they were 

conducting was as good as any I have seen in my professional career. 

Senator CARPER. OK. Would you talk to us a little bit about 

whether or not we need to examine more closely—we have talked 

about the process—the refugee process of getting here and the visa 

waiver process of getting here. How about student and tourist visa 

process of getting here? I am told that 40 percent of the people that 

are here, if there are 12—we will say there are 12 million people 

here undocumented in this country. I think about 40 percent of 

them came here in a legal status, maybe using a tourist visa or a 

student visa. But, are there any things that we should be mindful 

of, thinking about the rigor of those processes? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. I think the main thing to—— 

Senator CARPER. And the vetting of those people coming under 

those—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. Note about that, and I am going to 

try to say it in 5 seconds, is that those processes also involve both 

law enforcement and national security database checks. So, the fact 

that those are outside of the refugee process does not mean that 

we are not undertaking some of the same rigor that we apply to 

the refugee screening process. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Thanks so much. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Portman. 
12 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

holding another hearing on this topic. We were here last month 

talking with the Secretary of Homeland Security, your boss, and 

also talking to the FBI Director and the counterterrorism folks 

about this very topic. And, I think it is clear that we live in a dangerous world and it is something we have to be concerned about, 

not just in the refugee program, but all these various entry points. 

One, of course, is the Visa Waiver Program. We talked about the 

fact that there are 5,000 foreign fighters who come from these 38 

countries with which we have a visa waiver arrangement. That is 

a huge risk, and I think it is appropriate that this Committee focus 

on tightening up those standards. I know there are a couple of legislative proposals floating out there now and we would love to have 

your input on that today. 

We also, of course, have to worry about visas. I mean, the 9/11 

terrorists came here, overstayed their visas. We did not know who 

they were, where they were. That is an immigration reform issue. 

Legal immigrants—we have foreign fighters ourselves, and we 

have had some that have come back to my home State of Ohio. One 

came back to Columbus, Ohio, and plotted to commit terrorist acts 

in the United States and was arrested for it. It is happening. 

We, of course, have the issue of illegal entry. This morning, we 

hear about the five individuals who were stopped in Honduras with 

fake Syrian passports, and then we have apparently a couple families on the Mexican border this morning. And, this is a problem 

and this goes to our need to have a secure border, not just for immigration purposes, but for money, guns, drugs, and certainly for 

terrorism. 

And then homegrown terrorists. My hometown of Cincinnati, we 

have one person currently incarcerated, under arrest, for wanting 

to come to this capital to blow us up here. And in Akron, this 

month, we had a homegrown terrorist arrested. This is in Ohio, the 

heartland. 

So, this is a very real issue, but I do not think we should ignore 

the refugee side of it, either. Let me tell you a story, and maybe 

you can tell me that this is something that could never happen 

under the current program. But there were a couple of brothers 

who were brought in as refugees from Iraq—not Syria, but from 

Iraq—and they were in the heartland, right across the river from 

where I live, in Bowling Green, Kentucky. 

Recently, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed their conviction for terrorist activities, including providing assistance to alQaeda in Iraq. They also were taped saying that they wanted to 

build a bomb in the United States to kill a U.S. Army captain in 

the United States, and they were quoted as saying, quote, ‘‘many 

things should take place and it should be huge.’’ These were refugees. 

And, so, this notion that, somehow, we need to worry about all 

these other issues but it is OK in the refugee program, of course, 

we need to know who is coming in, and we need to be sure we not 

only know who they are, but also what their intentions are. 

And with regard to these Iraqi refugees who came in, they had 

been fingerprinted at the border in Syria, because they had to go 

through Syria to come from Iraq. They had been entered into a bio-
13 

metric database maintained by U.S. intelligence. Yet, when they 

applied for refugee status and were checked by DHS, your department, FBI and the Department of Defense, they came in clean and 

were admitted to the United States. So, later they bragged about 

what they had done to attack and kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq. They 

were not picked up. 

My concern, which was something that came forward in our last 

hearing here on October 8, in this room, where again we had your 

boss, the FBI Director and counterterrorism officials. They told us, 

point blank, we do not have the intelligence in Syria to be able to 

do the appropriate background checks. Here is the quote from Director Comey, the FBI Director, in response to asking about our 

gaps in intelligence collection and the sharing process that posed 

great risk, he said, ‘‘Senator, to me, there is a risk associated with 

bringing anybody in from the outside, but especially from a conflict 

zone like that. My concern there is that there are certain gaps, I 

do not want to talk about publicly, in the data that is available to 

us,’’ end quote. 

You said something similar this morning. You cannot talk in 

open session about the gaps we have. But, obviously, we do not 

have intelligence on the ground there. We have just spent 50 special forces there. That is great. They are not there to collect data 

on refugees. 

So, I do think it is a concern and I do think we have to tighten 

it up and I think if we do not, we are ignoring one of the—agreed, 

many other threats, some of which may be greater threats in the 

sense of numbers of people, but for us to stand here and say we 

are somehow against refugees because we think there ought to be 

proper checks in place, that is ridiculous. We are the most generous 

country in the world, and thank God we are. And I, along with my 

colleagues, I think, on both sides of the aisle, are strongly in support of the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program. But let us be 

darned sure that we do not have another situation, as we had in 

Bowling Green, Kentucky, in a case where, unfortunately, because 

we do not have intelligence on the ground, we had even less information than we did with regard to the Iraqis. 

Your response. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. Since the Bowling Green case, a lot has 

been done to upgrade the security check system. I have heard it 

certainly said by others that those individuals would have, in fact, 

been picked up under the kind of biographic screening that we do 

now. 

Nothing of what I am saying should be seen as contrary to what 

either Secretary Johnson or Director Comey said. There is, in fact, 

risk in what we do. What I am saying is that we engage in the sort 

of process with redundancies, with abundant resources and with 

highly trained officers, to keep those risks to an absolute, absolute 

minimum. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thanks, Senator Portman. 

Just out of respect to all of our Members here, I will be using 

the gavel here to keep the question and answer period as close to 

5 minutes as possible. So, with that, Senator McCaskill. 
14 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MCCASKILL 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you both for being here. I will not 

ask you to take the time to identify all the different ways that foreigners can come to our country, but I think it is obvious, and it 

has already been stated today and many times over the last few 

days, that these radical jihadists are all over the world. They are 

in our country. They are in many countries. And, if you look at the 

number of refugees that have been brought in from other countries, 

there are a number of countries on that list where we have brought 

in many more than Syria, like Somalia, Iran, and Yemen. And, we 

have intelligence gaps everywhere. There are intelligence gaps. 

So, the question I have for you is, if you were a terrorist—well, 

maybe this is not a good question because we do not want to tell 

terrorists this. Let me ask it this way. [Laughter.] 

Let me ask it this way. Which way, of all the ways to get into 

this country, are you subjected to the most scrutiny? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I can say with great confidence that applicants 

for refugee status, and in particular refugees from Syria, are subjected to the most scrutiny of any traveler, of any kind, for any purpose, to the United States. 

Senator MCCASKILL. So, my biggest concern is, listen, let me acknowledge, America is on edge. People I love are on edge. We are 

worried and we are angry, worried and angry. And what I would 

like us to do on a bipartisan basis is to calmly come together as 

a country, Democrats and Republicans, and figure out what we can 

do that enhances the security in all of the categories. But it seems 

to me we have gotten distracted by the shiny object of refugees because of this image of people swarming our borders without any 

checks, not realizing that this, of course, is not like Europe, where 

all they saw at the border of France is ‘‘Welcome to France.’’ That 

is it. I mean, once they got into Europe, they had free access 

around those countries. 

So, what I would like you to tell us, both of you, is if you were 

going to spend time and energy crafting better policies to keep 

America safe from those people who want to come here, where 

would you focus attention? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. For me, that is an operational question as much 

as a policy question, and it is an operational question that we ask 

ourselves every single day in what we do, which is, to the extent 

that we are screening, be they refugees or the other example that 

was given was individual student visas, what are we doing to plug 

up risks that we identify in those processes. So, even though I have 

identified what I think is a very rigorous process, we are constantly 

looking for opportunities to upgrade that process, to improve the 

scope of information that we access, to deepen the training and understanding of our officers. 

One example, actually, is to the extent that we talk about increasing admissions, our officers learn a lot from the refugees that 

they interview. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Right. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. That actually—— 

Senator MCCASKILL. And all that goes into our process. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. That is correct, and that deepens their ability to 

be able to screen the people that—— 
15 

Senator MCCASKILL. What about students? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. They encounter as part of the process. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Are we doing this for students? Are we 

checking them in all the databases? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. In many cases, depending on where they come 

from and the circumstances in which they come—we are certainly 

checking in the databases. We do that for just about every immigration category that we operate. The configurations are different 

depending on the categories, but we basically do a national security 

check and a criminal justice check for just about every applicant 

for immigration benefit or other sort of immigration consideration 

who we encounter. 

Senator MCCASKILL. And what about biometrics for all of the 38 

countries that we have Visa Waiver Programs with? How many of 

them now do not have the facial recognition and the fingerprint 

recognition and the chip-embedded passports that we think now 

should be standard? How many of those countries do not have that 

as a bare minimum? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Senator, I am going to respectfully defer to my 

Customs and Border Protection colleagues. They really are the experts on the operation of the Visa Waiver Program. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, I would like us to get that information 

because if we are crafting legislation, I think it is a big mistake not 

to use this as a moment of leverage with our visa waiver partners, 

to insist on the same kind of biometric protections that we have in 

our passports for those passports, since I believe, the foreign fighters in those countries pose much more of a risk to us than the 

small number of refugees who have gone through a great amount 

of vetting. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator McCaskill. Senator 

Ayotte. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AYOTTE 

Senator AYOTTE. I want to thank the Chairman. 

Director Rodriguez, just to be clear, following up on Senator 

Portman’s question about the current program and the refugee program, Director Comey, not only did he testify before this Committee with what he told Senator Portman, but also, I think, what 

has concerned many of us is the testimony that he gave before the 

House Committee on October 21, 2015 and in which he basically 

said that the U.S. Government may not have the ability to vet 

thoroughly all the Syrian refugees coming into the United States. 

He explained that if a Syrian person is not already in the FBI’s 

database, that person is unknown to the agency, leaving an inadequate basis for the person’s background to be screened for terrorism risk. He said, quote, ‘‘We can only query against that which 

we have collected.’’ He cautioned—he also said, ‘‘So, if someone has 

never made a ripple in the pond in Syria, in a way that would get 

their identity or interests reflected in our database, we can query 

our database until the cows come home, but we are not going 

to—there will be nothing because we have no record on that person.’’ 
16 

So, I guess my question is, I understand all the multiple steps 

that you are taking, but is not one of our big gaps here that we 

do not have the kind of intelligence we had in Iraq, where we actually had, because we had many representatives on the ground, we 

had men and women who fought there, we had diplomatic representatives that we do not have in Syria, that this presents a different challenge to us? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. There is no question that in Iraq, we had a 

unique level of intelligence saturation. To what I think was Senator McCaskill’s point, though—— 

Senator AYOTTE. But I am asking this question—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No—— 

Senator AYOTTE. So, are there greater challenges, and how do we 

reconcile what Director Comey has said about these gaps with concerns that our constituents have, that I think are very legitimate, 

about this vetting process based on a gap in information? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No, I am trying to explain. So, this is not the 

first time, by far, that we have been vetting individuals coming 

from a country that was a zone of conflict where we were not participants, where we did not have the intelligence gathering ability 

that we had in Iraq. The fact is that we are gathering intelligence 

around the world—— 

Senator AYOTTE. OK, so just a simple question. Do you diminish 

at all the concerns raised by the FBI Director to the Congress? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. No. I think I was very clear that what we do is 

not without risk. What I am saying is that we are using multiple 

intelligence resources—— 

Senator AYOTTE. I understand that. Just a simple yes or no. Do 

you disagree or do you have any quarrel with the comments that 

he has testified to in the House Committee? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I do not have quarrel with what he said. I think 

there is context that is critical. 

Senator AYOTTE. OK. I appreciate it. I just wanted to understand. 

So, I want to understand, of all the individuals involved in the 

Paris attacks, can either of you answer the question of how many 

were on our ‘‘no fly’’ list? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I know that I am not in a position, in an open 

hearing, to discuss that information. 

Senator AYOTTE. OK. And, can either of you answer the question 

of how many were on our terrorist watchlist, or is that something 

we cannot answer in an open session? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Again, in an open session, I do not believe I can 

answer. 

Senator AYOTTE. So, I would agree with Senator McCaskill that 

I think there are allies that we, on this Visa Waiver Program, 

which this Committee actually has been focusing on for a while— 

a number of hearings related, even prior to this, on the Visa Waiver Program—that we do need to understand what information and 

what gaps were on that, based on whether those individuals, who 

are engaged and are the perpetrators of the attacks in Paris, were 

on our list, No. 1. I think that we have all received some briefing 

on that in a classified setting. But, this is something we have to 

have an open discussion about, as well. 
17 

Where are those gaps that need to be fixed, because if they cannot get on our no fly list and they are not on our no fly list, this 

is a real issue on the Visa Waiver Program, because that means, 

potentially, they can come here. And, so, that is something that 

needs to be addressed. 

So, I do not think that it is mutually exclusive that we address 

these gaps in the Visa Waiver Program that need to be addressed 

and gaps in refugee resettlement programs. Obviously, there are legitimate and important reasons for people to travel to the United 

States of America, but we need to make sure that we address that 

issue, as well. 

But, I think many of us are concerned, based on what we are 

hearing from some of our top intelligence officials and the Director 

of the FBI, that the gaps we have do not allow us to fully know 

what we need to know on some of the individuals who are coming, 

potentially, to our country. 

Finally, I just want to say that if we do not address ISIS with 

what they are doing in Syria and Iraq, then we are not going to 

be in a position—if we do not work together with our allies to defeat ISIS, then the refugee problem is going to continue because 

these individuals will not have a home, and I hope that is something that we all work ontogether on a bipartisan basis. Thank 

you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Tester. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TESTER 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this hearing, and thanks to both of the people who testified for 

coming today. 

If a refugee’s application for admittance is denied, is there a tag 

put on that form, on that record? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. In other words, if we see the individual again? 

I assume that is the essence of your question, Senator. 

Senator TESTER. That is the next question, yes. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. OK. I mean, we certainly make sure that we 

know who that individual is. 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. It is also if, critically, if future cases demonstrate some connection to that denied individual, that is something that we are able to identify. 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. We are always looking at networks of people, 

family networks and networks of associations as part of our vetting. 

Senator TESTER. OK. So, is it fair to say that refugees that have 

been denied acceptance, none of them have tried to reapply and 

none of them have received? Once been denied, they are out? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I cannot say whether that is unheard of, Senator—— 

Senator TESTER. What would cause—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. We can certainly get you an answer 

to that question. 

Senator TESTER. Can you tell me what would cause a denied application to become one that would be accepted at a later date? 
18 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I suppose if it was a situation where it turned 

out that the individual was able to effectively refute—— 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. The basis of the denial—— 

Senator TESTER. Got you. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. That would be a pretty high bar. I should just 

underscore that. 

Senator TESTER. Could you give me an idea on how many refugee 

applications are received and how many are accepted? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. In any given year, we admit—this past year—— 

Senator TESTER. What I am talking about is, you applied, you 

are turned away or you are accepted. Can you give me the difference between applications and acceptance? I know how many 

people have come in already. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Umm—— 

Senator TESTER. If you cannot answer that, you can get back to 

me. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. I will get you that back—— 

Senator TESTER. Let me ask a little bit about the process for 

screening that you went through, and I appreciate that, by the 

way. You said that the refugees were continually queried through 

databases for additional information. Is that while the vetting process is going on, or does that even occur after they are admitted into 

the country? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. That occurs right up until the time of their admission into the country, from the time that the check is first run, 

during the intermediate portions of the screening, essentially, the 

State Department leg of the screening, and that occurs right up 

until the time of their admission. 

Senator TESTER. OK. Without getting into the specifics, and we 

have talked about VWP, we potentially will talk about political refugees and the difference. We could talk about different ways of getting into this country. Is your Department putting together a list 

of things as an ask of Congress to give you additional tools to make 

sure that the vetting process is where you believe it needs to be— 

if any are required? Are you willing to give us your suggestions on 

what needs to be done, not only with refugees, but with the entire 

overlay, political refugees and others? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Sure—— 

Senator TESTER. Visa waivers and others? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Sure. No, we are always willing to work with the 

Congress on those issues. I think it is important to understand that 

my agency is a fee-funded agency. 

Senator TESTER. Yes. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. The fees paid by most of our fee payers subsidize 

the refugee. So, they do not pay an application fee, but that is subsidized by other fee payers, other USCIS fee payers. 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. So, it is not from tax revenue. 

Senator TESTER. I have you, but that is not the question. The 

question is, if we need to tighten up VWP, for example, or if we 

need to tighten up political refugees and the regimen that they 

have to go through to get accepted into this country, are you guys 

willing to put forth those recommendations to us? And, I am not 
19 

saying there are any needed, but it would be nice to deal with the 

folks who deal directly on where the gaps are. You know them better than I. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Senator, we are absolutely willing to work with 

this body at any time to refine the way we do our work. Absolutely. 

Senator TESTER. OK. Let me see. What else is there? That is 

probably about it. I just want to say thank you for your work. I 

think that there is not anybody that serves in Congress that does 

not want to make sure this country is as secure and as safe as it 

can be. I think what happened in France rattled people to their 

soul. And, so, we need to make sure that the work you are doing 

fits the risk. Thank you. 

Senator CARPER. Senator, before you yield back your time, let me 

just share something. At our briefing yesterday, and in some discussion at our lunch today, there was some mention of a program, 

I think it is funded within DHS, the number $45 million per year 

sticks in my mind, and the money is used to combat radicalization 

in this country. Could you just take, like, 20 seconds and just tell 

us about that, because we heard yesterday that that is something 

we should do more of. It has worked. We should do more of that. 

It goes to the root causes that the Chairman was talking about. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes. Secretary Johnson has assembled at a high 

level in the Department something called the Office of Community 

Partnerships, the purpose of which is to engage in the activity we 

call countering violent extremism. And that is a series of engagements at a national, State, and local level, at a community level, 

with youth and with nongovernmental organizations, to really identify the root causes of radicalization and to use smart approaches 

to, in fact, interrupt the process of radicalization. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Baldwin. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BALDWIN 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Like my colleagues, I certainly am hearing from the public in 

Wisconsin with sincerely held concerns and fears about an attack, 

such as the horrific attack we saw in Paris, happening here in the 

United States. So, I was grateful to hear your response to Senator 

McCaskill’s question about which of the methods of entry into the 

United States would set up or provide the greatest amount of scrutiny, and I think I heard you say fairly specifically that the refugee 

path, especially if you are a refugee from Syria, would provoke, 

prompt, the most intense scrutiny. Is that correct? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Yes, that is correct. That is absolutely correct. 

I mean, I know what we do and across all lines of business and 

that is absolutely the most scrutiny to which we subject—— 

Senator BALDWIN. So, I wanted to follow-up, because a number 

of the Governors in the United States have come forward to try to 

cut off that path in terms of announcing some sort of refusal to 

participate in a Refugee Resettlement Program that is a national 

program. Governor Walker from the State of Wisconsin, my State 

that I represent, was among those Governors, and I just wanted to 

share what he communicated in terms of raising concerns. 

He said that ‘‘there are not proper security procedures in place 

to appropriately background and accurately ascertain the identities 
20 

of those entering our country through the Syrian refugee program,’’ 

end quote, and additionally that, quote, ‘‘this deficiency in the program poses a threat to the safety and security of our people,’’ end 

quote. 

Can you respond to those concerns? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Sure. There have been refugee populations that, 

because they come from conflict zones, because they are running 

from their house, have not presented a lot of documentation when 

we have encountered them. That has not generally been true of the 

Syrian refugee population. 

I would also point out that our officers, as part of their rigorous 

training, are trained in identifying fraudulent documents, to the 

extent that that is something we are always looking for as a concern. 

It is also a critical part of the vetting process from end to end, 

in other words, what UNHCR does, what Assistant Secretary Richard’s folks do and what we do, to really drill into the identity and 

associations of these individuals. So, I do have a high level of confidence that when we stamp a case ‘‘approved,’’ we know whose 

case we approved. We know the identity of that individual. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. 

Ms. Richard, my next question has to do with the implications 

on funding that flows from the Federal Government in support of 

Refugee Resettlement Programs, generally, if a State were to announce that it was not going to participate in that program. I know 

that you work in partnership with the Department of Health and 

Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement in all of this. But, 

let me just ask, do you think these State decisions jeopardize this 

funding stream and a series of programs that back up refugee resettlement, such as medical assistance, social services, and housing? And, I am particularly concerned about refugees who may 

have settled in our States from other places in the world aside from 

Syria. 

Ms. RICHARD. Thank you for your question, Senator. Three departments of the Federal Government are the ones who help run 

the process, although as you have heard, a lot of law enforcement 

and national security intelligence agencies are involved in the vetting process. But in terms of running the process, the State Department is responsible for working with UNHCR. UNHCR refers refugees to us. We have staff in centers around the world who help the 

refugees put their case together to tell their story and collect their 

documents. The essential decision over whether they are coming or 

not rests with DHS. 

The vetting process is complicated, as you have heard, and then 

we also are responsible for getting them to the United States, 

working with partner organizations to have them met at the airport, and getting them settled here in the first 3 months of their 

new lives in the United States. 

At that point, the Department of Health and Human Services 

has a program to provide assistance through the State Governments to give additional support to refugees. They will have refugee-specific programs. It varies from State to State. 

So, in the past, there has been at least one Governor who said, 

‘‘I do not like refugees coming here. I am not going to accept this 
21 

money.’’ And a Member of Congress from that State told him, 

‘‘Please accept the money. I worked very hard up here in Washington to get assistance for our State to help with these kinds of 

tests.’’ And this is a Federal program. The Governors do not have 

the ability to block the resettlement of refugees, but, more important than that is, this program depends very much on the support 

of the American people. 

It is run at the community level. There are a lot of community 

organizations, of volunteers, churches, faith-based groups and temples involved. A lot of the things that help a refugee family get 

started once they get here are furnished by charity. I have been to 

places in Miami where recently arrived Cuban refugees get furniture from a furniture store where the founder was a Cuban refugee. And, so, these contributions are a big part of this program. 

It is a public-private partnership. It only works if people at the 

community level support it. 

So, I am less concerned about the legal ramifications of the Governors’ actions and much more concerned about the message it is 

sending to the American citizens, that we would at all be running 

a program that is dangerous. We have no desire to do that. And 

we also need public officials and Senators and Members of Congress to help us—the responsibility is mine, but I can use the 

help—educate people about what this program is and why we do 

it and why it is in the best interests of our Nation to honor this 

tradition of bringing refugees to the United States. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Heitkamp. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HEITKAMP 

Senator HEITKAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

A couple of things. First off, just because I know you guys have 

deferred a number of times on the Visa Waiver Program, I am not 

going to ask you specifics. But I do want for the record to acknowledge that 20 million people last year in 38 countries—and I am not 

saying they all traveled to the United States—used the Visa Waiver Program. And we know very many of those 38 countries do not 

have the same level of scrutiny, do not have the same level of biometrics, not even looking at eVerified passports, that we have allowed in the interest of commerce and certainly with allied countries, maybe not being as enforcement-minded as what we are. So, 

I think that this is a huge part of what we need to be concerned 

about. 

But, we are here talking about the refugee program, and so I am 

going to just ask a simple question. Do you think it is legitimate 

for the American public to today ask you to provide answers to 

their questions about this program, but also for you to take a look 

at this program and analyze whether, in fact, there are any gaps, 

things that we could be doing better, choices that we could be making? 

Let us say, Mr. Rodriguez, for example, we have someone that 

we know nothing about, compelling story, but we know nothing 

about him. Another compelling story over here, we know a lot 

about that person. Given the competition for resettlement in this 

country, do you not think it makes sense for us to prioritize those 

folks that have compelling stories but that we know a lot about? 
22 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I am accountable to the American people, first 

and foremost. So, whatever questions they have are questions that 

I am fully prepared, at all times, to answer, and I think their questions are about how we conduct this process and how we prioritize 

within this process. 

The basic design of the refugee referral process is to prioritize individuals in the most need. And, at that point, it starts what is a 

very rigorous process of screening and a lot of information is gathered from everybody that we encounter. And if we cannot get that 

information, we do not clear them. We do not approve their cases 

and they either go on hold or they are outright denied. 

Senator HEITKAMP. And I think that is something that has been 

missed in this discussion today, because a lot of people are saying 

‘‘you know nothing about them,’’ as the FBI Director has said. And 

what you are saying now is if you cannot really find out enough 

about them, if there is not any third-party verifiable information, 

that person may not, in fact probably will not, make it into this 

country. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Well, or—— 

Senator HEITKAMP. Is that what you are saying? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Not entirely. In other words, the individual has 

to give us enough information that matches other information that 

we know about what is going on—— 

Senator HEITKAMP. Would that not be third-party verifiable—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I guess you are right, Senator. That is thirdparty information. 

Senator HEITKAMP. I think it is really—that is an important 

question, about how you prioritize, because no one here is suggesting that there is not a need or there are not compelling stories. 

But there are a lot of compelling stories, and maybe we prioritize 

those where we actually have a higher level of assurance. 

I do not have a lot of time and I want to get to this issue of the 

Northern border, because, obviously, we have a fairly open border 

with Canada. I can attest to that, and I think the Ranking Member, who has flown over the Canadian border, can also attest to 

that. And I know the Chairman mentioned the Northern border 

during his opening statement. Canada’s goals—and Canada’s goals 

regarding Syrian refugees. 

I think border security remains a critical priority for this country. I think we also have to include the Northern border, which I 

have been beating the drum for on this Committee since I have 

been on this Committee. So, we have to make smart investments 

on the Northern border. 

One of the issues or questions that I have regarding the refugee 

program, especially as it relates to Canada, are there any issues 

with how the Canadians vet their refugees, any suggestions that 

you have made to expand their vetting process or improve their 

vetting process, and can you speak to what would occur if someone 

was admitted into Canada as a refugee and that person later tried 

to legally cross the border to the United States. Would that person, 

even though they may not have passed the rigor in our country, be 

allowed entry through Canada? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. And I will ask Assistant Secretary Richard to 

add what I miss. We are in constant consultation, in particular 
23 

with the other English-speaking countries, on how we conduct our 

refugee screening process. The Canadians have been in this business for a long time. They do conduct at least sort of—the basic 

outline of their system, which is what I am familiar with, is also 

quite rigorous. But we are in a constant state of dialogue with 

them to make sure that we are learning from one another. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Is the Canadian system as rigorous as ours? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I cannot say. It appears to me to be, again, from 

where I have been watching-—— 

Senator HEITKAMP. That is something that you can get back to 

me on—— 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Certainly. 

Senator HEITKAMP [continuing]. And I have used up my time and 

the Chairman has offered to gavel us down if we go too far over. 

So, this is a dialogue that I think we need to continue. 

Ms. RICHARD. Senator, I am meeting with a Canadian official tomorrow, so if you give me some questions, I will get answers for 

you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. I like fear being a motivating factor. I appreciate the discipline. Senator Peters. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS 

Senator PETERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 

our panelists for your testimony today. 

This has been an interesting hearing, one that I am sure we are 

going to be continuing to discuss for some time. But it is of particular importance to me and the folks in the State of Michigan. As 

I think both of you are aware, we have one of the largest Middle 

Eastern populations, outside of the Middle East, in primarily the 

Detroit metropolitan area. We are the home to many refugees from 

around the world, but particularly from the Middle East, who come 

to the Detroit area. 

I have had an opportunity to work with refugee resettlement 

groups, with the religious community, and got to get to know many 

refugees who have come to this country, who contribute to the 

country. They are, for the most part—well, I should not say the 

most part. The refugees that I talk to are patriots. They are so excited to be in the United States because they are away from a very 

hazardous situation where their life was in jeopardy and this country opened up their borders and opened up our hearts to bring 

them here. They are store owners. They are entrepreneurs. They 

are physicians. They are engineers, contributing folks to our country. And, basically, this is what this country has been about since 

its founding, that we are about folks that come from around the 

world who want to pursue the American dream and be patriots. 

But, I think it is also important for us, as we know that, I think 

the context as we are discussing this is also that we are dealing 

with a humanitarian crisis of proportions I do not believe we have 

seen since World War II. We have literally millions of people who 

have been displaced from Syria, and they are displaced because 

thousands and thousands of Syrians were murdered and they left 

because they fear for their safety, for their families and their loved 

ones. 
24 

I was in, just about 2 months ago, in a Syrian refugee camp in 

Jordan. I had the chance to visit Zaatari, the largest refugee camp 

there. At the time I was there, there were about 85,000 individuals 

crammed in a camp in the desert not far from the Syrian border, 

in not the best of conditions to live in. They were receiving food allowance that was equal to 50 cents a day, is what they were living 

on. You cannot buy a whole lot of food for 50 cents a day. You have 

one propane bottle for your family to cook from. You cannot do a 

whole lot of cooking. 

But what was certainly most impactful to me was the conversations that I had with those refugees who just had a sense of hopelessness, that they had been there for a long time. You usually 

think you go to a refugee camp, you are there for 6 months, and 

you are back in your country. That is not the case. These folks had 

been there for 4 years, a lot that I talked to, with no idea what 

the future held for them. And their children were there and had 

to work and had difficulties surviving, not getting an education. 

I asked them, I said, where do you want to go? I mean, obviously, 

you are in this camp. You do not know what your future is. Where 

do you want to go, to the United States? Do you want to go to Europe? And every one of the refugees that I had a chance to talk to, 

they had the same answer. They said, we just want to go home. 

We just want to go home. We do not want to go to a foreign country. We do not want to have another language. We do not want to 

do that. We just want to go home. I think everybody here, certainly 

everybody in this room today, if we were in that situation, we 

would just want to go home. 

So, obviously, the most important thing is we have to stabilize 

the region. We have to deal with ISIS. We have to have a credible 

government there. We have to have a strategy to make sure that 

folks can go back and be comfortable. But we also know in the 

meantime that that is going to take some time. It is not going to 

happen overnight. 

And in the meantime, you have folks, not just in Zaatari, where 

I visited, but the millions of other folks who were not in camps and 

are in Jordan. Jordan has taken on an incredible responsibility, 

opening up and saying, we are going to help these folks who are 

displaced, these people who are hurting, these people who are running away from the bad guys. These are folks who are running 

away from war. They are running away from violence and trying 

to find a place for peace where they can raise their children. 

Now, the United Nations was at that camp. I know they were 

looking at folks to prioritize. I want to get a sense of how they get 

screened. You talked about the prioritization that the U.N. has as 

to how they determine which families should be in this program. 

And I think another important number, if both of you could respond to it, is that my understanding is about 20,000 folks have 

been referred to the United States from the United Nations as potential refugees, roughly. Out of that number, I understand we 

have looked at about 7,000—you can correct me on these numbers, 

but around 7,000—and that we admitted less than 2,000. So, already, the U.N. has done some screening, prioritizing, probably 

those who are in the most need, who have been there a long time, 
25 

but I would like to know what that is, how we can continue to 

screen down. 

So, I think those numbers alone show how robust the system is, 

and I think we heard some folks discuss here, if you are a terrorist 

wanting to get into this country, you are going to take the path of 

least resistance. I look at this process—this is far from the path of 

least resistance. You have to be in a refugee camp for a while before you are even looked at by the U.N. I mean, this is a multiyear process that folks go through, and from seeing it firsthand, it 

is horrible conditions that oftentimes these folks find themselves 

in, and there is not anybody in this room that would want to be 

in that position, and they would want someone to say, we have 

some compassion. We know you can be a valuable contribution 

when you come here, as well. 

If you could talk about that, please, the priorities and why we 

have moved those numbers down so much. 

Ms. RICHARD. So, UNHCR works with us all around the world 

and refers refugees to us, and they know that we would like to take 

the people who are the most vulnerable and could most benefit 

from the safety and the economic prosperity that America offers. 

And, so, they send us some of the most vulnerable people. 

And, my experience has been like yours, Senator, that most of 

the refugees you meet want to go home again, and so the resettlement sort of tears families apart in some ways. But, the people who 

we offer resettlement to, then, are widows with children, sometimes 

of an older generation, as well, people who have been victims of 

torture, trauma, people who have seen terrible things happen in 

front of them for whom there really is no going home ever again. 

We also give a home to people who are persecuted religious minorities, people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender 

(LGBT), and we also—anyone who—perhaps people who feel that 

there would be a death threat on them if they went home again. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator Peters. 

Just a couple quick questions and then I will give you each a 

chance to kind of wrap up if you have some closing comments. 

Mr. Rodriguez, we are going from 70,000 to 85,000 refugees total. 

That is a 21 percent increase in fiscal year (FY) 2016. A goal of 

going from 70,000 to 100,000, that is a 43 percent increase in 2017. 

Do you have the resources to take on that large of an increase? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. We do. It requires us to look for efficiencies in 

our process. I have often said that when organizations are challenged in this way, it actually becomes an opportunity to improve 

themselves. That is how we are treating this challenge. But, it does 

require us to move some resources around. It requires us to improve our processes where we can. Keep in mind, we are a $3 billion a year organization, so the challenge is an operational one 

more than a financial one. But, we are rising to that challenge. 

Chairman JOHNSON. How many Syrians are currently in the hopper that are being reviewed? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Currently in review—I thought I had this information—you know what? I will need to get back to you—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK, that is fine. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ [continuing]. With that information. 
26 

Chairman JOHNSON. My final comment, the House just passed 

the American SAFE Act of 2015. I have introduced the Senate companion bill. It basically says that no refugee may be admitted until 

the Director of the FBI certifies to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence that each refugee has, 

quote, ‘‘received a background investigation that is sufficient to determine whether the refugee is a threat to the security of the 

United States.’’ Then the refugees may only be admitted to the 

United States after the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 

Security and the Director of the FBI and the Director of National 

Intelligence certifies to Congress that the refugee is not a threat 

to the security of the United States. 

Now, that passed on a pretty strong bipartisan basis, 289 to 137. 

That seems like a pretty reasonable way to assure that these 

checks, that this robust process that you have been describing, 

is carried out. Under Sarbanes-Oxley, Chief Executive Officers 

(CEOs) have to certify that their financial statements are accurate. 

Do you think that is a pretty reasonable response? 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I think you saw that the White House took a position indicating that its view was that it did not add that much. 

I will say that the process that we engage in is essentially equivalent to the process contemplated in that bill. People are subjected 

to the most intense scrutiny. There is intense supervisory review. 

Cases that present concerns are actually elevated. Our Fraud and 

Detection and National Security Directorate is brought in to participate in the analysis of those cases. 

So, it would be my view, along the lines of what the President 

has said, that, in fact, it would not necessarily add much beyond 

the process that we are already—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. As you are seeing by the very legitimate 

questions of the panel, the concerns of our constituents, I would 

think this would just be one additional level of control to provide 

that kind of comfort to make sure that these—this redundant system would actually work. 

But, with that, Ms. Richard, do you have any closing comments? 

Ms. RICHARD. Yes, sir. Thank you. I want to assure Senator 

McCaskill that another way for us to help make America safer is 

to work with the Europeans to make their own borders safer, and 

that is something that is an active discussion right now overseas. 

Senator Peters asked about the 23,000 who had been referred to 

us, and we have brought 2,000 to the United States, but we continue to review cases and we will get new referrals and it is really 

more of a pipeline that people are flowing through. 

Senator Tester asked how many have been denied, and worldwide—and I am sorry I did not tell him this when he was 

here—under our current screening, worldwide, it is about 80 percent are approved, 20 percent, so one in five, are denied. And, so, 

I do not have specifics by nationalities. 

The issue about the FBI having no holdings, it is normal for the 

U.S. Government to have very little information about most refugees at the beginning of the resettlement process. Refugees are, 

after all, innocent civilians who have fled war zones. Iraq and Afghanistan are the exceptions. We have a lot of information about 

people who worked alongside or with the military or nearby. And 
27 

the people who, therefore, are referred to the program, we work 

with them so that they tell their stories and put together a case 

file and fill in the gaps that I know are a concern right now to everyone, based on the fact that the FBI does not have the whole picture on hand for Syrians. So, I do not think that has to stop the 

program. I think that we can work with the NCTC and with other 

intelligence agencies to help fill in those gaps, working with other 

agencies. 

I want to reassure this Committee that we work very closely 

with DHS. This is my fifth time on the Hill in the last 3 days, and 

that is partly why I was so glad you gave Leon all the tough questions—— [Laughter.] 

But we are very happy to continue to—we work together on a 

daily basis and we are happy to continue to respond to you. 

One question was, should we be looking closer at our program. 

The White House has already asked us to really go through the entire process carefully to look for efficiencies without cutting corners 

on security. Is it really the best process that we can possibly have? 

We are convinced that it is a very secure process, but everyone has 

noticed that it is lengthy. So, we are willing to do that. That is part 

of our jobs. 

Thank you very much. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Rodriguez. 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Chairman, Ranking Member, Senators, I want 

to thank you, first and foremost, for leading what I think has been 

an incredible, from my perspective, an incredibly thoughtful and 

productive hearing. I think the questions that you have asked of 

us are questions that we needed to be asked, and I hope our answers offered some clarity. 

I think one of the things that has become very clear to me over 

the last 2 weeks is that we have a burden with the American people in really explaining to them how this process works, what the 

safeguards are in that process, and this has been a great opportunity, the way this hearing has been led, to accomplish that. 

Senator Heitkamp asked me a question that I fear I did not actually answer, which is are you looking for ways to make your process better, and the answer is absolutely yes. It is something that 

I and my staff—some of my leadership is here with me today—we 

do it every day, because we realize what this means to the American people. We realize what this means to the individuals often in 

great distress who are asking us to admit them to the United 

States. And, so, to that extent, we always are looking to improve 

and we always are willing to engage with this Committee to talk 

about how we can improve that process further. 

So, thank you again for your invitation up here today. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Again, we want to thank you both for your 

service, for taking the time to testify. We really want to thank the 

administration for making you available. I know this was very 

short notice, but I think we all agree, this was very important and 

useful information for the American people to hear, so thank you 

very much. 

With that, you are dismissed and we will call up the next panel. 

[Pause.] 
28 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Bergen appears in the Appendix on page 73. 

I am just going to make you all stand up again, so why do we 

not all stand up. Raise your right hand. 

Do you swear the testimony you will give before this Committee 

will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 

help you, God? 

Mr. BERGEN. I do. 

Mr. JENKINS. I do. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. I do. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. I do. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. I do. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you. Please be seated. I like to be as 

efficient as possible. 

Again, I appreciate you all for taking the time. Our first witness 

of the second panel is Mr. Peter Bergen. Mr. Bergen is the Vice 

President at New America in Washington, DC, where he is also Director of Studies and of several programs. Mr. Bergen is also 

CNN’s National Security Analyst and a National Security Fellow at 

Fordham University. He is currently writing a book about homegrown terrorism, which HBO is basing a forthcoming film on. Mr. 

Bergen. 

TESTIMONY OF PETER BERGEN,1 DIRECTOR, NATIONAL 

SECURITY STUDIES PROGRAM, NEW AMERICAN FOUNDATION 

Mr. BERGEN. Thank you Senator Johnson and Senator Carper 

and distinguished Senators on the Committee for the invitation to 

speak today. 

So, my brief was to answer what are the homeland security lessons of the ISIS attacks in Paris and Sinai, and I think there are 

several. We have already addressed at length today the question of 

the refugees, but the real issue, I think, is not the refugees. It is 

the fact that there were so many Belgian and French citizens in 

the plot who might qualify for the Visa Waiver Program. It was not 

clear from the answers of the witnesses how many of these people 

were on watchlists, but let us assume that some of them were not, 

and even if some of them were, it certainly shows that with 1,800 

French citizens having gone to Syria and 700 Brits and 700 Germans and you name your country in Europe, you have had a substantial number. 

So, the Visa Waiver Program, I think, is more of an issue than 

the Refugee Resettlement Program, which seems to be incredibly 

robust. In fact, it seems like the last thing you would do would be 

to apply as a refugee because it would be so lengthy and so onerous. It would be much easier to come on a student visa or through 

the Visa Waiver Program. 

And, I think another issue that we learned from—sort of changing subjects slightly—but the bombs in the Paris attacks were 

made from triacetone triperoxide (TATP), which were used in the 

7/7 attacks, they were used in the planes plot of 2006, which actually did not work. They were used in the Najibullah Zazi plot to 

bomb the Manhattan subway around the eighth anniversary of 9/ 

11. And, I think that is a reminder to us that hydrogen peroxide 

bombs, which are easily, relatively easy to access, are what the 
29 

jihadi terrorist groups want to use in the future because hydrogen 

peroxide is obviously easy to acquire and does not flag in the same 

way as acquiringd ammonium nitrate or other kinds of issues. So, 

bulk purchases of hydrogen peroxide, as Najibullah Zazi did in 

Denver, Colorado, during his plan to attack in Manhattan, is something that certainly law enforcement around the country should be 

flagging for suspicious activity reports. 

Another, I think, lesson of the Sinai attack is the question of airport workers. We have seen that five American citizens since 9/11 

involved in jihadi terrorist crimes had jobs at American airports, 

three of them at Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport 

(MSP), two members of Shabaab, one member of ISIS, one of them 

at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), who was a baggage handler there before 9/11 but used that in a plot luckily that 

was deferred—that did not work out—and also one at Los Angeles 

International Airport (LAX), who was part of the cell that was 

planning to attack synagogues, LAX, and U.S. military recruiting 

facilities in California 4 years after 9/11. 

And then extend that problem to somewhere like Heathrow Airport, where a Heathrow Airport employee gave information about 

security to a self-described member of al-Qaeda. Luckily, she was 

arrested and he was arrested. An employee of British Airways was 

in touch with Anwar al-Awlaki, the leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen, 

about a plan to put a plane—a bomb on a plane, a British Airways 

plane, coming to the United States. And, so, this—I think Sharm 

el-Sheikh shows a huge vulnerability. 

We have 200 airports around the world. Many of them are not 

in countries with necessarily particularly strong security services. 

And if you want to kill a lot of people, do not send a group of people to Paris with AK–47s. Put a bomb on a plane. After all, if you 

look at Sinai, 224 dead versus 129 dead. So, this question of airport 

security, I think, is an important one. 

And then in the brief time I have left, New America, where I 

work, we have done a survey of 474 named foreign fighters going 

to ISIS, and here are the headlines about what we found. We found 

that one out of seven were women. Now, that is an astonishing 

finding because, in previous jihads, militants attracted to these 

jihads—by definition, these are very misogynistic groups—did not 

attract women. In Paris, of course, we had a woman blow herself 

up just 24 hours ago in a raid in St. Denis. 

We found the average age was very young, the average age was 

24. We found a lot of teenagers. For instance, we found an astonishing 80 named teenagers from the West who had gone, including, 

of course, from the United States, from places like Colorado and 

Chicago. Many of them have familial ties to jihadism, brothers, sisters who are also fighting in the jihad, or people who get married 

in Syria, or people who had been participating in previous terrorist 

plots, and a good example is what we just saw in Paris, where two 

brothers were involved and the leader of the plot brought his 13- 

year-old brother to Syria to basically fight there. 

The American profile of these foreign fighters is very similar to 

the overall Western profile—young, one in six are women, and a 

key point here is that, for the American recruits, nine out of ten 

were very active in online jihadi circles, and that does not mean 
30 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Jenkins appears in the Appendix on page 90. 

just sending e-mails. That means posting repeatedly on jihadi 

websites. 

A final point. The war in Syria and Iraq, of course, very deadly. 

Half of these foreign fighters, the male ones, are dead, and 6 percent of the females, even though they are not on the front lines. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Bergen. 

Our next witness is Brian Michael Jenkins. Mr. Jenkins serves 

as the Senior Advisor to the President of the RAND Corporation. 

He is also Director at Mineta Transportation Institute’s National 

Transportation Security Center. Mr. Jenkins is a decorated veteran, served as a member of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security for President Clinton, as well as an advisor to the National Commission on Terrorism. Mr. Jenkins. 

TESTIMONY OF BRIAN MICHAEL JENKINS,1 SENIOR ADVISOR 

TO THE PRESIDENT, RAND CORPORATION 

Mr. JENKINS. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and 

Members of the Committee, thank you very much for inviting me 

to address this urgent issue. 

I would like to be able to report that in response to the terrorist 

attacks in Paris, all of the perpetrators have been identified and 

apprehended. They will be executed promptly. That air strikes 

have smashed the Islamic State, and that an event such as this 

will never happen again. However, the reality is that this conflict 

is likely to go on. There are no quick or easy solutions. And terrorists certainly will attempt further attacks. 

Let me give you some observations from the written testimony I 

have presented, first with regard to the conflict, itself. The fighting 

in Syria and Iraq will continue. Right now, the situation is at a 

military stalemate. Syria and Iraq are now effectively partitioned. 

I think these partitions will persist. Sectarian and ethnic divisions 

now drive the conflicts. That is going to make them hard to settle. 

The world will be dealing with the fallout of this conflict for years 

to come. 

ISIL’s ideology continues to exert a powerful pull, despite the 

bombing, the coalition bombing. The number of individuals joining 

or planning to join ISIL has not diminished. ISIL right now is calling on more to come. 

The uniquely destructive nature of this conflict has produced four 

million refugees, caused four million people to flee from Syria and 

Iraq. Another 12 million are internally displaced. These are the 

new Palestinians. Neighboring countries cannot absorb them. They 

will be a continuing source of instability. We will be dealing with 

this issue for decades. 

Hundreds of thousands of these refugees have headed to Europe, 

raising fears that terrorists can hide among them. Some may have 

done so, which brings me to the events in Paris. 

The attack in Paris offers some important takeaways. It underscores the importance of intelligence. Now, just how this group 

managed to get past French intelligence, we are still not sure. But 

the French services are simply being overwhelmed by volume. The 

numbers that Peter mentioned of those who have gone from 
31 

France, the number that are suspected of planning to go, the number that is in France suspected of planning to carry out homegrown 

terrorist attacks, that has simply overwhelmed the authorities. It 

is thousands. 

The availability of terrorist recruits in France and Belgium 

and elsewhere in Europe reflects some societal problems of 

marginalized and alienated communities, where extremist 

ideologies can easily take root. Now, that is going to take a long 

time to fix. 

The Paris attack has increased pressure on the United States to 

step up the fight against ISIL. My own view is that certainly we 

can do more militarily, but we must keep cool and stay smart here. 

We should not be provoked into measures that, in the long run, 

and this has the potential to be a very long run, could prove to be 

unsustainable or counterproductive. 

Now, paradoxically, military success against ISIL in Syria may 

heighten the threat of terrorism beyond. That is, it will scatter the 

foreign fighters. It will validate ISIL’s propaganda that this is the 

final showdown between the believers and the unbelievers, and we 

could see a surge of terrorism worldwide even as we achieve some 

measure of success of ISIL in Syria. 

Further terrorist plots must be presumed. We must prepare for 

an array of scenarios, including armed assaults at multiple locations, like the one we saw in Paris, although we are more likely 

to see low-level attempts that still may be lethal. 

With regard to refugees and immigrants, immigrants since the 

19th century have brought their quarrels with them. The phenomenon is not new, but these are extraordinary circumstances. 

These are refugees from an active war zone where fighting continues, where loyalties are fluid, where our foes continue to exhort 

followers to carry out terrorist attacks here. This adds a layer of 

risk. 

However, on the good news, the United States is not Europe. The 

numbers here are much smaller. The American audience for ISIL 

propaganda remains unreceptive. They are simply not selling a lot 

of cars here. And the new laws and structures which Congress has 

put in place to prevent terrorist attacks appear to be working. 

Moreover, we are not dealing with hundreds of thousands of refugees landing on our shores, but much smaller numbers, and we 

have more opportunities to vet them and select them. 

An important point here. We are not just trying to filter out bad 

guys. Efforts to radicalize and recruit continue after arrival, and so 

this is not a one-time sign-off that gets us through. But America, 

historically, has been successful in assimilating immigrants. 

And, finally, our domestic intelligence efforts have achieved a remarkable level of success. We are batting about 900. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Jenkins. 

Our next witness is Daveed Gartenstein-Ross. Mr. GartensteinRoss is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an Adjunct Assistant Professor at Georgetown, and a lecturer at the Catholic University of America. His body of work concentrates on al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, and other jihadist organizations and transnational ambitions. Mr. Gartenstein-Ross. 
32 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Gartenstein-Ross appears in the Appendix on page 101. 

TESTIMONY OF DAVEED GARTENSTEIN-ROSS,1 SENIOR 

FELLOW, FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member 

Carper, and Senators, it is an honor to be here to testify before you 

today. 

I thought the first panel was quite strong and it was gratifying 

to see that it echoed my own conclusions in my written testimony. 

I would like to go over a couple of points and then look at broader 

issues. 

The first and most important point is that I concluded, as did the 

previous panel, that the risk of refugee resettlement, in terms of 

moving operatives into the United States, is low because it is such 

an inefficient way to place operatives. Not only do the operatives 

have to wait 18 to 24 months, but they have to be selected. We are 

selecting about 10,000 out of over 2.1 million refugees in recognized 

UNHCR camps. That is a very small figure. They have no control 

over whether an operative would be selected, and given the way 

that we privilege the most vulnerable populations, it is highly unlikely that they would be. 

That being said, I think it is also significant that the previous 

panel acknowledged the intelligence gaps, which I think we need 

to be forthright about. The panel characterized, I think accurately, 

the situation as one in which the risk we face is low, but it is not 

a no-risk proposition. There is some risk. But the selection process 

significantly reduces the risk, as well as increases the inefficiency 

of moving operatives in. 

That being said, I think that the selection process is much more 

of a barrier than the screening process. It is a multi-layered screening process, but as FBI Director Comey acknowledged and as 

NCTC Director Rasmussen talked about, we do not have good visibility, and that means, inherently, there are limitations on our intelligence. 

Indeed, recent events in Paris dramatically underscore the limitations of this intelligence. Not only did you have at least two large 

cells that were interlocking, but it is important to look at the travels of Abdelhamid Abaaoud, who was the mastermind of this attack. He was able to move from Europe, after a plot he was involved in in Belgium was interrupted on January 15 of this year, 

move back into Syria, then move back into Europe to personally direct the plot in France. That is significant. That means while he 

was a wanted man, he was able to move past European authorities 

into Syria, then past European authorities again as he moved back 

in. That indicates a much more significant intelligence gap than I 

think anybody would have anticipated prior to this plot. 

The third thing I will say is that I think it was very important 

to highlight the fact that, when you are looking at vulnerabilities 

that the United States has to terrorist entry, that things like VWP 

are just more important than refugee resettlement programs. The 

reason why we are talking about refugee resettlement programs so 

much is because of the dramatic pictures of large numbers of refugees and migrants moving into Europe. 
33 

But, as we all know, the situation that we face is very different 

in the United States. Rather than a refugee population which is 

crossing into the U.S.’s borders, these are refugees that are being 

selected out of camps. It is just a fundamentally different situation 

and I think it makes sense for this legislative body to think about 

those means of entry that are of highest risk, and definitively, refugee resettlement programs are not. 

The fourth point is that I do think we should think about the Islamic State’s use of refugees, not so much in the United States as 

in Europe, because this is a problem that will arise. The Islamic 

State sees the refugees who are fleeing its self-proclaimed caliphate, and also fleeing Syria, as a major public relations problem. Between September 16 and 19, they released a dozen videos about the 

refugee situation. It seems that either one of the attackers used the 

refugee route or else planted a refugee’s passport, or a Syrian passport, following the attack. We do not know which one yet, and 

there is evidence that points in both directions. 

But, either way, one thing they will absolutely, in my view, try 

to do is make it—is either infiltrate an operative that way into Europe or else make it seem like that has happened in order to provoke a backlash against refugees. They have talked about their desire to destroy the gray zone between the European population and 

the Islamic State, so that Muslims have nowhere to go. That is 

something that is worth thinking about, not so much for our own 

resettlement program, so much as that is an issue that will come 

up, and if such a backlash occurs, if such an attack occurs, we need 

to have thought about that, I believe, so that we can fashion appropriate policies. 

The final thing, or the final policy point I want to make, is that 

we also, as several Senators said, should consider our own policies 

toward Syria in order to reduce the destabilization. 

The final point I make in my written testimony pertains to our 

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program for sponsoring rebels. I 

think it deserves much more scrutiny because I think there are 

some very deep problems. I do not want to divert this hearing, but 

I think that is not separable from this overall issue. 

The final thing, taking off my hat as an expert witness and just 

talking as an American, I want to thank you for this hearing because I think that it was very sober at a time when we have had 

a political discussion which is extraordinarily hyperbolic. Senator 

McCaskill said we should come together as Americans, and I think 

that is very important. I think it is worth acknowledging that on 

both sides of this debate, people have very legitimate concerns. On 

the one hand, some people are concerned about security. Are they 

safe? And on the other hand, people are concerned that we, as 

Americans, are compassionate people. We want to welcome refugees. And I think both sides should recognize that there are legitimate concerns and be able to talk about this and advance ourselves, as opposed to having partisan finger pointing and zingers. 

So, thank you, as an American, for holding a hearing that was 

very reasonable and very measured. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you. 

Our next witness is Eric Schwartz. Mr. Schwartz is the Dean of 

Humphrey School of Public Affairs. Mr. Schwartz previously served 
34 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Schwartz appears in the Appendix on page 110. 

as the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, 

and Migration and as the second highest ranking official in the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 

Mr. Schwartz. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ERIC P. SCHWARTZ,1 DEAN, 

HUMPHREY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, UNIVERSITY OF 

MINNESOTA AND FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POPULATION, REFUGEES, AND MIGRATION AT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE (2009–2011) 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Committee has 

asked that witnesses discuss any vulnerabilities in the program for 

resettlement of Syrians, and this is a very important issue. But it 

is really only relevant, first, if we believe we have a national interest in resettling Syrians, and second, if we are confident that we 

are asking the correct security-related questions. So, I will talk 

about our national interests, in fact, our national security interests, 

in this program first. 

Nobody disputes the critical national security importance of 

issues surrounding the Syria conflict—stemming the proliferation 

of weapons of mass destruction, supporting our friends and allies, 

sustaining economic relationships, defeating ISIS and others seeking to export campaigns of terror, and providing assistance to desperate people in need—all objectives that demand U.S. leadership 

in highly uncertain times, when more than at any time in recent 

memory, we need the support of our friends and our allies. 

So, how does refugee resettlement of Syrians address these concerns, and more particularly, how might obstacles to the continuation of this program threaten our national interests? 

First, the program communicates a commitment to burden sharing to governments neighboring Syria. If we are asking Turkey, 

Jordan, and Lebanon to continue to host some four million refugees, and if we are expecting their support for our efforts in the 

region, it is important that we sustain our resettlement efforts and 

it is counterproductive for us to send those governments a negative 

signal by shutting off resettlement programs for Syrians, given all 

that those governments are doing. 

Second, if we are urging our European allies to implement humane policies on protection for hundreds of thousands of Syrians, 

here again, our commitment to resettlement is critical and a failure 

to offer modest resettlement will be perceived as hypocrisy and diminish our capacity to lead on issues of common concern. 

Third, the battle against ISIS is also a battle of ideas, in which 

ISIS rejects any notion of the compatibility of Islam with other traditions. Our Refugee Resettlement Program rebukes that preposterous notion. But imposing significant obstacles to particular 

groups does risk playing into the very narrative that we seek to 

combat worldwide, and it is worth reflecting—I think we have to 

reflect—on the fact that legislative efforts to single out particular 

programs in Iraq or Syria do risk playing into that narrative and 

might, indeed, be welcomed by our adversaries. 
35 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Limo ́n appears in the Appendix on page 117. 

Finally, the United States has long advocated refugee resettlement based on the applicant’s vulnerability, and measures that either privilege or disadvantage any group would depart from that 

principle and undermine our leadership. 

So, if there is a compelling interest, national security interest, in 

resettling Syrians, what questions regarding vulnerability should 

we be asking? First, we should not be asking whether the Syrian 

Refugee Resettlement Program, or for that matter any immigration 

program, can guarantee against admission of an individual with ill 

intent. To put this into perspective, between 2010 and 2013, some 

four million people entered our country to establish residence and 

almost none of them received anything like the scrutiny given to 

Syrian refugee applicants. 

In fact, applications for Syrian refugee admissions are, as we 

have heard, the most thoroughly vetted in our immigration and refugee process, involving reviews by intelligence, security, and law 

enforcement agencies. All applicants provide biometric and biographical data and undergo detailed interviews by officers of DHS. 

And I am convinced that these and other measures do provide a 

robust degree of safeguards that more than justify continuation of 

this program in light of the national security and humanitarian interests that they serve. 

In conclusion, in yesterday’s Smithsonian.com website, Daniel 

Gross writes of Herbert Karl Friedrich Bahr, who applied for U.S. 

asylum in 1942, claiming to be a persecuted Jewish refugee. Bahr’s 

story unraveled and he was convicted of conspiracy and planned espionage. The event helped to stoke the contention that Jews could 

be part of a fifth column of spies, as United States officials turned 

their backs on those who were in need of protection from the Holocaust. There were some voices who condemned this inaction, but, 

to use Gross’s words, they were drowned out in the name of national security. 

Members of the Committee, I hope that we can ensure that 

voices supporting protection of the vulnerable are not drowned out 

and recognize that our Refugee Admissions Program not only meets 

our national security interests, but also reflects our values as a 

people. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Schwartz. 

Our final witness is Lavinia Limo ́n. Ms. Limo ́n is the President 

and Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. Committee for Refugees 

and Immigrants, one of the nine domestic agencies contracted with 

the State Department to resettle refugees in the United States. Ms. 

Limo ́n has more than 30 years of experience working on behalf of 

refugees and immigrants. Ms. Limo ́n. 

TESTIMONY OF LAVINIA LIMO ́ N,1 PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, U.S. COMMITTEE FOR REFUGEES AND 

IMMIGRANTS 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Carper, 

and honorable Committee Members. On behalf of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, a national nonprofit organization serving refugees and immigrants with a network of over 90 
36 

agencies and offices around the Nation, I am honored to testify before you today in support of the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program and to provide information on the program. 

I want to thank you, Chairman Johnson, for complimenting our 

security screening fact sheet, which my staff works very hard to 

keep up to date, and we have changed it—it has been around for 

about 2 years, and we keep changing it as we learn more. And, of 

course, we are on the outside, so we do not have the inside information, but even the Government people say we got it right. So, 

that is pretty exciting. 

Chairman JOHNSON. I always appreciate good information, so 

thanks. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Thank you. 

So, for over 100 years, USCRI has protected the rights and addressed the needs of persons in voluntary or forced migration 

worldwide. We are proud to do this work in the United States because our country is the world leader in providing protection to 

people who need it. This global refugee crisis requires strong leadership and the United States will inherently make a statement by 

our presence or our absence. 

For refugees who are the most vulnerable, even after fleeing 

their countries: the torture survivors, women at risk and those 

with complex medical situations. For those individuals, resettlement is often the only option. And for refugees who have languished in refugee camps without the right to work and with their 

children denied education, these are the individuals for whom we 

stand. 

We must not let the heinous acts in Paris make us turn our 

backs on children and families when our heritage and our history 

is to welcome refugees in the United States. 

When I was invited to testify, I went out to our network and I 

said, tell me what Syrian refugees that we have resettled are saying, and I want to share some of their messages with you. 

A Syrian refugee who came to Detroit with his wife and four children in September wanted everyone to know that he and his family 

are so happy to feel and be safe again after arriving in the United 

States. He told us, quote, ‘‘I truly appreciate the kindness of the 

American people that we witnessed.’’ 

A Syrian family who arrived in Erie, Pennsylvania last night, 

told us that they were very happy to finally arrive in the United 

States after many years of waiting. The family was very thankful 

to be in Erie, Pennsylvania. The father was an electrician in Syria 

and he and his wife managed to keep their children alive while 

being displaced for almost 3 years. The father said that he felt an 

overwhelming sense of relief now that his children were finally 

safe. 

A Syrian refugee resettled in California had a video and music 

shop in Damascus before having to flee with his mother because of 

the conflict. They escaped to Lebanon, where they stayed for 2 

years until they were admitted to the United States as refugees in 

February of this year. He told us, quote, ‘‘There are many, many 

innocent people who really need help,’’ and he feels so blessed and 

lucky that he had the opportunity to resettle to the United States 

and wishes to see more Syrians have the ability to come here. 
37 

USCRI supports a solutions-based approach. Based on our experience, we have the following recommendation. We would like the 

U.S. refugee programs to be supported through all aspects of our 

government and by elected officials as a safe humanitarian and foreign policy operation. We would like to see funding for the Department of Homeland Security increased to maintain the integrity of 

the security checks. We would like to see increased support for the 

Office of Refugee Resettlement to enhance the integration of newly 

arrived refugees. 

As the former Director of the Federal Office of Refugee Resettlement, and after a 40-year career—we gave you bad information 

there, Mr. Chairman—of helping refugees, I am proud and confident that our resettlement program works and is in the best interest of America. 

Thank you for holding this hearing and thank you for listening 

to our point of view. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Ms. Limo ́n. 

Mr. Gartenstein-Ross, let me start with you. You talked about 

the refugee flow—I believe this is what you said. Let me just clarify this. You think the refugee flow is a public relations disaster 

for ISIS? 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Yes, absolutely, and this is something 

that they have made very clear in their own propaganda. They purport to be the home for Muslims worldwide, and the fact that people are fleeing from them and that other Syrians, rather than going 

from Assad-controlled areas or war-torn areas, they are going to 

Europe rather than into ISIS-held areas is—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. That was really the point I was going to 

make, because I think in other hearings, other briefings, we are 

being told that the refugee flow is not out of ISIS-controlled areas. 

It really is, primarily, because of Assad bombing his own people. 

It is really the Syrian government’s genocide, his killing his own 

people, that is really causing the refugee problem. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. It is out of both. I mean, for example, if 

you look at the flow out of Mosul when the Christians left, that 

was all because of ISIS. But, yes, I mean, if you are looking at it, 

it is not as though most refugees are fleeing ISIS. I do agree with 

those recommendations, or with those assessments. But, let us be 

clear. There are refugees fleeing ISIS. 

And, the other point, the reason why it is a public relations disaster for them is because ISIS is right there in Syria. 

Chairman JOHNSON. They should be flowing into ISIS. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Right, and—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. It is such a wonderful place. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Precisely. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Let us talk about the greatest risk. Again, 

I think, as we have heard testimony, the vetting process is redundant. It is pretty robust. As you said, pretty inefficient if you are 

trying to sneak people into the United States, at least—— 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Right. 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. Less so going into Europe, with 

that refugee flow. As I said in my opening statement, I mean, I 

view the greatest risk literally as our completely unsecure borders 

and people flowing into other countries, then potentially coming in 
38 

here. I just want to kind of go down the list, or down the panel 

here. What is the greatest risk? Then I will be asking you, what 

is the No. 1 thing we should do? Mr. Bergen. 

Mr. BERGEN. I think Paris shows that the Schengen Europe 

Agreement, in a sense, is the greatest risk, because it is very unclear that European countries understand who is coming into 

other—I mean, so, for instance, the mastermind, his travels that 

Daveed laid out. It is still not entirely clear, but it seems the 

French did not know what the Belgians knew and they were not 

sharing information, probably. So, that is the biggest problem. 

And the secondary problem, then, is the Visa Waiver Program, 

which is related to that problem. 

And, finally, the big thing that we are missing is a global database of who these people are. We only know 4,500 of their names. 

There are 30,000 of them, and that is—if we do not know who 

these people are, everything else is moot. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Again, so the free flow within Europe, combined with the Visa Waiver Program, creates a real risk for those— 

I mean, to America, to our homeland, is the greatest risk. 

Mr. BERGEN. Yes. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr. JENKINS. First of all, I would agree that you and Senator 

McCaskill, I think appropriately, broadened the inquiry from simply refugees to saying, let us look at the whole thing. Let us look 

at refugees, immigration, visa, VWP and border security and see 

what are our gaps and what are the most likely routes for terrorists, and I think there is probably consensus that the refugee may 

be the least productive route for them. 

I certainly would agree with Peter that a major vulnerability is 

Europe, one, because of the numbers. Two, because they do not 

have the capability of selecting—these are people that are arriving 

and the Europeans are then trying to sort them out. A third problem is that the Europeans are not sharing information with each 

other in these senses. And as a consequence of that, by the way, 

I think that either cooperation within Europe is going to increase 

or we are going to see increasing border controls within Europe, 

which is going to challenge the European notion of free movement, 

altogether. Border controls are going to come back up. 

The weakness that I think that we have in our system overall 

is that we are dependent on lists of names. We do not have—in 

terms of looking at visa, this is—we have a robust system for interviewing refugees and for screening that, but a lot of these other 

things are dependent on a name being on a list. If we do not have 

a name on a list, we do not have much else to go on. It would be 

useful, at the very least, if we could develop new ways of looking 

at this that we can say, look, there are some of these people that 

we can clear pretty fast because of who they are, and there are others that it is simply going to require a new way of taking a look 

at this. 

Chairman JOHNSON. In other words, if people have not created 

that ripple, you have a problem. 

Mr. JENKINS. Right. 

Chairman JOHNSON. I will pick up on this, but I will go to Senator Heitkamp out of respect for time. 
39 

Senator HEITKAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to just hang around because I think what you are talking about is so important, and I think as you have complimented 

the Committee, and I share that compliment, or I share your complimentary statements with the Chairman, I think we have a great 

panel here. 

And, so, just to kind of begin it, from everything that I have read 

in your testimony and what you presented here, would you say that 

the focus that we have put, kind of at this point solely, on the Refugee Resettlement Program is perhaps misplaced and it has diverted attention from much more critical security issues that we 

have? Is that—it seems to be unanimous on the panel. Just let the 

record reflect, everyone is nodding their heads. If you disagree, 

please weigh in. 

And, obviously, you represent a great cross-section of national security experts. Would you say that your view is kind of the majority view of people who study national security? So, you guys almost 

talked to each other at some point here. Can you tell me, building 

on what the Chairman has asked, what things you think we are 

missing, that we have not talked about today? 

Obviously, the Visa Waiver Program is on everyone’s mind. 

Along with Senator Feinstein, we are introducing a bill to address 

what we see as gaps. She has been on this for a long time. Obviously, it is much more timely now, so it will be a great bipartisan 

bill. We expect we are going to have a discussion on it. 

But, what are we missing that people within your expertise today 

are saying, wow, why do they not get this? And that is for anyone. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. One of the key things I would recommend, and I agree with Peter entirely about the greatest threat 

in terms of entering—terrorists entering the United States being 

the Schengen Zone and VWP. I think the key thing for me is, in 

the past, because of the Schengen Agreement, there is certain information that the United States does not get from European allies 

because of that agreement. Over the course of the past several 

months, we have seen the virtual collapse of the Schengen Agreement, which means that our own leverage with our European allies 

is at an all-time high. 

So, I would strongly recommend, Senators, to talk to U.S. Customs and Border Protection to figure out what they need, what information they need from Europeans, and where Schengen, in the 

past, has posed a threat to U.S. border security to see what we 

might be able to do in bilateral or multilateral negotiations with 

our European allies. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Other things that we have missed. 

Mr. BERGEN. Well, I will tell you something that has gone right, 

which is if you look at ISIS propaganda, they are very concerned 

about Turkey now, because the pressure on the Turks has really 

reduced, or at least impacted, the foreign fighter flow. So, any encouragement and/or expertise or aid we can give to Turks to increase their customs and border patrol would be very useful, because that is where, overwhelmingly, the foreign fighters are coming in. 

Senator HEITKAMP. OK. 
40 

Mr. JENKINS. Let me add to a comment by Daveed in terms of 

both putting pressure on Europeans, but assisting them, as well. 

This is probably going to be more emphasis on bilateral agreements 

than on multilateral. There are profound differences in Europe, policy differences, even philosophical differences about how to deal 

with these issues—about intelligence issues, about privacy issues, 

about resettlement issues and about returning foreign fighters, 

whether they should be charged with criminal violations or whether they should be rehabilitated and put back into society. 

When you deal with that many differences in a group like the 

European Union, it tends to dilute the efforts down to sort of the 

least common denominator, and so we really have to work closely 

on a bilateral basis to ensure that we are getting the information 

that we need for our own national security interests. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Go ahead. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. I would just make four very brief points, and 

they are a little bit disjointed, since we have been talking about a 

lot of different issues. 

First, I think support for front-line States is absolutely critical. 

I was part of a letter from 22 former officials, including Deputy 

Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy and others, urging an additional 

allocation of up to $2 billion, in large measure to support Jordan 

and Turkey, because they are experiencing such significant challenges, and that would be a very valuable symbol of solidarity and 

support. 

My second comment is I agree with the other panelists that the 

refugee program is not anywhere near the major threat. 

My third and fourth points are that I agree that we need to take 

a very close look at the Visa Waiver Program and other programs, 

but I also think that we have to accept the fact or understand the 

fact, without prejudice to that point about looking at the Visa 

Waiver Program, we have to accept the fact that our strength is 

also our vulnerability. I mean, our system of immigration is responsible for creating a superpower. Without the kind of immigration 

policies that we have had over the past century or more, the 

United States would not have achieved the kind of economic and 

political dominance that we have in the world. And we have been 

spared some of the very challenging, dramatically challenging, demographic challenges that some of our European allies and Japan 

face. That is our strength, but it is also our vulnerability. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Senator, I think the greatest risk is that we allow 

our political discourse and climate in the United States to make it 

acceptable to be anti-refugee and anti-immigrant, to say things 

that are negative and stereotypical of people, whereby the mainstream population thinks it is OK to turn our backs on newcomers. 

I think when you look at Europe, you can see the sort of social 

isolation that a lot of their immigrant communities live with day 

to day, and the strength of America, the beauty of America, is 

that we do not do that, that our values and our ability to assimilate—and I will use that old fashioned word—we do, in fact, assimilate new people. By the second and third generation, they usually cannot speak their grandparents’ or parents’ language. 
41 

When people are willing to share our values of freedom and individuality and acceptance and incorporation, they become Americans, and we native-born people look at them at some point and go, 

oh, they are American. I do not know when that shift takes place, 

but it takes place. And that ability to incorporate keeps us from 

having that group that may turn on us internally. 

And, so, we have to keep that political discourse and have the 

leadership to say to the American people—and it is not easy, because people are different and people do not like different and it 

makes everybody uneasy—but it is the political leadership that 

have to keep the dialogue in that positive way that it reinforces the 

beauty and strength of America. 

Chairman JOHNSON. And, unfortunately, the past is not a complete predictor of the future. So, I think that is a real particular 

question. 

I will start with Mr. Gartenstein-Ross again in terms of the 

greatest risk. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. As I said before, I agree with Peter 

about the Schengen Agreement and the problems within Europe as 

being the greatest immediate risk in terms of terrorist entry. 

But, I do want to highlight something else which is very much 

related. This hearing, obviously, for very good reason, has focused 

on the Islamic State, on ISIS. But our enemy for the past decade 

and a half has been al-Qaeda, which has been pushed from the 

headlines, and this is not a good thing. Al-Qaeda today enjoys a lot 

more freedom of movement than anyone would have thought possible 5 years ago. 

If you look at recent U.N. delistings, including Mohammed 

Islambouli, who has been fingered by National Public Radio (NPR) 

as a high-level leader in the Khorasan group, you can see that a 

lot of the U.N. sanctions are getting peeled back. Al-Qaeda is again 

receiving State support in Syria. Its affiliate, Jabhat al-Nusra, 

which is part of a coalition called Jaysh al-Fateh, is getting support 

from Qatar, from Turkey and from Saudi Arabia, and I think that 

we need to pay attention to this rebranding of al-Qaeda as a more 

reasonable jihadist force. 

This is something that, if we do not pay attention to it now, I 

believe we will fully regret this in several years, not just in terms 

of immediate entry to the United States, but ability to operate 

throughout the world. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Well, for my own part, I always refer to 

them as Islamic terrorists, and there are a number of different 

variations of that, a number of different groups, but they are Islamic terrorists and they are at war with civilization. 

Mr. Schwartz, what is the greatest threat? 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. I am sorry, in terms of—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. I guess, I could sign on to former Chairman 

of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, and say the 

greatest threat to our national security is our debt and deficit. I 

think that is true. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. I am sorry, is—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Our debt and deficit. I mean, I think that 

is true, but this hearing is really about the threat that we face be-
42 

cause of Islamic terrorism, so I think that is—and, again, we were 

talking about our vulnerabilities. You were talking about—— 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Yes. I mean, as I said—— 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. VWP, those types of things. I 

am looking for more specifics from that standpoint. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Yes. Sure. As I said before, I think my expertise 

here is on our refugee programs, in particular, and to my mind, the 

refugee programs are far from our greatest threat. I think they are 

durable programs with processes—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK, so you voice your support for that—— 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Right. 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. But where is our greatest vulnerability within these programs, within our acceptance of refugees 

and asylum seekers and immigrants? 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Well, as I said, I think it is clear that the Visa 

Waiver Program has greater vulnerabilities than the U.S. Refugee 

Resettlement Program, but I am, frankly, not an expert on all of 

the immigration programs. But, I can tell you that the Refugee Resettlement Program, which I know very, very well, is not one of 

those. 

And, if I could just make one other point, which I made in my 

testimony, but I really think it is important. If Members of the 

Committee feel that the Department has made the case about the 

security procedures in the Refugee Resettlement Program, you 

should think long and hard on this issue of additional legislation 

because of my concern that it does play right into the narrative of 

us against them, our choosing a particular group and creating 

greater obstacles when we have a system in place that is rigorous 

and responsible. 

I think our geopolitical interests require that we reflect very 

carefully about that kind of legislation. And even if the President 

has promised to veto it, the introduction of it and the passage of 

it is very worrisome. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Ms. Limo ́n, do you want to take another 

stab at it, or do you want to stand by your—— 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. I will just add that since last week, my office has received many phone calls of people who are extraordinarily worked 

up about Syrian refugees, and they will say things like, ‘‘I live in 

Des Moines. I want the names and addresses of every Syrian you 

brought here.’’ And that is one of the more polite things that are 

said. It has been kind of scary. 

And when we look at resettling refugees right now, and, as I 

said, someone arrived in Erie last night and people are going to arrive in Chicago tomorrow and we have State Government officials 

saying to us, we want the names and addresses of these people, 

and we are like, whoa, what is going on here? These people are legally admitted to the United States. And are we—how are we going 

to protect them? These are people who have been persecuted, who 

have been fleeing violence and persecution because of their race, 

religion, or membership in an ethnic group, and they come to 

America, the land of the free, and we have to say, you may be persecuted because of your membership in a particular ethnic group. 
43 

It is a very dangerous time, and I will tell you, there are thousands of people who do this work around the country who are calling us going, ‘‘What am I supposed to do?’’ 

Chairman JOHNSON. Which is why I think the certification process would give the American people the assurance that I think they 

probably are looking for. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. I apologize for being in and out. There is a lot 

going on, and I am very much interested in these issues. I spent 

a lot of time, as the Chairman knows, on these issues, and as does 

he. 

Something I said earlier that I think you heard, and I talked 

about competing moral imperatives, and one of the moral imperatives which was reminded to us by Pope Francis a month or two 

ago was our obligation to the least of these. When I was hungry, 

did you feed Me? When I was naked, did you clothe Me? When I 

was thirsty, did you give Me a drink? When I was a stranger in 

your land, did you take Me in? 

And the admonition—I think the biggest applause line that he 

got when he spoke at a joint session of the Congress was when he 

invoked the golden rule, that we should treat other people the way 

we want to be treated. I think everybody stood on their feet and 

applauded for a long time. 

And, so, we have that moral imperative that faces us squarely 

and I am reminded of every day, those imperatives, as we confront 

this challenge. But we also have a moral imperative to 325 million 

people who live here and who want to be able to live to a ripe old 

age and have a good life. And, the question is, can we do both? Can 

we do both? Do we have to be true to one and not to the other? 

Another Committee that I serve on, in fact, one of the things I 

was out of the room on was because of my responsibilities on the 

Environment and Public Works Committee. We have oversight over 

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But, we are always wrestling 

with the question, in that Committee, of can we have cleaner air, 

cleaner water, and at the same time have a stronger economy, or 

is it a choice of one or the other? I think it is a Hobson’s choice. 

I think we can have both, and if we are smart, we will have both. 

But, in terms of the moral imperatives, how do we meet both 

moral imperatives? How do we meet both moral imperatives, especially the latter one, to keep people safe, and one of them is to the 

rigor of the refugee programs, which is, I think, pretty well demonstrated now, and we are drilling down on the Visa Waiver Program to see what is good about that, and it has certainly improved 

over time. Is there some more that we can do? I think so. 

One of the things, we have a very senior guy that the administration has nominated, I think a very good guy, Adam Szubin. I understand he is the perfect guy and his nomination is hung up in 

the Banking Committee for reasons that I do not understand. He 

is, I think, the guy who did the financial—sort of helped bring Iran 

to its knees on the financial side and cut off their funding. He did 

the same thing with North Korea, and we would like for him to do 

that with ISIS, too, if we can get him confirmed. 

So, there are some things that we are doing, can be doing, but 

just respond, if you would, to my question, please. Thank you. 
44 

Mr. JENKINS. We have become a risk-averse, security-obsessed 

nation. That is understandable. I mean, we are still in the shadow 

of 9/11. We are dealing with these extraordinary times and threats. 

But we cannot remove all risk, and we have been doing a pretty 

good job, in terms of our domestic intelligence, in terms of preventing these attacks and so on. But we do not get to zero. 

The problem is, if we try to get to zero, that has costs in other 

directions, costs in terms of real economic costs if we were to abolish the Visa Waiver Program, costs in terms of moral costs, in 

terms of our reputation as a society. 

So, I think part of it is, without dismissing the very real threat, 

and this is very much a long-term thing, this is the shape of things 

to come, but we have to be able to accept that none of these programs, not one of these, provides us with an absolute guarantee— 

no amount of screening, no signatures, or so on. You can, as the 

Senate, keep the heat on people on this, and that is important, because over a period of time, measures become routinized, people go 

slack, and you can energize that. But, we do not get to zero. 

Senator CARPER. Good. Excellent point. 

Others, please. 

Mr. BERGEN. Can I just make a factual observation? Every person who has been killed by a jihadi terrorist in this country has 

been killed by an American citizen or resident since 9/11. Refugees 

have not been involved. I mean, the real problem, the domestic terrorism problem, is provoked by homegrown terrorists. 

Senator CARPER. That is a great point. 

Mr. JENKINS. Great point. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Senator Carper, I certainly agree that the Refugee Resettlement Program has robust procedures in it to help ensure the security of Americans, and I also believe that the Refugee 

Resettlement Program is the best expression of American values, 

the moral imperative. 

But let me repeat what I said in my testimony, which is that I 

also believe in this particular instance, and in many others, that 

the continuation of this program serves vital national security imperatives. Our burden sharing with front-line States that are 

hosting over four million refugees. And burden sharing with European governments that we are asking to treat humanely hundreds 

of thousands of Syrian refugees. These are governments that we 

need in terms of the geopolitical objectives that we are trying to 

achieve in Syria and other places in the world. 

And third, and perhaps most importantly, we rebuke the ISIS 

narrative of us versus them. Our programs are an expression of the 

proposition that it is not the Muslim world and everyone else. We 

combat that ISIS narrative day in and day out with our refugee 

programs. So, I think we have stakes in these programs that go far 

beyond the humanitarian imperatives. 

Senator CARPER. Wonderful points. Thank you. Thank you all. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Jenkins, you talked about the intelligence community (IC) being overwhelmed by the volume. Keep 

cool. Stay smart. I do not think—no one would dispute that we cannot turn this into a risk-free world, but these are threats and I believe these threats are growing. I mean, we just witnessed this in 

Paris. 
45 

So, if we sit back and play defense the whole time, I do not think 

that is particularly smart. How do we go on offense? I mean, how 

do we solve the problem then? 

Mr. JENKINS. I would not argue for a defensive strategy. I agree 

that we do have to—we do have to become more effective in how 

we deal with this in Syria. I personally happen to think that it is 

not by deploying large numbers of American forces on the ground. 

I think the numbers that people mention underestimate the task. 

I think that that would become very, very quickly an unsustainable 

thing. Can we do other things, with the air campaign, with increasing the number of special operations personnel? I think we can 

even do more creative things. For example, our efforts to create a 

guerilla army and then throw it into battle against ISIS, that has 

turned out to be—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. It obviously did not work. 

Mr. JENKINS. It did not work. However, that does not mean that 

competitive recruiting will not work. I am not talking about throwing people into battle. I am talking about, among Sunnis that are 

exposed to ISIL’s areas of influence, it may make more sense for 

us to recruit them and pay them, in a sense, just to be on our payroll rather than spending the money to go after them. Let us provide a place in Syria where we can bring people on board. 

Chairman JOHNSON. So, let me ask, has the threat grown or receded over the last year and a half under the current strategy? 

Mr. JENKINS. I would say that in some cases, certainly, we have 

checked ISIL’s advances. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Yes, but has the threat grown or has it receded? You are saying the intelligence community is overwhelmed 

by the volume. Is not the volume growing? 

Mr. JENKINS. The intelligence community in Europe is overwhelmed by the volume. We are—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. And, again, that is—— 

Mr. JENKINS. We are keeping up with it. 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. That is our greatest threat, is 

what you are telling us. 

Mr. JENKINS. It is. 

Chairman JOHNSON. So, that threat is growing. So, the strategy 

currently is not working, so the risk is increasing. 

Mr. JENKINS. The risk of terrorism outside is going up. That, I 

think, is true for a variety of reasons. In fact, as I said, even as 

we have more success on the ground, that threat outside is going 

up. So, you cannot connect necessarily—you cannot look at the 

threat outside as evidence of failure inside Syria. That threat can 

go up even with success inside. 

Chairman JOHNSON. But, again, remember the mission of this 

Committee is to enhance the economic and national security of this 

Nation. So, you have a destabilized Middle East. You started stabilizing nations in Europe. That destabilizes the entire world economy and that also affects our economic situation, as well. 

Mr. JENKINS. It clearly does. So far, though, so far, we have been 

able to manage—we have been able to manage this. This is a matter of, can we improve things as opposed to fundamentally alter our 

strategy? So, over a period of time. I think we have been extraordinarily cautious. 
46 

Chairman JOHNSON. Do you think it is a good thing that Iran 

and Russia are gaining greater influence in the Middle East? Is 

that a good—— 

Mr. JENKINS. Russia—— 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. Is that good for our regional security and world peace? 

Mr. JENKINS. OK. Russia is not a newcomer to Syria. I mean, 

when the Syrian army crossed—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. I understand, but its influence is growing in 

the Middle East, correct? 

Mr. JENKINS. I am not sure that it is. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Gartenstein-Ross, do you think that is 

a good thing? 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. No, I certainly do not think it is a good 

thing that either Russian or Iranian influence is growing, which 

both of them undoubtedly are. 

In terms of the strategy, I think that there are things that we 

can do. As Brian said, and this is not a duck from your question, 

my direct answer to your question is that the threat has grown 

worse in the past year and a half. But, No. 1, if you look on the 

ground in Iraq and Syria, ISIS has experienced about a steady year 

of losses with one very good week in May, where they gained 

Ramadi, Baiji, and Tadmur in Syria. But, publicizing their losses 

is very important because they have a narrative of strength. 

And I would say one area where the United States has clearly 

failed is it has not publicized their losses, including their losses 

outside of Iraq and Syria. They have at least four major losses in 

Africa that almost no one is aware of, including people in Africa. 

I know this because at an African Union seminar I was at last 

month in Namibia, people were absolutely unaware of all of ISIS’s 

setbacks there. 

A second reason why I would say that things have grown worse 

is if you look at the terrorism problem writ large, Tunisia is now 

fundamentally threatened in ways that it was not 2 years ago. 

Yemen is falling apart, and that is not an ISIS issue. There are 

many other things that are related, and ISIS has kind of glommed 

onto that. 

But, we have to recognize the overall situation is one where violent non-State actors, including jihadist violent non-State actors, 

are gaining much more ground. This is a real problem, not just the 

problem set of Islamic terrorism, but the problem set of the democratization of violence. We are going to see much more violence at 

a sub-State level. So, a lot of these concerns, including what Senator Carper, I think, very articulately describes as competing imperatives, they are going to remain, and this is one reason why, 

when discourse becomes so locked and very jaded, as we have recently seen, I think we do ourselves a disservice if we are not able 

to reason through together as one body these very, very difficult 

issues that we are going to be grappling with for a long time to 

come. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

On the question of the influence of the Russians and the Iranians 

waning, I think one of you maybe said maybe not so much. An-
47 

other, I think I understood you to say yes. Actually, Iran is sort 

of—talking about competing interests, you have competing interests there, as you know. You have the one group led by the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Guard, and you have another 

group led by the elected president of the country, in a country 

where, I want to say, like, 78 million people, the average age of the 

country is 25. And you have a generational divide there that we 

will see where they go. Most of the places where they seem to be 

involved in the Middle East, it has more to do with Shia versus 

Sunni, I think, than anything else. 

I want to go back to something, I think it was Mr. Bergen, that 

you said, talking about the greatest threats, at least the greatest 

threats to us. I do not believe, from what I can tell, that the greatest threats to us are necessarily with respect to Syria and ISIS. I 

do not think they are necessarily related to those that are going 

through the Refugee Resettlement Program. I think we pretty well 

established that. I am not sure that the greatest threats are those 

who are going through a Visa Waiver Program, or those who come 

here on a tourist visa, or a student visa, or some other way that 

I am not thinking of. 

I think you said it, Mr. Bergen. The thing that keeps me up at 

night more than anything else is the folks that are here, homegrown, born here, raised here, in many cases, and they become 

radicalized, and they can do great damage from the inside. Those 

are the folks that I worry about. 

And, in order to address that threat, reduce the threat, a couple 

things, and we talked about them, but they bear reiterating, and 

one of those—I read a couple of books not long ago by a woman 

named Phyllis Schwartz. Do I have that right? Jessica Stern—not 

even close. Jessica Stern. [Laughter.] 

Jessica Stern, one dealing with ISIS, another dealing with terrorism. She went around the world, just met with all kinds of terrorists. I cannot believe they let her in and just opened up their 

hearts to her, but they did. And she—the older book is the 

one—not the ISIS book, the ISIS book is the newer book—but one 

of the things she found in talking to all these terrorists, a lot of 

them were faith-based, and they—but they were people who, mostly guys, who had not had a lot of success in their lives and they 

were looking for a way into the big time. 

And the big time could be to be involved in a military operation, 

to be trained, be effective, be a hero, to get killed and go to heaven 

and then you would have all these brides or wives. If they do not, 

they get paid. They get on somebody’s payroll and make some 

money. Their families, if they do die, actually get money from the 

organization, in this case, ISIS. 

So, one of the points that came to me from reading her first book 

was if ISIS is not successful, if they are losing territory and not 

gaining territory, if we are cutting them off financially, they become a whole lot less attractive. In their social media, they can still 

pump out the social media, but if the back story is these guys are 

faking it, it is like, as you said in Montana, all hat, no cattle. 

So, that is why it is so important—Mr. Chairman, I agree on 

this—it is so important to crush these guys, sooner rather than 

later, but to do that. 
48 

The second piece is we actually have the ability—the Department 

of Homeland Security has this ability. We talked a little about one 

of the programs that they have that we have been asked to fund 

that enables them to run a counter-message within the Muslim 

communities, here in our country, where there are a lot of people 

and where a bunch, particularly the young people, are subject to 

being radicalized, but to have a countervailing message out there 

and work with the community there to make sure that that is an 

effective message, an effective message. 

So, those are a couple of thoughts that I would leave with us. Do 

you all want to react to any of that? If you do, please do. If you 

do not, that is OK. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. As a Minnesotan, by way of New York and Washington, but having spent my last 41⁄2 years at the University of 

Minnesota, I do need to say a word about the great work of the 

U.S. Attorney there, Andrew Luger. The countering violent extremism programs are one element, but what he has done and what 

his office has done is engage refugee and immigrant communities 

in very significant and substantial ways, in dialogue and in discussion, helping to understand the challenges that they confront without sacrificing in any way, shape, manner, or form the law enforcement imperative of his office. And, I think it is a real model for the 

rest of the country and deserves mention. 

Senator CARPER. Just a show of hands. On the issue of the greatest threat that we face to the homeland, whether it is refugees, 

VWP folks, travel visas, student visas, homegrown, does anybody, 

by a show of hands, also think that the homegrown threat may be 

the biggest threat that we face? 

[Show of hands.] 

Thank you. Four out of five. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. I do want to talk a little bit about the incentives created. In testimony we heard, and this is pretty well widely 

known, more than seven million refugees displaced within Syria, 

four million refugees outside, hundreds of thousands have now 

flown into Europe. The more that are accepted in, will not more 

flow? Is that not a destabilizing—again, Ms. Limo ́n, you talked 

about the lack of assimilation. Part of the problem, I think, in 

France is that they have, just around Paris, about a 1.7 million 

Muslim population, not particularly assimilated, people that lack 

futures. And so they are drawn to this or more easily recruited to 

this type of ideology. 

So, from my standpoint, the solution certainly is not to show 

greater compassion and allow the flow to go because you are just 

going to exacerbate the problem. Is that not a problem? Anybody? 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Yes, it is a problem. I think it is pretty unprecedented, as well, since World War II, the idea of all these people 

coming in. And I think Europe faces huge challenges in dealing 

with this. But I think it is also time—when Germany, Merkel says, 

fine, we will bring in—I think they are bringing in 800,000 people, 

and she sees that as a benefit to her country, which I happen to 

agree with her, but they are going to have to do this wholeheartedly. And that is, when you talk about those communities outside Paris, there are second, third generation Moroccans and other 
49 

Middle Easterners who live there who do not feel like they are 

French, and that is the beauty—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Again, it is that lack of assimilation—— 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. That is right. 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. The Balkanization of societies—— 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. That is right. 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. Which is not a good thing. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. That is not a good thing. 

Chairman JOHNSON. It is very destabilizing. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. And Europe has to deal with that and we need to 

make sure we do not do that here. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Bergen, I do have to challenge you. I 

mean, you talked about all the terrorist attacks being perpetrated 

by U.S. citizens, but the Tsarnaev brothers were not homegrown. 

I would argue certainly that the 9/11 hijackers were on visa 

overstays. That, by the way, is kind of ignoring the fact that Islamic terrorists were at war with us since at least the mid-1990s, 

that did bring—in the end, we had 9/11, and— 

Mr. Bergen. Well—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. And, by the way, talking about whether 

they are perceived as winners or losers, I mean, you down a jet 3 

weeks ago. You have a successful, and I would consider low-tech, 

terrorist event in Beirut, I would say another low-tech terrorist 

event in Paris. I do push back on the sophistication of these. People 

talk about sophisticated, like, it kind of deludes us. Well, it is too 

sophisticated. It takes an awful lot of planning. It seems to me 

pretty easy to say, here are the targets. We are going to hit them 

at zero hour. Take a look at the weapons, readily available on the 

black market. I think the explosives may be a little more complex. 

But, just speak to the real threat and the growing threat. Mr. Bergen. 

Mr. BERGEN. Well, I think you are absolutely right, sir, the attacks in Paris were not sophisticated, but they were complex, putting the operation together. 

Chairman JOHNSON. They were organized. 

Mr. BERGEN. They were highly complex. 

The point I was trying to make, sir, since 9/11, yes, the Tsarnaev 

brothers came as minors into this country, and the real problem 

was that they got radicalized here. They were perfectly normal. 

They lived here for 10 years. It was the last 2 years of their existence—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Point taken. 

Mr. BERGEN [continuing]. That they got radicalized. 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK. Does anybody else want to comment? 

Mr. Gartenstein-Ross. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Yes. Just, I agree with you. You made 

a point about winners and losers. Obviously, this is a point where 

ISIS has had a string of successes and, at such a time trying to 

have an information-operations campaign around their losses is 

just not going to be particularly effective. 

But, I do think that there is very strong proof, and I testified before the Senate about this back in April, that they have consistently exaggerated their strength, and I do think that we can do a 
50 

better job of knocking that down, bearing in mind that when they 

have big successes, like these awful attacks that we have just seen, 

you are not going to be able to convince people that they are on 

the losing side. 

Chairman JOHNSON. No. I would argue ISIS’s sophistication is 

the use of social media. The way that they are able to recruit and 

inspire people to join this barbarity, that takes a fair amount of sophistication to be able to identify people willing to blow themselves 

up. But, the actual attacks themselves strike me as relatively lowtech, which gives me a great deal of concern. 

Mr. Bergen, did you want to say something? 

Mr. BERGEN. No. I totally agree. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Mr. Chairman, can I address the other question 

you asked, about incentives. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Sure. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. In most cases, when you are dealing with migration and it is economic migration, you feel you can, as a matter of 

policy and ethics, it is reasonable to create certain deterrents to undocumented migration. The dilemma in the Syria case is that, yes, 

there are seven million internally displaced, four million refugees, 

but very few of those are people who did not have good reason to 

move, based on persecution, abuses, or conflict. 

Now, traditionally, there are three ways that the cases of people 

in that situation are resolved. They can be locally integrated into 

the places they flee, they can return to their country of origin, or 

they are resettled in a third country, and traditionally, third country resettlement is really for a pretty small minority of refugees, 

and—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Which, again, that is my point. It points to 

what the solution should be, which is to attempt to stabilize the situation in Syria and Iraq, which requires—— 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Well, that was—— 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. Wiping ISIS off the face of the 

earth in terms of their territory. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. But, I think it also—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. I do not see how that—I mean, I think that 

has to be the solution. I guess I was baffled, Mr. Jenkins, by your 

assertion that is going to make it even worse. 

Mr. JENKINS. No, it is not that I am saying that, look, do not go 

after them because it will make it worse. I am saying that that is 

a consequence we have to be prepared for anyway. That is not a 

reason not to go after them. We have to continue, and indeed increase, our efforts to destroy ISIL. I have never been equivocal 

about going after ISIL. There is no option. There is no option that 

allows the continued existence of ISIL. And I would agree with 

Daveed, I do not make these distinctions between a bad ISIL and 

a slightly less bad al-Qaeda. We are talking about an ideology—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. It is Islamic terrorism. 

Mr. JENKINS. Yes. 

Chairman JOHNSON. And we, I think, as a civilized world, it is 

about time we remain—we begin or become completely, 100 percent 

committed to defeating them. And I realize it is a long-term process, but—— 

Mr. JENKINS. That is the point. 
51 

Chairman JOHNSON [continuing]. We have taken care of them in 

one situation and said, OK, we have kind of mopped that up, and 

we forget about it. 

Mr. JENKINS. No, that is the point here, that, first of all, this is 

about this type of ideology, No. 1, that it—that we must destroy the 

military formations. I cannot tell you that we will ever change people’s souls or beliefs. There are still Nazis in the world that believe 

in Nazism. But we can destroy these organizations, and, hell, I 

have been the Senator Cato of this in terms of repeating regularly 

that, furthermore, al-Qaeda and ISIL must be destroyed. 

However, we have to accept that this is going to be a very long 

task and, therefore—and, therefore—pick our way through this in 

a way that we can sustain it in the long run and not do things that 

will immediately erode both international and domestic public support and not do things that are going to be counterproductive. So, 

this is not about going after them. This is about how we go after 

them. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Yes. I think we are on the same page here. 

It requires, again, the 100 percent commitment by the civilized 

world to understand the reality of this, it is not going away, and 

it has to be destroyed. 

Mr. JENKINS. Absolutely. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Anybody else—— 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. Well, I would only say that there is nothing inconsistent between that objective and the efforts to bring together 

the major powers that are so dramatically impacting the situation 

on the ground in Syria today. I credit the administration for the 

efforts it is making. If that does not happen, then the humanitarian crisis that really overlays this whole situation will just be 

continued, because however desirable these objectives are, the destruction of ISIS, that is a long-term proposition, and right now, 

there is an imperative to chart out some sort of disposition of the 

situation in Syria and to address the humanitarian crisis. 

Chairman JOHNSON. I would say the imperative is to make it not 

so long-term. I would say the imperative is to shorten the term of 

when we finally do achieve basic victory. 

But, anyway, let me give everybody a chance to kind of summarize. I have taken enough of your time. And we will start with you, 

Ms. Limo ́n. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Thank you. Senator, I was just going to add that, as 

we have already agreed, the majority of the refugees are actually 

fleeing the government of Syria and Assad—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Right. 

Ms. LIMO ́ N [continuing]. And their actions. And having spent my 

entire career trying to help refugees fleeing bad governments, I am 

really wishing we would start putting our attention on those actions—not to take away from destroying ISIS and al-Qaeda and the 

rest of it, that is a good thing. But, it is also—when does the international community punish governments who have bad policies 

that have people fleeing? We have tens of thousands of Eritreans 

fleeing what is going on inside there. I could give you a whole laundry list. I will not take your time. When do we have policies where 

we say, we have to go to the source of this—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. I would say, when America leads. 
52 

Ms. LIMO ́ N. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Schwartz. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. The issues of this hearing have been many and 

varied and quite fascinating. The issue of the day is the legislation 

that was just enacted in the House of Representatives, and I know 

you have expressed your perspectives on it. I would only ask that 

if you and other members have a reasonable degree of confidence 

that the testimony of the administration was persuasive in terms 

of the kind of security measures that are in place, I would ask that 

you consider all of the implications of this legislation in terms of 

its implications with respect to our friends, our allies, governments, 

and people that are listening very, very closely to what comes out 

of the U.S. Congress and the administration. I have expressed my 

views on this—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Right. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ [continuing]. Early in the hearing, so you 

know—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. I generally do try and consider everything. 

I think a simple certification provides the American people the type 

of assurance that all of these redundant safeguards and all of those 

vetting processes are actually done. And, like I say, we require certification from CEOs under Sarbanes-Oxley—— 

Mr. SCHWARTZ. But my question is, why target this particular 

program. the one that is least—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Because hundreds of people have been 

slaughtered in the last 3 weeks. 

Mr. SCHWARTZ [continuing]. Necessary in the—— 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Gartenstein-Ross. 

Mr. GARTENSTEIN-ROSS. Well, I thought this was a strong conversation. As Eric said, the topics were many and varied. We have 

talked at great length about the primary topic, which is the risks 

of refugee resettlement. We had a consensus on this panel. So, let 

me just point to a couple of things that relate to some of the last 

rounds of questioning. 

I think one thing that I would love to see the legislature exercise 

more oversight over is our CIA program for arming Syrian rebels. 

A lot of the recent revelations are extraordinarily disturbing, and 

I think that they are making the situation worse in terms of the 

primary topic that we are talking about, which is refugees. It also 

is something which I think is at a disservice to our strategic interests. 

The second thing I will say is, we talked about winners and losers, and that is another area where I also think that the legislature 

could play a very strong role. This, obviously, is a time when ISIS 

has a number of prominent wins in terms of awful, deadly attacks. 

They are also experiencing some significant losses, the loss of 

Sinjar, for example, and their major holding, their major victory in 

the past year, Ramadi, is now increasingly threatened. I think 

being able to publicize that is important. 

The final thing, because you asked about the influence of Iran 

and Russia, is Iran has been at the forefront of pushing back ISIS 

and this is not a fully positive thing at all. The atrocities being 

committed by the pro-Iran Shia militias against Sunnis is the kind 

of thing that lays the groundwork for this being a tragedy that will 
53 

continue ad infinitum. So, that is another thing that is not getting 

attention right now that richly deserves it. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Appreciate your insights. Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr. JENKINS. We do not like to use the term, or many people do 

not, but we are at war. We have been at war for a long time on 

this. That means we are going to incur costs, we are going to incur 

risks in this. We cannot say, on the one hand, we are committed 

to a war and we are going to go after these people, and on the 

other hand treat every time we confront a risk as if it is an outrage 

and a failure. And, so, if we are going to be as determined as I believe you are, then that has consequences, and it has consequences 

not just for what we do in terms of going after ISIL, but how this 

Nation ought to be—ought not to be panicked into fear as we go 

forward with this, which sometimes I think we tend to do. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Which, of course, the purpose of this hearing—I think we have done a pretty good job—is laying out the reality and getting a broad spectrum of viewpoints on this thing, and 

we have done a pretty good job of it. Mr. Bergen. 

Mr. BERGEN. Chairman Johnson, I could not agree more. I mean, 

this has been an excellent hearing. A lot of light was shone on an 

issue that is being quite politicized. 

One thing that we do not want to be doing is coming back here 

in 2019 having the same hearing about Afghanistan, because the 

plan to draw down to zero in Afghanistan is basically not a good 

idea, and hopefully we do not—we have already seen how this 

video plays out. ISIS already has a small presence in Afghanistan, 

which is growing. So, we do not want to make the same mistake 

that we have made in Iraq. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Well, thank you, Mr. Bergen. 

I really want to thank all the witnesses. I come from a manufacturing background. I like information. I like facts. I hate demagoguery. So, all of you, and the previous panel, too, I really do appreciate the administration—this was a very fast turnaround for 

the administration to provide us witnesses and I truly appreciate 

that, and I think it inured to their benefit on this issue. So, again, 

I appreciate all of you for bringing forth some good information for 

the American people to hear. 

With that, this hearing record will remain open for 15 days, until 

December 4 at 5 p.m., for the submission of statements and questions for the record. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5:03 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(55) 

A P P E N D I X 
56 

whether they could have come to the United States without a visa. What we do know is that 

there are between 5,000 to 8,000 known foreign fighters that originate from countries where the 

Visa Waiver Program would apply. 

I am grateful to have two distinguished panels ofleading experts here today to answer important 

questions about how we vet refugees before allowing them into our country, about what happens 

to the refugees once they arrive, and whether ISIS is likely to utilize our refugee resettlement 

program and other vulnerabilities to its tactical advantage. 

I thank the witnesses for appearing today, and I look forward to your testimony regarding the 

very serious challenges we face. 

[I] The term "Special Interest Alien" originated after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and refers to 

individuals from countries associated with terrorism. See Sylvia Longmire, What Can We Learn 

From Trends in 'Special Interest Alien' Migration Into the U.S., Homeland Security Today.US 

(May, 11, 2011), http://www.hstoday.us/brietings/correspondents-watch/single-article/what-canwe-1eam-from-trends-in-special-interest-alien-migration-into-theus/dde 14d2e6e96cdb40a5ae5003d4002f2.htrnl. 
57 

Statement of Ranking Member Tom Carper 

"The Impact ofiSIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

Thursday, November 19, 2015 

As prepared for delivery: 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

First off, I want to express my deepest sympathies to the people of France. France is our oldest 

ally, and we mourn with them as they bury their countrymen. 

The tragedy in Paris is yet another reminder that ISIS, A! Qaeda and other terrorist groups have 

no regard for innocent civilians and will stop at nothing to terrorize the West and our core values 

of freedom, democracy and respect for human life. 

I want to commend the French people for their stoicism in the face of the attacks, and French and 

Belgian authorities for their valiant work in the days since. Their bravery and hard work has 

already apprehended or killed some of the terrorists, and quite possibly averted follow-on 

attacks. 

We have also seen encouraging progress in the larger fight to dismantle and degrade IS IS. 

Here at home, it is our job, the job ofDHS, the FBI and the Intelligence Community to make 

sure that these kinds of attacks do not happen on US soil. The good news is that we have made it 

very hard for ISIS to do this. 

Over the past year, the FBI has arrested more than two dozen individuals on ISIS-related 

terrorism charges. DHS screens every single airline passenger coming to the United States and 

checks their data against our terrorism watchlist long before they ever get on a plane. 

Over the past year DHS's intelligence office-in partnership with the FBI-has issued dozens of 

intelligence reports to state and local law enforcement units throughout the country about ISIS. 

These reports give them the information they need to know what it is that ISIS may be trying to 

do and to take the steps necessary to protect their communities. One report even warned about 

the capabilities of the alleged mastermind of the Paris attacks the man we now know was killed 

in yesterday's pre-dawn raid by French authorities outside Paris. 

Lastly, DHS has set up a new Countering Violent Extremism office charged with reaching out to 

select communities across the country to alert them to the dangers ofiSIS. This office will help 

families, community leaders and religious figures understand ISIS's online recruitment and 

radicalization tactics. It will also help young people resist the lure of joining the ranks of ISIS 

and a! Qaeda. 

We can of course always do more. But make no mistake, we have a multi layered and effective 

homeland security system in place. Our borders are strong, our law enforcement officers remain 

vigilant, and our intelligence community is working around the clock to sniff out the next attack. 
58 

With that said, I now want to take a moment to talk about Syrian refugees. A couple of months 

ago, on the other side of the Capitol, we had a visit from Pope Francis. I'm not Catholic, but I 

was moved. I know a lot of our colleagues were moved, too, especially when the Pope invoked 

the Golden Rule. He called on all of us to treat other people the way we want to be treated. 

We were also moved when he invoked the words of Matthew 25: 'When I was hungry, did you 

feed me; when I was naked, did you clothe me; when I was thirsty, did you give me drink; when 

I was a stranger in your land, did you take me in?' 

Let me repeat that last part: 'when I was a stranger in your land, did you take me in?' 

When I hear that roughly a thousand Syrian refugees came to this country in the past year and 

more are coming next year, I think of the desperate plight of so many people who are trying to 

escape a hellacious situation in Syria. They've been living, in some cases, for months or even 

years in refugee camps. They've watched friends or family members suffer or die on the 

battlefield, at the hands of terrorists, and even on the route to safety as well. 

What happened in Paris, however, has many people asking questions about whether our country 

should be accepting Syrian refugees. 

From my perspective, we have two competing moral imperatives that should drive us in this 

situation. On the one hand, we have an obligation to care for 'the least of these.' And on the 

other hand, we have an obligation to protect those of us who live here from possible threats that 

might be caused by individuals fleeing the violence in Syria. 

It may seem as if these moral imperatives are in conflict, that we can't both help the desperate 

Syrians we've seen and read about in the media without putting ourselves in danger. I understand 

the concern, but I don't believe that is the case. 

"I think this Administration has worked hard to make sure that we can continue to welcome 

refugees with open arms while also keeping our citizens safe from terrorist groups like ISIS. The 

Administration has put in place a robust screening process for Syrian refugees - which we will 

hear about today. 

It usually starts with the United Nations winnowing down the pool ofrefugees after gathering 

extensive biometric data and background information on the applicants. Only those individuals 

who pass the U.N. assessment are ever referred to the United States for possible resettlement. 

At that point, federal agencies at the Department of Homeland Security and elsewhere begin a 

lengthy and intensive screening process, all conducted outside of our borders. Refugees are 

finger-printed, photographed, and vetted against all of the national security databases we 

maintain in search of any hint of terrorist ties or any other criminal or nefarious activity in their 

background. 
59 

Each refugee is then interviewed face-to-face by highly skilled immigration analysts who 

undergo special training to spot inconsistencies in information or attempts by someone to 

conceal their true identity in some way. After then going through a health screening, the refugees 

are subjected to another security check and are re-vetted against U.S. national security 

databases. 

All this happens well before any of these applicants ever set foot on U.S. soil. On average, the 

screening process here in the U.S. takes a year and a half. Let me repeat that. For the U.S. to 

conduct its review, refugees must wait out 18 months or more of screening. 

That's a long time to wait and a lot of hurdles that a member oflSIS would have to clear if they 

were going to try to use the refugee program to get to the United States. 

So we need to take a step back, tune out the hysteria, and identify some common sense steps we 

can take to advance both our obligation to provide safe harbor to the victims of war, and our 

obligation to keep Americans safe. 

I think we have a very experienced group of witnesses before us today who can help us have a 

productive dialogue on these issues. 

Thank you to you all and I look forward to hearing your testimony. 
60 

Testimony of Anne C. Richard, 

Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 

to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

Hearing on "The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015, 2:00pm 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and distinguished members of the 

Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this Subcommittee to discuss the 

humanitarian aspects of the crisis in Syria. 

I greatly appreciate the interest this Committee has taken in this very challenging 

situation. I would like to briefly outline the steps taken by the Population, Refugees and 

Migration bureau and others at the State Department USAID, and in the Obama Administration 

to provide humanitarian assistance to innocent civilians and to assist the governments of other 

countries to deal with the crisis in Syria and the phenomenon of large-scale migration of refugees 

and others to Europe. I also want to explain how this relates to our Department's efforts to 

resettle refugees in this country. 

As you know, in early September, the tragic photo of a little boy's body on a beach in 

Turkey awakened people to the plight of Syrian refugees in ways that years of grim statistics, 

bleak images, and mounting casualty figures could not. 

What started as unrest in Syria in 2011 has developed into a multi-front war and spilled 

over to become a regional crisis. Recently, the crisis reached Europe as hundreds of thousands 

of young men, women and sometimes entire families sought to reach that continent by boat, bus, 

train and foot. They are joined by refugees and migrants from other countries, chiefly 

Afghanistan (16%), Eritrea (6%), and Iraq (3%). While the outflow of refugees to Europe has 

garnered a lot of attention, it is important for us to remember and acknowledge that the vast 

majority of Syrian families remain in the Middle East. Over four million are refugees in Turkey, 

Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt. Roughly 7 million Syrians are displaced within their own 

country, and many more are dependent on aid to survive. 

For more than four years, the Obama Administration has helped countries neighboring 

Syria and the innocent people caught up in the Syria crisis, even as we continue to play a leading 

role in providing humanitarian aid to people affected by conflicts in many other places. 

We have a three pronged approach to the humanitarian aspects of the crisis in Syria 

and the region: strong levels of humanitarian assistance, active diplomacy, and expanded 

refugee resettlement. 

Page 1 of 4 
61 

First, the U.S. Government is the leading donor of humanitarian assistance to 

people in need inside Syria, in the surrounding countries, and to others caught up in crises 

around the world. Through contributions to international organizations such as the UN 

High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the 

International Organization for Migration, the World Food Program, UNICEF and leading nongovernmental organizations, U.S. funds are being used to save millions of lives. 

U.S. humanitarian assistance in response to the Syrian conflict totals more than $4.5 

billion since the start of the crisis and is made possible thanks to strong bipartisan support from 

Congress. Without U.S. support, more people would be making the dangerous voyage across the 

Mediterranean/to Europe. This assistance provides life-saving support-- including food, water, 

shelter, medical care and warm clothing-- to people in all 14 governorates of Syria, and to 

refugees and host communities in Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Egypt. It reaches 

approximately 5 million Syrians each month. Where hospitals are barrel bombed, our assistance 

allows medical teams to provide life-saving care. More than 6 million patients have received 

treatment in more than 140 U.S.-supported hospitals and clinics across Syria. We have repaired 

water and sanitation facilities, providing access to clean water for 1.3 million people across 

Syria. Yet the needs are staggering. 

Even with our sizable contributions (more than half of all those provided), however, UN 

appeals for humanitarian aid to address the crisis in Syria remain underfunded, with international 

donors stepping up to cover only 46% of the needs as of November 2015. These shortfalls have 

had real consequences; Syrian refugees in Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon are losing hope of ever 

returning to their homes; they are unable to work regularly to sustain their families, rents are 

high and their children are missing out on school. 

Roughly 85% of refugees now live outside of camps. We need to help refugees become 

seli~sufficient while we also support the communities that host them. We are looking at ways to 

better link our relief and development assistance. Importantly, we are working to get more 

refugee children in school throughout the region. Education for children who have been 

displaced is essential for their own futures and for ours. We support the "No Lost Generation" 

campaign to educate and protect Syrian children and youth with funding to UN agencies like 

UNICEF and leading non-goverrunental organizations. 

We stay in close touch with UN agencies to encourage the most efficient use of our aid 

dollars. Contributions from other donor governments, the private sector and the public are also 

urgently needed. In recent weeks, we have been gratified to see increased contributions from the 

public. We encourage members of the public seeking information about private efforts to visit 

www.aidrefi.tgces.gov. 

Page 2 of 4 
62 

The second prong of our response is diplomacy on humanitarian issues. For several 

years we have engaged government officials in the region to encourage them to keep borders 

open and allow refugees to enter their countries, authorize the work of leading humanitarian 

organizations, and allow refugees to pursue normal lives -as normal as is possible given what 

they have been through. We are part of a chorus of nations that call for the respect of 

humanitarian principles, even inside Syria in wartime. 

Diplomacy on humanitarian issues means working constructively with other nations to 

find solutions. I meet routinely with senior officials from other countries, from Lebanon, Jordan 

and Turkey to Sweden and Germany, and my bureau helps inform other Department leaders 

about humanitarian issues and concerns that they then raise in their meetings. The issue of the 

refugee and migration crisis was taken up again and again in recent international fora such as the 

UN General Assembly in New York in September, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees' 

Executive Committee meeting in Geneva in early October, and the Global Forum on Migration 

and Development in Istanbul in mid-October. Most recently, on November 13, I co-chaired with 

France a humanitarian working group in Vienna the day before the new International Syria. 

Support Group met, and a summary of our conclusions were reflected in that group's statement. 

All of these meetings have provided opportunities for countries to come together in a common 

effort. 

Diplomacy also includes pushing, when needed, those who can and should be doing 

more. We are encouraging countries that provide assistance outside the UN system to contribute 

to the UN appeals for Syria. Contributions to UN appeals can help prevent duplication and 

ensure that assistance is provided to those who need it the most. We are also encouraging 

countries to permit refugees to pursue livelihoods and become more self-sufficient, and to do this 

in ways that do not exacerbate existing unemployment issues in their countries. 

The third prong of our response is resettling refugees in the United States 

In FY 2015, nearly 70,000 refugees of 67 different nationalities were admitted for 

permanent resettlement in the United States, including 1700 Syrians. In FY 2016, the President 

has determined that we should increase that overall number to 85,000, including at least I 0,000 

Syrians. We recognize that admitting more Syrian refugees to the United States is only part of 

the solution, but it is in keeping with our American tradition. It shows the world that we seek to 

provide refuge for those most in need, it sets an example for others to follow, and it adds to the 

diversity and strength of American society. 

Resettlement is offered to refugees who are among the most vulnerable- people for 

whom a return to Syria someday would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, such as victims 

oftorture, bum victims, or others with chronic medical conditions. Families or individuals who 

Page 3 of 4 
63 

could benefit the most from resettlement are referred to the US Refugee Admissions Program 

(US RAP) by the UNHCR. 

I know the murderous attacks in Paris last Friday evening have raised many questions 

about the spillover of not just migrants to Europe, but also the spread of violence from war zones 

in the Middle East to the streets of a major European capital. 

Let me assure you that the entire Executive Branch, and the State Department that I 

represent, has the safety and security of Americans as our highest priority. As an essential, 

fundamental part of the US Refugee Admission Program, we screen applicants rigorously and 

carefully in an effort to ensure that no one who poses a threat to the safety and security of 

Americans is able to enter our country. All refugees of all nationalities considered for admission 

to the United States undergo intensive security screening involving multiple federal intelligence, 

security and law enforcement agencies, including the National Counterterrorism Center, the 

FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, and the Departments of Homeland Security, State and 

Defense. Consequently, resettlement is a deliberate process that can take 18-to-24 months. 

Applicants to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program are currently subject to the highest 

level of security checks of any category of traveler to the United States. These safeguards 

include biometric (fingerprint) and biographic checks, and a lengthy in-person overseas 

interview by specially trained DHS officers who scrutinize the applicant's explanation of 

individual circumstances to ensure the applicant is a bona fide refugee and is not known to 

present security concerns to the United States. 

The vast majority ofthe three million refugees who have been admitted to the United 

States, including from some of the most troubled regions in the world, have proven to be hardworking and productive residents. They pay taxes, send their children to school, and after five 

years, many take the test to become citizens. Some serve in the U.S. military and undertake 

other forms of service for their communities and our country. 

I am happy to answer any questions you may have about this three-pronged approach and 

to provide details about our programs. 

Thank you. 

Page 4 of 4 
64 

U.S. Citizenship 

and Immigration 

Services 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

OF 

LEON RODRIGUEZ 

DIRECTOR 

U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES 

DEPARTMENTOFHOMELANDSECURITY 

FOR A HEARING ON 

"THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND AND REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT" 

BEFORE 

THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

AND GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS 

NOVEMBER 19, 2015 

2:00P.M. 

342 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 
65 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and distinguished members of the 

Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testifY at today's hearing on the refugee admissions 

program, with particular emphasis on Fiscal Year 2016. As the Director of U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (US CIS), my team works in close partnership with colleagues at the 

Department of State's Bureau ofPopulation, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), with other 

components within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and with colleagues in the law 

enforcement and intelligence communities to meet the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program's 

(US RAP) mission to offer resettlement opportunities to eligible refugees while safeguarding the 

integrity of the program and our national security. 

As you know, the United States has a proud and long-standing tradition of offering 

protection, freedom, and opportunity to refugees from around the world who live in fear of 

persecution and are often left to languish in difficult conditions of temporary asylum. users 

remains dedicated to fulfilling this mission, in partnership with PRM, and continuing the United 

States' leadership role in humanitarian protection. An integral part of this mission is to ensure 

that refugee resettlement opportunities go to those who are eligible for such protection and who 

do not present a risk to the safety and security of our country. Accordingly, we are committed to 

deterring and detecting fraud among those seeking to resettle in the United States, and we 

continue to employ the highest security measures to protect against risks to our national security. 

As the Director ofUSCIS, I can assure you that this commitment to our humanitarian and 

national security mandates is shared inside and outside of DHS. The refugee resettlement 

program has forged strong and deep relationships with colleagues in the law enforcement, 

national security, and intelligence communities and we continue to benefit enormously from 

their expertise, analysis, and collaboration. It simply would not be possible for us to support a 
66 

resettlement program of the size and scope that the United States maintains without this critical 

interagency infrastructure. 

My testimony today will describe USCIS's role in refugee resettlement generally, and I 

will discuss the screening measures and safeguards that have been developed by the USRAP and 

enhanced over time. While many of these enhancements were first deployed in connection with 

the Iraqi refugee resettlement program, they are now being applied more broadly to applicants of 

all nationalities, including Syrians who now represent a growing portion of our caseload. 

Refugee Resettlement Case Processing 

As I mentioned above, the US RAP is a shared operational responsibility of the State 

Department and US CIS, among other agencies. The State Department is responsible for the 

overarching coordination and management of the USRAP, including the decision on which 

refugees around the world are granted access to the US RAP for resettlement consideration. As 

contemplated by section 207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, this work is guided each 

year by a Presidential determination, which sets the refugee admissions ceiling following 

consultations with Congress. US CIS is responsible for conducting individual, in-person 

interviews with applicants to determine their eligibility for refugee status, including whether they 

meet the refugee definition and are otherwise admissible to the United States under U.S. law. 

To maximize flexibility and program integrity, in 2005 USC IS created the Refugee 

Corps, a cadre of specially-trained USC IS officers who are dedicated to adjudicating applications 

for refugee status overseas. These officers are based in Washington, D.C., but they travel to 

multiple locations around the world. In addition, USC IS has a small number of officers posted at 

embassies overseas who conduct refugee adjudications, and we assign specially-trained officers 

from other programs- such as the Asylum Corps, Office of the Chief Counsel, and 

2 
67 

Administrative Appeals Office- to supplement the Refugee Corps. Using this model, USCIS 

has been able to respond to an increasingly diverse refugee admissions program, working in 

64 countries in Fiscal Year (FY) 2015. 

Recognizing that a well-trained cadre of officers is critical to protecting the integrity of 

the refugee process, we have focused our efforts on providing the highest quality training to our 

adjudicators. In addition to the basic training required of all USCIS officers, refugee officers 

receive five weeks of specialized training that includes comprehensive instruction on all aspects 

of the job, including refugee law, grounds of inadmissibility, fraud detection and prevention, 

security protocols, interviewing techniques, credibility analysis, and country conditions research. 

Before deploying overseas, officers also receive pre-departure training which focuses on the 

specific population that they will be interviewing. This includes information on the types of 

refugee claims that they are likely to encounter, detailed country of origin information, and 

updates on any fraud trends or security issues that have been identified. With the advent of 

large-scale processing oflraqi applicants in 2007, USC IS officers who adjudicate Iraqi refugee 

applications began receiving additional two-day training on country-specific issues, including 

briefings from outside experts from the intelligence, policy, and academic communities. This 

training has since expanded to a one-week training in order to include Syria-specific topics as 

well. 

In order to fully explore refugee claims and to identify any possible grounds of 

ineligibility, specially-trained US CIS officers conduct an in-person, in-depth interview of every 

principal refugee applicant. The officer assesses the credibility of the applicant and evaluates 

whether the applicant's testimony is consistent with known country conditions. These 

adjudicators also interview each accompanying family member age 14 and older to determine 

their admissibility to the United States. In addition, refugee applicants are subject to robust 

3 
68 

security screening protocols to identity potential fraud, criminal or national security issues. All 

refugee status determinations made by interviewing officers undergo supervisory review before a 

final decision is made. Refugee Affairs Division policy requires officers to submit certain 

categories of sensitive cases including certain national security-related cases - to Refugee 

Affairs Division Headquarters to obtain concurrence prior to the issuance of a decision. This 

allows for Headquarters staff to conduct additional research, liaise with law enforcement or 

intelligence agencies, or consult with an outside expert before finalizing the decision. 

Security Checks 

Security checks are an integral part of the US RAP process for applicants of all 

nationalities, and coordinating these checks is a shared responsibility between the State 

Department and DHS. Refugee applicants are subject to the highest level of security checks, and 

a refugee applicant is not approved for travel until the results of all required security checks have 

been obtained and cleared. 

All available biographic and biometric information is vetted against a broad array of law 

enforcement, intelligence community, and other relevant databases to help confirm a refugee 

applicant's identity, check for any criminal or other derogatory information, and identity 

information that could inform lines of questioning during the interview. Biographic checks 

against the State Department's Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS)- which 

includes watch list information- are initiated at the time of prescreening by the State 

Department's Resettlement Support Center (RSC) staff. In addition, the RSC request Security 

Advisory Opinions (SAOs) from the law enforcement and intelligence communities for those 

cases meeting certain criteria. 

4 
69 

In the fall of2008, USCIS launched a third biographic check with the National 

Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), which we now refer to as Interagency Checks or "lAC's." 

Initially the lAC was required only for Iraqi applicants, but the lAC is now required for all 

refugee applicants within a designated age range, regardless of nationality. In addition, 

expanded intelligence community support was added to the lAC process in July 2010. In 2015, 

all partners coordinated to launch lAC recurrent vetting. With recurrent vetting, any intervening 

derogatory information that is identified after the initial check has cleared but before the 

applicant has traveled to the United States will be shared with USC IS without the need for a 

subsequent query. 

In addition to these biographic checks, biometric checks against three sets of data are 

coordinated by users, using mobile fingerprint equipment and photographs which are typically 

collected at the time of the USC IS interview. These fingerprints are screened against the vast 

biometric holdings of the Federal Bureau oflnvestigation's Next Generation Identification 

system, and they are screened and enrolled in DHS's Automated Biometric Identification System 

(IDENT). Through IDENT, applicant fingerprints are screened not only against watchlist 

information, but also for previous immigration encounters in the United States and overseas 

including, for example, cases in which the applicant previously applied for a visa at a 

U.S. embassy. Starting in 2007, USCIS began to work with the Department of Defense (DoD) to 

augment biometric screening by checking against the DoD Automated Biometric Identification 

System (ABIS). ABIS contains a variety of records, including fingerprint records captured in 

theatre in Iraq, and it is a valuable resource to identifY a wide array of relevant information. 

Today, ABIS screening has been expanded to refugee applicants of all nationalities who fall 

within the prescribed age ranges. 

5 
70 

In addition to the existing suite of biometric and biographic checks that are applied to 

refugees regardless of nationality, users has instituted an additional layer of review for Syrian 

refugee applications, taking into account the myriad actors and dynamic nature of the conflict in 

Syria. Before being scheduled for interview by a users officer in the field, Syrian cases are 

reviewed at users headquarters by a Refugee Affairs Division officer. All cases that meet 

certain criteria are referred to the USe IS' Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate 

(FDNS) for additional review and research. FDNS conducts open-source and classified research 

on referred cases and synthesizes an assessment for use by the interviewing officer. This 

information provides case-specific context relating to country conditions and regional activity, 

and it is used by the interviewing officer to inform lines of inquiry related to the applicant's 

eligibility and credibility. 

Throughout the review process of Syrian refugee applicants, FDNS engages with law 

enforcement and intelligence community members for assistance with identity verification, 

acquisition of additional information, or deconfliction to ensure users activities will not 

adversely affect an ongoing law enforcement investigation. When FDNS identifies terrorismrelated information, it makes the appropriate nominations or enhancements to the Terrorist 

Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE), using standard interagency watch listing protocols. 

Additionally, users drafts and disseminates reports to U.S. law enforcement and intelligence 

agencies alerting the interagency to information that meets standing intelligence information 

requirements. 

Users continues to work with DHS's Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) and 

other intelligence community elements to identity options for new potential screening 

opportunities to enhance this already robust suite of checks. Finally, in addition to the checks 

that I have described, refugee applicants are subject to screening conducted by DHS colleagues 

6 
71 

at U.S. Customs and Border Protection's National Targeting Center-Passenger and the 

Transportation Security Administration's Secure Flight program prior to their admission to the 

United States, as is the case with all individuals traveling to the United States regardless of 

immigration program. 

The Refugee Admissions Pipeline 

Given the wide geographic scope of the USRAP, including remote and sometimes 

dangerous locations, and the complexities of refugee resettlement processing, users coordinates 

closely with PRM to develop a schedule for refugee interviews each quarter of the Fiscal Year. 

This yields a "pipeline" of refugee applicants who can be admitted to the United States, once all 

required security checks, medical examinations, and other pre-travel steps are completed. 

In FY 2015, USCIS officers conducted refugee status interviews for applicants from 

67 countries. The leading nationalities admitted to the United States were Burmese, Iraqis, and 

Somalis, as the multi-year program for Bhutanese nationals in Nepal continued its downward 

trend. Admissions from Africa continued their multiyear increase, notably including larger 

numbers of Congolese from the Great Lakes region of Africa. 

Refugee processing operations in the Middle East, which have been primarily focused on 

Iraqi nationals since 2007, expanded to include a larger number of Syrian referrals from the 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). As of late September 2015, the 

USRAP has received approximately 19,000 referrals of Syrian applicants from UNHCR, 

primarily in Turkey, Jordan, and Egypt. The USRAP continues to interview large numbers of 

Iraqi applicants in these same three locations, and has also resumed processing Iraqi nationals in 

Baghdad in spring 2015, after a break in operations since June 2014. USCIS was not able to 

7 
72 

work in Lebanon in FY 2015- but for one exceptional, one-officer visit- due to space 

constraints at the embassy, where officers both live and work due to the security conditions. 

In Fiscal Years 2013,2014, and 2015, USCIS and the State Department have succeeded 

in meeting the annual refugee admissions ceiling of 70,000. This accomplishment reflects a 

worldwide commitment to refugee protection, as well as intense and committed efforts by all the 

interagency partners to improve, refine, and enhance the security vetting regime for refugee 

applicants, while maintaining its integrity and rigor. We will continue these interagency efforts 

to improve the quality and efficacy of the US RAP security screening regime, including progress 

toward more automated processes. 

USCIS is prepared to work closely with the State Department and other interagency 

partners to support a larger refugee admissions program of 85,000 arrivals in FY 2016, including 

at least 10,000 Syrian refugees, while assiduously maintaining the integrity of the program and 

our national security. 

I would be happy to answer your questions. 

8 
73 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

November 19, 2015 

Peter Bergen 

Vice President, Director of International Security and Fellows Programs, New 

America, Professor of Practice, Arizona State University and CNN National 

Security Analyst 

1 
74 

This testimony is divided into six sections: 

I. What are the homeland security lessons of the large-scale ISIS terrorist attacks in Paris 

and Sinai? 

2. Who are the Westerners being recruited by ISIS? 

3. How are they being recruited? 

4. The threat to the United States by ISIS's American recruits 

5. The threat to the United States by ISIS's non-American recruits; 

6. How to defeat ISIS: twelve action items. 1 

On Friday November 13, France had its 9/11. At least 129 people were killed at 

multiple locations in Paris, including a concert hall, a soccer stadium and a popular 

restaurant, the kinds of venues that ordinary Parisians f1ock to on a Friday night. At, or 

near, these venues the attackers deployed a mix of terrorist tactics, including suicide 

attackers, an assault using more than one gunman willing to light to the death, hostagetaking and bombings. French President Francois Hollande blames ISIS, for the attack, 

and the terror group has claimed responsibility. It is still early in the investigation, but 

already it's clear that French and Belgian citizens some of whom had spent time in Syria 

fighting with ISIS were involved in the attack. One of the attackers had posed as a Syrian 

refugee. 

On October 31 ISIS brought down a Russian Metrojet airliner leaving Sharm eiSheikh airport in Sinai, Egypt killing all224 people on board; the deadliest attack 

on commercial aviation since 9/11. 

What are the homeland security lessons of the ISIS terrorist attacks in Paris and 

Sinai? The fact that one of the Paris attackers was posing as a Syrian refugee has caused 

many to ask whether one of the lessons of the Paris attacks is to end or "pause" accepting 

Syrian refugees into the States. More than 4.2 million Syrians have been registered as 

refugees according to the United Nations, yet the United States has accepted only around 

2,000 Syrian refugees with the Obama administration announcing that it will accept 

I 0,000 in 2016. Some have criticized the commitment to accept even 10,000 refugees 

citing fears that Syrian refugees would pose a terrorism threat to the United States. 

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson, commented, "The jihadists want to 

infiltrate our nation. We have to exercise something that even resembles common sense" 

adding "That would be foolishness to take in people from a region where we don't have 

any way in making a determination if this person is radicalized already or potentially 

radicalized." 

But how big a terrorist threat do Syrian refugees really pose to the United States? 

Animating the fear of accepting refugees is the belief that terrorism is a threat that 

infiltrates the United States from abroad. Yet a survey by New America of330 

individuals accused of jihadist criminal activity in the United States since 9/11 found 

that more than eight in ten were American citizens. 

1 Thanks to Courtney Schuster and David Sterman of New America for their help in 

preparing this testimony. 

2 
75 

Among those 330 jihadist terrorism cases, none involved a refugee plotting or 

conducting an attack inside the United States. (One involved an alleged plot to do, but 

it was a tightly controlled sting operation.) 

Attacks by foreigners entering the United States do pose a real threat, yet the plots to do 

so since 9/11 were not by refugees. British national Richard Reid's December 2001 

attempt to bring down an American airliner flying between Paris and Miami with a bomb 

hidden in his shoe was enabled by the Visa Waiver Program, not by being a refugee. 

Umar Abdulmutallab was able to attempt to bring down Northwest Flight 253 flying over 

Detroit with a bomb hidden in his underwear on Christmas Day 2009, because he had a 

multiple entry visa. Far from being a refugee, he was a privileged member of the 

Nigerian elite. 

Some refugees have been charged with terrorism related crimes. Of the 330 

terrorism cases New America found nine instances of refugees charged with some 

kind of terrorist crime, most of them for conspiring to support an overseas terrorist 

organization. 

In 201 I, Waad Ramdan A! wan and Mohanad ShareefHammadi were arrested in Bowling 

Green, Kentucky following a two-year FBI investigation. The FBI began tracking AI wan 

shortly after his arrival in the United States in 2009 due to his known insurgent activity in 

Iraq from 2003 to 2006, when he was detained by Iraqi authorities for placing IEDs 

targeting American forces. The FBI used a confidential informant to get close to AI wan 

and together the men developed what Alwan believed was a plan to send weapons to aiQaeda in Iraq. A! wan recruited Mohanad Hammadi, another refugee from Iraq. Together, 

the two men acquired weapons through a FBI informant and loaded these materials in a 

truck that they believed would be shipped to al-Qaeda in Iraq. They did not, however, 

make any plans for an attack on U.S. soil. Both are serving long prison terms. 

In another case, Yassin Aref, a Kurdish refugee from Iraq was convicted of conspiring to 

support a terrorist organization using a missile to attack a Pakistani diplomat in New 

York. The case was also a sting operation driven by an informant. 

Some cases involved Somali men from Minnesota who traveled to Somalia to fight for 

the al-Qaeda aligned terrorist group AI Shabaab. Other cases involve refugees from 

Uzbekistan. Fazzlidin Kurbanov, an Uzbek refugee who came to the United States in 

2009 was convicted of conspiring to provide material support to the Uzbek terrorist 

group, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. In another case involving an Uzbek refugee, 

Jamshid Muhtorov, was charged him with planning to travel to fight with the Uzbek 

terrorist group Islamic Jihad Union abroad. However, the government did not allege that 

he plotted attacks inside the United States. 

There are other reported cases beyond the nine we identified in which individuals who 

came, as refugees later became legal permanent residents or citizens. For example, Agron 

Abdullahu, a refugee from Kosovo who became a legal permanent resident, pleaded 

3 
76 

guilty to providing firearms to illegal aliens; who ended up being convicted of conspiring 

to attack the Fort Dix military base in New Jersey in 2007. 

The record simply does not provide support for fears of a significant threat from 

terrorists infiltrating as refugees. To the extent that there is a problem with refugees 

radicalizing, it is a homegrown problem similar to the radicalization of American 

citizens. Sometimes cited to justify fear of a refugee threat, the Tsarnaev brothers, who 

bombed the Boston Marathon in 2013, were both minors when their parents brought them 

to the United States from the former Soviet Union. They radicalized in the United States 

only around a decade after they had arrived in Boston. At the time of the bombing one of 

the brothers was an American citizen and the other had American residency. 

As Congress contemplates what to do with the very small number of Syrian refugees that 

the States is willing to admit, it's worth recalling a shameful episode in U.S. history when 

refugees fleeing another brutal dictator were turned away from American shores. At the 

time seven in ten Americans polled said that they did not want these refugees let into the 

States. The year was 1938 and the refugees were Jews fleeing Hitler. Those attitudes had 

consequences. On May 13, 1939, more than 900 Jews fled Germany on the St. Louis 

cruise ship steaming first for Cuba and then, they hoped, the States. The Jews were turned 

away both in Havana and from the States-they could see the lights of Miami in the 

distance as they sailed back to Europe---where some 250 were killed in the Holocaust. 

Today more than half of Americans polled say the States shouldn't take any Syrian 

refugees fleeing the terrible war in Syria and the brutal rule of both Syrian dictator 

Bashar al-Assad and of ISIS. Pandering to this anti-refugee sentiment may be easy 

politics but it isn't in the American spirit as best expressed by Emma Lazarus: "Give me 

your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse 

of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me." 

The existing Syrian refugee screening process involves a layered process of multiple 

checks and interviews by several US government agencies and on average lasts 18 to 24 

months and therefore poses significant hurdles to any effort to infiltrate terrorists as 

refugees. And so far, according to the US State Department, of the some 2,000 

Syrian refugees who have been accepted into the States only around 2% are 

"military age males" who are unattached to families; the rest are children and 

women and the sick and the elderly. 

The screening for Syrian refugee is a rigorous system that can certainly be reviewed but 

there is no reason to hold up the application process of any Syrian refugee given the fact 

that the screening process is both so rigorous and so lengthy. Syrian refugee claims 

should continue to be processed simultaneously as a review is instituted of the 

screening procedures to ensure they are the best procedures possible. 

Given the prevalence of French and Belgian citizens in the Paris attacks it's not so 

much the Syrian refugee program that bears more scrutiny but the Visa Waiver 

Program enjoyed by many European countries' nationals. Of course the Visa Waiver 

4 
77 

Program significantly benefits the US economy as it encourages tourism and business by 

Europeans and so any possible adjustments to the program should take this into account. 

One of the other lessons of the Paris attacks is the dangers ofT ATP born bs. French 

prosecutors say the bombs used in Paris last week were made from TATP, a fact 

that yields important clues about the way the plot was planned and executed. 

T ATP-based bombs are built using the common household ingredient hydrogen peroxide, 

which is used to bleach hair. Such bombs have been a signature of jihadist terrorists in 

the West for more than a decade because the materials are so easy to acquire, unlike 

military-grade explosives, which are tightly controlled in much of the West. 

Their use in the Paris attacks, as well as in terrorist plots in London and in the 

United States over the past decade, should remind law enforcement in the West that 

these TATP bombs are what jihadist terrorists may deploy in the future. 

What is tricky about T ATP bombs is that they are quite difficult to make because their 

ingredients, when combined, are highly unstable and can explode easily if mishandled. 

To make an effective TATP bomb requires real training, which suggests a relatively 

skilled bomb-maker was involved in the Paris plot, since the terrorists detonated several 

bombs. It also suggests that there was some kind of bomb factory that, as yet, appears to 

be undiscovered, because putting together such bombs requires some kind of dedicated 

space. And it also suggests that there were probably tests of the bombs in an isolated 

place to ensure that they worked. 

The dangers ofTATP bombs can be seen in the case of Matthew Rugo and Curtis Jetton, 

21-year-old roommates in Texas City, Texas. They didn't have any bomb-making training 

and were manufacturing explosives in 2006 from concentrated bleach when their 

concoction blew up, killing Rugo and injuring Jetton. The pair had no political motives: 

They had just wanted to blow up vehicles for fun. 

Others in the United States have built TATP bombs with far more malevolent intent. 

Najibullah Zazi, who grew up in New York City, wanted to blow up as many commuters 

as possible on the Manhattan subway system. Zazi was trained by a! Qaeda to make a 

T A TP bomb in Pakistan, and during the summer of 2009, he made bulk purchases of hair 

bleach in suburban Denver and set up his bomb factory in a nearby motel room. He 

mixed and cooked batches of hair bleach in the kitchenette of the motel. On the night of 

September 6, 2009, as he labored over the stove, Zazi sent several emails to an a! Qaeda 

operative "Ahmad." The emails contained a well-known a! Qaeda code for a terrorist 

operation being imminent -- "the marriage is ready" -- and also asked for specific 

instructions "right away, please" about the other ingredients needed for the explosive. 

Zazi had mastered the manufacture of the hair bleach-based bombs but had forgotten the 

The Brits tipped off American officials that the email account belonged to an a! Qaeda 

operative living in Pakistan, and the U.S. National Security Agency began monitoring it. 

Once the FBI realized there was an a! Qaeda recruit living in Denver making T A TP 

bombs, it intensively monitored Zazi. He traveled from Denver to New York to carry out 

5 
78 

his plan around the eighth anniversary of 9/11 and was soon arrested, as were two of his 

co-conspirators .. 

More successful for a! Qaeda was the cell of British suicide bombers who carried out the 

"7/7'' London bombings on July 7, 2005. They used their training to heat up and distill 

ordinary hair bleach, combining it with other ingredients to make effective bombs. 

Making these bleach-based bombs was a complex process, not something that could be 

picked up by reading bomb-making rcipes on the Internet. The ringleader had received 

bomb-making training from a! Qaeda in Pakistan. In an apartment the London plotters 

had rented to serve as their bomb factory, they mixed the chemicals. As they brewed up 

batches, they wore disposable masks because of the high toxicity of the materials, which 

bleached their dark hair a noticeably lighter color. They installed a commercial-grade 

refrigerator in the apartment to keep the highly unstable bomb ingredients cold. They 

built four devices. 

Fifty-two commuters were killed when the bombs detonated on three London 

Underground trains and a double-decker bus. Two weeks after the attacks, on July 21, 

2005, a second wave of hydrogen peroxide-based bombs was set off in London, this one 

organized by a cell of Somali and Eritrean men who were first -generation immigrants to 

the UK. Fortunately, while four bombs were set to detonate on July 21 --three on the 

Underground and one on a bus, mimicking the attacks two weeks earlier-- their faulty 

construction rendered them harmless. 

Hydrogen peroxide-based bombs would again be the signature of a cell of British 

Pakistanis who plotted to bring down seven passenger jets flying to the United States and 

Canada from the UK during the summer of 2006. The plotters were intent on committing 

suicide during the attacks on the passenger jets. Six of them made "martyrdom" 

videotapes recovered by British investigators. British authorities were tracking the 

ringleader intensively in the summer of 2006. When he was arrested in east London on 

August 10, 2006, he was carrying a memory stick storing flight plans for United Airlines, 

American Airlines and Air Canada jets flying from the UK to destinations such as 

Chicago, Washington, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Montreal and Toronto. Investigators 

later found several large bottles containing concentrated hydrogen peroxide that one of 

the conspirators had dumped in a London park. The plotters were planning to bring the 

liquid explosives disguised as soft drinks in hand luggage onto the flights they had 

targeted, together with other innocuous-looking items that could act as triggers. They had 

planned to assemble their bombs on the planes. 

It was this plot that triggered airlines to ban almost all liquids being taken on flights. 

As French investigators try to piece together what happened in Paris, they will surely be 

looking for where the T A TP bombs were assembled, whether in an apartment as the 717 

plotters did, or in a motel room as Zazi did, or in some other location. They will also be 

trying to determine who built the bombs. Were they built by the terrorists themselves, as 

was the case with the 7/7 plotters, or did someone else build them? And where did the 

training to build the bombs happen? Was it in France, or in Syria, or in some other 

6 
79 

location? These are some of the questions that, hopefully, the investigation will 

eventually unearth. 

After 9/11, the New York Police Department initiated Operation Nexus, in which cops 

visited thousands of stores in the city and the wider Northeast region that sold or 

distributed materials that could be used in a terrorist operation. It could be anything from 

pipes useful for pipe bombs to the explosive "black powder" that can be found in 

fireworks. Each storeowner would be told, "If you see in an anomaly in a purchase, let us 

know." 

Najibullah Zazi was just such an anomaly, as he was a dark-haired, bearded AfghanAmerican man in his 20s who bought six bottles of Clairoxide hair bleach during one 

shopping trip at a store in a Denver suburb. Zazi returned to the store a month later and 

purchased another dozen bottles of Ms. Kay Liquid, which is also a peroxide-based hair 

bleach. It's that kind of bulk purchase of hydrogen peroxide that should trigger a 

suspicious activity report in the U.S. and other Western countries. 

The bomb smuggled aboard the Metrojet flight by what was almost certainly an 

insider at Sharm el-Sheikh airport in Sinai raises the question: Could such an 

insider attack happen in the West? Short answer: It isn't out of the question. 

Five American citizens involved in serious terrorist crimes since 9/11 have worked at 

major U.S. airports in a variety of capacities. Add to that the 73 airport workers in the 

United States with access to secure areas who only six months ago were identified by 

officials at the Department of Homeland Security as being in a federal database of 

possible terrorists, and a troubling picture emerges. (Those 73 workers were in a 

classified database that the TSA could not normally access.) 

The five American terrorists who have worked at major American airports were recruited 

by variously ISIS; the a! Qaeda-affiliated Somali terrorist group, al-Shabaab; a virulent 

"homegrown" jihadist cell based in California; and another such group in New York City. 

In the years after 9111, Kevin Lamar James was jailed in California's Folsom prison 

where he formed a group that he conceived of as "al Qaeda in America." James recruited 

others to help him with his plans. One of them was 21-year-old Gregory Vernon 

Patterson who had recently worked at a duty-free shop at Los Angeles International 

Airport (LAX). James thought that Patterson's inside knowledge of LAX would be 

helpful for his plans and when he made a list of potential targets in California, James 

listed LAX. James' crew planned to attack around the fourth anniversary of 9/11. They 

financed their activities by sticking up gas stations and their plans only came to light 

during the course of a routine investigation of a gas station robbery by police in Torrance, 

California, who found documents that laid out the group's plans for jihadist mayhem. 

Members of the California cell are now serving long prison terms. At the time, senior FBI 

official John Miller said, "Of all of the terrorist plots since 9/11, it is probably the one 

that operationally was closest to actually occurring." 

7 
80 

On October 29, 2008, Shirwa Ahmed became one of the first Americans ever to conduct 

a suicide attack anywhere in the world when he was recruited by al-Shabaab to drive a 

truck loaded with explosives into a government building in Somalia, blowing himself up 

and killing 20 other people. Ahmed graduated from high school in Minneapolis in 2003 

and then worked at the Minneapolis airport pushing passengers in wheelchairs; it was 

during this period that he became increasingly religious and was recruited by al-Shabaab. 

Abdisalan Hussein Ali became a suicide bomber for al-Shabaab in Somalia in 2011 and 

had also worked at the Minneapolis airport, in a Caribou coffee shop. Similarly, 

Abdirahmaan Muhumed, who was killed in 2014 while fighting for ISIS in Syria, had 

worked at the Minneapolis airport, where he had a security clearance that gave him 

access to the tarmac and to planes. 

The problem of militants working at airports and airlines is not peculiar to the States. In 

the past decade, British citizens working at Heathrow and at British Airways have 

conspired with members of a! Qaeda. In the United Kingdom, British Airways IT expert 

Rajib Karim, 31, conspired with a! Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen to place a bomb on a U.S.-

bound plane. In 2010, one of the leaders of a! Qaeda's Yemeni affiliate, Anwar alAwlaki. wrote an email to Karim asking, "Is it possible to get a package or a person with 

a package on board a flight heading to the US?" Karim replied: "I do not know much 

about US I can work with the bros to find out the possibilities of shipping a package to a 

US-bound plane." Karim had applied for cabin-crew training before he was arrested and 

was sentenced to 30 years in 2011. In 2006, an employee at a shop in Heathrow working 

on the "airside" post-security section of the airport provided advice about the security 

conditions to self-proclaimed a! Qaeda terrorist Sohail Qureshi, who was convicted of 

multiple terrorism charges. 

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced in June that he was 

implementing new measures to "address the potential insider threat" by mandating 

biannual background checks for workers at U.S. airports, while also requiring airports to 

reduce the number of access points to secured areas and to increase randomized screening 

of airport employees. These are welcome developments but the real vulnerability is the 

two hundred or so airports around the world that have direct flights to the States. 

2. Who are the Westerners being recruited by ISIS? 

Until the Paris attacks, French citizen Mehdi Nemmouche was the only case of a Western 

tighter in Syria accused of returning to conduct a deadly terror attack in the West-- the 

May 24, 2014, shooting at the Jewish Museum in Brussels, Belgium, that left four people 

dead. Nemmouche has been extradited to Belgium. where he awaits trial. 

Two major factors place Europe at far greater risk of "returnee" violence from veterans of 

the Syrian conf1ict than is the case in the United States: the much larger number of 

European militants who have gone to fight in Syria and the existence of more developed 

jihadist networks in Europe. 

8 
81 

France has supplied more fighters to the Syrian conflict than any other Western 

country. In September, Prime Minister Manuel Valls told Parliament that 1,800 French 

citizens have been involved injihadist networks worldwide-- almost all of whom were 

drawn to the Syrian war. Nine months earlier, Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve 

estimated that 185 militants had returned to France from Syria. Of those who had 

returned, he said 82 were in jail and 36 were under other forms of judicial control. 

Gennan security services report that 720 Gennans have left for Syria. and they estimate 

that l 00 have been killed there, while another 180 have returned to Germany. Last year, 

the Belgian Foreign Ministry released ligures that up to 350 Belgians had left to fight in 

Syria. More than 700 British citizens have left fc1r Syria, with about half estimated to 

have returned to the United Kingdom, according to British officials. In January, 

Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop placed the number of Australians fighting 

abroad at !80, with 20 having died in Syria. 

I. So who exactly are the estimated 4,500 Westerners who have been drawn to join 

ISIS and other militant groups in Syria? To provide some answers to that question, 

New America collected information about 474 individuals from 25 Western countries 

who have been reported by credible news sources as having left their home countries to 

join ISIS or other Sunni jihadist groups in Syria or Iraq. The Western fighters drawn to 

Syria and Iraq represent a new demographic profile, quite different than that of other 

Western militants who fought in Afghanistan in the 1980s or Bosnia in the 1990s. 

First, women are represented in unprecedented numbers. One in seven of the 

militants in New America's data set are women. Women were rarely, if at all, represented 

in previous jihadist eont1iets. While Westcm women are not going to fight in the war in 

Syria, they are playing supporting roles, often marrying front-line fighters and sometimes 

working as a kind of police officer enforcing ISIS's draconian laws. They are women like 

Sally Jones, 44, from the United Kingdom. who took her 10-year-old son to Syria in 

2013, and Emilie Konig, 31, one of the tirst women to leave for Syria, who left France 

and her two children behind in 2012 to join her husband there. The U.S. State Department 

says both women have encouraged terrorist attacks in their native countries, and it 

officially desi!,Snatcd both of them terrorists in September. 

Second, the recruits are young. The average age of Western volunteers drawn to the 

Syrian jihad is 24. For female recmits, the average age is 21. Almost a fifth are teenagers, 

more than a third of whom are female. New America has documented an astonishing 80 

cases of Western teenagers who have traveled to the war in Syria. More than a third of 

these teenagers are girls. Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of Germany's domestic security 

agency, said. for instance. in March that nine female German teens had left for Syria. 

That same month, ISIS released a video of a French boy shooting a Palestinian hostage in 

the forehead. 

Third, many have familial ties to jihadism. More than a qumier of Western fighters 

have a familial connection to jihad, whether through relatives who are also fighting in 

Syria m1d Iraq, through marriage or through some link to other jihads or terrorist attacks. 

For instance the father of British ISIS recruit Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary is Adel Abdel 

9 
82 

Bary, who was convicted in New York for his role in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in 

Kenya and Tanzania. Of those with a familial link, one third are through marriage, many 

of them marriages between female recruits and male fighters conducted after they arrive 

in Syria. Three-fifths of Western fighters with familial ties to jihad have a relative who 

has also left for Syria. For example, the Deghayes family in the United Kingdom had 

three sons, ages 16 to 20, fighting in Syria together. 

Fourth, the Americans drawn to the Syrian jihad -- 250 who have tried or have 

succeeded in getting to Syria-· share the same profile as the Western fighters 

overall: Women are well-represented, and the volunteers are young, and many have 

family ties to jihad. One in six of the Americans drawn to the Syrian conflict are 

women. The average age of the American militants is 25, with a fifth still in their teens. 

Almost a fifth of the American militants have a familial connection to jihad. The 

American recmits are, perhaps unsurprisingly, particularly active online: Around nine out 

of I 0 American militants are active in online jihadist circles. 

Fifth, for Western militants, the wars engulfing Syria and Iraq have often proyed 

deadly. Almost half of the male fighters and 6% of the female recruits have been killed 

in Syria or Iraq. 

Sixth, few of the Western fighters who have traveled to Syria and Iraq are in 

government custody. Only one-seventh of Western fighters in New America's data set 

are in custody, and more than two-fifths of individuals are still at large. (As indicated 

above, around half the Western militants were killed in the conflicts in Syria or Iraq.) 

SeYenth, the most popular route to Syria is through Turkey. Almost half of the 

Western foreign fighters made their way to Syria or Iraq via Turkey. Only one of the 

militants is documented as attempting to use an alternative route via Lebanon. For the 

rest of the Western militants, it's not clear from the public record how they arrived in 

Syria. 

Eighth, where an affiliation can be determined, the majority of the Western fighters 

have joined ISIS: Three-fifths have joined ISIS, while only a tenth have joined al 

Qaeda's affiliate in Syria, known as al Nusra Front, and one-seventh have joined other 

smaller militant groups. 

2. How these Westerners are recruited: Propaganda and motivations. Who is 

inspiring these militants to give up their often-comfortable lives in the West for the rigors 

of the war zone in Syria? Based on court records and press reports, New America has 

identified several Western militants acting as online recruiters. Among them are a 

number of Americans. For instance, Abdi Nur, a 20-year-old from Minnesota, allegedly 

took on the role of online recruiter after leaving for Syria in the summer of 2014. A 

complaint filed in November that charged six Minnesota men with trying to go to join 

ISIS accuses Nur of acting as an online recruiter and providing encouragement and 

advice to the men via Kik and other social media platfonns from Syria. Another is Hoda 

Muthana, a 20-year-old American woman !rom Alabama. was identified bv BuzzFecd as 

the individual behind the Twitter account Umm Jihad, which encouraged militants to 

10 
83 

leave for Syria. 

ISIS has disseminated two online guidebooks to encourage its Western recruits. In 2015, 

ISIS published its how-to guides Hijrah and "How to Survive in the West." Hijrah 

provided potential fighters with detailed packing lists -- advice on how to get to Turkey 

and dupe customs officials into issuing visas for the country; Twitter accounts oftighters 

living in Syria who can facilitate their travel; and even suggestions for recruits to assess 

their personality strengths and weaknesses before leaving home to prepare themselves 

better for jihad. 

"How to Survive in the West" is a guide on how to "be a secret agent" in a Western 

country, giving readers tips on the making of Molotov cocktails, bombs and cell phone 

detonators; hiding weapons in secret compartments of vehicles, in the same fashion as 

gangs; and how to identify and evade police surveillance, even suggesting that readers 

watch the Jason Bourne t1lm series for tips on employing evasion tactics. 

What motivates many of these Western fighters to travel to a dangerous war zone with 

which most have no prior cmmection? A review of both ISIS propaganda and reporting 

on the individual cases in New America's data set suggests the answer is a mishmash of 

motivations that ISIS has picked up on as part of its recruiting strategy, including 

opposition to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, religious invocations of the spiritual 

benefit of participating in jihad, the belief that religious duty requires living under ISIS's 

so-called caliphate. anger and alienation from Western society, and for some the "cool" 

factor of participating in a war. 

Here are the rationales for joining ISIS that are provided by a couple of ISIS's alleged 

American recruits: Abdi Nur, the 20-year-old Minnesotan, tweeted: "Jihad Js The 

Greatest Honor For Man So Come On And Join Dawia Ya Iqwa (you brothers of the 

Islamic State])." Nur later explained to his sister: "[fi didn't care I wouldn't have left but I 

want jannah (paradise) for all of us." Authorities say Chicago teen Han1zah Khan left a 

letter for his parents before attempting to travel to Syria in 2014, explaining that "there is 

an obligation to 'migrate' to the 'Islamic State." He was charged with material support of 

ISIS and has pleaded not guilty. 

3. The threat to the United States by ISIS's American recruits. Four years into the 

Syrian civil war, little evidence has emerged to support the notion that returning 

fighters from Syria pose a great threat to the United States. In the United States, there 

has only been one case of a fighter returning from Syria and allegedly plotting an attack. 

Abdirahman Sheik Mohamud, 22, of Columbus, Ohio, left for Syria in April 2014 and 

fought there before returning home around two months later. The government alleges that 

a cleric in Syria told Mohamud that he should return to the United States to conduct an 

aet of terrorism and that he discussed some kind of plan (with an informant) to kill 

American soldiers at a military base in Texas. He has pleaded not guilty to a charge of 

providing material support to a terrorist group. 

Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in March, Director ofNational Intelligence 

11 
84 

James Clapper said that about 40 individuals had returned from Syria. "We have since 

found they went for humanitarian purposes or some other reason that don't relate to 

plotting," he said. 

We identified 23 Americans who actually reached Syria, 46 individuals who attempted or 

plotted to travel to Syria but were unsuccessful in doing so, and 14 who provided support 

to others fighting or seeking to tight in Syria. 

Instead of being a launch pad for attacks at home, Syria turned out to be a graveyard for 

the few Americans who made it to the war zone. Of the 23 individuals who reached 

Syria, nine died there. For instance, Floridian Moner Abu Salha died conducting a suicide 

bombing in northern Syria last year, and Douglas McAuthur McCain was killed lighting 

for ISIS. Nine of the Americans who reached Syria remain at large, while five American 

fighters who returned to the United States from Syria were taken into custody. 

Rather than being an easy target for ISIS recruits, the United States benefits from a 

series of layered defenses that make returning and plotting a sophisticated attack 

undetected quite difficult. It takes more than a plane ticket for a returning fighter to 

conduct a sophisticated attack: they also have to gather arms, conduct surveillance, and 

carry out the attack undetected. In assessing the threat posed by returning American 

fighters, it is worth putting the current Syrian conflict into historical perspective. The 

historical comparison most people are aware of is the Afghan war against the Soviets and 

the ensuring civil war, which helped launch Osarna bin Laden's al-Qaeda. Though an 

important cautionary tale, much has changed since then that makes it a weak comparison 

for how "blowback" from Syria might affect the United States.2 For example, on 9/11, 

there were 16 people on the U.S. "no fly" list. Today, there are more than 48,000 people. 

In 2001, there were 32 Joint Terrorism Task Force "fusion centers," where multiple law 

enforcement agencies work together to chase down leads and build terrorism cases. Now 

there are 104 centers.3 A decade ago, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 

National Counterterrorism Center, Transportation Security Administration, Northern 

Command, and Cyber Command didn't exist. In 2014, all of these new post-9111 

institutions make it much harder for terrorists to operate in the United States. The U.S. 

intelligence budget also grew dramatically after 9/11, with Congress giving the 

government substantial resources with which to improve its counterterrorism capabilities. 

In 2013, the United States allocated $72 billion to intelligence collection and other covert 

activities.4 Before 9/11, the budget was around one third ofthat figure: $26 billion. 

Perhaps of most relevance to the issue of returning fighters is that prior to 9/11, the U.S. 

law enforcement community demonstrated little interest in investigating or prosecuting 

individuals who traveled abroad to tight in an overseas jihad. Today, the U.S. 

government considers such persons to be a serious concern and tracks their activities. 

2 The section below is drawn from Peter Bergen et al. "2014 Jihadist Terrorism and Other Conventional Threats," Bipartisan Policy 

Center, September 2014. 

'Federal Bureau of Investigation. "'Protecting America from Terrorist Attack: Our Joint Terrorism Task Forces." Federal Bureau of 

Investigation. Accessed August 5, 2013. http://www.fbi.gov/about~us/investigate/terrorism/terrorismjttfs . 

.llntelligence Resource Program. "Intelligence Budget Data." Federation of American Scientists. Accessed August 25, 2014. 

http :/ /fas. orglirp/budgetl. 

12 
85 

A post-9111 American fighter flow to jihadist groups abroad that sparked fears but turned 

out not to be a real threat to the United States was Al-Shabaab's recruitment of American 

fighters to wage war in Somalia. According to a review by New America, no American 

fighter who fought in the conflict in Somalia returned to plot an attack in the United 

States. Instead, about one third of the individuals known to have traveled to fight in 

Somalia died there, either as suicide bombers or on the battlefield, while others were 

taken into custody upon their return. 5 

There are, however, worrisome cases of returning militants to the United States since 

9/11 that attempted serious attacks. The United States' experience with Americans 

fighting or training in Afghanistan and Pakistan provides an illustration of what a more 

serious returnee threat might look like. Najibullah Zazi, Adis Medunjanin, and Zarein 

Ahmedzay, who all grew up in New York City, traveled to Pakistan, where they ended up 

receiving training from al-Qaeda, and were sent back to the United States where they 

were part of a serious plot to bomb the New York City subway in the fall of 2009. On 

May I, 2010, Connecticut-based Faisal Shahzad, who was trained in bomb-making 

techniques in Pakistan by the Pakistani Taliban, left a car bomb undetected in New York 

City's Times Square that failed to properly explode. 

Acts of violence by Americans inspired by, but with no direct connection to the 

terrorist groups in Syria, pose a more immediate challenge than attacks by 

returning fighters from Syria. As FBI Director James Corney noted in September 2014 

while referring to the December 2013 arrest of Terry Loewen, who was accused of 

plotting an attack on Wichita Airport in Kansas after being radicalized online: "We have 

made it so hard for people to get into this country, bad guys, but they can enter as a 

photon and radicalize somebody in Wichita, Kansas." At the time, Corney also noted that 

ISIS lacked the capability for a sophisticated attack in the United States. 6 

On May 3, 2015, the United States saw its first actual attack inspired by ISIS along the 

lines of similar ISIS-inspired attacks in Ottawa, Copenhagen, and Paris. Two men were 

killed by police after opening fire at a contest to draw cartoons of the Prophet 

Mohammed in Garland, Texas, organized by the American Freedom Defense Initiative. 

The event featured right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who had been named on an 

al-Qaeda hit list. One of shooters, Elton Simpson, had previously been convicted of 

making a false statement to the FBI regarding plans to travel to Somalia. Before 

conducting the attack Simpson tweeted his allegiance to ISIS. 7 Simpson, a 30-year-old 

resident of Phoenix, Arizona, who was born in Illinois and converted to Islam during his 

youth, was joined in the attack by his roommate Nadir Soofi, a 34-year-old who was born 

in Garland. 

'Bergen, Peter and David Sterman. "ISIS Threat to U.S. Mostly Hype." CNN. 9/5/2014. 

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/05/opinionlbergen~sterman-isis-threat-hypc/. 

6 Kendall, Brent and Jay Solomon. ''FBI Cites Online Terror Recruiting, Training, Damps SubwaywPiot Claim," Wall Street Journal. 

9/25/2014. http://www. wsj. com/articles/fbi-dircctor-cites-onl ine-terror-recruiting-training-damps-subway-plot-claim-l41168 8762. 7 Ahmed, Saeed, Ed Lavendcra. and Joe Sutton. "Garland, Texa'i, shooting suspect linked himselfto ISIS in tweets" CNN 5/4/2015. 

http://www .cnn.coml20 15/05/04/us/garland-mohammed·drawing~ontest~shooting/ 

13 
86 

The shooting in Texas is not a lone case. While the United States has seen only one 

possible case of a domestic attack plot by a returned fighter from Syria, it has seen a 

number of alleged Syria-related plots to conduct violence that were inspired by the 

propaganda put out by ISIS. For instance, in March, the United States unsealed charges 

against Hasan Edmonds, a 22-year-old member of the National Guard, and his cousin 

Jonas Edmonds, alleging that Hasan Edmonds had sought to travel to fight with ISIS and 

that they had plotted to have Jonas Edmonds conduct an attack against a military facility. 

The plot was monitored by an undercover officer. 8 

4. Threats to the United States by non-American ISIS recruits. Many fighters from 

countries other than the United States have traveled to fight in Syria and could pose a 

potential threat to the United States. So far we have not seen a case of a foreign tighter 

trom another country traveling to the United States to conduct an attack. However, the 

large number offoreign fighters traveling to fight in Syria from other countries magnifies 

the potential threat of an infiltration attack, especially given the high numbers of foreign 

fighters from countries that enjoy the Visa Waiver Program with the United States, such 

as Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. 

Tracking the many foreign fighters from Western countries who have gone to Syria and 

who have returned to the West poses a greater challenge, given their larger numbers. than 

tracking the handful of returning American fighters. Each French militant placed under 

surveillance requires 25 agents to maintain round-the-clock monitoring, and the strain on 

resources produced by ever increasing numbers of militants who need to be monitored 

was in part behind the failure to maintain surveillance of the Kouachi brothers, who 

conducted the attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris earlier this year. It would 

take many thousands of agents to monitor each of the more than a I ,000 Frenchmen 

reportedly involved in the Syrian war, and France simply doesn't have that kind of 

manpower. The fact that a French prosecutor says that one of the Paris attackers on 

November 13 was a French national who was known to police is an indicator of how 

dit1icult tracking all of these militants has proven to be. 

5. ISIS expands it reach. ISIS controls territory in Syria and Iraq that by some estimates 

is the size of the United Kingdom, and it lords over millions of people in both countries. 

The group has also secured pledges of allegiance from two dozen militant organizations 

from around the Muslim world, including in the Sinai and Egypt's neighbor Libya, while 

around 10 other groups have declared some form of solidarity with ISIS. The key to 

ISIS's success is not the group's military strength- ISIS in Syria and Iraq may number 

only about 20,000 to 30,000 fighters- but the weaknesses of the regimes where the 

group is doing well. 

Think of the Sunni militant group ISIS as a pathogen that preys on weak hosts in 

the Muslim world. In fact, there is something of a law: The weaker a Muslim state 

the stronger will be the presence of ISIS or like-minded groups. 

8 "US Army National Guard Soldier and his Cousin Arrested for Conspiring to Support Terrorism (ISIL).'' Department of Justice. 

3/16/15. http://www_jmaice.gov /opafprfus~m m" ~national-guard-st•ldie-r-and -hi.':.~cou.<., in-arrestt""d-consniring--.upp;Jrt -ttrrorism-isil. 

14 
87 

In 2014 ISIS seized huge swaths oflraq, exploiting the fact that the country had been in a 

civil war for more than a decade and the Iraqi government had pursued a policy of 

excluding Sunnis from power. ISIS is one of the most powerful players in Syria because 

the country has been embroiled in a civil war since 2011 and the regime ofBashar alAssad has imposed a reign of terror on its Sunni population, including the use of 

chemical weapons and widespread torture. For the moment, ISIS and the countries allied 

against it, including the United States, have come to something of a stalemate in Iraq and 

Syria. 

ISIS also has a significant foothold in Libya because the country is embroiled in a civil 

war, which was instigated by the U.S.-led overthrow of Libyan dictator Moammar 

Gadhafi four years ago. (This move may turn out to be the most significant foreign policy 

blunder of the Obama administration, as there was no serious American plan for what 

would follow Gadhafi- the same negligence that had characterized George W. Bush's 

overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.) ISIS is growing in Egypt because a military 

dictator who seized power in a coup leads the country, and he has brutally quashed all 

forms of dissent, including criminalizing the Muslim Brotherhood, which has many 

millions of members in Egypt and had formed the previous government. It's fertile soil 

for ISIS, which had done particularly well in the Sinai, leading an insurgency there that 

has killed hundreds. 

When ISIS first gained significant ground in Iraq and Syria in 2014, it focused almost 

entirely on its actions there and encouraged its overseas followers to join the jihad. 

Writing in the third issue of Dabiq, its English-language online magazine, an ISIS writer 

asserted, "This life of jihad is not possible until you pack and move to the Khilafah," 

meaning to leave your home and travel to ISIS's areas of control in Iraq and Syria. 

In the past weeks, ISIS has shifted its strategy, attacking on a large scale outside of 

Iraq and Syria. The group claimed responsibility for the downing of the Russian 

Metro jet carrying 224 passengers and crew on October 31 in the Sinai in Egypt. The 

Russians have in the past 24 hours finally conceded what was obvious: the plane was 

brought down by a bomb. Two weeks after the Metrojet bombing the team ofiSIS 

militants attacked at multiple locations in Paris. 

6. How to Defeat ISIS: Twelve Action Items: 

I. Enlist defectors ti·om ISIS to tell their stories publicly. Nothing is more powerful than 

hearing from former members of the group that ISIS is not creating an Islamist utopia in 

the areas it controls, but a hell on earth. The flow of "foreign fighters" to ISIS from 

around the Muslim world is estimated to be about 1,000 a month. Reducing that flow is a 

key to reducing ISIS manpower. 

15 
88 

2. Amplify voices such as that of the ISIS opposition group Raqga is Being Slaughtered 

Silentlv, which routinely posts photos online of bread lines in Raqqa, the de facto capital 

ofiSIS in northern Syria, and writes about electricity shortages in the city. This will help 

to undercut ISIS propaganda that it is a truly functioning state. 

3. Amplify the work of former jihadists like the Canadian Mubin Shaikh, who intervenes 

directly with young people online who he sees are being recruited virtually by ISIS. 

4. Support the work of clerics such as Imam Mohamed Magid ofNorthern Virginia, who 

has personally convinced a number of American Muslims seduced by ISIS that what the 

group is doing is against Islam. 

5. Keep up pressure on social media companies such as Twitter to enforce their own 

Terms of Use to take down any ISIS material that encourages violence. Earlier this year, 

Twitter quietly took down 2,000 accounts used by ISIS supporters, but the group 

continues to use Twitter and other social media platforms to propagate its message. 

6. Keep up the military campaign against ISIS. The less the ISIS "caliphate" exists as a 

physical entity, the less the group can claim it is the "Islamic State" that it purports to be. 

That should involve more U.S. Special Forces on the ground embedded with Iraqi and 

other coalition forces and more U.S. forward air controllers calling in close air support 

strikes for those forces. 

7. Applaud the work that the Turks have already done to tamp down the foreign 

fighter flow through their country to ISIS in neighboring Syria, and get them to do 

more. Turkey, which had long been criticized by Western countries for allowing foreign 

fighters to move through its territory on their way to Syria, has started to clamp down on 

that traflic into Syria. Those efforts by the Turks are paying off, according to ISIS itself. 

In early 2015, ISIS posted advice in one of its English-language online publications to 

would-be foreign fighters, saying, "It is important to know that the Turkish intelligence 

agencies are in no way friends of the Islamic State [ISIS]." 

8. Provide "off ramps" to young ISIS recruits with no history of violence, so that instead 

of serving long prison terms for attempting to join ISIS -as they presently do in the 

United States -they would instead serve long periods of supervised probation. This will 

help families that presently face a hard choice: If they suspect a young family member is 

radicalizing and they go to the FBI, that person can end up in prison for up to 15 years on 

charges of attempting to support ISIS; but if they don't go to the authorities and their 

child ends up traveling to Syria, he or she may well end up being killed there. Providing 

off-ramps would offer families a way out of this almost impossible choice. 

9. Educate Muslim-American parents about the seductive messages that ISIS is 

propagating online. 

I 0. Relentlessly hammer home the message that ISIS positions itself as the defender of 

Muslims, but its victims are overwhelmingly fellow Muslims. 

16 
89 

11. Build a database of all the foreign fighters who have gone to Syria to fight for ISIS 

and Nusra. This is one of the recommendations of the House Homeland Security 

Committee's September 2015 report on foreign fighters in Syria and it is a very good one. 

How can you prevent an attack by returning foreign fighters if you are not cognizant of 

their names and links to ISIS? Right now INTERPOL has a list of some 5,000 foreign 

fighters, but that is simply dwarfed by the estimated 30,000 foreign fighters who have 

gone to fight in Syria. 

12. Stay in Afghanistan beyond 2016. One only has to look at the debacle that has 

unfolded in Iraq after the withdrawal of U.S. troops at the end of2011 to have a preview 

of what could take place in an Afghanistan without some kind of residual American 

presence. Without American forces in the country, there is a strong possibility 

Afghanistan could host a reinvigorated Tali ban allied to a reinvigorated ai-Qaeda- not to 

mention ISIS, which is also gaining a foothold in the region. Earlier this month U.S. and 

Afghan forces in Kandahar province destroyed "probably the largest" al-Qaeda training 

camp discovered during the 14-year Afghan War, according to Gen. John Campbell, the 

U.S. commander in Afghanistan. This U.S. military presence in Afghanistan doesn't have 

to be large, nor does it need to play a combat role, but U.S. troops should remain in 

Afghanistan to advise the Afghan army and provide intelligence support past 2016. 

17 
90 

Testimony 

The Implications of the Paris Terrorist 

Attack for American Strategy in Syria and 

Homeland Security 

Brian Michael Jenkins 

RAND Office of External Affairs 

CT-445 

November 2015 

Testimony submitted before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on November 19,2015 

This product is part of the RAND Corporation testimony series. RAND testimonies record testimony presented by RAND associates 

to federal, state, or local l-egislative committees; government-appointed commissions and panels; and private review and oversight 

bodies. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address 

the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of 

its research dients and sponsors. RAND® is a registered trademark. 
91 

Brian Michael Jenkins1 

The RAND Corporation 

The Implications of the Paris Terrorist Attack for American Strategy 

in Syria and Homeland Securitl 

Before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate 

November 19, 2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, distinguished members of the Committee, thank 

you for inviting me to address this urgent issue. 

I would like to be able to report that, in response to the terrorist attacks in Paris, all of the 

perpetrators have been identified and apprehended, they will be executed promptly, airstrikes 

have smashed the Islamic State, and an event such as this will never happen again. 

The reality, however, is that this conflict is likely to go on, there are no quick or easy solutions, 

and terrorists will attempt further attacks. 

This hearing was urgently called following the November 13 terrorist attack in Paris. 

Investigations are continuing in France while we are witnessing the consequences of that attack 

in Syria. Let me offer some quick observations: 

The fighting in Syria and Iraq will continue. 

Right now, the situation is at a military stalemate. By stalemate, I mean that the insurgents 

arrayed against the Syrian government and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)3 forces 

1 The opinions and conclusions expressed in this testimony are the author's alone and should not be 

interpreted as representing those of RAND or any of the sponsors of its research. This product is part of the 

RAND Corporation testimony series. RAND testimonies record testimony presented by RAND associates to 

federal, state, or local legislative committees; government-appointed commissions and panels; and private 

review and oversight bodies. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective 

analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the 

world. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. 

2 This testimony is available for free download at http://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies/CT445.html. 3 The organization's name transliterates from Arabic as ai-Dawlah al-lslamiyah fi al-'lraq wa a I-Sham 

(abbreviated as Da'ish or DAESH). In the West, it is commonly referred to as the Islamic State of Iraq and 

the Levant (ISIL), the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (both 

abbreviated as ISIS), or simply as the Islamic State (IS). Arguments abound as to which is the 

most accurate translation, but here we refer to the group as ISIL. 
92 

in Iraq cannot overthrow governments in Damascus or Baghdad, but for the foreseeable future, 

neither government will be able to restore its authority throughout national territory. 

Sectarian and ethnic divisions now drive the conflicts, which have become an existential 

contest for all of the local parties-it is a fight to the death or, at least, exhaustion. 

Syria and Iraq are now effectively partitioned-Iraq into relatively homogenous Shia, Sunni, 

and Kurdish zones and Syria into a messier mosaic. This partition is likely to persist. 

Foreign powers have significant stakes in the conflicts, but competing interests. Absent 

major military investments, outsiders cannot guarantee the victory of local allies. 

The world will be dealing with the fallout of this conflict for years to come. 

Such fallout includes a continuing terrorist threat, returning foreign fighters, and a deluge of 

refugees. 

ISIL continues to exhort its affiliate groups and individual followers abroad to carry out terrorist 

attacks on its behalf and has been involved in a number of terrorist plots. 

ISIL's ideology continues to exert a powerful pull. The American-led coalition bombing 

campaign in Syria and Iraq, along with ground offensives by Iraqi government forces and Kurdish 

fighters, have recaptured some territory from ISIL, but the number of individuals joining or 

planning to join ISIL has not diminished. 

ISIL is calling on more to come. It offers believers what it portrays as an authentic Islamic state, 

while its advertised atrocities promise opportunities for unlimited violence. 

ISIL portrays its struggle in apocalyptic terms as the final showdown between believers and 

infidels. This encourages extreme action and individual sacrifice. It also serves a useful 

propaganda purpose in the Islamic State's current circumstances. ISIL is being bombed; many in 

its ranks are being killed. ISIL attempts to maintain the morale of its fighters by arguing that this 

suffering is foretold, that it is God's will, and that it is proof that ISIL is on the right side of the 

conflict. 

2 
93 

I suspect that as ISIS is put under increasing military pressure, we will see more references to the 

end of times and more calls to its supporters to carry out attacks, lest they be left behind and miss 

their shot at paradise. 

The volume of recruits and potential recruits is overwhelming authorities in Europe. While the 

number of Americans wanting to go to Syria has increased, it remains a fraction of the number of 

Europeans who are joining ISIL's cause. 

As a consequence of the destructive style of fighting, especially in Syria, 12 million people have 

been displaced, 8 million internally and 4 million fleeing the country. Another 4 million have fled or 

have been internally displaced in Iraq. 

Hundreds of thousands of these refugees have headed to Europe, raising fears that terrorists can 

hide among the refugee masses to gain entrance into a country. Thus far, we have seen little 

evidence of this, although one of the terrorists in the Paris attack may have arrived in Europe as a 

refugee. This is still being investigated. 

The terrorist attack in Paris offers some important takeaways. 

The Paris attack reminds us of the continuing terrorist threat, although we should not need 

reminding. AI Qaeda declared war on the United States nearly 20 years ago and continues to be 

dedicated to attacking the "far enemy"-that's us. The emergence of ISIL in 2012 has heightened 

the threat. In their online websites and through social media, both organizations continue to call 

on followers to attack American targets. 

Since 9111, there have been multiple terrorist attacks on American citizens abroad, attempts to 

bring down U.S.-bound airliners, and scores of homegrown terrorist plots. We don't like to use the 

term, but the United States is at war. 

The terrorists in Paris attacked soft targets-restaurants, a stadium, a nightclub where they knew 

they would encounter little or no security. This attack was all about the killing. People were the 

target. 

Terrorists almost always have the advantage. Theoretically, they can attack anything, 

anywhere, anytime. And governments cannot protect everything, everywhere, all the time. 

Roughly 80 percent of all terrorist attacks are carried out at locations where there are no security 

perimeters to penetrate, no armed guards to respond. 

3 
94 

The lethality of the attack in Paris reflects the determination of the attackers to kill 

wantonly, not tactical sophistication or combat skills. The attackers combined suicide 

bombers with armed assaults and hostage taking at multiple locations-a worst-case scenario for 

police response. As we have seen in the United States, a single determined shooter can cause 

havoc. Many deaths can occur in the first few minutes. Despite rapid response, casualties will 

likely run high. 

The Paris attack underscores the importance of intelligence. We do not know how a plot 

involving eight attackers, the acquisition of automatics weapons, and construction of seven 

suicide vests got past French authorities. Thousands of French fighters have gone to Syria, and 

some of them have returned. Thousands more are suspected of preparing to go. Others are most 

certainly planning attacks in France; several homegrown terrorist plots have been thwarted. The 

French intelligence services are being overwhelmed by the number of people they must keep 

under surveillance. 

France was targeted because ISIL was able to recruit the human assets-French and Belgian 

nationals-to carry out the attacks. The availability of terrorist recruits in France and Belgium 

reflects societal issues of isolated, marginalized, and alienated communities where 

extremist Ideologies can easily take root. This will take a long time to fix. 

The Paris attack may reflect a new threat configuration. The 9/11 attacks were centrally 

planned, directed, and supported. The original hijackers were sent to the United States with an 

agreed-upon plan. They communicated with al Qaeda's operational planners and received 

additional funds and later reinforcements. 

The Shoe bomber and Underwear bomber were lone operatives recruited and equipped to carry 

out their attacks on airlines headed to the United States. 

While al Qaeda taught Najibullah Zazi how to make explosive devices, he planned the attack to 

carry out suicide bombings on New York's subways. 

Responding to exhortations, self-radicalized homegrown terrorists-on their own initiatives-have 

plotted terrorist attacks. 

The investigation is ongoing, but the Paris attack reportedly involved a cell of French nationals 

with ISIL in Syria determined to carry on a terrorist campaign in France. They remotely recruited 

and assisted their own acquaintances in France and Belgium to carry out attacks. The ringmaster 

4 
95 

was in Syria. The assets were local residents, but some may have come from Syria. In other 

words, it was not solely a matter of homegrown terrorists, returning fighters, or direction from 

fellow nationals abroad, but a combination of all three. 

The Paris attacks have increased pressure on the United States to step up the fight in Syria and 

Iraq, but adjustments to strategy should be a matter of degrees, not fundamental course 

changes. 

The terrorist attack in Paris has understandably caused alarm beyond France and has renewed 

debate about America's strategy to fight terrorism. 

For some critics, the continuing chaos in Syria and Russia's intervention are the result of a 

vacuum created by American timidity. The Paris attack provides further proof that the current 

strategy of containment-and of what could be described as the "slow strangulation" of ISILcannot prevent ISIL from mounting a global terrorist campaign that threatens Europe and the 

United States. We need to be prepared for a terrorist backlash. 

On the opposite side of the debate, some Americans are convinced that the United States ought 

to disengage. They believe that the United States cannot, without a huge military investment, 

significantly affect the outcome of a nasty civil war, and that attempts to do so will only make 

matters worse, above all, bogging the United States down in another Middle East war while the 

country faces more-serious national security challenges elsewhere and even more-pressing 

domestic problems. 

My own view is that the rise of ISIL and a/ Qaeda in Syria and Iraq directly threaten U.S. security. 

Disengagement would be dangerous. The United states clearly has the power to do more 

militarily, but must keep cool and stay smart. The immediate threat posed by homegrown 

terrorists, returning foreign fighters, and terrorist infiltrators among Syrian refugees is real but 

manageable. We should not be provoked into measures that in the long run-and this has 

the potential to be a vel}' long run-could tum out to be counterproductive. 

Conventional American ground forces (with or without North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] 

allies) can shatter ISIL's military formations, although we should not underestimate the 

number of troops required or the friendly casualties that could come from dislodging ISIL 

from a dug-in defense of the urban areas it now holds. One need only look at how tough the 

fighting was for the Kurds taking Sinjar or for the Iraqis to take towns held by ISIL to understand 

that fighting an enemy that is determined to die in battle is a fundamentally different challenge. 

5 
96 

Breaking ISIL's military formations will not end ISIL's campaign, but will push ISIL's 

fighters underground where they continue their armed struggle as the jihadist insurgents did 

in the years following the American defeat of Saddam Hussein's army in 2003. America will still 

face a long-term pacification problem. For good reasons. American military commanders are 

not enthused about the prospect of seeing the armed forces tied down in another bloody and 

costly counterinsurgency campaign. 

The air campaign against ISIL can be intensified. In retaliation for the terrorist attacks, the 

French already have increased their operations, with more on the way. The United States has 

recently deployed more aircraft. But the issue is not just more airplanes, but identifying sufficient 

targets and being willing to increase the risk of collateral casualties and damage. Ruthlessness 

by itself is not much of a strategy. 

The United States can deploy additional special operations forces to assist non-jihadist 

formations, as it has done to support Kurdish fighters who have had some success in pushing 

back ISIL. The numbers involved are small. but can make a big difference in facilitating the 

sharing of intelligence, planning operations, coordinating air support, and facilitating re-supply. 

However, the other Syrian rebel formations have not yet proved to be a significant fighting force, 

and a strategy of more Americans on the ground comes with the risk of casualties and politically 

dangerous hostage situations. No option is risk free. 

The United States can begin to recruit a Sunni army, initially not to directly challenge ISIL on 

the battlefield, but instead to draw off those within ISIL's zone of influence who have little income 

now and face an even more desperate future as the coalition's air campaign destroys what 

remains of the Islamic State's economy-and who may end up in ISIL's ranks out of sheer 

hunger. This is competitive recruiting rather than open combat, but it is cheaper to pay 

soldiers than it is to hunt them down as enemies. 

Containing ISIL on the ground and protecting surrounding nations, especially Jordan and 

Saudi Arabia, should be a priority. ISIL's black flag flying over Mecca would have catastrophic 

consequences. 

Smashing ISIL on the ground will scatter its foreign fighters. As foreigners, they will not survive 

long in an underground resistance movement. Some of these fighters will return home or move 

on to other jihadist fronts to continue their armed struggle. 

6 
97 

Destroying the Islamic State will validate ISIL's Armageddon propaganda while further 

galvanizing its supporters abroad. 

Paradoxically, success against ISIL In Syria and Iraq may heighten the threat of terrorism 

beyond. As ISIL becomes more desperate, its support for terrorist operations abroad will 

increase. Some foreign fighters will come back seeking revenge for their defeat. ISIL supporters 

will want to prove the struggle is not lost. 

This is not to argue that leaving ISIL alone will bring peace-it will not-but rather to point out that 

future terrorist attacks cannot always be interpreted as evidence of a failing 

counterterrorist strategy in Syria. 

What we see taking place in the Middle East and Europe has direct implications for U.S. 

homeland security. 

Terrorist plots must be the operative presumption. That has been the case for years, but the 

current military effort in Syria could produce a surge in terrorist attacks outside of Syria. 

Surprises are almost guaranteed. What happened in Paris is shocking but not surprising, in the 

sense that we know France in particular has been under terrorist assault. Surprises and setbacks 

are a feature of all wars, and especially of conflicts of long duration. 

We should not overreact. It is difficult to stay on course. Americans do not excel at being 

phlegmatic. We are an impatient nation. We are heavyweight fighters looking for knockout blows 

in early rounds. To suggest anything less than that risks condemnation. 

We need to be prepared but also keep the threat to the United States in context. We 

suffered a horrific terrorist blow on 9/11, which was unprecedented in the annals of terrorism and 

has cast a long shadow. We have witnessed appalling terrorist attacks in Madrid, London, and 

elsewhere throughout the world-now Paris. No doubt, there will be more. This is the way of the 

world today. 

The United States is not Europe. Even though the number of Americans heading to Syria has 

increased, it remains a fraction of those going from France, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and 

Germany. 

7 
98 

Terrorist attempts and plots in the United States reveal no evidence of a deep reservoir of 

recruits. Most are one-off attempts by individuals or tiny conspiracies. There is little 

organizational connectivity between recent terrorist plots in the United States. Unlike the more 

turbulent 1970s, there have been no sustained campaigns of terrorism. 

The United States must be prepared for an array of terrorist attacks-mini-Mumbai scenarios like 

the one carried out in Paris cannot be roled out. 

Authorities have uncovered a number of plots involving armed assaults by gunmen and suicide 

attacks. More likely to unfold on American soil, however, are the low-level, often 

amateurish attempts that we are familiar with. 

Larger-scale terrorist plots, if initiated from abroad, would still require local confederates. The 

record of U.S. intelligence efforts since 9/11 has been remarkable. Of close to 60 known 

jihadist terrorist plots, all but a handful have been interrupted. We are batting .900. 

Intelligence has been our first line of defense. The 9/11 attacks brought about unprecedented 

international cooperation among intelligence services and law enforcement organizations. This 

needs to be maintained and expanded. Our European allies are still struggling to achieve the 

kind of cooperation among their intelligence services that we have achieved here. The 

United States should assist Europe in whatever way it can while enhancing American access to 

vital information on foreign fighters or terrorist networks that could threaten U.S. security. 

Americans are uncomfortable with domestic intelligence efforts, and some communities find them 

offensive. Domestic intelligence is vital to homeland security and to preventing the kind of 

suspicions and hostilities that arise when terrorist attacks occur. Efforts aimed at countering 

violent extremism, which some communities find equally offensive, cannot substitute for 

domestic Intelligence and criminal investigations. 

Foreign fighters coming back from Syria must be identified. The Visa Waiver program does not 

offer anybody a free pass to enter the country. There are still checks in place. But terrorist 

watch lists need to be informed by continuing exchanges of information between the United 

States and visa waiver countries. 

The intelligence role of U.S. Customs and Border Protection can be enhanced. Secondary 

interviews of those arriving at U.S. ports of entry should be viewed as opportunities to collect 

8 
99 

intelligence. I am not suggesting that we increase the number of secondary interviews, but that 

we exploit them. 

The United States does not face the deluge of refugees pouring into Europe. Unlike Europe, U.S. 

authorities will have more opportunities to vet applicants before they arrive, and the 

numbers being admitted are much smaller. 

However, these are extraordinary circumstances. V\lhile the refugees may be fleeing from 

some of the same groups that are currently being attacked by the United States, they are coming 

from an active war zone where violence continues, where loyalties are fluid, and where America's 

opponents are exhorting followers to carry out terrorist attacks in the United States. Security 

concerns dictate thorough vetting. 

It is not just a matter of keeping the bad guys out. The refugees currently flowing into Europe 

include a large percentage of single young males. This is typical of refugee populations, but these 

young men are coming from violent environments; they have little or no education; they will be 

difficult to employ. Frustrated and angry, some will turn to crime. Others may be receptive to 

radical ideologies. 

Recruiting does happen here. Beginning in 2007, several dozen Somali-Americans, mainly 

from Minneapolis, returned to Somalia to fight invaders from Ethiopia and later to join al Qaeda's 

affiliate, ai-Shabaab. This was a community already troubled by its young men joining street 

gangs. After learning of the recruiting that had secretly been going on, the community cooperated 

with authorities to successfully halt it. 

The United States excels at assimilating immigrants, but a tiny fraction of America's new 

arrivals invariably bring the quarrels of their homeland with them. In a country of 

immigrants, this is not a new phenomenon. Previous diasporas have produced their share of 

terrorist groups and criminal gangs. There is no evidence, as far as I know, to indicate that Arab 

or Muslim immigrants in this country are having trouble assimilating into American society. 

The conflicts in the Middle East and their consequences add layers to the existing terrorist threat. 

The threat is dynamic, and every major terrorist attack tells us more about how our foes operate. 

For the past half century, the United States has dealt with homegrown and foreign terrorist 

threats. The years since 9/11 have been exceptionally tranquil. New laws, institutions, and 

programs have been put in place to prevent terrorist violence; these approaches appear to 

9 
100 

be working. But as with any security measures, there is a tendency for vigilance to decline. The 

Paris attack tells us to keep our guard up. 

10 
101 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

, Senate Testimony 

. 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross 

Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies 

ChiefExecutive Officer, Valens Global 

Hearing before the 

U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

Washington, D.C. 

November 19,2015 

~FDD llKFJ£NSK OF lll';\IOCKACJBS 1726 M Street NW • SUJte 700 • Washmgton, DC 20036 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
102 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and distinguished members of the 

committee, on behalf of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, it is an honor to appear 

before you to discuss the Islamic State's {IS) impact on Syrian refugee resettlement in the United 

States. 

In the aftermath of the Paris attacks, there has been much discussion about the security 

challenges associated with admitting Syrian refugees. I offer several overarching conclusions 

that I will discuss at greater length in this testimony: 

• If a jihadist group like IS wants to place terrorists in the United States through the 

current refugee resettlement program, the risk is very low, though it is non-zero. 

• The biggest barrier to terrorist operatives entering the United States in this way 

is the selection process rather than the screening process. The existing selection 

process for admitting refugees into the United States is rigorous and time-consuming, 

and the odds are significantly against any one refugee's admission: only I 0,000 of an 

estimated 2.1 million Syrians registered by UNHCR will be admitted. Further, the 

United States privileges the "most vulnerable" refugee populations in its admission 

process, a cohort that includes single mothers, children, and individuals with medical 

needs but excludes populations-like teenage and young adult males-that are most 

likely to be infiltrated by violent extremist groups. This makes it difficult for 

extremist groups to plant operatives in the admitted refugee population. Moreover, 

the resettlement process for refugees entering the United States takes 18 to 24 months 

on average. 1 However, the refugee screening process is highly unlikely to uncover an 

operative who can be considered a "clean skin" (someone connected with a j ihadist 

organization whose connections to the group are not known by American 

intelligence), and the U.S.'s intelligence penetration into Syria is limited. 

• A significant expansion of the Syrian refugee resettlement program in the U.S. 

would increase the risk of militant infiltration. Significantly increasing the number 

of Syrian refugees who will be resettled might expand the parameters of the selection 

process beyond "most vulnerable" populations, and could make the infiltration of 

operatives in this manner more attractive to militant groups. 

• IS views the refugee outflows from Syria as a major challenge to the legitimacy 

of its caliphate, and the group has exhorted Syrian refugees to return. At the same 

time, it is in IS's interest to create a backlash against Syrian refugees in Europe or the 

United States, which would then allow militant organizations to recruit from within 

the ranks of disaffected refugee populations. A backlash could also deter future waves 

of refugees from leaving Syria. Such a move is central to IS's playbook. 

• It is counterproductive for U.S. governors to publicly announce their opposition 

to admitting refugees into their states. Governors do not have control over where 

refugees are placed, but this hard line marginalizes refugee populations even before 

U.S. Department of State, "U.S. Refugee Admissions Program," n.d., available at 

http:llwww.statc.gov/jlorm/ra!admissions/. 

2 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
103 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

they arrive, and creates the perception that they are not welcome, thus complicating 

and threatening integration and assimilation processes. While it is their prerogative to 

express their legitimate concerns to the Obama administration, the very public 

announcements that have been made recently are counterproductive. 

The Islamic State's Strategic Outlook Toward Refugees 

The iconic images of thousands of Syrians fleeing their homes for Europe are terrible 

publicity for IS. IS has sought to foster the perception that the caliphate is a refuge and safe 

haven for Muslims from across over the world; this narrative is essential to the group's foreign 

fighter recruitment efforts. But the refugee crisis directly undercuts this narrative. If Syrians 

choose to flee for thousands of miles rather than joining the caliphate next door or remaining in 

it, the caliphate's political legitimacy is called into question. Prospective foreign fighters may be 

less inclined to join IS after witnessing the flood of refugees into Europe, and hearing horror 

stories about life in the caliphate. 

IS has utilized its propaganda apparatus in an effort to dissuade Syrians from fleeing to 

Europe.2 Between September 16 and 19, IS media outlets released twelve videos addressing the 

refugee crisis. IS's strategy in this propaganda blitz was twofold: underscore the dangers of life 

in Europe for refugees while painting the caliphate as a safe haven for Muslims. One theme that 

emerged in this propaganda was the idea that Muslim refugees who flee to Europe will suffer 

oppression at the hands of secular and Christian governments, and will be forced to abandon 

their faith. 3 IS also warned of the dangerous journey to Europe, in one video montage 

incorporating the image of Aylan Kurdi, the young Syrian refugee who washed up dead on a 

beach in Turkey as his family was attempting to travel to Greece. 4 Another theme that pervaded 

IS's refugee propaganda was that the caliphate was preferable to Europe. IS juxtaposed the 

experiences that refugees would encounter in Europe with images and videos portraying the 

caliphate as an Islamic utopia, where refugees are cared for and all Muslims can find religious 

salvation. 5 

While IS sees the Syrian refugee crisis as a challenge to its legitimacy, it also perceives 

strategic opportunities. One possibility is that IS may attempt to embed militants into refugee 

populations. In January 2015, an IS supporter released a short article that discussed opportunities 

for IS militants to use migrant and refugee flows from Libya to gain entry to Europe. 6 Further, an 

al-Qaeda operative who had served time in prison in Italy before being extradited to his home 

country of Tunisia was arrested in October 2015 after traveling from Libya to the Italian island 

2 Aaron Zelin has compiled a comprehensive list of IS propaganda statements related to refugee. The statements 

cited in this testimony are drawn from his list. See Aaron Zelin, "The Islamic State on Refugees Leaving Syria," 

Jihadology, November 14, 20I5; Aaron Zelin, "Targeting Europe's Refugees Is Not the Answer," Washington 

Institute for Near East Policy, November 16, 2015. 3 "Would You Exchange What is Better for What is Less," Wilayat Salah al-Din, September 16, 2015. 4 "And [He] Will Replace You With Another People," Wilayat Halab, September !8, 20I5. 

' See, for example, "Messages from the Muslims to the Displaced Peoples [Going] to the Abodes of the 

Unbelievers," Wilayat al-Furat, September 17, 2015. 6 See discussion in Charlie Winter, Libya: The Strategic Gateway for the Islamic State (London: Quilliam 

Foundation, 2015). 

3 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
104 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

of Lampedusa.7 Placing operatives among the Syrian refugees would advance IS's strategic 

objectives. IS believes that if it can drive a wedge between Muslim populations in Europe and 

the rest of European society, it can present itself as a protector of European Muslims, thus 

building its base of support in Europe. This strategic logic is clearly articulated in issue seven of 

Dabiq, IS's English-language online magazine, in which IS predicts that jihadist attacks in 

Europe will "compel the crusaders to actively destroy the grayzone," forcing Muslims in the 

West to make one of two choices: "apostatize and adopt the [infidel] religion" or migrate to the 

caliphate to "escape persecution from the crusader governments and citizens. " 8 This strategy-in 

which the group carries out attacks to accelerate societal schisms, then steps in to defend the 

group against whom its attacks triggered discrimination-is one that IS utilized to great effect in 

Iraq in the mid-2000s. During that period, IS's predecessor, al-Qaeda in Iraq, launched attacks 

against Shia populations in order to trigger revenge killings against Iraqi S unnis. 

It now appears that the passport of a Syrian citizen that had been stamped in Greece, 

Serbia and Croatia-three typical way-stations for refugees making the trip to western Europewas on one of the Paris attackers in an effort to incite anti-refugee backlash.9 (It is possible that 

IS planted a stolen or forged passport on one of the attackers, and as of this writing its 

authenticity has not been determined.) 

Refugee Selection and Screening Policies 

It would be easier for IS or another jihadist group to infiltrate operatives into Europe than 

the United States. As previously noted, the biggest barrier to terrorist operatives entering the 

United States in this way is the refugee selection process rather than the screening process. 

Indeed, it is important not to overstate the efficacy of the screening process, something many 

observers have done. 

The United States has a set of layered policies in place for selecting and screening 

refugees. The selection process is highly rigorous, with many refugees being selected from "most 

vulnerable" populations, a category that includes children, single mothers, torture victims, and 

people with special medical needs. 10 Meanwhile, the screening process involves multiple checks 

across several agencies for security and medical concerns. This multi-stage screening process 

means that it takes a long time-18 to 24 months-for refugees to enter the United States, which 

means that any attempt to infiltrate operatives in this way must be undertaken with a fair amount 

of advance planning. Though this multi-stage screening system lessens the probability that 

malevolent actors will gain entrance into the United States, the efficacy of screening 

fundamentally depends on the quality of U.S. intelligence about the Syrian refugee population. 

In response to the refugee crisis sweeping Europe, the Obama administration recently 

announced that it would increase the number of refugees from around the world that the United 

States will permanently resettle, from 70,000 per year to 100,000 by 20I 7. This plan allows the 

7 Francesco Viviano, "Lampedusa, su un Barcone Terrorista di Ritomo," La Repubblica, November 8, 2015. 8 "The Extinction of the Grayzone,'' Dabiq issue 7, February 2015. 9 "Syrian Passport by Stadium Stolen or Fake, A.F.P. Reports," New York Times, November 17, 2015. 10 Gardiner Harris, David Sanger and David Herszenhom, "Obama Increases Number of Syrian Refugees for U.S. 

Resettlement to 10,000," New York Times, September !0, 2015. 

4 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
105 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

admission of 85,000 refugees in 2016 and 100,000 refugees the following year.U The White 

House also recently announced plans to admit at least 10,000 Syrian refugees in 2016-a 

significant increase over the approximately 1,500 Syrians expected to be resettled in the United 

States in 2015Y The administration announced plans to open additional refugee screening 

centers in Iraq and Lebanon. 13 

The selection process for refugee resettlement in the United States is markedly different 

from the process in Europe. Whereas Europe has little choice but to temporarily harbor, and 

process the asylum requests of, refugees and migrants who wash up on its shores, the U.S.'s 

geographic distance from conflict zones in the Middle East and North Africa allows it to 

implement a rigorous selection process. This process represents the greatest obstacle to jihadist 

penetration of the refugee resettlement program. 

Approximately 75 percent of refugees who are screened by the U.S. are first vetted and 

then referred by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). 14 Many 

refugees that the UNHCR refers for resettlement come from populations labeled as the "most 

vulnerable." Of the Syrian refugees who have been admitted thus far, more than half have been 

children. Moreover, just two percent of Syrian refugees who have been admitted are considered 

to be "single men of combat age." 15 UNHCR's preference for referring "most vulnerable" 

populations presents an obstacle for militant organizations seeking to infiltrate the refugee 

resettlement program. Unlike in Europe, where all refugees who request asylum must be 

temporarily housed until their requests are processed, IS and other militant groups have no 

control over who is selected for the U.S. refugee resettlement program. 

The duration of the resettlement process is another obstacle for militant groups. Though 

resettling refugees can take as few as eight weeks in special circumstances, the process takes 18 

to 24 months on average. 16 Though IS and al-Qaeda plan external operations months in advance, 

this lag time does create obstacles for any militant organization seeking to strike the U.S. through 

the refugee resettlement program. There are more efficient ways to infiltrate the United States. 

Though the refugee selection process presents a major obstacle to militant infiltration, the 

screening process is far from infallible even though it involves multiple checks. To be 

admissible, a refugee must pass a series of security and medical checks. 17 A Department of State 

Resettlement Service Center (RSC) compiles personal data and background information for the 

security check process. 18 Some refugees go through an additional review, a Security Advisory 

11 Michael R. Gordon, Alison Smale, and Rick Lyman, "U.S. Will Accept More Refugees as Crisis Grows," New 

York Times, September 20, 2015. 12 Harris et al., "Obama Increases Number of Syrian Refugees for U.S. Resettlement to 10,000." 13 "U.S. to open new screening centers for Syrian refugees State Department," Reuters, November 6, 2015. 14 U.S. Department of State, "Background Briefing on the Mechanics of the United States Refugee Admissions 

Program," September II, 2015, available at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2015/09/246843.htm. 

"Laura Koran, "How Do Syrian Refugees Get into the U.S.? Explaining the Process," CNN, November 17,2015. 16 U.S. Department of State, "U.S. Refugee Admissions Program," n.d., available at 

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/ra/admissions/. 

11 U.S. Department of State, "Background Briefing On the Mechanics of the United States Refugee Admissions 

Program," September II, 2015. 18 The various steps of the refugee settlement process are outlined in U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, 

"Security Screening of Refugees Admitted to the United States: A Detailed, Rigorous Process," n.d., available at 

5 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
106 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

Opinion, which is conducted by law enforcement and intelligence agencies. (Presumably, those 

who are flagged as potentially posing a more severe security threat are selected for this advisory 

opinion.) Candidates for refugee status are also fingerprinted and interviewed in person by a U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services officer. A medical screening is completed, mostly to check 

for infectious diseases such as tuberculosis. Finally, a second interagency security check is 

completed before the refugee's departure to verifY that all information remains correct, and that 

there are no relevant additions since the process began. After these security and medical checks 

have been completed and analyzed, a refugee be admitted to the United States. 

However, a significant limitation to the screening process is that it is only as good as the 

data that the United States can gather within Syria. Top law enforcement and intelligence 

officials have said that the U.S. has significant intelligence gaps with regard to Syrian refugees. 19 

The biggest concern for the intelligence community is a "clean skin," an individual connected 

with a jihadist organization whose connections to the group are not known by American 

intelligence or law enforcement agencies. As FBI assistant director Michael Steinbach said, 

"You have to have information to vet. Databases don't [have] the information on those 

individuals, and that's the concern."20 Thus, while the selection process significantly reduces the 

chance of terrorists entering the United States through the refugee resettlement program, we 

should understand that the screening process would be unlikely to identify militant 

operatives. Thus, a significant expansion of the resettlement program for Syrian refugees would 

pose risks. 

Assessing the Security Risks Associated with Refugees Entering the United States 

The overall risk associated with admitting refugees into the U.S. in current numbers is 

low but non-zero due to the obstacles to selection highlighted in the previous section. There are 

also some risks apart from the direct infiltration of operatives. For example, refugee populations 

may not fully assimilate into American society, and may be vulnerable to recruitment by violent 

extremist groups or local street gangs. 

There are several cases of refugees who have been involved in terrorist activities in the 

United States, though these cases are relatively few and the risks should not be exaggerated. In 

May 2011, Waad Alwan and Mohanad Hammadi, two Iraqi refugees who had been resettled in 

Kentucky, were arrested in a sting operation and charged with attempting to provide arms to aiQaeda in Iraq (the group that would later become IS). In talks with an undercover informant, the 

men discussed the possibility of carrying out attacks domestically. Both Alwan and Hammadi are 

believed to have been involved in the Sunni insurgency in Iraq before coming to the United 

States: Hammadi even boasted to an undercover operative that he had planted IEDs in Iraq, while 

www.rcusa.org/uploads/pdfs/Refugee%20resettlement%20~%20stcp%20by%20step%20USCRl.pdf. Obviously, I 

assess the rigor of the process differently than does the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, but its 

description ofthe steps involved is accurate. 19 See Evan Perez, "Intelligence Gaps Pose Challenge for Syrian Refugee Screening," CNN, October B, 2015. Perez 

quotes NCTC director Nicholas Rasmussen, who explained that "the intelligence picture we've had of this conflict 

zone isn't what we'd like it to be," and that "you can only review against what you have." 20 Justin Fishel and Mike Levine, '"U.S. Officials Admit Concern over Syrian Refugee Effort," ABC News, February 

12,2015. 

6 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
107 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19, 2015 

Alwan told the same operative that he had killed U.S. soldiers with a sniper rifle. 21 Both men 

were admitted into the United States despite having been detained in Iraq due to suspicions about 

their involvement in insurgent activities.22 The cases of Alwan and Hammadi exposed significant 

flaws in the refugee screening process, and screening procedures were improved in subsequent 

years. 23 

Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsamaev, the brothers responsible for the Boston Marathon 

bombing, were refugees. They arrived in the United States after their parents received refugee 

status in 2002.24 Tamerlan was 15 and Dzokhar was 8 at the time they came to America. They 

would subsequently radicalize and carry out their notorious attack. 

Al-Shabaab and Islamic State recruiting in Minneapolis and St. Paul illustrates a different 

type of security threat associated with resettling refugee populations from conflict zones--one 

that relates not to domestic terrorism but to foreign fighter networks.25 From 2007 to 2009, more 

than 20 Somalis from the Minneapolis area, many of them teenagers and young adults who had 

grown up in the United States, traveled to Somalia to join al-Shabaab, which utilized the 

Ethiopian invasion in 2006 as an opportunity to rally the Somali diaspora. 26 This group included 

Shirwa Ahmed, a naturalized American citizen who, in October 2009, became the first American 

suicide bomber in an attack in the Puntland region.27 Other members of this community were 

involved in fundraising for Shabaab. 

Though distinct from the above instances due to the differences between the admission of 

refugees and asylum seekers, several jihadists involved in terrorist activities in the United States 

used asylum applications to remain in the country. Mir Aimal Kansi, who shot and killed two 

CIA employees and wounded three more in a January 1993 attack outside the agency's Langley 

headquarters, entered the U.S. illegally but applied for asylum, and was later allowed to stay in 

the country under a general immigration amnesty. Omar Abdel Rahman applied for political 

asylum to delay his deportation.28 Ramzi Yousef, a key leader of the 1993 World Trade Center 

attack, "asked for asylum and was released pending a hearing," and organized the attack while 

his asylum application was still pending. 29 Various gaps in the asylum process that allowed these 

21 Carrie Johnson, "Terrorism Case Exposes Gaps in Refugee Screening," NPR, June 8, 2011. 22 James Gordon Meek, Cindy Galli and Brian Ross, "Exclusive: U.S. May Have Let 'Dozens' of Terrorists into 

Country As Refugees," ABC News, November 20,2013. 23 Evan Perez, "Intelligence Gaps Pose Challenge for Syrian Refugee Screening," CNN, October 8, 2015 (noting 

that officials said "the U.S. has vastly improved its screening procedures after failures in the vetting of Iraqi refugees 

in recent years,'' but that there are significant intelligence gaps with respect to Syria). 24 Peter Finn, Carol Leonnig and Will Englund, "Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Were Refugees from 

Brutal Chechen Conflict,'' Washington Post, Aprill9, 2013. 

" The Somali community in Minneapolis-St. Paul originally came to the area "as legal refugees, largely." Jason 

DeRusha. "Good Question: Why Did Somalis Locate Here?," WCCO (Minneapolis), January 19,2011. 26 Andrea Elliott, "A Call to Jihad, Answered in America," New York Times, July II, 2009. 27 Bob Drogin, "Young Men Vanish into Somalia, Stirring Fears of Terrorist Recruitment," Los Angeles Times, 

January 18, 2009. 

"Ted Conover, "The United States of Asylum," New York Times, September 19, 1993. 29 Daryl Fears, "Bill Shifts Burden to Asylum-Seekers," Washington Post, May I, 2005. Both Kansi and Yousef 

exploited an asylum process that, at the time, allowed any migrant who applied for asylum to receive a work permit 

while his claim was being investigated. Following Kansi's attack, the United States eliminated asylum seekers' 

ability to do so. 

7 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
108 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

individuals to remain in the United States were addressed in subsequent years, and in 2005 

Congress passed the Real ID Act, which imposed stringent requirements for asylum seekers. 

Policy Options Associated with Refugee Resettlement 

Syrian refugee resettlement poses only a minimal security risk to the United States as 

presently constituted. However, there are several things legislators and officials should consider 

to address security and other concerns: 

1. Discussion of refugee admission should not occur without recognizing that the United 

States has failed to meet its basic obligations to foreign nationals who assisted U.S. 

efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. This should change. Only a fraction of the Afghans 

who served U.S. military efforts, including as interpreters or contractors, have been 

admitted into the United States.30 Emerson Brooking and Janine Davidson note that 

"when American servicemen rotate away," their "translators remain--often becoming 

top-priority targets for reprisal attacks."31 The United States has a fundamental obligation 

to the men and women who worked with us in Iraq and Afghanistan, risking their lives 

and their families' lives. It is in our moral and strategic interest to admit the individuals 

who assisted American efforts as soon as possible, and that should not be seen as separate 

from the present discussion. 

2. On the topic of particularly vulnerable populations, it is appropriate for legislators to 

demand answers about why the Obama administration reportedly does not intend 

to designate IS's treatment of Christians as an act of genocide.32 It is absolutely right 

for the administration to classifY IS's treatment of Y azidis as genocidal, but Christians 

have also been subjected to IS's genocidal policies. 

3. The United States can adopt a data-driven approach to assessing the reliability of 

refugees' background stories. American and European agencies can develop a database 

allowing officials to cross-check the accounts that Syrian refugees provide to 

investigators with open-source data, intelligence reports, and accounts from activist 

groups like the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The centerpiece of this dataset 

would be a comprehensive catalogue of significant activities (SIGACTS) involving state 

and non-state actors in Syria that would enable intelligence officials to corroborate 

refugees' reports related to their flight from Syria. Using this database, officials could 

identifY factual inaccuracies in refugee statements. 

4. Policymakers should understand that because the biggest barrier to militant entry 

through refugee resettlement is the selection process rather than the screening 

process, significant expansion of the number of refugees admitted increases the 

30 Peter Cobus, "Where the Grave Isn't Free: One Afghan Interpreter's Trials of U.S. Resettlement," Voice of 

America, April22, 2015. 

" Emerson Brooking and Janine Davidson, "Why is a Comedian the Only One Talking About the Plight of Afghan 

Interpreters?," Council on Foreign Relations, October 23, 2014. 32 See discussion in Michaellsikoff, "U.S. Weighs 'Genocide' Label for IS in Iraq-and More than a Word May be 

at Stake," Yahoo News, November 12, 20\5. 

8 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
109 

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross November 19,2015 

security concerns. This is because the biggest reasons that risks are low are a) the low 

percentage of refugees being admitted, and b) the focus on admitting "most vulnerable" 

populations. The odds will shift as more Syrian refugees are resettled into the United 

States. 

5. Politicians, government officials and thought leaders should recognize that signaling 

strong distaste in advance of Syrian refugees' arrival is counterproductive from a 

national security standpoint. At the same time, the administration fails to create a sound 

environment for discussing these issues if it meets expressions of concern about security 

with hectoring, condescension, and accusations. We all have an interest in having a real 

discussion free of grandstanding on any side of the issue. 

6. The United States has a strong interest in repairing its disastrous policy toward 

Syria, which cannot be considered separate from the refugee issue. Numerous news 

reports, quoting U.S. officials, show that Syrian rebel factions that have received arms, 

training, and funding from the CIA are collaborating on the battlefield with Jabhat alNusra-al-Qaeda's Syrian affiliate-in places like Idlib province. 33 Regardless of the fact 

that some CIA-supported rebel factions describe their collaboration with Nusra as an 

"uncomfortable marriage of necessity," the fact remains that weapons the CIA distributes 

to rebels in Syria are consistently ending up in Nusra's hands, and CIA-backed rebels 

have helped Nusra make gains.34 Fourteen years after the 9/11 attacks, there is no 

justification for the United States to aid an al-Qaeda affiliate. Legislators should demand 

to know how and why this has happened, and should call for the administration to end all 

support that it knows will help al-Qaeda affiliates. Syria has enough refugees. Let's not 

make more. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify today. I look forward to answering your 

questions. 

" See, e.g., Ken Dilanian, "Officials: CIA-Backed Syrian Rebels Under Russian Blitz," Associated Press, October 

10,2015. 

34 Anne Barnard and Karim Shoumali, "U.S. Weaponry Is Turning Syria Into Proxy War with Russia," New York 

Times, October 12, 2015. 

9 

Foundation for Defense of Democracies www.defenddemocracy.org 
110 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Testimony of Eric P. Schwartz 

Dean and Professor, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

Washington, DC 

November 19,2015 

I am very grateful for the opportunity to testify today. I deeply appreciate the important 

role of this Committee in ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the agencies and 

departments of the U.S. government, and including and especially those related to the critical 

issues of national security. 

The Committee has asked that witnesses discuss any vulnerabilities within the program 

for U.S. resettlement of Syrians "to gauge the feasibility of ISIS and other dangerous actors 

reaching the United States." This is an important question, but really only relevant if, first, we 

believe we have a strong national interest in resettling Syrians; and second, if we are confident 

we are asking the right questions about vulnerabilities in the program. 

What is our foreign policy interest in this refugee resettlement program? 

We have a compelling national security interest in sustaining and strengthening this 

program., which is why I was pleased to have signed a letter to the President and Congressional 

leaders from 22 former U.S. officials involved in foreign policy Republicans, Democrats and 

former foreign service officers (including former U.S. Ambassadors to S)Tia) urging that the 

United States both increase substantially our levels of overseas humanitarian assistance and 

support a refugee admissions goal of 100,000 Syrians. (I ask that the letter be included in the 

written record of this hearing.) 
111 

2 

In short, the United States of America is confronting geopolitical and humanitarian 

challenges of historic proportions at a critical time in world history a time that compels our 

elected and appointed officials to exercise world leadership by thinking and acting boldly in the 

promotion of both our interests and our values. 

The signs of these challenges are clear and compelling, and were tragically reflected in 

the grotesque attacks against civilians in Paris last Friday night. They are also reflected in 

ongoing conflict, and egregious abuses of international human rights and humanitarian law in 

Syria and the throughout the region. They demonstrate the reality of a more chaotic world, made 

more uncertain by the emergence of dangerous non-state actors, and further complicated by an 

increasingly multi-polarity that will test the capacity of the United States to influence events that 

impact the well-being of Americans and the world community. 

These new realities are also reflected in humanitarian crises of historic proportions. In 

recent years, we've seen a sharp increase in the numbers of individuals displaced by persecution 

and conflict. As of the end of last year, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees estimated that 

there were some 60 million people displaced worldwide, including some 20 million refugees 

who have left their countries of origin due to persecution or conflict, and some 40 million 

internally displaced persons- "internal refugees," if you will. According to the High 

Commissioner, Antonio Guterres, "we are witnessing a paradigm change, an unchecked slide 

into an era in which the scale of global forced displacement as well as the response required is 

now clearly dwarfing any seen before." And of course, in the case of Syria, the numbers are 

striking: some half of the population displaced, with more than seven million internally 

displaced persons and more than four million refugees in neighboring countries. 
112 

3 

Whatever one's perspective on the precise U.S. strategy for addressing the political, 

security and humanitarian crises in Syria, nobody disputes the critical importance of U.S. 

leadership. Our interests and our values are deeply implicated, whether those involve stemming 

the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, supporting friends and allies, sustaining 

economic and commercial relationships, defeating ISIS and other forces that are seeking to 

export their campaigns of terror, or providing basic assistance to desperate people in dire need. 

So how does refugee resettlement of Syrians help to achieve these objectives, and how do 

efforts to thwart the refugee resettlement program frustrate those objectives? 

First, our Syrian refugee resettlement program communicates a critical commitment to 

burden sharing to governments in the region that are providing safe haven to Syrians. Turkey is 

hosting more than two million Syrian refugees; Lebanon is host to more than one million and 

Jordan's numbers are estimated at over 630,000. To be sure, the United States should be 

providing significant and substantial assistance in support of those governments as they seek to 

manage this burden, but for a limited number of Syrians who are among the most vulnerable, 

third country resettlement is a compelling priority, and the United States must be prepared to 

make a modest commitment to such resettlement. It is the neighboring countries that are bearing 

the overwhelming burden of this challenge. And if we are asking them- as we are indeed asking 

them- to continue to do so, and if we are expecting their support for diplomatic and other efforts 

we are making to reach a political settlement in Syria, it is counterproductive for us to send those 

governments such a negative signal by effectively shutting off our resettlement program for 

Syrians. 

Second, we must also recognize the responsibility of burden-sharing with our allies in 

Europe. If we are urging our European friends and allies to implement humane policies and 
113 

4 

procedures on protection for the hundreds of thousands of Syrians who have entered Europe, 

then we must demonstrate a commitment to provide resettlement opportunities for Syrians in the 

United States. Our failure to do so will not only be perceived as an expression of hypocrisy, but 

also as a reflection of diminished leadership that could undermine our capacity to influence 

European governments on diplomatic, political and military measures we may ultimately believe 

are critical to addressing the conflict. 

Third, we must recognize that the battle against ISIS is a worldwide effort, in which ISIS 

-in its use of social media and other means of communication offers an apocalyptic vision of 

conflict, and of course rejects any notion of the compatibility of Islam with other traditions. Our 

refugee resettlement program, which has welcomed persecuted Muslims and others from around 

the world, is a highly effective rebuke of that preposterous notion, and, in a world of inevitably 

increasing migration, offers a model of inclusion not only for other governments around the 

world, but for people- Muslim, Christian, Jewish and others around the world. Conversely, 

imposing bars or unreasonable obstacles to the entry of particular groups of refugees risks 

playing into the very narrative that we are seeking to combat worldwide. 

Finally, the United States has historically played a critical role in the provision of 

international humanitarian assistance and in support of refugee resettlement, which reflects a 

proud and bipartisan tradition ofU.S. worldwide leadership. In terms of its focus on 

vulnerability of the applicant, our refugee resettlement program has served as a model for others 

around the world. Legislative measures that would appear to compromise that dimension of our 

program and either privilege or disadvantage any particular group would send an unfortunate 

signal about our commitments and undermine our world leadership on humanitarian issues. 
114 

5 

What questions should we be asking about the Syrian refugee resettlement 

program? 

This is a particularly important issue, as the wrong question can result in policy outcomes 

that ill-serve U.S. national interests. We should not be asking whether the Syrian refugee 

resettlement program- or, for that matter, any refugee resettlement or immigration programcan guarantee against admission of an individual who has ill-intent. No program can do that. To 

put this issue into perspective, as of 2013, there were some 41.3 million immigrants in the United 

States according to data gathered by the Migration Policy Institute. And between 2010 and 

2013, some four million people entered our country to establish residence of one kind or another 

-and almost none of these individuals received anything like the scrutiny that is given to refugee 

applicants from Syria. 

We know well why the United States is prepared to encourage the entry oflarge numbers 

of immigrants. Ifl may borrow from an address I offered at the Council on Foreign Relations as 

Assistant Secretary of State in 2010, entitled Respecting the Dignity and Human Rights of People 

on the Move: International Migration Policy for the 21st Century, let me note what you all know 

so well: that immigration has been absolutely critical to the economic growth and development 

of the United States; that it is impossible to imagine that the United States could have become 

the leading economic and political power it is today without the contribution made by many tens 

of millions of immigrants; and that immigration including the entry of refugees who are often 

so determined and entrepreneurial- is a critical factor in enabling the United States to avoid 

many of the very troubling demographic trends that bedevil other industrialized countries less 

hospitable to immigrants. 
115 

6 

So if our broad array of immigration programs, none of which has as rigorous screening 

as our Syrian refugee resettlement program, cannot guarantee against admission of an individual 

who has ill-intent, what are the issues we ought to be considering as we evaluate the security 

dimension ofthis Syrian resettlement effort? 

The government witnesses you will have heard before this private panel will have 

described to you the procedures surrounding the security screening of Syrian refugees, so I will 

not describe them in detail. As I have indicated, applicants for refugee admissions are the most 

thoroughly vetted applicants in the U.S. immigration and refugee process. In the case of 

refugees, this involves reviews by federal intelligence, security and law enforcement agencies, 

including the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI Terrorist Screening Center and the 

Departments of Homeland Security, State and Defense. All applicants provide biometric and 

extensive biographical data, and undergo detailed interviews by officers of DHS to ensure that 

the applicants have bona fide claims and do not pose security risks. l would be pleased to 

discuss these procedures in greater detail with members of the Committee, but I am convinced 

that these and other measures provide a robust degree of safeguards that more than justifY 

continuation of these programs, in light of the national security and humanitarian interests they 

serve. 

Conclusion 

In Smithsonian. com (November 18), Daniel Gross has written a compelling and poignant 

piece relating to the very issue of this hearing. He writes of an individual asylum claimant, 

Herbert Karl Friedrich Bahr, claiming to be a persecuted Jew who fled on the SS Drottingholm 

in 1942 to seek asylum in the United States. During what Gross describes as "a meticulous 

interview process that involved five separate government agencies," the story unraveled and 
116 

7 

Bahr was prosecuted and convicted for conspiracy and planned espionage. The tragedy of this 

story, of course, is that the event helped to stoke anti-refugee sentiment in the United States, and 

the contention that Jews could be part of a fifth column of spies serving the Nazis. This 

sentiment contributed to restrictive immigration policies surrounding Jews threatened by the 

Holocaust, as United States officials turned their backs on those in need of protection. As Gross 

notes, historian Deborah Lipstadt wrote in her book, Beyond Belief, the American Press and the 

Coming of the Holocaust, that The New Republic characterized the government as "persecuting 

the refugee," and The Nation criticized the our government's posture. But, as Gross writes, 

"these voices were drowned out in the name of national security." 

Some 75 years after that terrible inaction, we must ensure that voices in support of 

protecting the vulnerable are not drowned out, and we must recognize that our refugee 

admissions program- including resettlement of Syrians- meets both our national security 

interests and our values as a people. 
117 

U.S. C 0 M MITT E E 

FOR REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS 

Statement of Lavinia Limon, President and CEO, 

U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) 

Senate Homeland Security Committee 

Hearing on "The Impact ofiSIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19,2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper and honorable Committee members, on behalf of 

the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI), a national non-profit organization 

serving refugees and immigrants with a network of over 90 agencies and offices across the 

nation, I submit our testimony in support of the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program and to 

provide information on the program. 

First, our sincerest condolences to the families of the victims in the Paris attacks. Our thoughts 

are with them in this difficult time. Refugees across the U.S. who fled persecution and violence 

submit their condolences as well. Those who have sought refuge in Europe and the Middle East, 

understand the suffering of Parisians well because they have lived it every day. They too are the 

victims of the brutal actions of ISIS. 

For over I 00 years the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) has protected the 

rights and addressed the needs of persons in forced or voluntary migration worldwide and 

supported their transition to a dignified life. We help the uprooted by facilitating and providing 

direct professional services, and promoting the full participation of migrants in community life. 

We understand the impacts of terrorist acts, because we have seen them firsthand in our work 

with refugees fleeing terrorist persecution. 

We are proud to do this work in the United States because our country is a world leader in 

providing protection to people who need it. Our heritage is to show compassion for victims of 

persecution and this is what we will continue to do. The global refugee crisis requires strong 

leadership and the U.S. will inherently make a statement by our presence or absence. For 

refugees who are the most vulnerable even after fleeing their countries: torture survivors; women 

at-risk; those with complex medical situations, for these individuals resettlement might be the 

only option. For refugees who have languished in camps without the right to work, with children 

denied education, with the daily betrayal of basic human rights, these are the individuals for 

whom we must stand. We must not let these heinous acts in Paris make us turn our backs on 

children and families when our opportunity is to welcome refugees in the U.S. We must not 

forget our own country was founded by refugees fleeing religious persecution. 
118 

A Solutions-Based Approach 

Based on our experience we have the following recommendations: 

I. Support the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program as a safe, humanitarian and foreign 

policy operation. 

2. Increase funding for the Department of Homeland Security to maintain the integrity of 

security checks. 

3. Increase support for the Office of Refugee Resettlement to enhance the integration of 

newly arrived refugees. 

Continue the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program because it is safe 

As the former Director of the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement I am familiar with the 

security checks that refugees must undergo prior to their arrival to the U.S. and am confident that 

our vetting system works. Unlike the current situation in Europe, the U.S. gets to choose which 

refugees we admit. Refugees coming in through the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program must 

pass through a many-layered review which includes an in-depth, in-person interview by welltrained Homeland Security officers; and multiple highly rigorous background checks, including 

biographic and biometric investigations, using multiple databases. The FBI, DHS, and National 

Intelligence Agencies each run their own investigation. The security screenings occur at 

multiple points in the process and there is ongoing, recurring vetting. Syrians also go through an 

enhanced review with U.S. Customs and Immigration Services. Refugees also pass a health 

screening to ensure they don't have a contagious medical condition. 

Less than I% of refugees are resettled worldwide. There are more than 4 million Syrian 

refugees, and the US has resettled a little over 2,000 since the civil war began in 20 II. While our 

resettlement impact has been small, it has demonstrated to other countries the importance of 

making opportunity for those who cannot return home. 

Governors stating they will not allow refugees in their states is un-American and against the law. 

Profiling and screening solely on the basis of religious or racial characteristics would, in our 

view, be discriminatory and inappropriate. Freedom of movement is a constitutionally protected 

right of all persons and it has consistently been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The federal 

government has the exclusive power to regulate immigration and any state law that conflicts with 

federal law is illegal according the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution which made federal 

law "the supreme law of the land." States cannot determine the federal government's refugee 

policy or prevent people from moving to their states, but governors can make Syrians feel 

unwelcome-- which would break down a system that relies on community support. From its 

inception, the U.S. Refugee Resettlement program has been a public/private partnership relying 

on the welcoming intentions of communities, individuals and states. 
119 

USCRI also thanks President Obama for his leadership in continuing to support the resettlement 

of refugees. USCRI stands with the President's statement that, "The people who are fleeing 

Syria are the most harmed by terrorism. They are the most vulnerable as a consequence to civil 

war and strife. We do not close our hearts to these victims of such violence and somehow start 

equating the issue of refugees with the issue of terrorism." 

Increase funding for the Department of Homeland Security to maintain the integrity of 

security checks 

Beginning in 2011, additional security checks were implemented for refugees seeking admission 

to the United States, resulting in severe disruptions in refugee travel, unclear and erroneous 

results, and a 'looping' effect where some checks expire while refugees wait in line for the next 

step in the process. This has made it nearly impossible for many to travel, which can result in 

further harm as they wait. There are at least three to five different biometric and biographic 

security checks performed depending on the applicant's age, gender, and country of nationality. 

The administration should consolidate security checks to replace the current system of 

overlapping checks that expire while others are conducted. A comprehensive biographic and 

biometric check acceptable to all agencies would improve efficiency, processing, and the 

protection of refugees. Also, cases in which one persons' checks are holding up their family or 

cross-referenced case should be told their options so they can make well-informed decisions 

about their family's future. Additional interview officers will enable the system to maintain its 

rigorous nature without redundancy and waste. USCRI shares the interest in keeping the refugee 

program safe as our network of agencies and staff work with refugees every day. 

Increase support for the Office of Refugee Resettlement to enhance integration 

Resettled refugees make significant economic and cultural contributions to their new 

communities. An increase in funding for the Office of Refugee Resettlement to ensure adequate, 

stable and sustainable resources and programing for newly arrived refugees will only improve 

these outcomes. Ensure that efforts are pursued to encourage and equip refugees for 

naturalization by increasing the number of civic engagement programs and access to English 

language training. Congress should strongly consider funding the Matching Grant Program at 

higher levels. The Match Grant program enables refugees and other eligible individuals to 

become self-sufficient without resorting to federal or state assistance programs. A variety of 

programs support newcomers but are without sufficient or secure funding. This includes Ethnic 

& Community Based Organizations, Preferred Communities, Elderly Programs, Home 

Childcare, Refugee Agricultural Partnership, Microenterprise, Individual Development Account, 

Cuban-Haitian, Technical & Training Assistance, and School Impact grants. 

The Need to Act 

As a nation of immigrants, we know better than most the importance of providing hope and 

opportunity to those fleeing persecution and expect our government to continue to demonstrate 

leadership on this issue. We cannot continue to stand by while refugees are in need of life-saving 
120 

protection. I welcome any questions or opportunity to meet to discuss the program and our 

recommendations further. Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Attachments: 

USCRI Refugee Security Screening Backgrounder 

USCRI Refugee Flow Chart 
Becoming a RE'Z-fugee 

Refugees flee their country seeking safety and protection. In 

most cases, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees {UNHCR) 

determines that the individual qualifies as a refugee under international law. A refugee is defined as :someone who has fled his 

or her home country and cannot return because he or she has a 

well-founded fear of persecution based on religion, race, 

nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social 

group. 

AU refugees must undergo an interview with a refugee officer from 

the DHS' United States Citizenship 

and Immigration Services (USCIS). 

A trained refugee officer travels to 

the host country to conduct a detailed, interview with 

Resettlement 

A refugee that meers one of the criteria 

for resettlement in the United States 

could be referred to the U.S. Government by UNHCR,a U.S. Embassy, or 

trained Non-Governmental Organizations. Less than one percent of refugees 

worldwkle gain access to the program. 

Travel and Preparations 

Every refugee is assigned to a 

Voluntary Agency in the United 

States, such as the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants 

(USCRI). USCRI places refugees 

with a local partner agency or office 

that will assist refugees upon their 

arrival to the U.S. 

Upon arrival to the U.S. at a 

designated airport, a Customs 

Border Protection (CBP) offic

reviews the refugee documema

tion. Refugees are met by loca

resettlement staff andfor family 

start a new life in America. 
122 

SECURITY SCREENING OF REFUGEES ADMITTED 

TO THE UNITED STATES: A DETAILED, RIGOROUS PROCESS 

Resettlement is considered a durable solution for refugees who cannot return to their countries 

of origin or integrate into the current country that is hosting them. Resettlement to a country like 

the U.S. presents a life-saving alternative for a very small number of refugees around the world 

[less than one half of one percent]. Refugees seeking resettement in the United States must pass 

through a number of steps aimed at ensuring that they will not pose a security risk to the United 

States. 

-STEP 1 

Refugee Status: In most cases the UN High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR] determines 

that the individual qualifies as a refugee under international law. A refugee is someone who has 

fled from his or her home country and cannot return because he or she has a well-founded fear 

of persecution based on religion, race, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particu· 

tar social group. 

-STEP2 

Referral to the United States: A refugee that meets one of the criteria for resettlement in the 

United States is referred to the U.S. government by UNHCR, a U.S. Embassy, or a trained Non-Governmental Organization. 

-STEP 3 

Resettlement Support Center: A Resettlement Support Center [RSC], contracted by the U.S. 

Department of State, compiles the refugee's personal data and background information for the security clearance process and to present to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security [DHS] for an 

in-person interview. 

-STEP4 

Security Clearance Process: With information collected by the RSC, a number of security 

checks are conducted. The State Department runs the names of all refugees referred to the 

United States for resettlement through a standard CLASS (Consular Lookout and Support System] 

name check. In addition, enhanced interagency security checks were phased in beginning in 2008 

and applied to all refugee applicants by 201 D. 

-STEP 5 

Security Clearance Process: Certain refugees undergo an additional security review called a Security Advisory Opinion [SAO]. These cases require a positive SAO clearance from a number of U.S. 

law enforcement and intelligence agencies in order to continue the resettlement process. When 

required, this step runs concurrently with Step 4. 

*Note that under limited circumstances, refugee applicants may be interviewed in their home 

country rather than in a country of asylum . 

. Jfl~U.S. COMMITTEE FOR REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS {f'fr 223! Crystal Drive, Suite 350 • ArHngton,VA 2.2202 •Tel: (703)310.1130 • Fax: (703)769.4241 

fl.rc/?1 www.refugees.org 
123 

-STEP6 

Security Clearance Process: Refugees who meet the minimum age requirement have their finger>-

prints and photograph taken by a trained U.S. government employee, usually on the same day as their 

DHS interview. The fingerprints are then checked against various U.S. government databases and 

information on any matches is reviewed by DHS. 

-STEP7 

In-person Interview: All refugee applicants are interviewed by an officer from DHS's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS]. A trained officer will travel to the country of asylum • to 

conduct a detailed, face-to- face interview with each refugee applicant being considered for resettlement. Based on the information in the refugee's case file and on the interview, the DHS officer will 

determine if the individual qualifies as a refugee and is admissible under U.S. law. 

-STEPS 

DHS Approval: If the USCIS officer finds that the individual qualifies as a refugee and meets other 

U.S. admission criteria, the officer will conditionally approve the refugee's application for resettlement 

and submit it to the U.S. Department of State for final processing. Conditional approvals become final 

once the results of all security checks [Steps 4, 5, and 6) have been received and cleared. 

-STEP9 

Medical Screening: All refugee applicants approved for resettlement in the U.S. are required to 

undergo medical screening conducted by the International Organization for Migration or a physician 

designated by the U.S. Embassy. 

-STEP 10 

Matching Refugees with a Sponsor Agency: Every refugee is assigned to a Voluntary Agency 

in the U.S., such as the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants [USCRI). USCRI will place refugees with a local partner agency or office that will assist refugees upon their arrival in the U.S. 

-STEP 11 

Cultural Orientation: In addition, refugees approved for resettlement are offered cultural orientation while waiting for final processing, to prepare them for their journey to and initial resettlement in 

the United States. 

-STEP 12 

Security Clearance Process: Prior to departure to the U.S., a second interagency check is conducted for most refugees to check for any new information. Refugees must clear this check in order 

to depart to the U.S. 

-STEP 13 

Admission to the United States: Upon arrival at one of five U.S. airports designated as ports of 

entry for refugee admissions, a Customs and Border Protection [CBP] officer will review the refugee 

documentation and conduct additional security checks to ensure that the arriving refugee is the 

same person who was screened and approved for admission to the United States. 
124 

Acronyms for 11119/2015 Hearing 

ABIS- Department of Defense's Automated Biometric Identification System 

AQI- Al-Qaeda afiliate in Iraq 

CBP United States Customs and Border Protection 

CIA- Central Intelligence Agency 

CLASS- Department of State's Consular Lookout and Support System 

DHS- United States Department of Homeland Security 

EU- European Union 

FBI- Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FDNS- United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' Fraud Detection and National 

Security Directorate 

HHS United States Department of Health and Human Services 

I&A -Department of Homeland Security's Office of Intelligence and Analysis 

lACs- Interagency Checks 

IDENT- Department of Homeland Security's Automated Biometric Identification System 

lED - Improvised Explosive Device 

INTERPOL - International Criminal Police Organization 

ISIL Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant 

ISIS -Islamic State of Iraq and Syria 

LAX- Los Angeles International Airport 

MENA- Middle East and North Africa 

NATO- North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

NCTC- National Counterterrorism Center 

ORR Department of Health and Human Service's Oflice of Refugee Resettlement 

PRM- Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 
125 

RSC- Department of State's Resettlement Service Center 

SAOs Security Advisory Opinions 

SIGACTS- United States Army Database for Significant Activities 

STATE- United States Department of State 

T ATP- Acetone peroxide (triacetone triperoxide, peroxyacetone )-based Explosive 

TIDE- Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment 

TSC- Federal Bureau of Investigation's Terrorist Screening Center 

UNHCR United Nations High Commission for Refugees 

UNICEF- United Nations Children's Fund 

USCIS United States Citizenship and Immigration Services 

USCRI- United States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants 

USRAP -United States Refugee Admissions Program 

USRRP- United States Refugee Resettlement Program 

VWP Visa Waiver Program 
126 

ADVANCING 

JUSTICE 

Written Statement of Asian Americans Advancing Justice 

Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs 

Hearing on "The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

Asian Americans Advancing Justice (Advancing Justice) is a national partnership of five nonprofit, non-partisan organizations that work to advance the human and civil rights of Asian 

Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPis) through advocacy, public policy, public education, and 

litigation. We are based in Washington D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco. 

We appreciate this opportunity to submit a statement concerning today's hearing on America's 

refugee policies. The overwhelming majority of Asian Americans today arc immigrants or the 

children of immigrants. Many Asian immigrants came and still come to the United States as 

refugees due to volatile conditions, war or strife in their countries of origin. Between 1975 and 

2006, the United States admitted 1,306,355 East Asians as refugees to the United States, more 

than half of the total 2,671,012 refugee population. Asian refugees increased in recent years and 

now many Burmese and Bhutanese nationals come to the United States as refugees. For example, 

in 2011, more than half of new refugees arriving in the United States are from Burma and Bhutan 

combined. As a result of our own community's experience, we are deeply committed to strong 

and robust humanitarian protections for refugees and asylum-seekers. 

Around the world, more than 60 million individuals are displaced from their homes. Due to the 

Syrian crisis alone, more than eight million people are internally displaced and four million are 

seeking refuge in the region and in Europe. Seventy-six percent of these refugees are women and 

children. Advancing Justice is deeply disappointed that this Committee chose to focus today on 

the alleged "terrorist" threat from refugees. We call upon this Committee to use this opportunity 

to discuss how the United States can welcome more people fleeing harm and provide better 

support for refugees already in our communities, rather than closing our doors. 

Since 9/11, and even before, immigrants have been unfairly targeted for suspicion of terrorism or 

other threats to national security. In 2002, the Department of Homeland Security established the 

National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) program, requiring male visaholders over the age of 16 from predominantly Arab and Muslim countries to register with local 

immigration offices. Around 84,000 Arab and Muslim men registered voluntarily and over 

14,000 of them were deported for complying with the program, sending shockwaves through 

Arab and South Asian communities. Many individuals who came forward and registered under 
127 

the NSEERS program were detained and deported for infractions of immigration law, principally 

overstaying a visa. While the NSEERS program was rolled back in 2011, thousands of Arab and 

South Asians are still battling removal proceedings as a result of the initiative, and the religious 

fear politics of9/11 continues to be used to justify discrimination against Arab, Middle Eastern, 

Muslim and South Asian individuals. 

Moreover, we have seen a continuation ofthese overreaching government policies that rely on 

the pretext of national security to unfairly target the communities we serve. For example, we 

have learned that DHS has adopted a de facto policy of flatly denying parole and imposing 

disproportionately high bond to Bangladeshi asylum seekers fleeing political persecution as 

members of the opposition Bangladesh National Party (BNP), which DHS claims without 

credible basis is a Tier III terrorist organization. Even putting aside the hypocrisy of this position 

in light of the fact that the U.S. was an ally of the BNP when it was Bangladesh's ruling party as 

recently as in 2004, 1 DHS' s position is a prime example of why we must question a rush to 

judgment that entire refugee populations are somehow suspect as terrorist threats. 

Concerns about national security have also more broadly and directly affected refugees and 

asylum-seekers. In 2009, Human Rights First reported at the time "over 7,500 cases pending 

before [DHS] are on indefinite hold based on some actual or perceived issue relating to the 

immigration law's 'terrorism' -related provisions."2 Further, the "overwhelming majority" of 

those cases on hold were family reunification petitions or applications for permanent residence 

filed by people granted asylum or refugee status several years ago3 

Given that many oftoday's displaced persons and refugees are from Syria and other 

predominantly Muslim countries, we are disappointed that today's hearing appears to be 

triggered by unfounded concerns about the motivations or intentions of refugees and asylumseekers from certain countries. The refugee resettlement program is already the most difficult way 

to enter the United States, routinely taking individuals several years to be processed. All refugees 

undergo thorough and rigorous security screenings prior to arriving in the United States, including 

but not limited to multiple biographic and identity investigations; FBI biometric checks; in-depth, 

in-person interviews by Department of Homeland Security officers; medical screenings; 

investigations by the National Counterterrorism Center, and other checks by U.S. domestic and 

international intelligence agencies. In addition, other measures such as mandatory supervisory 

review of all decisions, random case assignment, and forensic document testing are in place to 

maintain the security of the refugee resettlement program. 

Our existing immigration laws related to terrorism are overly broad and unfairly deny relief to 

many otherwise eligible individuals seeking shelter. While we must protect against real threats to 

1 See, e.g., OFFICE OF THE COORDINATOR FOR COUNTERTERRORISM, U.S. DEP'T OF STATE, 2004 COUNTRY REPORTS 

ON TERRORISM 72-73 (2005), available at http://www.state.gov/documentslorganization/45322.pdf (noting that in 

2004, Bangladesh supported the global war on terror and that the United States was assisting Bangladesh's capacity 

to combat terrorism). 2 Human Rights First, "Denial and Delay: The Impact oflmmigration Law's "Terrorism Bars" on Asylum Seekers 

and Refugees in the United States," (November 2009), available at https:l/www.humanrightsfirst.orgiwpcontentiuploads/pdURPP-DcnialandDclay-FULL-11! 009-wcb.pdL 

3 !d. 
128 

national security and public safety, we should not let fear and prejudice guide our decisions 

about whom to welcome to America. 

Sadly, in the aftermath of recently deadly and brutal attacks in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad, even 

limited efforts by the United States to resettle more Syrian refugees in the United States 

are being met with a brutal political backlash designed to incite fear and foment hate. Since the 

attacks, dozens of governors have declared they will not help resettle Syrian refugees in their 

states. And it appears the House will vote this week to temporarily halt the admission of Syrian 

and Iraqi refugees. 

We must be careful not to act impulsively in response to this violence; instead we must have a 

measured and focused response more likely to actually address the root cause. The security of 

our country and its residents is paramount. But the kneejerk response of many, to blame 

refugees, does not reflect our country's history and values. Advancing Justice strongly urges this 

Committee to devote its time and resources to developing strong policies that promote the human 

rights, peace and security of people across the globe. 
129 

"' 

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 

Statement for the Record on the 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

before the 

U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee 

November 19,2015 

Abed A. Ayoub, Esq., ADC Legal & Policy Director 

Yolanda C. Rondon, Esq., ADC Staff Attorney 

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 

1990 M Street NW Suite 610 

Washington, DC 20036 

Phone: (202) 244-2990 

Fax: (202) 333-3980 

E-mail: legal@adc.org 

Web: www.adc.org 
130 

American·Arab Anti·Discrim!nation Committee 

To: Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

Introduction 

I am writing to you on behalf of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the 

country's only national Arab-American organization. ADC has a long history of supporting the 

human and civil rights of all Americans and opposing racism, discrimination and bigotry in any 

form. ADC was founded by former U.S. Senator James Abourezk in 19&0. Today, ADC is the 

largest grassroots Arab-American civil rights and civil liberties organization in the United States. 

ADC is non-profit, non-sectarian, and non-partisan, with members in every State of the United 

States. ADC routinely works with a broad coalition of national organizations to address 

immigration, refugee, and humanitarian crisis in the Middle East and Arab region. ADC 

respectfully takes this opportunity to provide a statement for the record to U.S. Senate Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on R~fugee Resettlement in the United States. 

Statement 

The fact that a number of governors have rejected Syrian refugees does not demonstrate any 

concrete fact or reliable evaluation of anything but their decision to cave into sensationalized 

propaganda aimed to cultivate fear. Our governmental agencies the U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), the Department of 

Defense (DOD), and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) have the capacity to properly 

screen refugees prior to entrance into the United States.' "The length and thoroughness of the 

U.S. vetting system sets it apart from the chaotic, dangerous process for refugees fleeing into 

Europe by sea," said Geoffrey Mock, the Syrian country specialist for Amnesty International 

USA2 Actually, the United States has one of the most comprehensive and vigorous in-depth 

security check processes, if not the top in the world, for screening refugee applications. 

Contradictory positions are merely opinion unfounded in objective reliable reports. 

The United Nations Refugee Agency conducts an extensive vetting process that can take several 

months to a year with multiple levels of clearances before the U.S. vetting and security checks 

process even begins. These strict security measures have also been drastically enhanced in the 

past few years, including but not limited to required biometrics processing - eye scans and 

fingerprinting, collection of all biographical data, thorough interviews in person, and the crosschecking of asylum applicant names through a variety of government databases. The U.N. 

Refugee Agency security scrutiny applied to refugee applications referred to the U.S. is not 

conduct to refugees seeking refugee status in Europe, the vetting occurs after their entry. 

1 See U.S. Refugee Admission Program, http://www.state.gov/ilprrn/raladmissions/index.htm. 2 See Linda Qiu, Jeb Bush: 'It takes almost a year for a Refugee to be processed in the United States", POL!TlFACf, 

Nov. 15,2015. 

- P 202 244 2990 I F 202 333 3980 11990 M Street, NW SUite 610 I Wash mgt on, DC 200361 www adc org 
131 

Amerkan·Arab Antl·Discriminatlon Committe-e 

The numerous and vast strictly enforced security measures are beyond adequate and efficient to 

protect the security of the United States.' Upon referral of a refugee application from the U.N. 

Refugee Agency, the U.S. makes the ultimate determination of whether the U.S. will accept or 

allow the refugee to enter the U.S. Multiple federal agencies- DOD, DHS, FBI, NCTC, the U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services agency and the U.S. Department of State are intricately 

involved in the rigorous review process of each and every refugee application. The U.S. decided 

which refugee applications to approve and which refugee applications to deny. 

DHS conducts several security checks and interviews overseas to make sure refugees meet the 

legal definition for a refugee - requiring demonstrable proof that were persecuted or feared 

persecution in their home country. Plus additional strenuous security provisions have been put in 

place for special screening and vetting of Syrian refugees that requires a minimum of 18-24 

months for Syrian refugees to be fully examined. 4 Syrian refugees as coming from an active war 

zone are scrutinized at the highest level security analysis\ where multiple checks are conducted 

on all biographical information and biometrics, and cross-referenced with the DOD, DHS, 

among other intelligence agencies to assure true identity and criminal background. There is also 

a pre-departure check that is conducted against accepted refugee's right before their scheduled 

travel to the U.S. and health testing done by the U.S Department of Health and Human Services.6 

Syrian refugees must meet the basic requirements like all refugees and are subject to tbe same 

bars. Refugee applications will be denied and/or barred from refugee status where applicants 

have been involved in terrorism, torture, extrajudicial killings, genocide, acts that qualify as 

serious violent felonies under U.S. law, or engaged in fraud or misrepresentation of a material 

fact to gain admission to the U.S. 7 The U.N. and U.S. governmental agency vetting process has 

been applied and used to aid refugees seeking safe haven from other similarly situated war tom 

and labeled "dangerous countries", whom nationals have also been subjected to terrorism, 

including but not limited to Iraq, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and tbe Central 

African Republic. 

The strict security measures demonstrate that the terminology "safety and security" is being used 

as a tool to limit refugees because of anti-Arab sentiment and Islamophobia. "Empirically, 

3 Syrian Refugees Eyeing America Sec: Long Waits and Extensive Vetting, WALL STREET JOURNAL, Nov. 9, 2015, 

http://www.wsj.com/video/syrian-refugees-eyeing-america-see-long-waits-and-extensive-vetting/4FOCA055-6E95-

42DA-821F-15873247B4CI.html?mod-WSJ World VideoCarousel I. 4 Elise Foley, Refugee Screenings Are More Intensive Than Some Politicians Would Have You Think, Huff Post, 

Nov. 17, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/refugee-screening-processsyrians 564b55ece4b045bf3d!Uece7. 5 Refugees seeking safe haven as nationals from Eastern Europe and Asian have not been forced to undergo such 

scrutiny as Syrian refugees. 6 Office of Refugee Resettlement, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/prograrns/refugee~health. 7 Bars & Security Screening in the Asylum & Refugee Processes, HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST, 

http://www.humanrightsfirstorg/wp~contenUuploads!HRF-Securitv-Safeguards.pdf. 

P 202 244 2990 IF 202 333 3980 I 1990 M Street, NW SUite610 I Washington, DC 200361 wwwadc org 
132 

ADC 

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 

historically, we don't see terrorists trying to embed people in refugee flows exactly because they 

are so highly vetted," agreed Gary Shiffman, former chief of staff for Customs and Border 

Protection at DHS and the CEO of Giant Oak, a company that analyzes large data sets to help 

address terrorism and crime problems. 8 Congress must uphold its responsibility to help the 

millions of people that have been forced to flee their homes in Syria since 20 11 to escape 

indiscriminate violence, ongoing civil war, rape, torture, and death. We are undisputedly facing a 

global refugee crisis that requires the United 

States to provide safe haven. There are over 4 million registered Syrian refugees and 8 million 

Syrians internally displaced. The United States has only accepted 1,600, less than 1 percent of 

the entire need, with 20,000 pending Syrian refugee referrals from the United Nations Refugee 

Agency. By contrast, Germany has said that it will accept 800,000 refugees in 2016 and is 

willing to accept 500,000 more each year for the next few years. Jordan has provided safe harbor 

to half a million Syrian refugees. The United States has committed to accepting at least l 0,000 

Syrian refugees in the next fiscal year, but much more is needed. This is a crucial time for the 

United States to take the leadership role in the international community during the largest 

humanitarian crisis in recent history and encourage other nations to pull their weight and 

responsibility. 

Congressional actions that contradict and/or attempt to undermine the purpose and existence of 

the refugee program including but not limited to H.R. 39999 and H.R. 3573 10, to save human 

lives, through measures to effectively shut down the refugee program and/or engage in national 

origin and/or religious profiling of refugee applications must be prohibited. Both H.R. 3999 and 

H.R. 3573 are in direct violation and/or contrary to the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the 

Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees policy of nondiscrimination, non-penalization, and non-refoulement. 11 The aforementioned U.N. Convention 

recognized as customary international law, and the Immigration and Nationality Act§ !Ol(a)(42) 

demand and reinforce the fundamental principle that refugee status be applied without 

discrimination. Refugee status is granted and/or extended to provide temporary protection in the 

U.S. for all persons subjected to persecution or in fear of persecution based on a protected 

characteristic including religion and national origin. The United States cannot pick and choose 

based upon a person's race, national origin, or religion whether to grant refugee status. How can 

we single out and treat people differently who are seeking protection for their very lives for the 

'Rachel Oswald, GOP, Democrats Gear Up to Clash Over Refugee Program, CQ NEWS, Nov. 12,2015. 9 American Security Against Foreign Enemies (SAFE) Act of2015, H.R. 3999, 

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20 151116/BILLS-ll4hr-AI~Foreign.pdf. 10 Refugee Resettlement Oversight and Security Act of2015, RR. 3573 

https:!/www.congress.gov/ll4ibillslhr3573/BILLS-Il4hr3573ih.pd( 

11 htto://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa!O.html. 

- P 202 244 2990 IF 202 333 398011990 M Street, NW SUite 610 I Wash<ngton DC 20036[ www adc 019 
133 

American·Arab Artti·Dlscrlmination Committee 

exact same reason? All Syrian and Iraqi refugee lives must be protected and are worth saving, 

not only Syrian Christians and Iraqi Christians. 

Terrorism and the threat of terrorism are not solely cont1ned to a particular country or religion. 

However, H,R. 3999 specit1cally signals out refugees coming from Syria or Iraq as requiring 

unanimous certit1cation by the Secretary ofDHS, the Director of the FBI, and the Direction of 

National Intelligence to Congressional committee that the refugee accepted by the federal agency 

is not a threat to the security of the U.S. This is clearly an attempt by Congressional members to 

add additional burdens to elongate, and prevent refugee resettlement, and to create more 

bureaucratic loopholes and hurdles. As the requested federal intelligence and government 

agencies are already required to and enforce through their respective strict policies and 

procedures multiple cross-security checks to verifY and assess the national security risk of each 

refugee. In addition, U.S. immigration law bars entry from the U.S. for any person "who is 

believed to be seeking to enter the U.S. to engage in unlawful activity" and "people who have 

been associated with a terrorist organization and intend to engage in activities in the U.S. that 

could endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the U.S. 

The Refugee Resettlement Oversight and Security Act of2015, H.R. 3573 if enacted would 

amend the INA to limit and effectively prohibit the number of refugees allowed to enter the U.S. 

where there is an unwillingness or inability to work together. The language ofH.R. 3573 

prohibits the acceptance of refugees approved through the federal agencies screening process 

unless a joint resolution is enacted into law by Congress that sets the number of refugees for the 

t1scal year. This is seriously troubling for several reasons: 1) the U.S. needs the flexibility to be 

able to suft1ciently respond to refugee crisis and humanitarian needs as they fluctuate and/or an 

unanticipated armed conflict, war, genocide and/or environmental disaster occurs, and not be 

cont1ned to a specit1c number; and 2) where there is not bipartisanship, politics will determine 

whether or not we can provide a safe haven to refugees fleeing for their lives, rather than 

capacity and feasibility. 

Section 5 ofH.R. 3573 goes further and impermissibly authorize selective discrimination on the 

basis of religion, by providing that refugees from religious minority groups are given preferential 

treatment and are prioritized for entry. Not only is this impermissible but refugee eligibility on 

the basis of persecution because of one's religion is already provided for and identit1ed as a 

protected characteristic. This demonstrates that the underlying intention of this provision and the 

legislation overall is to allow only for Christian refugees to be granted entrance into the U.S., 

which is fairly due to Islamophobia and improper correlation of Islam with terrorism. 

- P 202 244 2990 I F 202 333 3980 11990 M Street. NW SUite 610 I Washmgton, DC 20036 ; www adc org 
134 

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 

Conclusion 

All Syrian refugees fear ISIS and terrorism as much if not more than Americans, like any human 

being. Syrian refugees are the daily targets and victims, suffering immense direct persecution by 

ISIS. The only difference is there chance of birth in a country that cannot protect them Syrian 

refugees have been forced to live under siege, military invasions, plane and suicide bombings, 

rubble and destruction- terrorism- many for most of their lives. From World War II to 

Vietnam, America has always opened its doors to those in need of safe harbor, welcoming half a 

million refugees from Cuba and three quarters of a million from Vietnam, and today should be 

no different. 

- P 202 244 2990 IF 202 333 398011990 M Street, NW SUite 610 I Washmgton, DC 200361 wwwadc org 
135 

I ' 

' 

American 

Immigration 

Council 

STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL 

SUBMITTED TO THE U.S. SENATE HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENT 

AFFAIRS COMMITTEE 

HEARING ON "THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND AND REFUGEE 

RESETTLEMENT" 

Contact: 

Beth Werlin, Director of Policy 

bwerlin@immcouncil.org 

Phone: 202/507-7522 

November 19, 2015 

1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20005 

Fax: 202/742-5619 

The American Immigration Council is a non-profit organization which for over 25 years has 

been dedicated to increasing public understanding of immigration law and policy and the role of 

immigration in American society. We write to share our analysis and research regarding refugees 

coming to the United States and the many safeguards already in place. 

As set forth in our publication, ·'A.n Overview of U.S. Refugee Law and Policv'' (November 18, 

2015) (Attachment A), the United States plays an important role in protecting thousands of the 

world's most vulnerable people. The United States is one of 28 countries that resettles refugees. 

A refugee is a person who either has been persecuted or has a "well-founded fear" of persecution 

on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political 

opinion. 1 This definition derives from the United Nations 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocols 

relating to the Status of Refugees, which the United States became a party to in 1968.2 

Responding to the Syrian Refugee Crisis 

The violence and devastation in Syria has led to the largest number of refugees since World War 

II. As of September 2015, the United States had taken in 1,500, or less than 0.03 percent of the 

total in need.3 This seems like a small number for such a large nation with a long history of 

welcoming those fleeing persecution. President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry have 

signaled that the United States will respond more robustly. The President has directed 

his Administration to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees in Fiscal Year 2016 and to increase the 

1 8 U.S.C. § ll0l(a)(42)(A) (2015). 2 Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 

available at, http:liwww.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa I O.html. 3 Michael Gordon; Alison Smale; Rick Lyman, "U.S. Will Accept More Refugees As Crisis Grows," New York 

Times, September 20, 2015, available at; http:/iwww.nytimes.comi2015/09J21 /worJd!curope/us·to-increascadm ission-of~refugces-10- I 00000-in-20 I 7 -kerry-savs.htm L 

1331 G STREET NW SUITE 200 WASHINGTON DC 20005 I 202-507-7500 I americanimmigrationcouncil.org 
136 

number of overall refugees to 85,000 from the current level of 70,000.4 Although the Council 

believes that more must be done, 5 it is important that the United States remains steadfast in its 

commitment to providing refuge to those most in need. 

Following the attacks that took place in Paris just days ago, some have called for denying entry 

to Syrian refugees. This is the wrong approach. Syrian refugees are fleeing exactly the kind of 

terror that unfolded on the streets of Paris. The attacks in Paris sadly reflect the volatile times in 

which we live. Punishing refugees will not change this. The United States must respond to this 

crisis by carrying on our long history of welcoming those fleeing such dire situations. As former 

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright reflected, in response to proposals to halt the refugee 

program: 

These proposals are motivated by fear, not by the facts, and they fly in the face of 

our country's proud tradition of admitting refugees from every corner of the globe 

and every faith background. We have always been a generous nation, and we have 

in place a rigorous process for refugee resettlement that balances our generosity 

with our need for security. It works, and it should not be stopped or paused. 6 

The United States Has a Rigorous Screening Process In Place 

The United States has established a rigorous screening process for refugees coming to our 

country. Before admission as a refugee, a person must pass through an extensive 13 step 

screening process that usually takes between 18 and 24 months.7 This process includes having 

fingerprints and a photograph taken by the U.S. government, an in person interview with the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), two different interagency security background checks, 

a medical screening, and a final security check by Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 8 We 

currently have systems in place to ensure the safety and security of our nation, while also 

fulfilling our humanitarian obligations around the world. 

Post Arrival Steps 

Although refugees are provided assistance in order to support their transition into the country, 

they are expected to have a job within six months of arrival. Refugee men who have recently 

arrived are employed at a higher rate than native born (67 percent to 60 percent respectively), 

'Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year2016, U.S. Department of State, available at. 

http :I /www. state. gov /j/prm/releases/docsforcongress/24 7770 .htm. 5 The Immigration Council has joined a broad coalition of organizations to urge the President to increase the number 

of refugees that we resettle to 200,000 for FY 16, with 100,000 of them being Syrian. As we explain, "After the end 

of the wars in Southeast Asia, the United States resettled 111,000 Vietnamese refugees in 1979 and then essentially 

doubled that number to 207,000 in 1980. The United States' rising to the occasion now would both encourage 

European nations to live up to their refugee protection obligations, and help to prevent further deterioration in the 

protection climate in the countries bordering on Syria that are currently hosting millions of Syrian refugee." 6 Madeleine Albright, "Madeleine Albright: ISIS Wants Us to Think Refugees Are the Enemy," Time Magazine, 

November 17,2015, available at, http://time.comi4117333 1

madeleine-albright-refugees/. 7 U.S. Committee For Refugees and Immigrants, "Security Screening of Refugees Admitted to the United States: A 

Detailed, Rigorous Process," available at; http:l/w .. vw.rcusa.org/uploads!pdfs/Refugce0/020resett)ement%10-

'%20step0;~)20by% >Ostcp0lo20U SCRI.pdf. 8 Id. 
137 

and refugee women are employed at the same rate as native women. 9 Many refugees go on to 

make substantial contributions to the U.S. economy and their communities. As the Migration 

Policy Institute noted, "Most refugee populations in the United States have integrated well, 

becoming productive residents and, often, citizens who enrich their communities and their new 

country. From Albert Einstein to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, refugees often give back much 

more than they take." 10 

9 Randy Capps, Kathleen Newland, Susan Fratzke, Susanna Groves, Michael Fix, Margie McHugh. and Gregory 

Auclair. "The Integration Outcomes of U.S. Refugees: Successes and Challenges," Migration Policy Institute, June 

20 15, available at, http://www .migrationpolicy .org/research/integration-outcomes-us-refugees-successes-andchallenges. 

1

° Kathleen Newland, "The U.S. Record Shows Refugees Are Not A Threat," Migration Policy Institute, October 

20 15. available at; http://vv\-VW. migralionpolicy.org/ncw~/us-rc<.;;ord-shows-r~ 1\Jgecs-arc-not-thrcat. 
138 

ATTACHMENT A 
139 

I . 

American 

Immigration 

Council 

An Overview of U.S. Refugee Law and Policy 

The United States passed its first official refugee legislation to address the plight of displaced Europeans 

following World War II. Most refugees are displaced from their country of origin to a neighboring country, and 

then resettled to a third country through international organizations. The United States resettles more 

refugees than any other country, refugees who go on to contribute to our communities and our economy. 

What is a refugee? 

A refugee, as defined by Section 101(a)(42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), is a person who is 

unable or unwilling to return to his or her home country because of a "well-founded fear of persecution" due to 

race, membership in a particular social group, political opinion, religion, or national origin. This definition is 

based on the Unit0d NJ_LionsJCJ:)l Convc:ntion and 196-r Protocn!s relating to the Status of Refugees! which the 

United States became a party to in Following the Vietnam War and the country's experience resettling 

Indochinese refugees, Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980, which [ncorpo[ilt~.d the Convention's 

definition into U.S. law and provides the legal basis fortoday's U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (US RAP). 

A person who meets the definition of a refugee, but who applies for this status from within the United Stateseither when they are seeking admission at a port of entry or after they have already entered the country in a 

different status or without status-is an asylee. The United States processes asylees differently than those who 

enter the country in refugee status; that process is not addressed in this fact sheet 

How many refugees are there in the world? 

According to illiti[£!, at the end of the 2014 there were an estimated 14.4 million refugees (a 19 

percent growth from the previous year). According to ""'-'.d.c,lCili.l.o'"'""" it is estimated that there are over 

4.2 million Syrian refugees. 

The for refugees in 2013 were Afghanistan (2.6 million), Syria (2.5 million) Somalia 

(Ll million), Sudan (650,000), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (499,600), and Myanmar 

(480,000) 

How many refugees does the United States admit? 

Each year the President, in consultation with Congress, determines the numerical ceiling for refugee 

admissions. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, the proposed ""''-'·'u.,;.-"?c.~crlill1331 G STREET NW SUITE 200 WASHINGTON DC 20005 I 202-507-7500 I americanimmigrationcouncil.org 
140 

An Overview of US Refugee law and Policy I American Immigration Council! November 2015 

Refugee Ceilings and Admitted Refugees to the United States, FY 2009-2015 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 

Ceiling • Total number of refugees admitted 

Over one-third of all refugee arrivals (3S 1 P£LQCQ1, or 24,579) in FY 2015 came from the Near East/South 

Asia-a region that includes Iraq, Iran, Bhutan, and Afghanistan. 

Another third of all refugee arrivals (32.1 percent, or 22,472) in FY 2015 came from Africa. 

Over a quarter of all refugee arrivals (26.4 percent, or 18,469) in FY 2015 came from East Asia -a region 

that includes China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. 

How does the U.S. refugee resettlement process work? 

The Refugee Admissions Program is jointly administered by the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 

(PRM) in the Department of State, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), and offices within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (USCIS) within DHS conducts refugee interviews and determines individual eligibility for 

refugee status in the United States. 

There are rhrt:E" principal catcrorics for classifying refugees under the U.S. refugee program: 

Priority One. Individuals with compelling persecution needs or those for whom no other durable solution 

exists. These individuals are referred to the United States by UNHCR, or they are identified by a U.S. 

embassy or a non-governmental organization (NGO). 

Page2of4 
141 

An Overview of U,S. Refugee Law and Polley J American Immigration CouncilJ November 2015 

Priority Two. Groups of "special concern" to the United States. which are selected by the Department of 

State with input from USCIS, UNHCR, and designated NGOs. Currently, the groups include certain persons 

from the former Soviet Union, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Iran. Burma, and Bhutan. 

Priority Three. The relatives of refugees (parents, spouses, and unmarried children under 21) who are 

already settled in the United States may be admitted as refugees. The U.S.-based relative must file an 

Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) and must be processed by DHS. 

Before admission to the United States, each refugee must undergo an extensive interviewing, screening, and 

security clearance process conducted by Regional Refugee Coordinators and overseas Resettlement Support 

Centers (RSCs). To qualify, individuals generally must not already be firmly resettled in any other country. Not 

everyone who falls into the three preceding categories is admitted to the United States. 

The INA requires most prospective refugees to prove their individual case of "well-founded fear," 

regardless of the person's country, circumstance, or classification in a priority category. 

Refugees are subject to the grounds of exclusion listed in Section 212(a) of the INA, including healthrelated grounds, moral/criminal grounds, and security grounds. They may also be excluded for polygamy, 

misrepresentation of facts on visa applications, smuggling, and previous deportations. Waivers exist for 

certain grounds of exclusion. 

After a refugee has been conditionally accepted for resettlement, the RSC sends a request for assurance of 

placement to the United States, and the Refugee Processing Center (RPC) works with llL:ill!~illi!lli.•ec'Lt 

(VOLAG) to determine where the refugee will live. Refugees resettled in the United States do not need 

to have a U.S. "sponsor." If a refugee approved for admission does have a relative living in the United States, 

every effort will be made to place the refugee near his or her relative. 

If a person is accepted as a refugee for admission to the United States, it is conditioned upon the 

individual passing a medical examination and ali security checks. 

o According to a report, the processing times of the U.S. refugee resettlement 

program "can be quite prolonged, leaving some refugees stranded in dangerous locations or in 

difficult circumstances." According to the Deoart<ne!lt oi Stetr• the entire process can take an 

average of 18-24 months to complete. These issues have improved in recent years; in a 2014 

report, the Oba1na i\clrninistrcJtion cited "interagency coordination and processing procedures" as 

one of the reasons for increased admissions. 

Once this assurance of placement has been secured and medical examinations and security checks have been 

completed, RSCs work together with the International Organization for Migration (!OM) to schedule and 

arrange refugee travel to the United States. 

Before departing, refugees sign a promissory note to repay the United States for their travel costs. This 

travel loan is an interest-free loan that refugees begin to pay back six months after arriving in the country. 

Upon receipt of the !OM travel notification, the VOLAG arranges for the reception of refugees at the airport 

and transportation to their housing at their final destination. 

Page3of4 
142 

An Overview of U.S. Refugee Law and Policy j American Immigration Councilj November 2015 

What happens once refugees arrive? 

A VOLAG is responsible for assuring that most services are provided during the refugee's first 90 days in the 

Unites States. They arrange for food, housing, clothing, employment counseling, medical care, and other 

necessities. 

One year after admission, a refugee may apply for Lawful Permanent Resident ("LPR") status. If they 

adjusted to LPR status, they may petition for naturalization five years after their arrival in the United 

States. 

In new refugee arrivals went to 46 states. Top recipient states were California (3,068), Michigan 

(2,753), Texas (2,462), Illinois (1,064), and Arizona (973). 

Refugees are J;::<QC'cled to have a job within six months of arrivaL Refugee men who have recently arrived 

are employed at a llilti.lc:· ra1<c than native born (67 percent to 60 percent respectively), and refugee women 

are employed at the same rate as native women. 

Page4of4 
143 

AMERICAN 

IMMIGRATION 

LAWYERS 

ASSOCIATION 

Statement of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 

Submitted to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

November 19, 2015 hearing 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

Contact: 

Greg Chen 

Director of Advocacy 

gchenriilaila.org; 202-507-7615 

Alyson Sincavage 

Legislative Associate 

asincavageru)aila.org; 202-507-7657 

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is the national association of 

immigration lawyers established to promote justice and advocate for fair and reasonable 

immigration law and policy. AILA has over 14,000 attorney and law professor members. 

The world is witnessing the largest refugee crisis since World War II, with an estimated 60 

million people currently forcibly displaced from their homes due to war, civil conflict, and 

persecution who are seeking safety either within their countries or in other countries. By itself, 

the civil war in Syria has forced over 4 million Syrians to flee as refugees into neighboring 

countries, and within Syria, nearly 12 million people are displaced internally. 

Following the violent, tragic attacks in Paris and Beirut last week, some of our nation's leaders 

are calling for the suspension of the U.S. refugee resettlement program or a ban on Syrian 

refugees. These refugees are fleeing exactly the kind of terror that unfolded last week and 

deserve international protection from persecution. We urge Congress not to pass legislation that 

would impose such restrictions on the U.S. refugee program which saves thousands of lives 

every year. 

The U.S. refugee program already has a rigorous security screening process. Before being 

selected and brought to the U.S., refugees undergo screening that involves multiple agencies, 

checks with government intelligence and security databases, and in-person interviews-a process 

that typically takes two years or more. This process minimizes the risk that someone intending 

to do harm would ever enter the U.S. through the refugee program. In fact, not a single reported 

act of terrorism has been committed on U.S. soil since the refugee program was begun in 1975. 

Protecting Syrian refugees 

Each day, thousands of Syrians make the terrifying decision to flee having borne witness to the 

destruction of their homes and neighborhoods, and the senseless killing of their family, friends, 

and neighbors. According to the U.N., more than half of all Syrian refugees are under the age of 

18. Children fleeing this horrible violence are at risk of falling ill, becoming malnourished, and 

being abused and exploited. The perils of remaining in Syria are so great that many risk 
144 

everything to make the dangerous journey to safety. In 2015, more than 2,500 refugees have 

died in the Mediterranean trying to attempt the journey. 

On September I 0, 2015, the Obama Administration pledged to resettle I 0,000 Syrian refugees 

for the fiscal year 2016. This was a welcome step, but only an initial step that must be followed 

by a more comprehensive plan to protect the millions in need. Other smaller and less affluent 

countries across the Atlantic are hosting far greater numbers of Syrian refugees, with a total of 

about 4 million being hosted in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. Several European countries 

have stepped up as well, most notably Germany, which committed to accepting 35,000 Syrian 

refugees, in addition to Syrian asylum seekers. 

The United States has the capacity to resettle at least 200,000 refugees in a single year. In 1980, 

the U.S. government accepted over 200,000 Vietnamese refugees, and in other years, similarly 

high numbers from Cuba, Northern Iraq, and Kosovo. 1 Our nation has always been a beacon of 

hope for those fleeing persecution and oppression, and we should accept far more than the 

85,000 total refugees planned for the next year. AILA calls upon our nation's leaders to increase 

our resettlement of refugees worldwide to 200,000 for the current fiscal year beginning October 

I, 2015. Of that total number, !00,000 should be refugees from Syria. 

Rigorous security and background checks for refugees 

Some commentators have recommended that the United States place additional restrictions on 

the refugee resettlement program to ensure national security and public safety. Since the terrorist 

attacks of September II, 2001, the U.S. government has implemented a detailed and rigorous 

security screening process for all refugees who are candidates for resettlement to the United 

States. These security protocols are extremely rigorous, and it is unnecessary for Congress to 

mandate additional measures. 

First, refugees are referred to the U.S. by the UNHCR, a U.S. embassy, or a trained nongovernmental organization. Refugees then undergo a series of biometric and investigatory 

background checks, including collection and analysis of personal data, fingerprints, photographs, 

and other background information, all of which is checked against government databases. All 

refugees must also appear for a detailed interview by trained DHS personnel. Where any 

security concerns exist, refugees must undergo additional screening by way of a Security 

Advisory Opinion, which requires clearance from multiple U.S. law enforcement and 

intelligence agencies before resettlement may be approved. 

Stopping fearmongering against Muslims 

In the media and public discourse, a dangerous sentiment against those of Muslim faith is taking 

hold. Some have suggested that the U.S. refugee resettlement program should exclude Muslims 

outright or prioritize other religious groups. Such a change to our laws and traditions would be a 

terrible mistake. Restricting refugee protection to certain faiths would be inconsistent with U.S. 

and international asylum law which do not discriminate against any religious group. Exclusion 

of Muslims from the U.S. resettlement program would leave thousands of people who have 

suffered horrific violence and persecution at the hands of ISIS or other warring factions without 

1 The United States resettled Ill ,000 Vietnamese refugees in 1979 and then doubled that number to 207,000 in 1980. 
145 

humanitarian protection. We call upon Congress to demonstrate leadership by speaking out 

against the scapegoating of any group during this time of crisis. 

AILA supports efforts to increase the capacity of DHS and the Department of State to process 

security and background checks for Syrian and other refugees so they can be efficiently cleared 

for resettlement. It is imperative that our country take the lead when responding to the global 

refugee crisis, and not close its doors to Syrian and other refugees. We should be setting a 

benchmark for the rest of the world. The United States has a proud history as a global 

humanitarian leader, one that has protected refugees from every part of the world. We must not 

retreat from this legacy when confronted with these recent violent attacks. Instead we must 

demonstrate the strength of our beliefs and renew our commitment to humanitarian protection 

worldwide. 
146 

COLUMBAN CENTER FOR ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH 

Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: 

Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement 

In the Wake of Attacks in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad 

We Urge Justice and Compassion, Not Vengeance and Hatred 

The Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach joins with people of all religious traditions to 

condemn the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad. and offer our deepest 

condolences to the f~1milies of the victims and survivors. We pray for an end to the senseless 

violence in Syria, which has claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people these past four 

years. 

For many years now, and in many countries, Columbans have worked with migrants and 

refugees, offering them hospitality and assistance as they seck to build a new life in a ftlreign 

country. In the United States, the Columban Mission Center in El Paso. TX has welcomed 

unaccompanied minors and migrants tleeing the violence in Central America and Mexico. while 

the Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach in Washington DC continues to work for 

comprehensive immigration rcfonn. 

In recent months, hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees have f1ed the violence in their home 

to seek refuge in Europe. They should not be punished for the acts of terrorists who have taken 

advantage of the refugee route to commit heinous crimes in other nations. We urge our political 

leaders and fellow citizens in all nations to open their hearts and borders to the millions of Syrian 

refugees who have tlcd their homes in search of safety and asylum. 

The refugees are not our enemy: they are our sisters and brothers, families with children, people 

like us who seck safety and shelter in a time of crisis. 

These refugees arc victims of the same terrorist violence that killed hundreds of innocent people 

this past weekend. We must respond to them with justice and compassion, not vengeance and 

hatred. We must bring to justice those who committed these heinous crimes, but let us also 

welcome their victims with compassion. 

And let us not forget so soon the message of Pope Francis on his recent visit to the United States, 

when he reminded us: 

"Our world is ji1cing a refugee crisis '<fa magnitude not seen since the Second World War. This 

presents us with great challenges and many hard decisions." 

Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach • 415 Michigan Avenue NE, Suite 225 • Washington DC 20017 
147 

COLUMBAN CENTER FOR ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH 

"All too ofien, those most in need ofour help are unable to be heard. You are their voice, and 

many ofyou havejaitl(/ullv made their cry heard " 

"In this witness, which.kequently encounters powerfit! resistance, you remind American 

democracv olthe idealsfor ·which it was founded, and that society is weakened whenever and 

wherever injustice prevails. " 

We urge our fellow citizens, religious and political leaders alike, to not tum our backs on the 

Syrian refugees. 

Since the beginning ofthe conflict_ nearly 12 million Syrians have lled their homes. 

This amounts to nearly half oft he country's population, who are now deprived of their basic 

rights to shelter and adequate housing, security and human dignity. More than 4 million people, 

most of them women and children. are staying in neighboring countries, and a further 8 million 

people arc believed to be internally displaced. 

We urge President Obama and the leaders of Congress to not close our doors to the Syrian 

refugees. Now more than ever they need our support Let us respond with justice and 

compassion. 

Ending the war and saving lives must be our top priority. To that end, a return to internationally 

mediated negotiations is imperative in order to pursue a political transition to a tree and 

democratic state. 

But while the war continues, and refugees flee their homes to protect their lives and the lives of 

their f~unilics. we must not tum them away ti·om our borders, or punish them for the acts of the 

very terrorists t\·om whom they arc fleeing. 

Remember, as Pope Francis reminded us, we too were once foreigners in a foreign land. Let us 

not be afraid to respond with justice and compassion. 

Rev. Timothy Mulroy, SSC 

U.S. Regional Director 

Missionary Society of St. Columban 

The Missionary Society of St. Columban is a Catholic missionary order founded in 1918. 

"As missionary disciples of Jesus, we are called to heal, reconcile, build bridges, and create mutual 

understanding through prophetic dialogue. Our commitment to inter-cultural and inter-faith dialogue, 

solidarity with marginalized people and the exploited earth are ways we participate in God's mission. 

Our proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus challenges us to build communities of peace." 

Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach* 415 Michigan Avenue NE, Suite 225 *Washington DC 20017 
148 

Christian 

Reformed 

Church 

MEMORANDUM 

CRCNA Statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

pertaining to its hearing on Lessons from the Paris Terrorists Attacks: Ramifications for the 

Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Thursday, November 19, 2015 

As Executive Director of the Christian Reformed Church in North America, !lament the attacks in Beirut, 

Baghdad, and Paris on November 12 and 13 and would like to express my grief for the victims and their 

families. 

In the wake of these attacks, anti-refugee sentiment has greatly increased throughout the world. Refugees 

--who are fleeing from the violence of terrorism-- should not be scapegoated for these extreme acts of 

violence. As Christians, we must speak clearly and loudly: we are called to welcome the stranger, protect 

the vulnerable, and love fearlessly. We are called to respond with love even amidst our fear. 

The world is still facing the largest refugee crisis in recorded history. We must continue to have 

compassion for the vulnerable individuals fleeing conflict in Syria. Refugees already go through security 

screenings that can take up to 1,000 days; unnecessary additions to the process would be neither 

compassionate nor caring. 

The Christian Reformed Church has a long history of welcoming the vulnerable and helping to resettle 

refugees in safe communities. The CRCNA pledges to fully participate in resettling Syrians of all 

religions during this current crisis as it has done with refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Cuba, 

Vietnam, and elsewhere. 

Sincerely, 

Dr. Steve Timmermans 

Executive Director, CRCNA 

1700 28th Street SE 

Grand Rapids Ml49508-1407 

616-241-1691 

616-224-5895 fax 

~ www,crcn;~,org 

3475 Mainway 

PO Box 5070 STN LCD I 

Burlington ON l7R JYS 

905-336-2920 

905-336-8344 fax 
149 

0 The 

CENTER tor 

VICTIMS of 

TORTURE 

Statement Submitted by the Center for Victims of Torture to the 

U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

The Center for Victims ofTorture (CVT) welcomes the opportunity to submit a statement for this timely 

and important hearing on the impact of ISIS and refugee resettlement. CVT provides healing services to 

survivors of torture and severe war atrocities at its clinics in the United States, the Middle East and 

Africa and engages in training and capacity building initiatives in support of torture survivor 

rehabilitation programs worldwide. CVT's largest program serves urban refugees in Jordan. In 2015, CVT 

provided inter-disciplinary counseling, physical therapy and social work services to over 1,000 Syrian and 

Iraqi refugees who come to us with severe psychological and physical wounds resulting from torture and 

other traumatic experiences. 

As the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee considers the impact of ISIS as it 

relates to refugees being resettled to the United States, CVT urges the honorable members of the 

Committee to not conflate the victims of terrorist activities and/or mass government-sponsored 

atrocities with the perpetrators of such horrific acts. At all of CVT's programs that are helping survivors 

heal from severely traumatic experiences associated with war, violence, terrorism and government 

repression, we see the impacts of such horrors every day. 

CVT abhors the brutal and inhumane tactics that have been employed in the course of the Syrian and 

Iraqi conflicts and by terrorist organizations with roots or bases in Syria and/or Iraq, including but not 

limited to ISIS. We stand in solidarity with efforts to bring perpetrators of torture, war crimes and other 

human rights violations on all sides of the conflict to justice. We also support measures to ensure that 

the United States is not a safe haven for human rights violators and that the U.S. refugee resettlement 

program is not exploited as a way for terrorists to enter the United States. At the same time, we believe 

that national security protections and a robust refugee resettlement program are not mutually 

exclusive. 

The Syrian and Iraqi Refugee Crises 

As the conflict in Syria shows few signs of subsiding and its spill-over effects are increasingly evidentincluding through the rise and expansion of ISIS and the escalation of violence in Iraq-the levels of 

suffering, damage and despair throughout the region are immense. The UN High Commissioner for 

Refugees (UNHCR) reports that over 4 million Syrians are registered as refugees, with the majority in 

Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan.' The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) 

estimates that 6.5 million people are displaced internally in Syria, with 13.5 million people in need of 

1 U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees: Syrian Regional Refugee Response, July 15, 2015, 

http:// data. u n her .org/syria n refugees/regia na I .ph p. 

1 
150 

humanitarian assistance.' Throughout the region, people are scrambling to survive. Iraqi refugees who 

fled to Syria in the mid-2000's have seen their new communities in Syria destroyed and are facing 

displacement again. Syrians who fled to Iraq in 2012 and 2013 are being forced to flee from violence 

there. Iraqis who may have returned when the country began to appear more stable are being forced 

back into exile in neighboring countries or displaced internally. OCHA reports estimates of more than 3.2 

million people internally displaced within Iraq and 8.7 million people in need of humanitarian 

assistance.' 

Without the prospect of returning home in the near future and conditions for refugees in highly strained 

host communities ranging from challenging to hostile to impossible, refugees are becoming more 

frustrated and more desperate.• At CVT's program in Jordan, clients report that life is extraordinarily 

challenging for refugees. One CVT client commented, "We are like the living dead here." Work 

authorization is highly restricted and most refugees in Jordan do not have permission to work legally and 

earn a living. Simultaneously humanitarian assistance is being reduced or cut, leaving refugees in an 

impossible situation of having neither the means nor the opportunity to meet their basic needs of 

shelter, food, medical assistance and education. A CVT staff member in Jordan explained, "Syrians are 

feeling anger and frustration. Before they had the belief about returning, now they are stuck and they 

don't know what to do." 

U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program: A Lifeline for Refugees in Need 

The needs of Syrian and Iraqi refugees cannot be ignored. As part of this, the United States must 

substantially increase the number of Syrians it resettles in the coming years. Refugee resettlement not 

only helps address the immediate protection needs of some of the most vulnerable of refugees, it is also 

a vital component of international-responsibility sharing. 

For example, "Amal's"5 family has been severely affected by the war in Syria: 

Amal's oldest son was killed in an attack an his car while attempting to flee Syria. Two of her younger 

children have also suffered war-related injuries-her 19 year old suffers from a severe back injury that 

prevents him from being able to carry heavy objects. Her 7 year old was shot in the head and now has a 

facial disfigurement that will require specialized medical attention to repair. Her husband and two oldest 

sons -ages 19 and 21- were arrested in a neighborhood sweep, even though they were never involved in 

ony opposition activities. They were imprisoned for four months. During that time, officers tried to force 

them to "confess" but they had nothing to confess. When her husband returned home, he was severely 

malnourished and looked hollow. They hit him with rods and pipes on his hands. He'd been beaten so 

much that his teeth were all broken and his thumbs were fractured. 

The family was once quite rich and prosperous in Syria. Amal's husband was a business owner in 

Damascus. They lost everything- their home was destroyed by a rocket attock on their neighborhood. 

After their home was destroyed, they spent 6 months internally displaced in Syria prior to arriving in 

2 U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Syrian Arab Republic Crisis Overview, November 2015, 

http://www.unocha.org/syria. 

3 U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: Iraq Crisis Overview, November 2015, http://www.unocha.org/iraq. 4 CARE International in Jordan, Five Years into Exile: The challenges faced by Syrian refugees outside camps in Jordan and how 

they and their host communities are coping, June 30, 2015, htto:lfwww.care1nternationaLorg/uploaddocument/news/publications/english/care%20f!ve%20years%20!nto%20exi!e%20exec%20summary%2 

02015%20print%20final%20recut.pdf. 

s Written informed consents for use of client stories are on file with CVT. Names have been changed to protect confidentiality. 

2 
151 

Jordon. The family's journey to Jordan was very difficult- there were rockets and bombs everywhere, 

forcing them to travel/ate and in the dark. The family is suffering in Jordan -they feel dehumanized, 

dependent and hopeless about the future. Amal wants to be resettled so that her children can have 

opportunities and get an education. 

Similarly, "Sayeed" believes his family's only hope will come through resettlement to a third country: 

Sayeed is the father of four from Hams, Syria. Prior to the war, he owned a thriving business and lived a 

comfortable life with his family. He participated in early peaceful demonstrations in 2011-ho/ding signs 

and leading the crowd in pro-democracy, pro{reedam chants. Intelligence officers taking photos during 

the demonstration turned him in and, in the middle of the night, he was attacked his home. He was 

arrested a few months later at a regime checkpoint and held in prison far seven months. Far the first two 

months in prison, he was tortured daily-beaten with cables, farced to raise his hands far up far 90 

minutes, farced ta strip naked and subjected ta sexual torture, chained to his core and hung from the 

ceiling, and burned with cigarettes. After being released, his family obtained Jordanian visas and fled 

Syria. Life in Jordan is very difficult. They are nat allowed work and the limited UNHCR support they receive 

is nat enough- his family can't afford basic necessities. They last everything they had in Syria. His only 

hope is that in the future his family can be resettled ta a third country. 

The United States can-and must-help families like Amal's and Sayeed's, who are full of hope and 

potential yet lost everything in Syria and now lack options and opportunities. The United States can do 

this while simultaneously protecting national security. In fact, USRAP's eligibility criteria and scrutiny are 

so rigorous at each stage that refugees are the most thoroughly screened people to travel into the 

United States. Prior to being admitted, all refugees undergo a series of meticulous security screenings 

conducted by the U.S. government. These checks include multiple biographic and identity investigations; 

FBI biometric checks of fingerprints and photographs; in-depth, in-person interviews by specialized and 

well-trained Department of Homeland Security officers; medical screenings; and other checks by U.S. 

domestic and international intelligence agencies including the National Counterterrorism Center and 

National Security Counci1.6 

The commitment by the Obama Administration to resettle 85,000 refugees in FY 2016, including at least 

10,000 Syrian refugees, is a step forward. Thus far, the United States has only resettled 1,854 Syrian 

refugees. 7 Nevertheless, given the scale and severity of refugee needs globally, current U.S. 

resettlement goals are still far more modest than the number of people the United States can and 

should welcome. CVT continues to call on the United States to resettle 200,000 refugees in FY 2016 with 

100,000 of them being Syrian. 

5 Center for American Progress, "lnfographic: The Screening Process for Entry to the United States for Syrian Refugees/' 

https://www.amerlcanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/11/18/125812/infographic~the-screening-process-forentry-to-the-unlted-states-for-syrian-refugees/. 

7 New York Times, "Paris Attack Intensifies Debate Over How Many Syrian Refugees to Allow into the U.S./' 

http://www.nytlmes.com/interactive/2015/10/21/us/where~syrian-refugees-are-in-the-united-states.html. November 16, 

2015. 

3 
152 

(t) 

cws CWS Statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Government Affairs pertaining to its hearing 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Thu.,;day, November 19, 2015 

As a 69-year old humanitarian organization representing 37 Protestant, Anglican and Orthodox communions and 33 refugee 

resettlement offices across the country, Church World Service urges the Committee, as it discusses Syrian refugees, to 

affirm the importance of the U.S. refugee resettlement program, which has the most robust screening procedures in the 

world. CWS urges all Senators to reject any proposals that would stop the resettlement of Syrian refugees or put at risk vital 

funding for refugee protection overseas and resettlement in the United States. 

Syria is experiencing the worst humanitarian crisis the world has seen in twenty years, with approximately four million 

refugees and eight million internally displaced persons. Roughly three-quarters of those displaced are women and 

children. Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt currently host more than three million Syrian refugees. This crisis is 

complex and requires a variety of solutions, including refugee resettlement, which plays a strategic role in alleviating 

pressure on host countries in the region, demonstrating international leadership, and providing durable solutions and 

opportunities for a new life for vulnerable populations fleeing persecution. While less than one percent of the world's 

estimated 19.5 million refugees are resettled to a third country, resettlement saves lives and also helps encourage other 

countries to provide durable solutions for refugees within their borders, including local integration. 

The United States is one of 28 countries that resettles refugees. The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is a 

public-private partnership that helps rescue refugees who have no other means of finding safety. To be considered a 

refugee, individuals must prove that they have fled persecution due to their nationality, ethnicity, religion, political opinion 

or membership in a particular social group. Refugees face three options: return to their home country, integrate in the 

country to which they first fled or be resettled to a third country. For the millions who are unable to return home due to 

significant threats to their safety and rejection by the country to which they first fled, resettlement is the last resort. While 

traditionally a world leader in refugee resettlement, the United States has only resettled about 2,000 Syrian refugees. 

During World War II, the United States admitted more than 650,000 displaced Europeans, and following the fall of Saigon, 

annual resettlement numbers ranged from 100,000 to more than 200,000 throughout the 1980s. 

The refugee resettlement program is the most difficult way to enter the United States, routinely taking individuals longer 

than 1,000 days to be processed. Security measures are intrinsic to the integrity of the refugee program, and over the 

years, the U.S. government has continuously fine-tuned the system to maximize domestic security. All refugees undergo 

thorough and rigorous security screenings prior to arriving in the United States, including but not limited to multiple 

biographic and identity investigations; FBI biometric checks of applicants' fingerprints and photographs; in-depth, inperson interviews by well-trained Department of Homeland Security officers; medical screenings; investigations by the 

National Counterterrorism Center; and other checks by U.S. domestic and international intelligence agencies. 

In addition, mandatory supervisory review of all decisions; random case assignment; inter-agency national security teams; 

trained document experts; forensic tes~ng of documents; and interpreter monitoring are in place to maintain the security of 

the refugee resettlement program. Due to technological advances, Syrian refugees are also undergoing iris scans to confirm 

their identity through the process. Thus, refugees are the most vetted individuals to travel to the United States. 

U.S. communities, schools, congregations, and employers welcome refugees and help them integrate in their new 

homes. In turn, refugees contribute to their new communities with their innovative skills, dedicated work, and inspiring 

perseverance. Through the Matching Grant Program, 80% of refugees find employment and become self sufficient within 

their first four to six months in the United States, an impressive success rate during an economic downturn and given the 

difficulty of learning a new language and rebuilding one's life in a new country. Refugees provide substantial contributions 

to the workforce and to local economic development. Many refugees are highly skilled and obtained high levels of 

education in their home countries. Additionally, refugees frequently begin successful business ventures after resettling in 

the United States and participate in civic engagement activities to give back to their new communities. 

CWS calls on Congress to support resettlement as a lifesaving program and affirm the need to increase the resettlement 

of Syrian refugees during this time of crisis. Proposals to stop the resettlement of Syrian refugees are reminiscent of 

sobering times in this nation's history, when U.S. law specifically prohibited persons of Chinese descent from immigrating 

to the United States, when the coastguard returned Jewish people back to Germany during the Holocaust, and when the 

military imprisoned Japanese Americans in internment camps. History will judge us all in this moment, when we had the 

opportunity to stand in solidarity with the victims of ISIS and work together to defeat hate, or to instead turn our backs on 

them in cruel irony. We call on our elected officials to stand with the millions of Americans across the country who are 

donating to help refugees abroad and volunteering to welcome refugees in their communities. CWS stands committed to 

working with both chambers of Congress and the Administration to resettle Syrian refugees as part of the implementation 

of our foreign policy and humanitarian responsibilities. We urge all Senators to support these efforts to provide safety to 

vulnerable refugees from Syria and beyond. 
153 

, ,IQJ-JI Disciples \~\ M Home ,_..._,. Missions 

DISCIPLES HOME MISSIONS STATEMENT 

TO THE U.S. SENATE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE, FOR THE NOV. 19,2015 HEARING ON: 

THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND AND REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 

As a North American Christian faith movement of over 600,000 which was birthed on the American frontier, our 

congregations have long cherished the principle of freedom of religion for communities of all backgrounds. We 

are grateful to be part of a faith tradition that has spoken again and again of our key faith value of welcoming 

the stranger despite religious or cultural background. Since WWII, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in 

the U.S. and Canada has worked through our Disciples Home Missions office of Refugee & Immigration 

Ministries, in partnership with Church World Service, to resettle over 40,000 refugees in the past six decades. 

Now, in these days when our world is facing the worst humanitarian crisis since the end of World War II, we reaffirm strongly our readiness to continue to embrace refugees, and to welcome them without exclusion. We 

are ready to do so because we are called to love our neighbor as ourselves. Indeed, in light of the reality of 

over 60 million displaced persons and 20 million refugees in the world, we urge congress to support a greatly 

increased number of refugee arrivals in the coming years. We are aware that Secretary of State Kerry has 

requested the U.S. to resettle 85,000 overall refugees in 2016 and 100,000 in 2017. 

Instead, we strive for a greater goal of hospitality-one which our history has shown is attainable through 

strong community and government partnerships. We believe that, just as the U.S. admitted over 650,000 

European refugees during WWII, and between 100,000-200,000 Southeast Asian refugees for over a decade 

and a half after the Vietnam War, we are capable now to safely admit even greater numbers than the 

recommended 85 000 in 2016 and 100,000 in 2017. We also urge Congress to expedite the processing of 

Syrian refugee applications, and improve refugee admissions processes to reduce waiting times for longsuffering families. Further, we recognize that the multiple existing levels of refugee security screenings mean 

refugees are the most heavily scrutinized of all arrivals into the United States. This amount of security is 

appropriate and of greatest importance. However, we encourage Congress to take note that refugees are the 

most thoroughly vetted group of people who ever enter the United States, with rigorous screenings that engage 

the Dept of Homeland Security, FBI, Dept. of Defense, and multiple intelligence agencies. We must support 

these screenings, while at the same time continuing to welcome refugees who have the same enemy of "ISIS". 

In our international partnerships in mission, we have consistently observed families struggling desperately to 

stay together, and even to remain alive, because of the spiral of violence in their homelands. We commend 

the U.S. commitment of $4.5 billion to the region. Yet, as we encourage other international communities to 

increase their contributions, we advocate for the U.S. to offer additional humanitarian aid to counter root 

causes in the Middle East, where the majority of refugees remain. Together with multiple faith partners, we 

urge that a negotiated solution to the Syria crisis be made a top U.S. diplomatic priority, and that armed 

involvement of partners must cease, together with provision of arms, and training of opposition groups. 

We see many Christians, Muslims, Jews, and families of other faiths persecuted. As we support relationships 

of peace and solidarity across religious divides internationally, we are absolutely opposed to any legislation 

here in the U.S. that would prioritize Christian refugees at the expense or rejection of Muslim refugees and 

individuals of other faiths. Rather, we must counter anti-Muslim sentiment at every turn-allowing us to offer 

protection to Syrian refugees who are our world's most vulnerable. By so doing, we will welcome opportunities 

for relationship with hard working doctors, lawyers, teachers, business owners, coaches, pastors, imams. 

There is a moral challenge directly before us. Our congregations are calling us constantly, expressing their 

willingness to help house, teach English, mentor, employ, and surround the wortd's most vulnerable people. 

Members of Congress, we urge you to do all you can to open these doors of opportunities for the world's most 

vulnerable persons-and we are ready to continuing to partner in welcoming all who come to our shores. 
154 

Franciscan Action Network 

Transforming the World in the Spirit ot St. f·rancis and St. dare 

FAN Statement to the House Judiciary Committee for its November 19,2015 Hearing: Lessons 

from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement 

Franciscan Action Network, with 50 institutional members and approximately 12,000 

Franciscans across the United States, religious and lay men and women, primarily but not totally 

Catholic, urges an increase in resettlement of refugees in fiscal year 2016, especially for Syrian 

refugees fleeing from violent conflict. With over 60 million displaced people around the world, 

the United States resettled fewer than 70,000 refugees this past fiscal year. Secretary of State 

John Kerry announced plans for our country to resettle 85,000 refugees in fiscal year 2016 and 

I 00,000 in fiscal year 2017. This increase is very modest compared with the number of 650,000 

displaced Europeans during World War II, and, following the fall of Saigon, annual resettlement 

numbers ranging from 100,000 to 200,000 during the 1980's. 

Resettlement security measures are integral to the United States program and the government 

continually fine-tunes the program to maximize domestic security. All refugees undergo 

rigorous security screenings. Through the Matching Grant program, 80 % of refugees find 

employment and become self-sufficient within six months, an impressive rate of integration 

which also involves learning a new language. Many refugees are highly skilled and educated. 

Resettlement saves lives and also helps to encourage other countries to provide for refugees 

within their borders. 

As a faith based organization, FAN heeds the call of the Scriptures and our church leaders to 

welcome the stranger, especially families who are fleeing violence in their home countries. We 

have special concern for Syrian refugees, yet the United States has resettled only 1,700 refugees 

from Syria. We call on our government to admit 100,000 Syrian refugees over and above annual 

resettlement numbers. And we urge members of Congress to heed the message of Pope Francis 

when he visited our country, to put a human face on the numbers of refugees. 
155 

·t human rights first 

HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST 

Written Statement for 

Senate Homeland Security Committee 

342 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

November 19, 2015 

The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

We are pleased to submit this statement on behalf of Human Rights First. Human Rights First works in 

the United States and abroad to promote a secure and humane world by advancing justice, human 

dignity and respect for the rule of law. Human Rights First is an independent advocacy organization that 

challenges America to live up to its ideals. We are a non-profit, nonpartisan international human rights 

organization with offices in New York, Washington D.C., and Houston, Texas. 

For over 30 years, we've built bipartisan coalitions and teamed up with frontline activist and lawyers to 

tackle issues that demand American leadership, including the protecting of the rights and refugees who 

flee persecution. Protecting the persecuted is a core American value. Reflecting this country's deepseated commitment to liber and human dignity, as well as its pledge under the 1951 Refugee 

Convention's Protocol, the United States has long led efforts to protect those who flee from political, 

religious and other persecutions. 

The world is facing the largest refugee crisis since World War II and needs American leadership. The 

United States can protect its security while also protecting refugees from persecution. Human Rights 

First has condemned the brutal terrorist attacks in Paris. In the wake of those attacks, the United States 

should remain true to its ideals and commitment to protect refugees who have fled persecution and 

violence. Refugees are more closely vetted than any other group coming to the United States. As further 

detailed in attached fact sheet, the current system of background and security checks for Syrian 

refugees being resettled to the United States is the most rigorous vetting process applied to any people 
156 

coming to the United States. The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees first registers refugees, 

interviews them, takes biometric data and background information. These refugees-overwhelmingly 

women and children-have been living in Jordan, Turkey or other frontline refugee-hosting countries for 

years, struggling to survive. The U.S. government then conducts its own extremely rigorous screening 

process, including health checks, repeated biometric checks, several layers of biographical and 

background screening, and interview conducted abroad by specially-trained Department of Homeland 

Security officers. Multiple agencies are involved, including the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the State 

Department, DHS, the National Counterterrorism Center, Department of Defense, and U.S. intelligence 

agencies. DHS has added an additional country-specific layer of enhanced review for Syrian refugee 

applications, which includes extra screening for national security risks. 

A halt or "pause" in the U.S. resettlement system would send exactly the wrong message to the worldincluding to U.S. allies and to the refugees who have already been waiting for years in our resettlement 

process. U.S. allies in the Middle East, including Jordan and NATO ally Turkey, have been struggling for 

years to host Syrian refugees. They need the United States, the global resettlement leader, to launch a 

meaningful and robust resettlement initiative for Syrian refugees. This effort is already long overdue. 

Globally about 60 million people have been forced to flee their homes. Over 4 million Syrians have fled 

their country, and many have been stranded for years in neighboring countries where they can't work, 

cannot support their families, have little access to education, and face shortages in food and other 

assistance due to massive underfunding of UN humanitarian aid appeals. Syria's neighbors, faced with 

overwhelming refugee numbers and inadequate international support, have made it more difficult for 

refugees to enter to seek protection or extend their stays. Meanwhile, the fighting and violence within 

Syria has intensified, leaving refugees with little hope that they will be able to safely return. 

Many are turning to dangerous routes to reach places of safety where they can rebuild their 

lives. Hundreds of thousands have embarked on risky journeys in an attempt to reach Europe. 

How the United States addresses this refugee crisis, particularly in the wake of the Paris terrorist 

attacks, wilt be a critical test for U.S. leadership. The United States has played a leading role in providing 

humanitarian assistance, giving over $4 billion to relief efforts both within Syria and in neighboring 

countries. This is consistent both with U.S. leadership on humanitarian relief and its strategic interest in 

preventing further destabilization of the region. But the U.S. government can and should do more, 

including by using its unique position as a global leader to champion the protection of refugees trying to 

flee from Syria and to launch a meaningful resettlement initiative. 

The United States has not launched a significant resettlement initiative that would demonstrate to 

Syria's neighbors a real commitment to share in hosting at least some of Syria's refugees and would 

encourage other resettlement states to follow suit. A meaningful resettlement initiative, in addition to 

providing a future to the individual refugees and families it would directly assist, should be seen as part 

of a broader effort to increase the protection space available to Syrian refugees in the region and 

globally. 

Such a response would also help support the stability of refugee hosting states in the region including 

key U.S. allies like Jordan. As Ambassador Ryan Crocker pointed out this week in a piece in the Wall 

Street Journal: "Increased assistance would protect the stability of a region home to U.S. allies, 

including Jordan, NATO's Turkey and Lebanon, all of which are hosting refugees. The infrastructure-
157 

water, sewage, medical care and education-of these states is overwhelmed. A major resettlement and 

aid initiative can relieve that strain. But left unaddressed, the strain will feed instability and trigger more 

violence across the region, which will have consequences for U.S. national security." 

The United States has long been a leader in protecting refugees and has typically resettled about half of 

the refugees identified as in need of resettlement each year. The United States has only resettled about 

1,800 Syrian refugees since the Syrian conflict began nearly five years ago. Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon 

are hosting about 4 million Syrian refugees. Meanwhile Germany has announced it can host 800,000. 

This level of U.S. response falls far short of global leadership, and our resettlement process is much too 

slow, often taking two years or longer. 

The United States must lead, and lead by example. Not only is it the right thing to do, but it is 

strategically smart. In addition to supporting Europe, a stronger refugee response will promote the 

stability of states bordering Syria including key U.S. allies in the region such as Jordan. 

In light of this global emergency situation, we urge the United States to lead a comprehensive global 

initiative in partnership with European and other states to improve access to protection for refugees. 

We urge the President and Congress to: 

1. Reject Efforts to Halt or "Pause" Refugee Resettlement. Jordan, Turkey, and U.S. allies in Europe 

need the United States to lead global efforts to resettle refugees and to improve the pace and scale 

of U.S. resettlement efforts. Practically speaking, pausing a program that is already moving at a 

snail's pace would be devastating. It would also exacerbate the crisis in Europe by signaling that the 

United States is pulling back on its already minimal resettlement efforts, prompting more refugees 

to try to reach Europe given the lack of timely and orderly routes to refuge. With respect to the 

American Safe Act, it would also prolong the already lengthy waits facing Iraqi refugees, including 

those who are at risk due to their work with the U.S. government or U.S. organizations and media. It 

would effectively shut down the resettlement of refugee families from the Syria and Iraq region, at 

least for months or years, and create an unworkable "certification" requirement that would make it 

nearly impossible to resettle any refugee families from the region given the level of bureaucratic 

coordination and time this process would require from very high level officials. 

2. Increase Resettlement and other Routes to Protection. The United States should lead a global 

initiative that includes many countries to resettle Syrian refugees. The United States should 

increase its own resettlement commitment to 100,000 Syrian refugees and implement more 

expeditious routes to protection for Syrian refugees with family in the United States and other atrisk refugees. In the next month, the administration should appoint a high-level coordinator in the 

White House to oversee the refugee response. This officials should be tasked with securing 

significant improvements in the pace of the U.S. resettlement program. The U.S. should press other 

countries to sharply increase resettlement or other admission routes, and call on the European 

Union to create safe and legal ways for refugees to reach Europe. Overt he next six months, the 

United States should review and reform its delay-plagued resettlement process to be more timely 

and effective without compromising security. 
158 

3. Meet humanitarian assistance goal. The United States should lead a global push to secure 100% 

funding of the UN's humanitarian appeal for the Syria crisis, set a strong example by further 

stepping up its contribution to cover a higher percentage of the appeal, significantly increase 

development funding for refugee-hosting countries, press wealthy states to increase contributions 

and develop longer term strategies for meeting the front-line needs of refugees and hosting 

communities. 

4. Champion protection for refugees. The United States should encourage states in the region 

neighboring Syria- and in Europe and beyond- to respect the human rights of refugees and 

migrants, including to allow refugees to work to support their families, to educate children, to 

facilitate access to higher education, and to respect obligations to protect people from arbitrary 

detention and return to persecution. 

5. Redouble efforts to find effective multilateral solutions to the political and security crisis in Syria 

and to address the human rights abuses causing so many people to flee in search of protection. 

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, leading Jewish groups, major faith-based groups, and even the 

~have called on the United States to respond to this refugee crisis. Human Rights First and other 

leading organizations focused on refugee protection and refugee resettlement have called on the 

administration to resettled at least 100,000 Syrian refugees in fiscal year 2016. Various national security 

professionals including national security experts and officials who served in both democratic and 

republican administrations have called on the United States to lead by example to commit to resettling 

100,000 refugees. 

The United States has always led in time of international crises. This country should continue to be a 

beacon on human rights. Human Rights First believes that America is strongest when our policies and 

ideals match our actions. 
159 

human rights first 

American ideals. Universal values. 

FACT SHEET: November 2015 

Refugee Resettlement· Security Screening Information 

Refugees to the United States are more stringently screened and vetted than any other group allowed to enter the country. 

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees first registers refugees, interviews them, takes biometric data and background information. These 

refugees-overnhelmingly women and children-have been living in Jordan, Turkey or other frontline refugee·hostlng countries for years, struggling 

to survive. UNHCR has data from its regular interactions with these refugees over the years. Resettlement helps support the stability of nations that 

are key U.S. allies, as they are straining under the pressure of hosting so many refugees. Only those who pass the U.N. assessment are referred to 

the United States for resettlement. At least 18,000 have already been through the U.S. process and are awaiting U.S. government consideration and 

review. 

The U.S. government then conducts its own extremely rigorous screening process, including health checks, repeated biometric checks, several 

layers of biographical and background screening, and in-person interviews by specially-trained officers. Multiple agencies are involved, including the 

FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the National Counterterrorism Center, 

the Department of Defense and U.S. inte!Hgence agencies. OHS has added an additional country~specific layer of review for Syrian refugee 

app!lcations, which includes extra screening for national security risks. 

Secretary Jeh Johnson outlined this process in Congressional testimony in October 2015: 

"With regard to the current refugee crisis, the U.S. is committed to providing refuge to some of the world's most vulnerable 

people, while carefully screening refugees for security concerns before admitting them to the United States. The reality is that, 

with improvements to the process we have made over time, refugees are subject to the highest level of security checks. DHS 

works in concert with the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the 

FBI's Terrorist Screening Center for the screening and vetting of refugees. The U.S. Government conducts both biographic 

and biometric checks on refugee appHcat!ons, including security vetting that takes place at multiple junctures in the application 

process, and even just before arrival to account for changes in intelligence. All refugees admitted to the United States, 

including those from Syria, will be subject to this stringent security screening. Acting on my direction, USCJS has developed 

additional protocols to aid in the identification of security concerns with regard to the Syrian population, and the entire 

Department, along with the interagency, is committed to continua! improvement of overall security vetting, as new techniques 

or sources of information are identified.~ 

More specifically, the U.S. refugee vetting process for Syrian refugees includes the following elements as outlined by 

Department of Homeland Security officials: 

Department of Homeland Security Interviews: Refugees are interviewed by DHS·USCIS officers to determine whether or not they can 

be approved for resettlement to the United States. These interviews are conducted while refugees are still abroad. 

Consular Lookout and Watch List Check: Biographic checks are conducted against the State Department's Consular Lookout and 

Support System (CLASS)-which includes watch list information. 

Human Rights First 
160 

.~~~-'-F"-A:::CT SHEET 

Security Advisory Opinions from Intelligence and Other Agencies: DHS seeks Security Advisory Opinions (SACs} from law 

enforcement and intelligence communities for cases that meet certain criteria. 

National Counterterrorism Center Checks with Intelligence Agency Support: Interagency checks, known as ~lAC's," are conducted 

with the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) for all refugee applicants within a designated age range, regardless of nationality. In 

addition, expanded intelligence community support was added to the lAC process in July 2010, and recurrent vetting was added in 2015 so 

that any intervening derogatory information that is identified after the initial check has cleared but before the applicant has traveled to the 

United States will be provided to DHS. 

DHS and FBI Biometric Checks: Fingerprints are screened against the vast biometric holdings of tne Federal Bureau of Investigation's 

Next Generation Identification system, and are screened and enrolled in DHS's Automated Biometric Identification System (IDE NT). 

Through IDENT, the applicant's fingerprints are screened not only against watch list information, but also for previous immigration 

encounters in the United States and overseas-including cases in which the applicant previously applied for a visa at a U.S. embassy. 

Department of Defense Biometric Screening: Biometric screening is also conducted through tne Department of Defense (DOD) 

Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS). ABIS contains a variety of records, including fingerprint records captured in Iraq. ABIS 

screening has been expanded to refugee applicants of all nationalities who faH within the prescribed age ranges. 

Enhanced Review for Syrian Cases: In addition to the many biometric and biographic checks conducted, DHS-USCIS has instituted 

additional review of Syrian refugee applications. Before being scheduled for interview by a DHS-USCIS officer (while the refugee is still 

abroad), Syrian cases are reviewed at DHS-USCIS headquarters. All cases that meet certain criteria are referred to the DHS-USCIS Fraud 

Detection and National Security Directorate (FDNS} for additional review and research. FDNS conducts open-source and classified 

research on referred cases and synthesizes an assessment for use by the interviewing officer. This information provides case-specific 

context relating to country conditions and regional activity, and is used by the interviewing officer to inform lines of inquiry related to the 

applicant's e!lgibillty and credibility. DHS-USCIS reports that FDNS engages with law enforcement and intelligence community members 

for assistance with identity verification and acquisition of add!Uonal information. 

• Additional Screening Checks on Entry: When they travel to the United States, refugees are subject to screening conducted by DHS~ 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection's National Targeting Center-Passenger and the Transportation Security Administration's Secure 

Flight program prior to their admission to the United States, as is the case with aU individuals traveling to the United States regardless of 

immigration program. 

Addilional Resources: 

The Wall Street Journa!in a video outlines the steps a refugee must go through to reach the United States. 

• The New York Times in an interactive map shows where Syrian refugees currently reside. 

• Q.QnQoleez.a Rice: In Alabama said she hopes America can remain Hopen and welcoming" to refugees fteeing violence in the world, 

including Syria 

David Miliband: "There are many ways to come to the United States. Comparatively the refugee resettlement program is the most difficult 

short of swimming the Atlantic.'' 

Fran Townsend: "There are no easy answers in Syria, but it's time to stop acting as if the problems there are too hard or too complicated. 

While we cannot right the wrong of the current policy failure, it is still possible to act now to both alleviate tt1e consequent suffering and 

mitigate the potential future." 

• ~overnQ[ Nikki M~: "These are people who have protected our troops, tnese are people who have been persecuted for being Christian 

... these are people who we took in because they were unsafe 'Nhere they were.n 

Finally, states cannot unilaterally block resettlement. Governors do not have the legal authority to determine who lives in their states. 

When refugees are legally admitted to the United States they have the right to move freely throughout the country. 

Human Rights First 
161 

Statement by Gainesville FL Interfaith Alliance for Immigrant Justice 

To the Senate Hearing Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: 

Ramifications from the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

November 19, 2015 

The Gainesville, Florida, Interfaith Alliance for Immigrant Justice has 

previously asked Congress to increase the number of Syrian refugees 

offered a refuge in the United States to at least 100,000 and we now 

respectfully repeat that request and not limit the number of refugees 

admitted to this country any further. 

The Gainesville City Commission is actively seeking to make Gainesville 

a Welcoming City for people from around the world and building strong 

community support for Welcoming Refugees. Our Interfaith Alliance 

for Immigrant Justice has developed a network of faith leaders from the 

Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities who are committed to 

providing hospitality for as many Syrian refugees as may be sent here. 

We have firm offers for housing, jobs, and other support from business 

and other community leaders. We have a full-time staff person ready 

to direct this welcoming project. 

We ask you not to turn your backs on Gainesville, Florida, whose 

citizens of many faiths and none are united in welcoming strangers who 

are victims of war and in rejecting every form of religious bigotry. 
162 

Written Statement for the Record 

Submitted by Jennifer Sime, Senior Vice President, U.S. Programs 

International Rescue Committee 

To, U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

For the Hearing: "The Impact ofiSIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19,2015 

In the wake of the horrific attacks in Paris last Friday, the United States has shown the very best of America's 

compassion -the U.S. government has pledged assistance to help the French government bring those 

responsible to justice and individuals around the country have expressed outrage and solidarity with the 

victims in Paris. 

Unfortunately, the compassion of some has not extended to refugees. We have seen calls to action that are 

entirely incompatible with fundamental American values. Among these, some elected officials have called to 

suspend or restrict resettlement of some refugees on the basis of national origin or religious belief. Such 

actions are based on fear, plain and simple, and are a rejection of American values. Turning away Syrian 

refugees perpetuates the very narrative oft hose responsible for the barbaric attacks in Paris and Beirut. 

It is deeply disappointing to hear some elected officials equating Syrian refugees to the militant groups that 

are the very reason for their flight. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that fear has undermined our 

humanity and our common sense. In the late 1930s, public opinion polls showed Americans overwhelmingly 

opposed to the U.S. welcoming Jewish refugees to its shores. We all know what persecution awaited the very 

people many in the U.S. wanted to turn away. Let not history judge us poorly again. 

Elected officials calling for a moratorium on Syrian refugee resettlement risk are putting themselves on the 

wrong side of history. They are also putting themselves on the wrong side of facts. Some officials have 

expressed concerns that terrorists may infiltrate the refugee resettlement program due to insufficient security 

measures. Such statements do not reflect reality. 

Refugees are the most thoroughly vetted group of people amongst all immigrant groups who come to the U.S. 

Short of swimming the Atlantic, the refugee resettlement program is the most difficult way to come to the U.S. 

Refugees do not self-select to be resettled; they are identified by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) on the 

Page 1 
163 

basis of specific needs or vulnerabilities, from amongst a population that is registered and documented by 

UNHCR. And UNHCR meticulously screens and documents refugees' history (and takes biometric data) before 

even referring them to one of a dozen countries. If among the fortunate few to be referred to the U.S. 

resettlement program, U.S. security screenings are extremely rigorous, involving the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS), the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Defense and multiple intelligence 

agencies. Highly-trained DHS officials interview each refugee to determine whether they meet the refugee 

definition and whether they are admissible to the United States. Refugees undergo a series of biometric and 

investigatory background checks, including collection and analysis of personal data, fingerprints, photographs, 

and other background information, all of which is carefully checked by specially-trained analysts and vetted 

against all relevant government databases. The entire process typically takes more than two years- and often 

much more before a refugee family arrives in the U.S. This is a secure program. 

Maintaining the integrity of the U.S. refugee program is of paramount importance, and the IRC supports 

efforts by the U.S. government to ensure that program integrity is preserved, However, we are highly skeptical 

that adding a burdensome role for Congress in the approval of refugee resettlement applications will add any 

value. In fact, it would further delay the admission of refugees and effectively grind the program to a halt, all 

at a substantial additional cost to American taxpayers. Funds would be better used in enhancing the human 

resources available to the federal agencies that actually conduct refugee security checks, so that these can be 

performed with the same level of integrity but more quickly- bringing at-risk refugee families to safety 

sooner. 

Banning Syrian refugees from resettlement will not make America safer. On the contrary, by feeding into ISIS 

propaganda that Muslims do not belong or are not welcome in the West, it makes us all less safe. An individual 

poses a danger to the U.S. when he or she is a violent extremist- not simply because he or she has a specific 

religious identity or nationality. And the U.S. can best counter violent extremists if it continues to serve as an 

example of multi-culturalism, religious tolerance and co-existence on its soil. Here, the U.S. is on the right side 

of the facts. In recent years, polls underscore Muslim-Americans' widespread feelings of integration and sense 

of belonging in American society. This is not the case in some European countries- where marginalization and 

lack of integration may be more strongly felt by Muslims. When our own leaders feed into hateful extremists' 

own propagandist narrative of Muslim vs. non-Muslim, it ignores America's long history of welcoming refugees 

of all races, religions and national origins, and integrating them into our communities and the fabric of our 

society. This has been one of the success stories of this country. Now is not the time to abandon this proud 

tradition. 

European leaders recognize the importance of welcoming refugees- both for the sake of humanity and as a 

means of combating violent extremists. French President Francois Hollande on Wednesday reaffirmed his 

September pledge to resettle 30,000 Syrian refugees- even as his country still reels from last week's attackacknowledging that with the proper security checks in place, this could be done without compromising 

France's national security, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, with President Obama at the 

G20 summit earlier this week, underscored the importance of distinguishing refugees from those who are 

violent. Our reaction should be to welcome- not turn away -the refugees who have been driven from their 

homes, fleeing the very people who perpetrated the attacks in Paris as well as Beirut. Welcome, not rejection, 

makes this nation safer. 

Page 2 
164 

On Friday, November 13, the world caught a glimpse of what a terrorist group like ISIS is capable of. The over 

four million Syrian refugees who have fled their country have been subjected not just to ISIS but to violence by 

government forces and various other militant groups. They have been living with terror for almost five years. 

The Syrian crisis is a conflict that has been brutal in the indiscriminate killing of civilians. The U.S. must double 

down in diplomatic efforts to the end the conflict and maintain its commitment to assisting civilians affected 

by the brutal war- both overseas and here at home. Banning the most vulnerable Syrian refugees from 

resettlement would put innocent lives at risk. 

The U.S. can lead the world by example of how to live together in a free, democratic and plural society. Syrian 

refugees will be an asset to U.S. communities, not a threat. The true threat is giving in to intolerance and fear. 

Page 3 
165 

Jesuit Refugee Service/USA 

Statement for the Record 

Submitted to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs 

Hearing: "The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

Jesuit Refugee Service/USA (JRS/USA) is an international Catholic non-governmental organization whose 

mission is to accompany, serve and advocate for the rights of refugees and other forcibly displaced 

persons. JRS works in 47 countries worldwide to meet the educational, health, social and other needs of 

almost 780,000 refugees and other forcibly displaced persons. JRS services are available to refugees and 

displaced persons regardless of their race, ethnic origin, or religious beliefs. 

One of the proudest traditions of the United States has been to welcome the stranger. Through the U.S. 

resettlement program, we have provided a safe harbor to those fleeing violence and oppression, and an 

opportunity to make a new life in a country that does not just tolerate, but embraces, diversity. 

In the past four decades, America has welcomed more than a million refugees from many countries, 

including Vietnam, Somalia, Bhutan, Iraq, Iran, Eritrea, Colombia, Burma, and, yes, Syria, to name just a 

few. All have been selected for vulnerability, and carefully vetted to ensure that these are freedomseeking people, the kind that you and I would welcome as our neighbors. 

Year after year, these refugees have integrated among us, adding the unique qualities of their traditions 

and cultures to enrich the tapestry of our communities. 

To call for a halt to the resettlement of Syrian refugees in the wake oft he Paris attack makes little sense. 

These are people who are fleeing violence visited upon their homes during the Syrian conflict, often by 

ISIS or by other extremist factions. Out of the millions who have fled, only a few thousands have thus far 

been selected as resettlement candidates, and these are those who have suffered most greatlywidows with children, trauma and torture survivors, and members of persecuted minorities. 

They are, furthermore subject to the most rigorous security screening that our government has ever 

imposed. From initial identification to final approval, these candidates often must wait from eighteen 

months to two years in wretched conditions before admission to the United States because of our 

security standards, by far the most stringent in the world. 

It is worth remembering that more than 70 million businesspeople, students, tourists, and immigrants 

enter the United States each year. The few thousand refugees invited to become part of our community 

are the most carefully selected and highly vetted of all. 

Jesuit Refugee Service/USA· 10161Gth St., NW~ Suite 500 ·Washington, DC 20036 · www.lrsusa.org 
166 

In the current debate over refugee admissions, it is also important to remember that those lucky few 

offered resettlement are but a tiny fraction of the four million refugees in neighboring countries and ten 

million people who have been displaced within Syria. The vast majority of those people would far rather 

return to their homes than to attempt the dangerous path to Europe or endure the long wait for 

resettlement. 

Their desperate need to move onward stems from the severe and deepening suffering and growing 

despair they are experiencing in their present circumstances, which have made life intolerable. Refugee 

parents are seeing their children going hungry, deprived of an education, lacking adequate medical care, 

inadequately clothed and facing another harsh winter in buildings with no windows and no heat. Worse, 

they can see no end in sight. 

As we feel compassion for the terrible loss of the people of Paris, so we must also not forget these other 

victims of violence struggling to endure in Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey, and within Syria. 

While we should feel pride that the United States has been the most generous donor to the crisis, we, 

and the international community, must do far more. Adequate resources must be found to relieve their 

suffering and to address the worsening humanitarian crisis that has led to the march of hundreds of 

thousands into Europe. Both our American values and our long-term hopes for peace should compel us 

to insist on a better response. 

Jesuit Refugee Service/USA '101616th St., NW, Suite 500' Washington, DC 20036 · www.lrsusa.org 
167 

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Hearing 

Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

The Leadership Conference of Women Religious is horrified at the violence we witness in our world and 

appalled by the recent acts of bloodshed in Paris, Beirut, and throughout the Middle East. We continue 

to pray for all who suffer as a result of these senseless acts of terror. 

We also pray for the strength and courage to respond to this violence with love and mercy. We refuse to 

let these acts of death and destruction sow the seeds of fear and mistrust that threaten to tear our 

communities apart and lead inevitably to more violence and harm. 

We are witnessing the largest refugee crisis since the Second World War. More than 4 million Syrians 

have fled violence in their homeland and 12 million more are displaced internally. Syrian refugees are 

fleeing exactly the kind of terror that we have witnessed in these past few weeks. More than 250,000 

Syrians have lost their lives, many more have lost family, home, and community. 

At a time when the world is in desperate need of humanitarian relief, some are calling for suspension of 

the U.S. refugee resettlement program, an end to funding for Syrians, or a rationing of mercy based on 

religious creed. Such restrictions violate the tenets of our faith and the principles of our nation. 

We reject the false choice currently being proffered by some in Washington, state capitols across the 

country, and on the campaign trail. We need not choose between the gospel call to welcome the 

stranger and our legitimate need for security. The protection that we rightly promise the world's 

refugees must not be denied to Syrians fleeing for their lives. The US refugee resettlement program has 

rigorous and multilayered security screenings to ensure that those we admit as refugees pose no threat 

to our security. 

The present situation presents us with great challenges and many hard decisions. As Pope Francis 

reminded us just a few short weeks ago in his address to Congress, 

Let us remember the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" 

(Mt 7:12). This Rule points us in a clear direction. Let us treat others with the same passion and 

compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities 

which we seek for ourselves. Let us help others to grow, as we would like to be helped 

ourselves. In a word, if we want security, let us give security; if we want life, let us give life; if we 

want opportunities, let us provide opportunities. The yardstick we use for others will be the 

yardstick which time will use for us. 

As women religious, as citizens of the United States, we choose to stand for life and hope. We will not 

give in to fear. We will not allow others to divide us by race or creed or nationality and we will not turn 

our back on our Syrian sisters and brothers in their hour of greatest need. 

Contact: Ann Scholz, SSND, Associate Director for Social Mission 

ascholz@lcwr.org, 301-588-4955 
168 

Statement for the Record on 

"The Impact ofiSIS on the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement" 

U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

~ovember19,2015 

by Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Sen•icc 

Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS) appreciates the opportunity to submit its views 

on the United States Refugee Admissions Program. As the national organization founded by 

Lutherans to serve uprooted people, LIRS is committed to helping those who have been forced to 

flee their homes find protection. Following God's call in scripture to uphold justice for the 

sojourner, LIRS serves as a leader in calling for the protection of vulnerable migrants and refugees, 

including children and families from Syria. 

In light of the tragic attacks in Paris, we must stand together with vulnerable Syrian refugees who 

seek safety and a future. Every day, average Syrian people, including Christians persecuted for their 

faith, are being tortured murdered, bombed and traumatized. And for the most vulnerable, a 

relatively small number, who have no chance of ever being able to go home in safety-starting life 

anew in a strange land is the only possibility other than death. As Christians, as Americans, and as 

global citizens-we must choose to stand for hope and life. 

For over 75 years, LIRS has worked to welcome over 500,000 refugees to the United States on 

behalf of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and 

the Latvian Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. In Fiscal Year 2015, LIRS and its refugee 

resettlement network partners welcomed over 10,500 refugees to their new communities and 

empowered them to build new lives. 

Resettlement in a third country is considered a durable solution and a last resort for only a small 

fraction of the world's most vulnerable refugees. LIRS is proud to be one of nine organizations that 

partners with the federal government, particularly the Department of State's Bureau of Population, 

Refugees and Migration (PRM) and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of 

Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to be a part of this solution. 
169 

LIRS is dismayed that despite the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) 

registering over 4 million Syrian refugees, half of whom are children, only a precious few Syrian 

refugees have been resettled in the United States. LIRS has urged the U.S. government to do far 

more by resettling 200,000 refugees in Fiscal Year 2016, including 100,000 Syrians. In response to 

past global crises, the U.S. has led the effort to resettle hundreds of thousands of refugees a tiny 

fraction of those who are displaced - and America has always been better and stronger as a result. 

With the support of local churches and communities, our nation has the capacity to take a bold 

stance in welcoming far more of these vulnerable refugees into the United States. 

The United States Refugee Admissions Program (US RAP) that is located within the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) agency continually 

achieves its dual mission to offer resettlement opportunities to eligible refugees while safeguarding 

the integrity of the program and the United States' national security. To protect U.S. national 

security, DHS provides advanced training to its refugee adjudicators on security protocols, fraud 

detention and fraud prevention. In addition, each refugee considered for resettlement in the United 

States goes through a multi-layered screening process before coming to the United States. These 

processes include multiple biographic and biometric checks by U.S. security vetting agencies which 

are routinely updated, in-person interviews with trained adjudication's officers and 'pre- departure' 

checks. No case is finally approved until results from all security checks have been received and 

analyzed. 

To add unnecessary security screening mechanisms to this already robust process would needlessly 

harm individuals who need protection by delaying their resettlement. "Sadly, the Syrian refugee 

population includes severely vulnerable individuals: women and girls at risk, survivors of torture and 

violence, and people with serious medical needs or disabilities," said Linda Hartke, LIRS President 

and CEO. "LIRS and our national network stand ready to do what it takes to welcome into U.S. 

communities the most vulnerable Syrian refugees who cannot return home or integrate in the 

countries currently hosting them." 

The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program offers refugees safe haven and a chance at a new life, while 

also bringing tangible benefits to the communities that welcome them. Having endured incredible 

hardship and unimaginable horrors in their home countries, refugees often spend years exiled in 

host countries once they flee, awaiting the opportunity to rebuild their lives. Once they are resettled 

in a third country, refugees routinely become engaged and productive community members, 

contributing economically, socially, and spiritually to our communities. The support of welcoming 

communities, congregations, volunteers, employers, schools, foster families and others makes 

resettlement a successful public-private partnership. The federal government, particularly PRl'vf and 

ORR, and state governments play a vital role. 

In the case of Syrian refugees, the conflict continues to worsen and host countries in the region are 

increasingly strained and unable to offer benefits or stability. Desperate refugees are risking their 

2 
170 

lives and the lives of their entire families making dangerous journeys over land and sea to reach 

safety. Hundreds of thousands have arrived in Europe with the hope of a permanent solution. 

While most citizens in affected countries in the European Union have reacted with welcome, some 

governments are choosing to close and militarize their borders to keep refugees out. It is against 

this backdrop that LIRS and our partners will continue to call on the Administration to resettle 

more Syrian refugees. 

Increased Funding Needs and Necessary Resettlement Reforms 

Resources available to individual refugee families and adults through ORR have remained stagnant 

for many years. To ensure that Syrian refugees resettled in the United States receive the help they 

need to locate housing, receive medical attention and employment assistance, among other services, 

and to promote self-sufficiency and long-term integration this funding must be increased. In 

addition, Congress must authorize and appropriate funds to meet the needs of the additional 15,000 

refugees that the President has authorized for admission in FY2016. 

While private support plays an important role in the reception and integration of refugees, federal 

resources are critical to ensure refugees receive essential services. Refugee populations arriving to the 

United States have changed significantly since the formal establishment of the resettlement program 

in the Refugee Act of 1980. Today's refugees are much more diverse and vulnerable than it was 

more than three decades ago. However, services lack flexibility to be responsive to the diverse 

strengths and needs of refugees arriving today. Furthermore, ORR's mandate has expanded over 

the years from serving resettled refugees to include asylees, Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrant Visa 

recipients, Cuban and Haitian entrants, survivors of human trafficking and torture and 

unaccompanied children. Because funding has not kept up with these changes in ORR's mandate 

and diversifying client needs, ORR has strained to provide sufficient support and services to all of 

the populations under its care. 

Reforms to Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds 

Under immigration law, an individual cannot be admitted to the United States if they have provided 

material support, including insignificant material support, to an undesignated terrorist organization; a 

member of such an organization; or to an individual the individual knows, or reasonably should 

know, has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity. In 2001, Congress enacted legislation 

that significantly broadened the definition of "terrorist activity." 

As a result, refugees, including many vulnerable Syrian refugees who pose no threat to national 

security, face denial of protection and resettlement in the United States due to unintended 

consequences of the overly-broad application of the "material support to terrorist organizations" bar 

(and related bars) to admission. Indeed, current law threatens to exclude any Syrians who fought 

with any armed opposition group in Syria (regardless of whether or not the individual applicant was 

involved in any violations of international humanitarian law or other crimes), anyone who provided 

3 
171 

"material support" to any opposition force or opposition fighter, anyone who solicited funds or 

members for such a force, and even anyone whose spouse or parent is found to have done these 

things. 

These bars are duplicative and carry severe consequences. As mentioned previously, refugees are 

required to pass intense security screenings and background checks as part of the admission process. 

People who commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, or who persecute others are inadmissible 

to the United States under other provisions of our immigration laws. However, overly broad 

"terrorism" bars prevent the ability of the United States to provide welcome to bona fide refugees 

seeking safety. 

LIRS Recommendations 

URS's expertise, experience, and compassion ·· drawn from decades of welcoming vulnerable 

newcomers -- inspires our advocacy. To address current resettlement needs facing refugees, 

including millions of Syrian refugees, and improve welcome for refugees in the United States, LIRS 

makes the following recommendations to Congress: 

Enact pending legislation to strengthen refugee protections and resettlement, 

including the bi-partisan Protecting Religious Minorities Persecuted by ISIS Act of 2015 

(H.R. 1568). 

Urge the President to authorize the admission of100,000 Syrian refugees in Fiscal 

Year 2016 through an Emergency Presidential Determination on Additional Refugee 

Admissions pursuant to Section 207(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Support alternative mechanisms to resettle more Syrian refugees, including: 

l> Identifying specific groups of refugees in the region as being of particular humanitarian 

concern to the United States and designating them for group processing. 

l> Expanding family reunification opportunities through the US RAP (through the P3 

family reunification priority) to allow Syrians in legal status in the United States, even if 

they did not arrive as refugees, to ftle affidavits of relationship (AORs). 

l> Allowing specific NGOs in the region to make direct resettlement referrals to the United 

States. The U.S. government should provide increased capacity building and training for 

these NGO partners so they can identify and refer the most vulnerable refugees for 

resettlement. 

l> Utilizing iris scans and additional biometric data that UNHCR has collected for 65-67% 

of registered Syrian refugees. The use of this data could help reduce redundancies in the 

USRAP screening process. 

Amend problematic anti-terrorism provisions that define "material support" too broadly. 

4 
172 

Ensure robust funding of the Department of State's, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and 

Migration and the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Refugee 

resettlement to better protect and assist refugees overseas and those resettled to the United 

States, including: 

~ Funding appropriate for successful support and resettlement of the authorized 

85,000 refugee admissions in FY 2016. 

~ Funding for DHS to make more frequent visits to the region to conduct interviews 

with refugees slated for potential resettlement. When security concerns make in-person 

interviews impossible, DHS should consider using video conferencing for interviews. 

~ Funding to decrease wait times: Security checks are a vital part of the United States 

Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) and have proven successful in maintaining the 

program's integrity. Although these safeguards have been enhanced and updated, 

Congress should authorize sufficient funds such that the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS), other U.S. security agencies, and the White House have sufficient 

resources and staff to eliminate delays and redundancies to reduce the waiting time for 

refugees at significant risk. 

~ Increased per capita funding for the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS) and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to allow these agencies to 

support programming that assists communities and organizations that resettle Syrian 

refugees to foster a welcoming climate for them, offer services that are tailored for Syrian 

refugees, and include a long-term focus on their successful integration. 

If you have any questions about this statement, please contact Brittney Nystrom, LIRS Director for 

Advocacy at bnystrom@lirs.org or 202.626.7943. 

5 
173 

A Statement by the National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd 

November 17, 2015 

Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: 

Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Since the Order of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd was founded in France in 1835, the Order 

has dedicated itself to serving poor and marginal people. The work of the Sisters in 70 

countries in 5 continents, 17 States, and 2 U.S. Territories is based on the belief that everyone, 

regardless of age, sex, culture or religion, has the right to a basic quality of life; adequate 

income, shelter, opportunities for education and employment, quality health care, and 

nutrition. As Catholics, our faith requires that everyone should be treated with the utmost dignity 

and respect. 

Based upon that belief system, the National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good 

Shepherd urges you to keep the United States a welcoming home to people of all religions who 

are fleeing violence in their home countries. Keeping Syrian refugees out of this country based 

on their religion sends the wrong message to the rest of the world about who we are as 

Americans. We are a welcoming country with a religiously diverse society and our resettlement 

program should continue to reflect this. To not do so only feeds into ISIS' propaganda and 

makes us all less safe. 

Speaking of the plight of refugees, Pope Francis recently said, "They are human people, I stress 

this, who are appealing for solidarity and assistance, who need urgent action but also and 

above all understanding and kindness. God is good, let us imitate God. Their condition cannot 

leave us indifferent. Moreover, as Church we should remember that in tending the wounds of 

refugees, evacuees and the victims of trafficking, we are putting into practice the commandment 

of love that Jesus bequeathed to us when he identified with the foreigner, with those who are 

suffering, with all the innocent victims of violence and exploitation." 

We urge you to avoid knee-jerk reactions that politicize the events in Paris, to reject misplaced 

blame that creates an atmosphere of fear, and to stand in solidarity with Syrian refugees, who 

are themselves the victims of ISIS. Thank you. 
174 

NAFSA: Association of 

International Educators 

NAFSA 

STATEMENT OF 

Marlene M. Johnson Executive Director & CEO 

NAFSA: Association oflntemational Educators 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES SENATE 

THE IMPACT OF ISIS ON THE HOMELAND AND REFUGEE 

RESETTLEMENT 

November 19,2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and members of the 

Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony. 

On behalf of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, I appreciate 

the opportunity to express our support for the Administration's proposal to 

resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year. However, the United 

States has the ability and duty to open our doors to an even greater 

number of people in need. NAFSA urges the Administration and 

Congress to support policies that would welcome 100,000 Syrian 

refugees in the coming year, in addition to other global refugees. We also 

urge Congress and the Administration to take steps to ensure that Syrian 

students who seek higher education in the United States have a path to do so. 

The recent tragedies in Paris and Beirut and other cities around the world 

remind us that we must remain ever-vigilant against threats of violent 

extremism; however, closing our borders to Syrian refugees simply because 

they might share the same nationality as some perpetrators of terror 

perpetuates fear and isolationism, while failing to recognize that the refugees 

arc desperately fleeing violence themselves. 

NAFSA is the world's largest professional association dedicated to the 

promotion and advancement of international education and exchange. Our 

more than I 0,000 members believe that connecting students, scholars, 

educators, and citizens across borders is fundamental to building mutual 

understanding among nations; preparing the next generation with vital crosscultural and global skills; and creating the conditions for a more peaceful 

world. A commitment to fostering peace and security through international 

education demands that we go beyond providing the basic necessities of 

some of the world's most vulnerable people. As an association that was 

founded to respond to the needs of European students following WWII, we 

recognize that in order not to lose a generation of minds to the ravages of 

war and terror, we must educate them. 
175 

NAFSA: Association of 

lnternationcd Educators 

NAFSA 

As Nelson Mandela said, "Education is the most powerful weapon which 

you can use to change the world," The United States has a proud history of 

promoting mutual understanding through international education and 

exchange. In the decades since World War II, U.S. institutions of higher 

education have welcomed and educated millions of students from all over 

the world, with many becoming world leaders and some of our closest 

friends and allies. These students are among our greatest foreign policy 

assets, for it is through their time here that they come to understand our 

country firsthand. 

The United States should move quickly to facilitate the matriculation of 

eligible refugee students to study at U.S. institutions of higher education. 

Specifically, to ensure Syrian students are able to study in U.S. institutions 

of higher education, Congress must call on the Administration to streamline 

the F-1 Visa process in order to make it easier for Syrian students to obtain 

Foreign Student Status. Currently, in order to be eligible for an F-1 Visa, 

foreign students must demonstrate, among other things, that they have no 

intent to immigrate to the United States. Given the current conflict, U.S. 

consular officers may assume Syrian visa applicants intend to immigrate to 

the United States. Applicants should be allowed to assert that they intend to 

return to Syria when it is safe to do so. Continuing their education will make 

it more feasible for them to return and contribute to rebuilding their country. 

Second, to complete their visa application process, students arc required to 

have face to face interviews at U.S. consulates. The U.S. Department of 

State should make accommodations to allow Syrian students expedited 

access to appointments at various locations to compensate for the severe 

logistical challenges refugee students face. 

Finally, the Department of State should create an Exchange Visitor Program 

to provide another avenue for Syrian refugees to study at U.S. institutions of 

higher education. 

To be sure, even when visa issues are resolved, enabling Syrian refugees to 

study in this country will require the cooperation of institutions of higher 

education as well as other stakeholders in the private sector. To that end, the 

administration should convene a working group of relevant parties in the 

government, higher education and the private sector to collaborate on 

addressing the practical hurdles-travel costs, application fees, missing 

transcripts and test scores, tuition and living expenses-SyTian students are 
176 

NAFSA: As::;ociation of 

International Educators 

NAFSA 

likely to face. U.S. institutions of higher education must pledge to accept as 

many refugee students as possible and to waive application fees and 

document requirements. Corporations, foundations and other NGOs must 

work independently and in public/private partnerships to provide funding to 

offset travel and tuition expenses. Taken together, these actions would 

benefit Syrian refugees in the short term and foster the goodwill essential to 

building mutually beneficial partnerships among nations in the future. 

It is imperative that we move quickly to offer safe refuge to 100,000 

desperate Syrians, and to provide those who want to continue their education 

in the United States with the means to do so. If we fail to offer educational 

opportunities to qualified Syrian refugees we risk fostering the isolationism 

that helps to drive anti-Western sentiment. On the other hand, offering them 

safety and an education will build good will and cross-cultural understanding 

that enhances our own national security. Clearly, we must choose the latter. 

Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on this critical matter. 
177 

8 

National Council of Jewish Women 

1707 L Street NW, Suite 950 

Washington, DC 20036-4206 

NCJ ~® 

Contact: Debbi Dunn Solomon 

Director of Marketing & Communications 

347-569 4364 dsolomon@njcw.org 

National Council of Jewish Women 

NCJW Statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Government Affairs 

pertaining to its hearing The Imp oct of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Thursday, November 19 

Despite Terrorist Attacks, NCJW Calls on US to Welcome Refugees 

November 18, 2015 Washington, DC -The National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW) today 

expressed deep sadness about the recent terrorist attacks and protested efforts to close borders to 

refugees seeking sanctuary from the same terrorism. NCJW CEO Nancy K. Kaufman released the 

following statement: 

"Our prayers go out to the families and communities affected by the terrorist attacks in Paris 

and Beirut. NCJW mourns the senseless loss of so many and the trauma inflicted in order to 

sow terror. 

"We must also remember that the millions of refugees from Syria and Iraq are trying to 

escape the same destructive force. We must rise above prejudice and fear to open our 

communities to the men, women, and children who seek sanctuary in the United States. 

While we can exercise due diligence in admitting refugees, we cannot use tragedy as an 

excuse for bigotry, silence, or inaction. 

"Today, more than half of all state governors are speaking out against helping refugees, and 

there are bills proposed in Congress that, if passed, could stop the Syrian and Iraqi refugee 

resettlement program altogether. We must also speak out against the bigotry and anti-Muslim 

vitriol echoing in the chambers of the federal and state governments. 

"It is a disgrace to stand idly by as innocent refugees flee violence and persecution. As Jews 

we are taught va'ahavtem et ha-ger- as we were once strangers, so must we love the 

stranger. Our nation must find the moral courage to welcome those seeking refuge from fear, 

persecution, and hate." 

The National Council of lewish Women (NCJW) is a grassroots organization of volunteers and 

advocates who turn progressive ideals into action. Inspired by Jewish values, NCJW strives for social 

justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families and by safeguarding individual 

rights and freedoms. More information on Facebook and on Twitter at @NC!W. 

### 
178 

Statement for the Record of the Niskanen Center • 

Submitted to 

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs 

Hearing on 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

The terrorist attack in Paris has led to inquiries concerning the security of the U.S. 

Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). Lawmakers and the public should be able to 

feel confident that the program is secure. However, a thorough understanding of the 

US RAP process and history leads to the conclusion that while refugees are unlikely to 

become terrorists, they can be important assets in the war against the Islamic State. 

Paris attacks are not applicable to the U.S. refugee vetting process 

All of the confirmed Paris attackers, including the mastermind, were natives of Europe, 

highlighting the fact that homegrown terrorism played a more significant role in these 

attacks than terrorism originating abroad.1 A fake Syrian passport, copies of which have 

reportedly been used by as many as eight other individuals in Europe,2 was found near 

the body of one of the attackers, leading to the suspicion that a Syrian national may have 

been involved in the attack.' 

The passport holder apparently entered the European Union (EU) on a boat from Turkey 

through Greece and applied for asylum in Serbia.4 According to German Interior Minister 

Thomas de Maiziere, however, the passport may have been a "planted lead," saying that 

it is "certainly unusual that such a person would have faithfully registered in Greece and 

Serbia and Croatia, while we're constantly pressing for registration and aren't happy that 

is isn't happening to the necessary extent."5 

Supposing that the attacker was a Syrian national, however, reveals nothing about the 

U.S. refugee resettlement process. This individual was not vetted by intelligence 

agencies, designated as a refugee by the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees 

(UNHCR), or granted refugee status by any country. This case is simply not applicable to 

the U.S. refugee program, which requires extensive vetting prior to admission. 

Unfortunately, Europe does not have the same capabilities as the United States. 

U.S. refugee program is not an attractive avenue for terrorist activity 

The U.S. refugee resettlement program is, according to the State Department, "the most 

stringent security process for anyone entering the United States."6 The process for most 

refugees, including all Syrian refugees, begins with designation as a refugee by UNHCR. 

The UN only refers refugees for resettlement if the individual has no hope of return to 

their country of origin, and there is a complicating factor requiring their resettlement 

outside of the area. Some examples include ethnic or religious persecution, health issues, 

or children with special needs. UNHCR refers less than one percent of the 14.4 million 

'The Niskanen Center is a libertarian 50l(c)(3) nonprofit think tank located in Washington, D.C. founded 
179 

refugees for resettlement.7 A terrorist, looking to gain entry to the U.S. through UNHCR 

referral, would have very low odds of succeeding without any screening at all. 

If a refugee is referred to the United States for resettlement, overseas Resettlement 

Support Centers managed by the State Department collect biometric and biographical 

information from the applicants. This information is then immediately compared to the 

State Department's Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS), which includes 

terrorist watch list information.8 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services refugee 

officers with special training for Syrians and Iraqis then interview the applicants.9 They 

attempt to find inconsistencies in the applicants' statements and test whether the person 

has firsthand knowledge of events that they claim to have witnessed. 

The Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the 

Department of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and other security agencies 

check the information gathered against information held by the government. Biometric 

checks are then conducted. These databases include the FBI's Integrated Automated 

Fingerprint Identification System and DRS's Automated Biometric Identification 

System. Individuals are also run through the DOD's Automated Biometric Identification 

System, which holds fingerprints from weapons and explosives from Iraqi insurgents. 10 

This entire process takes between two and three years during which time the refugee 

remains in UNHCR refugee camps. On its face, this process is an unlikely avenue for 

terrorist infiltration. It would require a two- to three-year investment with no knowledge 

of whether the mission would result in resettlement in the U.S. There are much faster 

legal means for an individual to enter the United States, such as student or tourist visas, 

and there are much easier ways for the Islamic State to send attackers, such as individuals 

with European passports. It simply makes no sense for a terrorist to attempt to infiltrate 

the U.S. refugee resettlement process. 

The history of U.S. resettlement shows that the vetting process works 

Since 1980, the U.S. has welcomed about three million refugees, including hundreds of 

thousands from the Middle East. Since 9/11, more than 750,000 have been resettled, 

including a large population from Iraq. Over that period, there have been dozens of 

terrorist attacks on American soil but not one of them involved refugees1 brought over 

under the U.S. refugee resettlement program." This fact alone demonstrates that the U.S. 

refugee vetting process and Jaw enforcement can together handle threats from terrorism. 

There have been six cases in which refugees have been convicted of terrorism-related 

charges, all well before their plans could be carried out and most not targeting the United 

1 Some have claimed that the Boston bombers, the Tsamaev brothers, change this conclusion. But the 

brothers were not refugees. Their parents came to the U.S. on a travel visa and were awarded asylumwhich is not subject to the normal UNHCR referral process-and the brothers were young children and not 

subject to the vetting process. The case simply does not show that refugees cannot be vetted properly. Even 

if we do include asylees- and their foreign-born children- in this analysis, the risk of terrorism from an 

asylee or refugee is less than a million-to-one chance, one in every 1.8 million admissions. Bump, Phillip. 

"How the Boston Bombing Suspect Became a U.S. Citizen." l]te Wir£. April 19, 2013. 
180 

States. 12 These cases show that the threat of refugee-related terrorism is one that is 

manageable through law enforcement and also very small-one person linked to 

terrorism for every 494,000 refugee admissions. For comparison, one American out of 

every 23,000 committed murder last year,13 and yet none of the would-be attackers were 

as successful as these American murderers. 

The U.S. government does not report cases rejected based on terrorism-related concerns, 

so there is no way to verify how often the process screens out terrorists. But the refugee 

resettlement caseload only has a 50 percent approval rate (including pending cases),14 and 

at least one terrorist, the Los Angeles airport shooter in 2002, had his asylum claim 

rejected due to vetting. 15 

Moreover, if ISIS wanted to attack the United States, it need only dispatch one of the 

many foreign fighters who have come from the U.S. or the E.U. to do so. It would not 

need to attempt a two to three-year mission with a very low probability of success. 

Accepting Syrian refugees is an important part of the fight against ISIS 

Since 2011, more than 210,000 people have been killed in Syria, meaning about 140 

people have died every single day in Syria. The result has been an exodus of over 4 

million people from Syria. The Islamic State considers the fugitives from its "caliphate" 

to be traitors and have repeatedly condemned the flight of Muslims from the region. Its 

propaganda describes the abandonment of their caliphate as apostasy, which is punishable 

by death in ISIS-controlled territory .

16 

If the United States announced that it would no long accept refugees from Syria and Iraq, 

ISIS would immediately introduce into their propaganda the message that America and 

the West hate Muslims and are willing to push them back to Assad. Combating ISIS 

propaganda is as important as any weapon the U.S. has. Since the beginning of the 

conflict, every single ISIS fighter killed has been replaced by a new recruit or foreign 

fighter. 17 Without winning the propaganda war, the U.S. and its moderate Muslim allies 

will not win the actual war. 

Some have suggested the creation of a "safe zone" or "humanitarian corridor" as an 

alternative to refugee resettlement. But whether this is a good idea or not, this does not 

replace refugee resettlement or solve the refugee crisis. There already is a de facto "safe 

zone" in Turkey that refugees are abandoning due to its squalid and dangerous 

conditions. Extending that safe zone down a few miles into Syria will not change the 

equation for most Syrians or would-be refugees. 

Safe zones have a very mixed history as well. In 1994, the French established a safe zone 

in Rwanda to stem the tide of refugees into Zaire, but the mission had little long-term 

success at preventing the exodus from the country once the French left. 18 In 1995, the 

U.S. attempted to support a safe city in Bosnia for Muslims that were victims of ethnic 

cleansing. The city ultimately became a target for attacks and failed to protect the civilian 

population.19 ln 2009, a United Nations safe zone for refugees in Sri Lanka was attacked 
181 

by the Tamil Tigers organization.20 Whether a safe zone can protect some civilians in this 

case is unclear, but it is clear that it will not stop the refugee crisis. 

Safe zones will also not alleviate the need for U.N. to resettle refugees in special 

humanitarian circumstances. U.N. camps cannot provide for the needs of many refugees 

with special health or mental issues, childcare needs, or protection from persecution in 

the country in which the refugee is currently residing. Refugees also cannot hope to 

become self-sufficient in refugee camps. This fact partly explains the large numbers who 

flee camps in search of opportunity in Europe. 

During the Cold War, we used refugee resettlement to gain foreign policy assets, spies, 

allies, and spokesmen to refute the enemy's propaganda. In the fight against ISIS, allies 

gained from aiding refugees will be as important as any weapon we have. 

Recommendation 

The U.S. should resettle the full20,000 refugees referred by UNHCR on the condition 

that they take a loyalty oath, publicly condemning the Islamic State- an act of further 

apostasy under its law-and expressing their support for freedom of religion. If America 

closed its doors during what the U.N. has called the humanitarian crisis of our time, it 

would be a dark chapter in our history. We should look to find ways to address the 

security concerns without abandoning our moral leadership in the world. 

1 The New York Times. "Finding Links Between the Paris Attackers as the Manhunt Continues." 

November 18, 2015. http://www .nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/15/world/europe/manhunt-for-paris-

' Drury, lain. "The Syrian passports to terror: EIGHT migrants have got into Europe with same papers as 

those found on stadium suicide bomber." Daily Mail. November 18,2015. 

http://www .dailymail.co .uk/new s/article-3 322960/The-Syrian -passports-terror-EIGHT-migrants-gotEurope-papers-stadium-suicide-bomber.html 

3 Walker, Marcus; Noemie Bisserbe. "Paris Stadium Attacker Got to Europe Using Fake Syrian Passport." 

Wall Street Journal. November 16, 2015. http://www .wsj.com/articles/paris-stadium-attacker-enteredeurope-via-greece-144 7698583 ?alg=y 4 Maltezou, Renee; George Georgiopoulos. "Holder of Syrian passport found in Paris traveled through 

Balkans." Reuters. November 15,2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/15/us-france-shootingasylum-idUSKCNOT40EB20151115#bU3JcsFZRhhgTVFm.97 

5 Donahue, Patrick; Rainer Buergin. "Syrian Passport in Paris May Be Planted, German Minister Says." 

Bloomberg. November 17, 20 I 5. http://www .bloomberg.com/news/articles/201 5-11-17/syrian-passport-inparis-may-be-planted-german-minister-says 

6 Koran,Laura. "How do Syrian refugees get into the U.S.? Explaining the process." CNN, November 17, 

2015. http://www .cnn .com/20 15/ II /16/politics/syrian-refugees-u-s-applicants-explainer/ 7 UNHCR. "Resettlement: A New Beginning in a Third Country." UNHCR. Accessed November 9, 2015. 

http://www .unhcr.org/pages/4a 16b 1676 .html 8 Barbara Strack. "Terorist Exploitation of Refugee Programs." USCIS Testimony for House Committee on 

Homeland Security, Subcomittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. December 4, 2012. 

http://www .dhs .gov /new s/20 12/12/04/written-testimony-u scis-house-home! and-security-subcommitteecounterterrorism-and 

9 Foley, Elise. "Refugee Screenings Are More Intensive Than Some Politicians Would Have You Think." 

Huffington Post. November 17, 2015. http://www .huffingtonpost.com/entry/refugee-screening-processsyrians_564b55ece4b045bf3df0ece7 
182 

10 Barbara Strack. "Terorist Exploitation of Refugee Programs." US CIS Testimony for House Committee 

on Homeland Security, Subcomittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. December 4, 2012. 

http://www .dhs .gov /news/20 12/ 12/04/wri tten -testimony-u scis-hou se-homeland -security-subcommitteecounterterrorism-and 

11 Bier, David. "AntHmmigrant Activists More Prone to Terrorism Than Refugees." The Hill. September 

2 9, 20 15. thehill.comlb lo gs/pundi ts-blog/immigration/25 5 23 7 -anti-immigrant -activists-more-prone-toterrorism-than-refugees 

12 Bier, David. "Anti-Immigrant Activists More Prone to Terrorism Than Refugees." The Hill. September 

29, 2015. thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/25 523 7 -anti-immigrant-activists-more-prone-toterrorism-than-refugees 

Ashford, Ben. "America's 'enemies within'." Daily Mail. November 18, 2015. 

http://www .dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322649rrhe-enemy-Nearly-SEVENTY -arrested-America-ISISplots-include-refugees-given-safe-haven-turned-terror.html 

13 Nowrasteh, Alex. "Syrian Refugees Don't Pose a Serious Security Threat." Cato Institute. November 18, 

2015. http://www .cato .org/blog/syrian-refugees-dont-pose-serious-security-threat 14 Foley, Elise. "Refugee Screenings Are More Intensive Than Some Politicians Would Have You Think." 

Huffington Post. November 17, 2015. http://www .huffingtonpost.com/entry/refugee-screening-processsyrians_564b55ece4b045bf3dffiece7 

15 Eddy Ramirez. "Panel Probes LAX Gunman." LA Times. October 10,2002. 

http:/ /articles .latimes.com/2002/oct/1 0/local/me-lax l 0 

"Zelin, Aaron. "Targeting Europe's Refugees Is Not the Answer." Washington Institute. November 16. 

2015. http://www .washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/targeting-europes-refugees-is-not-theanswer 

17 Naylor, Sean. "Airstrikes Killing Thousands of Islamic State Fighters, but It Just Recruits More." Foreign 

Policy. June 9. 2015. http://foreignpolicy .com/2015/06/09/airstrikes-killing-thousands-of-islamic-statefighters-but-it-just-recruits-more/ 

18 Haspeslagh, Sophie. "Safe Havens in Rwanda: Operation Turquoise." Beyond Intractability. 

http://www .beyondintractability .org/cic_documents/Safe-Havens-R wanda.pdf 19 Editors. "Srebrenica: A U.N. 'Safe Haven' That Soon Was Not." New York Times. October 29, 1995. 

http://www .nytimes .com/ I 99 51 1 0/2 9 /war ld/ srebrenica-a-un-safe-haven-that -soon-w as-not.h tml 20 Buncombe, Andrew. "Massacre in the Sri Lanka 'safe zone'." Independent. October 23,2011. 

http :1 /www .independent.co .u k/news/world/ asia/massacre-in-the-sri-lanka-safe-zone-151 7 8 50 .h tml 
183 

00 OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates ADVOCATE EMBRACING THE HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

Statement for the Hearing Record 

Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs 

Hearing on "The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, members of the Committee, on behalf of the OCA- Asian 

Pacific American Advocates and our fifty local chapters around the country, we thank you for the 

opportunity to submit this statement for inclusion in the record for today's hearing. 

The United States has long been a leader in humanitarian aid and refugee resettlement. According to 

the Migration Policy Institute, over three million refugees have received refuge in the US since 1975. The 

number equates to more than double the amount of refugees that the other nine resettlement 

countries have accepted combined1

. Our country's continued leadership on this issue has led to the 

immigration of over 1.3 million East Asian' and over 360,000 Near East and South Asian3 refugees into 

the United States. Because of this, Asian Americans now comprise over half of the total refugees living 

here today. As such, our communities have a strong and vested interest in ensuring the protection of 

policies pertaining to the admittance of asylum seekers and refugees. 

In the wake of the terrorist attacks in Baghdad, Beirut, and Paris, there have been calls to suspend, 

delay, or defund refugee resettlement programs, particularly those for individuals from Syria and 

Afghanistan. These proposals do not keep the United States safer and only hinder the migration process 

for the over four million Syrian refugees attempting to escape from harm. By passing any legislation that 

may threaten the acceptance process, Congress would effectively prevent countless struggling 

individuals from obtaining the refuge they require; damage our reputation as the world leader in times 

of humanitarian crises; and hamper the resettlement process. 

Refugees coming to the United States receive the most security scrutiny of any immigrant group or 

individual arriving here. Multiple government agencies are involved in the vetting process, including the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Departments of 

Homeland Security, State, and Defense. It also includes numerous interviews, biometrics and biographic 

1 Refugee Resettlement in Metropolitan America (migrationpo!icy.org), available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/refugeeresettlement-metropolltan-america. 

2 Refug€e Admissions Program for East Asia {U.S. Department of State), available at 

http;/ /www .state.gov /j/prm/releases/onepagers/228693.htm. 3 Refugee Admissions Program for Near East and South Asia (U.S. Department of State), available at 

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/onepagers/228691.htm. 

OCA iS A NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP-DRIVEN ORGANIZATION OF COMMUNITY ADVOCATES 

DEDICATED TO ADVANCiNG THE SOCIAL POUHCAL AND ECONOMIC WELL·BEING OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

OCA NATIONAL CENTER I 1322 10'" STREET NW J WASHINGTON DC 20036 

T 202.223.5500 I F 202.296.0540 I oco@oconalionol.org I WINW.ccanationol.org 
184 

00 OCA- Asian Pacific American Advocates 

ADVOCATE EMBRACING THE HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

checks, and medical screenings. The interviews, in particular, often determine whether or not an 

individual can even be considered a refugee as defined by §101(a)(42) of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act. 

For refugees attempting to enter the United States, they must present various forms of identification, 

including birth certificates, passports, and school IDs and also prove displacement, which is particularly 

hard for individuals that have escaped their countries with very little to their person. Additionally, 

refugees often must relive their traumatic experiences in multiple rounds of interviews with various 

agencies, which then are cross checked with interviews with their family members. On average, this 

process takes 24 months to be completed. Once in the United States, they must again provide the same 

materials and recount their escape to various government agency staff. 

In stark contrast, on an average day in 2014, over 5 million international passengers travelled in and out 

of the country; some entering as a matter of right, others by lawfully obtained visas.4 None of those 

entering undergo the type of multinational, intense, vetting process to which refugees are subjected. All 

of the 9/11 hijackers entered the country in this manner, yet there have been no cries to close the 

borders to such potential threats. 

We recognize the important interest that the country has in protecting those within our borders and 

encourage efforts to strengthen our ability to detect potential threats by utilizing the full resources of 

the federal government. But simply turning our backs on helpless individuals, who are themselves 

victims of terrorism, sends two very dangerous messages. First, it paints all refugees as potential threats 

who should be objects of suspicion and fear, such objectification makes refugees the targets of bigoted 

violence, disparate treatment and harassment which can result in very tragic results. Second, it bolsters 

terrorists' claims that America is at war with Islam and undermines our claim to be at war with only 

terrorism. The result will aid the enemy in recruiting and radicalizing more terrorists to its cause and in 

fundraising, thereby making America even less safe. 

Given the aforementioned security procedure for refugee admission, it is clear that today's hearing and 

the various calls for increased regulation are driven not by need but by unfounded concern regarding 

the potential actions of Muslim refugees. As reported in the Economist, only two of the 750,000 

refugees resettled in the United States post-9/11 have been arrested on domestic terrorism charges. 5 In 

contrast, there have been nine domestic terrorist attacks by non-Muslim extremists groups, claiming 48 

lives during that same timeframe. 6 Legislative efforts by congress to counter terrorism must focus on the 

actual threats rather than on the imagined actions of an already vulnerable population. 

4 The U.S. International Air Passenger and Freight Statistics, released July 2015. U.S. Department of Transportation, available at 

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/US%201nternationai%20Air%20Passenger%20and%20Freight%20Statistics%20Report 

%20for%20December%202014_0.pdf 

5 Yearning to breathe free {The Economist), available at http:/ /www.economist.com/news/united-states/21674694-america-should-redaim-itsrole-beacon-those-fleeing-persecution-and-war~yearning. 

6 Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11 (The New York; Times) By; Shane, Scott. 

http://www .nytimes.com/201S/06/ZS/us/ta!ly-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat. html 

OCA IS A NATIONAL MEMBE~SHIP·DRIVEN ORGANIZATION OF COMMUNITY ADVOCAToS 

DEDICATED 10 ADVANCING THE SOCIAL. POLITICAL. AND ECONOMIC WELl·BEING OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

OCANATIONALCENT(R I l32218."STREETNW I WASHINGTON DC 20036 

1 202.223.5500 1 F 202.296.0540 i oca@occnatlonol.org I www.ocanotionol.org 
185 

00 OCA- Asian Pacific American Advocates ADVOCATE EMBRACING THE HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

Although we must continue to maintain the United States strong security measures against terrorism 

and harm to the American public, we urge the Committee to not further delay the already arduous 

vetting process for refugees seeking admittance here. Placing further regulations on the two year 

average it takes for an individual or family seeking safety only increases the trauma that refugees have 

already faced. OCA strongly recommends that the Committee focus on ensuring that an adequate 

amount of refugees are able to relocate to the United States and that their rights are not violated during 

the security process rather than unnecessarily denying them access to our country. 

OCA IS A NATIONAL MEMBERSHIP-DRIVEN ORGANIZATION OF COMMUNITY ADVOCATES 

DEDICATED TO ADVANCING THE SOCIAL, POUTICAL AND ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICANS 

OCA NATIONAL CENTER i 1322 18'" STREET NW I WASHINGTON DC 20036 

T 202.223.5500 ! f 202.296.0540 r OCQ(glocar"lot!OnaLorg I www.ocanat!onaLorg 
186 

Presbyterian Church (USA) 

Statement to the US. House ofRepresentatives' Judiciary Committee, pertaining to its 

hearing 

"The Syrian Refugee Crisis and its Impact on the Security of the U.S Refugee 

Admissions Program" 

November 19, 2015 

We are a world grieving. We mourn the many deaths, not only in Paris, but also in Beirut, 

Baghdad, and Egypt. Any sense of security we have had is badly compromised by these 

horrific events; moreover, our fear ofiSIS grows with every successful execution of its 

violent agenda. 

Much has been taken from us but we still hold the choice as to how we react in our grief 

and fear. Many politicians have rushed from grief to fearful judgment. More than half of 

the governors of our states have attempted to protect their citizens by issuing declarations 

denying entry of Syrian refugees into their states (as if all of the potential terrorists are 

Syrian). Some have gone so far as to caii for denial of entry to all refugees at the present 

time, as if that will guarantee safety to the citizens of their state. 

As U.S. governors pledge to refuse Syrian refugees within their states and some 

presidential hopefuls promise to abandon the refugee program altogether, we the people 

have a choice to make. We can choose to follow those who would have us hide in fear or 

we can choose hope. 

Our nation, for decades, has chosen hope and welcome for those fleeing war and 

persecution. Since 1975, more than three million refugees have found safety and security 

within our nation's borders. Right now 11 million Syrians cannot go to school, tend to 

their land, or raise their children in the place they know as home. They cannot do these 

things because they, themselves, have been terrorized for far too long by numerous 

factions, including their own government. 

Do we choose to abandon our plan to protect these Syrians because the people who have 

been threatening them are now threatening the West as well? ISIS has taken lives; they 

have taken our sense of security. Do we now hand over our hope and compassion to 

them? 

Obviously, we need to move forward with a disciplined response, expediting security 

checks such as those employed by the U.S. refugee admission program. To refuse certain 

persons who are fleeing terror and persecution because they are "Syrian" or of some other 

particular ethnic group is unjust and may be illegal under U.S. law. We can be disciplined 

and, at the same time, led to love beyond our own limited, fearful vision. 

After the crucifixion of Jesus, the disciples hid in fear. They locked the doors but God 

had another plan. Jesus appeared to them and said, "Peace be with you. As the Father has 
187 

sent me, so I send you" (Jn. 20:21). We were not meant to hide. We were meant to walk 

out in hope and compassion. Author, poet, and peace activist Wendell Berry wrote, 

"Healing is impossible in loneliness; it is the opposite of loneliness. Conviviality is 

healing. To be healed we must come with all the other creatures to the feast of Creation" 

(The Art of the Commonplace: The Agrarian Essays, "The Body and the Earth," p. 99). 

The way to end terror is to prove that those who demonize us are wrong. We are not a 

heartless secular culture. We must witness to the Gospel with generous hospitality. To 

hide in fear is a mistake. Fear is the ammunition of terror. Hope is the best defense. 
188 

ReligiousV7 Action 

Center 

of Reform Judaism 

Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner 

Director 

Jennifer Brodkey Kaufman, Chair 

Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism 

202.387.2800 Fax: 202.667.9070 E-mail: rac@uri.arq 

Arthur and Sara Jo Kobacker 

Building 

2027 Massac!'1usetts Avenue, NW 

at Kivle Kaplan Way 

Washington, DC 20036 

Visit our website at www.rac.org 

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Hearing: The 

Impact ofiSIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

November 19, 2015 

On behalf of the Religious Action Center, the Washington office of the Union for Reform 

judaism, whose nearly 900 congregations across North America encompass 1.5 million 

Reform jews, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis, whose membership includes 

more than 2,000 Reform rabbis, we submit this testimony as an urgent plea on behalf of the 

refugees fleeing the horrific violence in Syria and elsewhere in the region, who so 

desperately need our support. 

Our tradition teaches us that "The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the 

native among you, and you shall love him as yourself' (Lev. 19:33). As a community, we find 

it impossible to close our hearts to the plight of the millions of refugees seeking a haven 

from violence and persecution. In our congregations nationwide, rabbis and congregants 

are eager to respond with compassion and efficacy. Many have contacted us ready to 

sponsor individuals or families of refugees, as many of our Canadian congregations are 

doing. In the absence of that opportunity in the U.S., these congregations have responded 

with financial donations to relief organizations and robust advocacy in support of 

welcoming increased numbers of refugees. 

The recent attacks in Paris echo the kind of terrible violence that the Syrian people have 

lived with for the past several years. Now is the time to ensure the U.S. refugee system 

remains open to those fleeing this violence, reflecting our values as a country that is a safe 

haven and beacon of freedom. This can be done while maintaining our national security, 

assured in the knowledge that individuals allowed into the U.S. as refugees go through a 

lengthy and rigorous screening program. 

A nation built by refugees from political and religious persecution cannot turn its back on 

refugees seeking escape from the same. We stand ready to do our part, but we know, as you 

must, that what is required first and foremost is governmental action, which should never 

discriminate against refugees or others based on their religion. 

We must all ask ourselves what more can be done to help those in desperate need. We must 

all, including and perhaps especially those of us who hold public office and make decisions 

about our nation's priorities and actions 1 act with courage and compassion. We pray that we 

as a nation will rise to meet this challenge, and will all be found to have lived up to our 

responsibility to care for the poor, the needy and the stranger among us. 

The Religious Action Center pursues social justice and religious liberty by mobilizing the Jewish community 'l(i\~Jl 

and serving as its advocate in Washington, D.C. The Center is led by the Commission on Social Action ofthe ll]'iill Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Union for Refonn Judaism (and its affiliates) and is 1 URJ I 

supported by the congregations of the Union. ', ·-· · ... ' 
189 

REFUGEE SOLIDARITY 

NETWORK 

RSN's Statement to the Committee on the Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs of the U.S. Senate 

pertaining to the hearing 

Lessons from the Paris Terrorists Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

Thursday, November 19,2015 

By Zaid Hydari, Executive Director of RSN 

The war in Syria, now in its fifth year, has been described as the worst humanitarian crisis of our time. Nearly 4 million people have 

fled the country, of which well over 90% reside in neighboring countries Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt. Turkey alone hosts 

some 2 million Syrians, in addition to over 200,000 individuals that have fled Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and Somalia. 

The Refugee Solidarity Network (RSN) is a USN based non-profit organization that seeks to protect and advance refugee rights 

worldwide, with a current focus on Turkey. In addition to building capacity of local legal advocates and supporting legal assistance 

initiatives on the ground in Turkey, RSN advocates for ways in which the international community can better respond and share in the 

responsibility of this human tragedy. 

One way is through resettlement. The United States has a long and significant history of resettling populations in need. Since 1975, the 

U.S. has resettled more than 3 mi!lion refugees to its shores with annual admissions figures ranging from a high of207,000 in 1980 to 

a low of27,ll0 in 2002, Since the war in Syria broke out in March 2011, the U.S. has resettled less than 2,000 individuals from Syria. 

On September 10, 20 l 5 the White House announced a commitment to increase refugee resettlement to the US over the next two years. 

RSN welcomed this announcement, acknowledging it as a step in the right direction and advocating along with several partner 

organizations to further expand those commitments. However, some elected officials responded to these initiatives with derogatory 

remarks and offensive rhetoric, stoking fear against this program and against individuals in urgent need of assistance. 

The recent heinous events in Beirut and Paris have only made matters worse. Governors and Congressional officials have spoken out 

against resettlement of all Syrians, with varying degrees of inflammatory generalizations and prejudice. Like all challenging moments, 

this has provided an opportunity to reflect not only on our mora! obligation, but on the robustness of the security screening procedures 

carried out as part of the US Refugee Admissions Program. 

Refugees are the most vetted and screened of any immigrants granted entry to the U.S. There is no objective basis to challenge the 

integrity of the security process, a rigorous and lengthy procedure that on average takes over 2 years from start to finish for each and 

every refugee selected for resettlement. Comparisons to the European context are simply not relevant, as asylum~seekers in Europe do 

not undergo advanced intensive screening. 

While resettlement is not the only solution to this complex crisis, it is a critical gesture ofburden~sharing to first countries of asylum 

like Turkey, where the government and host population have sacrificed a great deal, both monetarily and otherwise, to receive and 

protect the displaced. RSN and its partner's efforts to improve standards in Turkey are made difficult when other global leaders do not 

contribute their fair share. 

RSN furthermore unequivocally opposes proposals to prioritize or favor resettlement of certain religious groups before others. RSN 

and its partner on the ground disseminate information to and advise refugees on their eligibility for humanitarian programs in Turkey 

and discriminatory distinctions between ethnic and religious groups adversely affect humanitarian aid providers and their programs. In 

addition to creating confusion, such policies stoke resentment and tarnish the image of the United States among vulnerable 

populations and on the world stage. 

As it has done so many times in the past, the US should lead by example, encouraging other developing nations to increase their 

participation in humanitarian funding and resettlement, instead of participating in a race to the bottom. Congress should continue to 

promote funding appropriations for humanitarian assistance overseas, while increasing resettlement and family reunification 

opportunities to the US. RSN urges members of Congress to abandon harmful and misleading discourse instead of abandoning 

refugees in need of protection. 

Refugee Solidarity Network 

4556 42nd St., Suite 1 E, Sunnyside, NY 11104 I (202) 602~77481 \\ W\\ .Rct\tgecSolid<~rirvNI.'twork.om 
190 

Written Testimony of Catherine Orsborn, Director of the Shoulder to Shoulder 

Campaign 

"Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland 

and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015; 2:00pm 

I would like to thank the members of the House Subcommittee on 

Immigration and Border Security for providing the opportunity to submit this 

statement on the need to address the Syrian refugee crisis. As I will discuss 

below, this is an issue that is too often clouded by misinformation and 

prejudice, and I welcome the opportunity to expand the conversation of this 

critical topic. 

I bring before you today the collective voices of 31 different religious 

denominations and organizations, the members of the Shoulder to Shoulder 

campaign to combat anti-Muslim bigotry. We are calling on the United States 

government to respond generously in the face of the Syrian humanitarian 

crisis, and urging public officials to refrain from bigoted and discriminatory 

rhetoric and approaches in this response. The magnitude of the Syrian crisis 

is daunting, and the U.S. must help to lead a global response that honors the 

human dignity of each and every person seeking freedom from the violent 

conditions in Syria today. 

As religious leaders, it is deeply concerning to our coalition that we too often 

hear this crisis discussed in terms of U.S. national security instead of our 

moral and humanitarian commitment to the least among us. We are of course 

concerned with safeguarding the national security of our nation, but too much 

of this rhetoric is a smokescreen for bigotry and prejudice. Elected officials 

have referred to the refugee resettlement system as a "Trojan horse" for 

terrorist groups. Such claims are unfounded, as the resettlement program is 

one of the most difficult ways to enter our country. Syrians from all 

backgrounds are leaving some of the most horrific conditions imaginable to 

find security for themselves and their communities; their human security is 

the security that is most threatened at the moment. We must not talk about 

Syrian refugees as "security threats," politicizing their plight, but we should 

talk about them as human beings who, as such, deserve our respect and 

compassion. 

We do a disservice to our nation's values if we allow religious prejudice to 

influence our response to this crisis. Our nation's mandate in resettling 

refugees is to prioritize the most vulnerable. The most vulnerable of those 
191 

fleeing Syria are from a number of different religious and ethnic 

backgrounds- this includes religious minorities and Muslims alike. All of 

whom are fleeing the horrific conditions in Syria today; all of whom are 

searching for peace and security for themselves and their families. To paint 

Muslim refugees in particular as security threats on the basis of their 

religious identity is bigoted and defies the compassion with which we as 

Americans of different faith traditions should approach those asking for our 

help. 

We thus lift our voices to call upon our elected officials to recognize the 

human dignity of Syrians reaching out for global support in this time of great 

need. We call on our elected officials to refrain from politicizing their plight 

and to instead reach into the wells of our own national values to find the 

courage and compassion to extend a welcoming hand to those seeking refuge 

without religious or ethnic discrimination in so doing. 
192 

Syrian American Medical Society Statement for the Record 

To the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlemenf' 

Thursday, November 19,2015 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and all members of the Senate Committee on 

Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, thank you for the opportunity to submit a written 

statement on the important issue of the Syrian refugee crisis and its implications for the United 

States. 

We write to you as a non-religious, non-political, Syrian American led humanitarian organization 

that provides assistance to over 1.5 million Syrians each year and represents thousands of 

Syrian American medical professionals in the United States. The Syrian American Medical 

Society (SAMS) is working on the front lines of crisis relief in Syria and neighboring countries to 

save lives, support doctors and medical professionals, and rebuild healthcare. 

SAMS was founded in 1998 as a professional society, working to connect physicians of Syrian 

descent through educational and professional activities. When the conflict in Syria began in 

2011, SAMS expanded its capacity significantly to meet the growing needs and challenges of 

the medical crisis. SAMS is now a leading organization in the Syria crisis response, impacting 

the health and lives of millions. We support over 100 field hospitals, clinics, and surgical centers 

inside of Syria and support over 800 Syrian doctors, nurses, and health workers in Syria who 

are risking their lives to save others. Our members and supporters have led dozens of lifesaving 

medical missions to Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey to support refugees regionally. SAMS also 

supports Syrian refugees in neighboring countries with critical psychosocial support, medical 

care, and social services. 

Civilians are experiencing unthinkable atrocities right now in Syria. Hospitals, schools, markets, 

and other civilian infrastructure is targeted daily by aerial attacks. On October 20, one of our 

field clinics in Sarmin, ldlib was hit by two air-to-surface missiles fired from Syrian government I 

ally warplanes. This strike killed two of our heroic medical staff and 10 civilians. The director of 

the Sarmin clinic said afterwards, "When I am in the hospital, I feel like I am sitting on a bomb. It 

is only a matter of time until it explodes. It is wrong - a hospital should not be the most 

dangerous place. I wish I could say that targeting a hospital in Syria is unique, but is not. The 

field clinic I direct in Sarmin has been targeted and hit by airstrikes more than a dozen times. 

We've seen too many civilians and medical staff die in our hospital to count. The hardest part is 

knowing that these attacks will happen again." This is daily life inside of Syria. Another SAMS-
193 

supported surgeon from Aleppo spoke about the aftermath of a barrel bomb attack, describing, 

"The bodies of a mother and daughter were blown apart but their hands were still 

clasped together." These attacks are what civilians flee from each day, becoming internally 

displaced or refugees in surrounding countries to escape the daily violence. 

As a result of these horrific events, the world is witnessing the largest refugee crisis since World 

War II. More than 12 million Syrians are displaced internally, and more than 4 million Syrians 

have fled as refugees. For nearly five years, they have been victims of unspeakable violence, 

losing not only their country and community but also family members and friends. The 

surrounding countries of Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon have each taken in over one million 

Syrian refugees seeking protection. The enormous flow of refugees has created a strain on 

these countries in the region, which are forced to deal with extreme economic pressures, 

overcrowded hospitals, shortages of basic public services, and growing resentment among host 

communities. The sheer numbers of refugees and lack of support for host communities threaten 

their stability. Tens of thousands of Syrians are risking death again to flee to Europe; over 2,500 

of them have drowned or disappeared in the Mediterranean in 2015. 

SAMS strongly supports the U.S. refugee resettlement program, which resettles tens of 

thousands of refugees from around the world each year. It is essential for the U.S. to take a 

leading role in Syrian refugee resettlement for the protection of Syria's most vulnerable 

refugees, for the stability and security of the region, and for the relevance of the U.S. as a 

humanitarian and global leader. 

Historically, the United States has always taken a leadership role in assisting vulnerable 

refugees fleeing major disasters. The U.S. has accepted the majority of all UNHCR referrals 

from around the world. The families and individuals being considered for resettlement face dire 

protection challenges and often need specialized care. Over 76 percent of Syrian refugees are 

women and children. Among those being considered for resettlement are victims of torture, 

women at risk, persons with disabilities, LGBTQ persons facing risk, women-headed 

households, and those facing acute security threats. We call on all Congresspeople to 

maintain policy stances that are open-hearted to the most vulnerable populations and 

non-discriminatory in nature. 

To members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, and to all 

Members of Congress, we recommend: 

• Working to ensure sufficient staffing and capacity for security vetting agencies to 

increase their ability to conduct thorough and quick security checks. We commend 

the meticulous and exemplary work of the Refugee Admissions Program, coordinated by 

the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration at the Department of State and the 

Department of Homeland Security. All Syrian refugee profiles being actively considered 

for resettlement are reviewed thoroughly by the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program with 

support and leadership from the White House and numerous security vetting agencies, 

including the Department of Defense and Federal Bureau of Investigation. These 

Syrians go through extensive security background checks, and those being considered 

for resettlement are among the most vulnerable populations. The U.S. vetting process is 

the most robust in the world and typically takes more than two years. To prohibit Syrian 

refugees from the option of U.S. resettlement because of the presence of ISIS and other 

extremist groups in Syria, and not based on thorough U.S. led security checks and 

humanitarian needs assessments, discounts the commendable work of the Department 
194 

of Homeland Security and Department of State and amounts to blatant discrimination 

based on nationality. 

• Demonstrating leadership by opposing inflammatory anti-refugee legislation. 

• Fully funding essential humanitarian and refugee accounts. It is essential that 

ample assistance is provided to the refugee response in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon, 

which together house 86% of Syrian refugees. With services and assistance at a 

regional level, more refugees will be able and willing to remain in the region, and fewer 

will flee to Europe or desperately need resettlement. Furthermore, funding is needed to 

maintain the stringent and rigorous vetting processes already in place through the 

Department of State and Department of Homeland Security so that refugees being 

resettled in the U.S. are properly vetted and assisted once they arrive. We call for 

funding at the following levels or higher: 

o Migration and Refugee Assistance (SFOps): $3.604 billion 

o International Disaster Assistance (SFOps): $2.42 billion ($950 million for EFSP) 

o Refugee and Entrant Assistance (L/HHS): $2.44 billion 

o Dept. of Homeland Security Refugee Corps (DHS): $17.3 million in direct 

appropriations(+ $32.3 million from anticipated fees for a total of $49.6 million for 

DHS to do refugee resettlement screening) 

• Enhancing regional support and renewing efforts to stem flow of refugees by 

addressing the driver of the refugee crisis- the lack of protection for civilians in 

Syria. The U.S. must make immediate civilian protection in Syria and the pursuit of a 

sustainable political solution to the conflict in Syria its top diplomatic priorities. Until 

protection is available and the conflict is resolved, Syrian civilians will continue to be 

killed, displaced, or flee the country, and it will not be safe for them to return home. 

Refugee resettlement is not a political or partisan issue. It is a human issue. It is critical 

that the U.S. take further steps to act as a leader in this unprecedented global refugee crisis. 

The U.S., founded as a nation of immigrants, must continue and scale up its support for 

vulnerable Syrian refugees, providing them with the hope of resettlement and a brighter future. 
195 

Statement to the U.S. House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee, pertaining to its hearing "Lessons from 

the Paris Terrorists Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

Thursday, November 19, 2015 

The Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC) was founded in 1979 to facilitate the relocation of 

Southeast Asian refugees into American society, and continues at present to advance the interests of these 

communities through advocacy, leadership development and capacity building. 

Cambodian, Laotian and Vietnamese American communities arose from the largest refugee resettlement in U.S. 

history. Approximately 1.3 million refugees from war-torn countries in Southeast Asia were resettled into the 

United States after decades of the U.S. war in Vietnam, the Secret War in Laos, and the bombings of Cambodia, 

followed by the ruthless Khmer Rouge genocide. In 1975 alone, the United States resettled 4,600 refugees from 

Cambodia, 800 from Laos, and 125,000 from Vietnam, and continued to welcome hundreds of thousands more 

in need of safe haven in the years to come. 

Syria is currently facing a similar humanitarian crisis, with more than 50 percent of its entire population 

displaced from their homes due to civil war and the growing threat of ISIS. More than 4 million refugees have 

fled the country, and an additional 8 million are internally displaced-76 percent of whom are women and 

children. Although SEARAC applauds Secretary Kerry's announcement to increase refugee resettlement numbers 

to 85,000 in 2016, and 100,000 in 2017, these efforts still need to be drastically improved. At present, the United 

States has resettled less than 2,000 Syrians since the beginning of the conflict. In contrast, there are currently, 

1.9 million registered refugees in Turkey, 1.1 million in Lebanon, 630,000 in Jordan, 250,000 in Iraq, and 130,000 

in Egypt. 

Growing anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiment fuel the fire of fear and hate that penalizes millions of these 

refugees in need of protection. The current process of refugee screening in the United States subscribes to the 

most stringent of standards, allowing admission into the country only after successfully undergoing a rigorous 

11-step process, which includes a number of security clearances. Despite this, xenophobia and islamophobia 

continue to steer the direction of publlc policy decisions, and weaken the country's resolve in pursuing its 

humanitarian responsibility. 

2015 marks the 40th year anniversary since the United States opened its doors to millions of men, women and 

children from Southeast Asia seeking humanitarian protection. Their courage and resilience has led these 

communities to grow and contribute to the country. SEARAC, along with more than 2.5 million Cambodian, 

Laotian and Vietnamese Americans living in the country, stand with our refugee brothers and sisters from Syria, 

and call on the Administration and Congress to carry on America's legacy as a leading humanitarian leader by 

opening its doors to vulnerable communities. 
196 

Co-Signers: 

Organizations: 

ACT for Women and Girls 

Asian Law Alliance 

California Pan-Ethnic Health Network 

Chinese for Families 

Community Health for Asian Americans 

Fresno Interdenominational Refugee Ministries( FIRM) 

Guam Communications Network 

Khmer Health Advocates Inc. 

National Korean American Service & Education Consortium 

NQAPIA: National Queer API Alliance 

OCA- Asian Pacific American Advocates 

Pacific Islander Cancer Survivors Network 

Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education Network (SIREN) 

Southeast Asians in Medicine (SEAM) at UC Davis School of Medicine 

Stone Soup Fresno 

The Greenlining Institute 

UCDSOM Southeast Asians In Medicine 

United Cambodian Community 

Vietnamese Youth Development Center 

WSU Khmer Cougs 

Individuals: 

Adriana Garcia 

Albert Le 

Amelia Ortega 

Angela Jia Yin Ng 

Angie Tran 

Anhlan Nguyen 

Anh-Thu Nguyen 

Anne Martin-Montgomery 

Annie Luong 

Anthony Le 

Ariana Yang 

Ashley Uyeda 

Sao Kou 

Sinh Ly 

SINH NGUYEN 

Bopha Cheng 

c 

Camille Llanes-Fontanilla 

Casey Tran 

Chariya Sok 

Cherry Lim 

Cynthia Brothers 

D Cahn 

Dao Chang 

David 

David Yang 

dena 

Dinh Le 

Elena Macias 

Emily Reyes 

Erin Tsurumoto Grassi 

Ethan Nguyen 

Farrah Tek 

Francis Guzman 

Giao Tran 

Henrissa Bassey 

Henry Vue 

Huong nguyen 

Jacqueline Dan 

JENIFFER CALLEJA 

Jeniffer Huong 

Jennifer 

Jennifer Ka 

Johnny Rodriguez 

Jennie Luong 

Justin Nguyen 

Ka Xiong 

Kao Yong Thao 

Kayla Lor 

Kee Vang 

Kenny Hoang 

Kevin Nguyen 

Khamphoui Singvongsa 

Khassandra Heu 

Khaum xiong 

Khonnie Lattasima 

Kia Vang 

Kristi Moua 

Kurt Siklar 

Lean Deleon 

Lee Vang 

Linda Sok 

Linda Vang 

Linh Chuong 

Lisa Ph an 

Lyia Jalao 

Lynna Vong 

Maggie Doman 

Maggie Quan 
197 

Mai Nhia Vang 

Marcus Degnan 

Martin Tran 

Mary Rose 

Mary Scully 

Mary xiong 

Mary Yang 

Mayta Lor 

Melissa Koch 

Merri Sullivan 

Michelle Yeung 

Min a Nguyen 

Minh Nguyen 

Mykhou Vue 

Nancy Le 

Natalie Nguyen 

Navy Nhiv 

Nga Bui 

Nhi Tran 

Nit Ounniyom 

Odyssey Xiong 

Pa Thao 

Prenz 

Quynh Nguyen 

Rachel Pomeroy 

Ricky Ly 

Ruth Silver Taube 

Sandy Kuoch 

Sarita Panchang 

Seng 

Sheila Nem 

SONEXAY SANAPHOL 

Steven Doman 

Suzanne 1m 

Tagoipah Mathno 

Tam Duong 

Tanira Chau 

TANYA NGUYEN 

Thanh Nguyen 

Thao Xiong 

ThearChum 

Thomas Steers 

Tiffany Clark 

timothy mcdermott 

Tin Thanh Nguyen, Esq. 

Tina Ngo 

Trinh Le 

True Vang 

Uyen Phuong Hoang 

Vang Xiong 

Vieng Siklar 

Vincent 

Vincent P. Tran 

Yi Chia Chen 

ZVue 

Zer Vang 
198 

Testimony of T'ruah: the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights 

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to submit 

testimony on behalf of T'ruab: the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights concerning the response of 

the United States to the refugee crisis and the effect of recent terror attacks in Beirut and Paris on 

these important decisions. It is worrisome that more than two dozen state governors have been 

ignoring our country's obligations to refugees under the UN Refugee Convention, which we 

signed and ratified in 1967. We are grateful for the Subcommittee's timely review of our 

responsibilities today. 

T'ruah: the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights is an organization of 1,800 rabbis from all streams 

of Judaism that acts on the Jewish imperative to respect and protect the human rights of all 

people. Grounded in Torah and our Jewish historical experience and guided by the Universal 

Declaration of Human Rights, we advocate for human rights in Israel and North America. We 

are one of many organizations working with Shoulder to Shoulder: Standing with American 

Muslims, Upholding American Values, and our concern for the welfare of Muslims in the United 

States comes from our commitment to human rights for all and our own Jewish historical 

experience as a minority often in need of protection. 

Our historical experience as Jews in the United States teaches us the consequences of letting our 

fears dictate our policies towards those seeking refuge. 75 years ago, as Jewish refugees from the 

Nazis in Europe desperately sought a safe haven, elected officials in the United States spoke 

about the threat of Nazi infiltrators arriving on refugee boats, and spoke out against letting in so 

many Jews. Similar rhetoric about Muslim refugees is being used today, and similar fears are 

being used as excuses for refusing refuge to Syrians. Today, the processes our country have in 

place for screening refugees are incredibly thorough, and at least half of the refugees are 

children, who do not pose a threat. Americans made the mistake less than a century ago of 

turning away refugee Jewish children and their parents, many of whom went to their deaths. 

Today, we see in the Syrian refugees the same need that we saw two generations ago among 

European Jewish refugees, and today we have the strength, the resources, and the understanding 

to provide them with the shelter and aid they so desperately need. 

At the beginning of Genesis, we read: "God created the human in his own image." (Genesis 

I :27) Our primary understanding of who we are comes from this phrase, teaching us that every 

human being- no matter their religion or nationality- is created in God's image, b'tzelem 

elohim. Therefore, to refuse hospitality and aid to millions of human beings in a dire situation is 

akin to degrading the divine. 
199 

If we take our belief in God seriously as people of faith, then we cannot be silent when millions 

of fellow human beings are being prevented from seeking refuge in other countries, and who are 

now being treated as undesirable in our country, primarily because of their religion. The Muslim 

faith of refugees does not make them inherently dangerous, as some voices have said. Acts of 

terror being committed today by extremists have had devastating impacts on Muslim 

communities as well as others. The fear is understandable, but our fears are shared by the 

majority of refugees from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, who are fleeing precisely the same 

violence. Refusing to help victims of our shared enemy is immoral and cowardly. 

Jewish tradition emphasizes the need for a shared sense of human responsibility. In a collection 

of Biblical interpretations called Pirke DeRabbi Eliezer, we are told that god gathered the dust -

red, black, white, and yellow - to create the first person from the four corners ofthe world. Why? 

So that if a person traveled from east to west or from west to east, and the time came for that 

person to die, the earth would not be able to say that the dust ofthat person's body did not belong 

there, or should return to the place from which the person had been created. We learn that the 

basic elements of creation in each of our bodies are the same everywhere, and that each person's 

body will return to the dust, as is says in Genesis 3:19, "For you are dust, and you shall return to 

dust." 

We believe that the moral voice of rabbis is critical in ending hateful and false anti-Muslim 

rhetoric, and we believe that the time to act and help these refugees is now. Mr. Chairman, 

Members of the Subcommittee, T'ruah: the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights believes strongly 

that the United States should do everything it can to be a place of refuge and welcome for those 

in dire need. We have a moral obligation to uphold the dignity and the safety ofthose in 

desperate circumstances. To that end, we strongly support your leadership in sponsoring 

legislation that would bring Syrian refugees to the United States and ensure their safety once 

here. We implore you to publicly recommit to our obligations under the Refugee Convention and 

come to the aid of our allies in Europe and the Middle East today by acting immediately to bring 

refugees to the United States. Your hearing today is a very important effort in doing that, and we 

thank you for the opportunity to contribute to it. 
200 

General Board of Church and Society of The United Methodist Church 

Statement to the U.S. Senate's Judiciary Committee, 

pertaining to its hearing 

Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement 

Thursday, November 19,2015 

The General Board of Church and Society grieves for the victims of violence in Paris, 

Beirut, and other places around the world recently. We continue to pray for the day when 

no more tears will be shed as war will give way to peace. Christians are reminded of the 

coming season of Advent and anticipate the coming of our Lord. We recall the Savior of 

the world began his life as a refugee. 

Vulnerable people are increasingly facing crises in our world today. Perhaps the most 

vulnerable people are refugees. This is evident today as we see approximately four 

million refugees from Syria, with three quarters of them being women and children. The 

solutions to this crisis are complex, but one solution is the safe resettlement of refugees. 

Currently, more than three million Syrian refugees have resettled in Lebanon, Turkey, 

Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq. U.S. participation in the resettlement of refugees is vital and 

demonstrates global leadership while providing relief for the countries in the region to 

which refugees immediately flee. 

The United States presently has resettled only 2,000 Syrian refugees. We feel strongly the 

United States should significantly increase this number and show authentic global 

leadership. Refugees are the single most scrutinized and vetted individuals to travel to the 

United States: undergoing more than seven security checks by intelligence agencies 

including biometric tests, medical screenings, forensic testing of documents, iris scans to 

confirm the identity of Syrian refugees throughout the process, investigations by the 

National Counterterrorism Center, and in-person interviews with Department of 

Homeland Security officials. It takes individuals longer than 1,000 days to be processed 

before entering. 

States and governments have a responsibility to protect their citizens, including 

protecting the human rights of all people in their boundaries. However, the calls for 

stopping Syrians from entering the country are reminiscent of shameful times in this 

country's history when we surrendered to our fears and refused to serve people who truly 

were experiencing violence and persecution. Protecting and upholding human dignity and 

freedom for those fleeing terror, persecution, and economic deprivation, is not only the 

common responsibility of everyone including state and religious bodies, it is our highest 

calling. 

The United Methodist Church has consistently supported humanitarian responses to 

crises. Christian witness should reflect the special care that Christ offers migrants, 

refugees and the vulnerable. As United Methodists, we know that fearful responses are 

not reflective of Christian life and witness. Instead, Christ calls us to a love for 

humankind and compassion for all of people regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion. 
201 

Therefore, we oppose all efforts to curtail the acceptance of Syrian refugees into the 

United States as well as the efforts of some to impose a religious litmus test that will 

discriminate against Muslim refugees. To conflate refugees with terrorists is inexcusable 

when the millions of people leaving Syria are fleeing that same violence and terror. 

Rather than submit to fear, we pray that public officials will give pause to thoughtful 

deliberation and choose wisdom over political rhetoric. Our hope is that Congress shows 

true leadership in this time of great tragedy. United Methodists serve refugees across the 

world and will continue to welcome refugees to our communities. Our prayer is that this 

will include refugees from Syria. 
202 

Written Testimony of 

Most Reverend Eusebio Elizondo, M.Sp. 

Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Seattle, W A 

Chairman, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Migration 

For a Hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee 

"On Safe and Secure Resettlement of Refugees Fleeing from the Syrian Crisis" 

2:00p.m., Thursday, November 19,2015 

Room 342 Dirksen Senate Office Building 
203 

I am the Right Reverend Eusebio Elizondo, M.Sp., Auxiliary Bishop of Seattle, Washington, and Chair of 

the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Migration (USCCB/COM). 

I would like to thank Chair Ron Johnson (R-WI), Ranking Member Thomas R. Carper (D-DE), and 

committee members for the opportunity to comment on the important issue of safe and secure refugee 

resettlement. 

All of us are mindful of the senseless violence perpetrated by ISIS in Paris last week. As we mourn with 

our French brothers and sisters and offer our deepest condolences, we rededicate ourselves to seeking 

peace for Syria and her people and safe and dignified options for refugees fleeing from ISIS and other 

persecutors in Syria. 

I am disturbed by calls from both federal and state officials for an end to the resettlement of Syrian 

refugees in the United States. These refugees are fleeing terror themselves-violence like we have 

witnessed in Paris. They are extremely vulnerable families, women, and children who are t1eeing f(w their 

lives. We cannot and should not blame these vulnerable refugees for the actions of a terrorist 

organization. 

Moreover, refugees to this country must pass security checks and multiple interviews before entering the 

United States-more than any arrival to the United States. It can take up to two years for a refugee to pass 

through the whole vetting process. We can look at strengthening the already stringent screening program, 

but we should continue to welcome those in desperate need. 

Instead of using this tragedy to scapegoat all refugees, I call upon our public officials to work together to 

end the Syrian cont1ict peacefully so the close to 4 million Syrian refugees can return to their country and 

rebuild their homes. Until that goal is achieved, we must work with the world community to provide safe 

haven to vulnerable and deserving refugees who are simply attempting to survive. As a great nation, the 

United States must show leadership during this crisis and bring nations together to protect those in danger 

and bring an end to the conflicts in the Middle East. 

Our analysis and recommendations in today's testimony will focus on how we believe safe and secure 

resettlement fits in as a small, but important, part of the overall solution to the Syrian refugee crisis. 

Before, and especially since, September 11,2001, Congress has been vigilant about maintaining the 

safety and security of the U.S. resettlement program. This testimony will detail the bars to U.S. asylum 

and refugee protection, particularly those involved in crime or terrorism. It will also detail how 

compliance with these bars are maintained through numerous and arduous interviews, administrative 

reviews, security checks, and background checks built into the refugee resettlement screening process by 

the Departments of State, Justice, and Homeland Security. In the testimony, we will also show how safe 

and secure resettlement fits in to the overall comprehensive humanitarian response to the Syrian crisis. 

A USCCB/COM delegation travelled to the region in October 2012 and completed a report titled, 

"Mission to the Middle East: Report of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on Syrian Refugees." 

We also traveled to the region more recently and released a report in January 2015 entitled, "Refuge and 

Hope in the Time of ISIS: The Urgent Need for Protection, Humanitarian Support, and Durable Solutions 

in Turkey, Bulgaria, and Greece." Between 2012 and 2015, we have seen more than a sevenfold increase 

in the number of Syrian refugees fleeing to neighboring host countries. There were 550,000 Syrian 

refugees in the region when we first visited. By the end of 20 IS, the number is expected to reach 4.3 

million, with over half of them being children under the age of 17, 38% children under the age of 12, and 

three quarters of them being women and children. 

With the coming of ISIS we have also witnessed an enormous increase in the number of ethnic and 

2 
204 

religious minorities fleeing persecution. The conflict has also spread into Iraq, displacing many in that 

country, as well. 

Mr. Chairman, I ask that the above reports be included in the hearing record. In this current written 

testimony, I will integrate and update our observations and recommendations from those reports. 

When considering refugee situations, Catholics and all Christians are reminded that one of Jesus' first 

experiences as an infant was to flee for his life from King Herod with his family to Egypt. Jesus, Mary, 

and Joseph were refugees in the Middle East and faced some of the same fear, uncertainty, and 

dislocation that the millions of Syrians and Iraqis imperiled by this crisis face today. The situation is 

especially urgent given the unprecedented size, complexity, and rate of growth of the displaced 

population. 

Mr. Chairman, in my testimony today regarding the U.S. resettlement program USCCB/COM 

recommends that the United States: 

Assure that U.S. resettlement is done in a safe, secure, and timely manner. 

Fully fund the U.S. Departments of State, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services to 

securely vet and humanely resettle 85,000 refugees admitted under the Presidential Determination 

(PD) for Fiscal Year 2016, I 00,000 refugees admitted underthe PD for the Fiscal Year 2017, and 

additionally, the US should carry out its usual role as international human rights and refugee 

protection leader and assure that we do our fair share of safe, humane resettlement of Syrians. 

Encourage the Department of State (DOS) to focus especially on the most vulnerable refugees, 

including unaccompanied refugee minors (URMs), other children at risk, women at risk, refugees 

with serious health concerns, the elderly, victims of torture and/or trauma, those with affiliations 

with the U.S. government or U.S. based NGOs, media, and companies; members of persecuted 

minority ethnic and religious groups; and refugees in immediate danger. 

Increase U.S. resettlement of vulnerable non-Syrian refugees in the region, such as Iraqis, and 

urge other nations to do likewise and thereby share the refugee protection responsibility with the 

host countries. 

Further, Mr. Chairman, we recommend that resettlement be integrated into a comprehensive approach to 

this crisis and urge that the United States: 

Work with other governments to obtain a ceasefire, initiate serious peace negotiations, provide 

increased impartial humanitarian assistance and allow safe passage for this assistance within 

Syria, especially for internally displaced people (IDPs), and establish a peace that builds an 

inclusive society in Syria and Iraq that protects the rights of all its citizens, including Christians 

and other minorities, enabling them to return to their homeland in the future with safety and 

dignity. 

Encourage refugee host countries to maintain secure border and migration enforcement policies 

and practices but at the same time maintain policies and practices that enable Syrians and other 

refugee groups (such as Iraqis) to safely flee from Syria and Iraq to find protection and 

humanitarian care without improper rejection at the border, deportation, or arbitrary detention in 

poor conditions. 

3 
205 

Provide more U.S. support and encourage more international humanitarian and development 

support for refugees in the region, especially children, for their basic necessities of life, 

immediate protection, primary and secondary education, and systems that lay the groundwork for 

durable solutions, including employment for adults; and provide host countries additional 

housing, food, water, sanitation, health, education, and transportation infrastructure to allow them 

to host these large numbers of refugees. 

Urge the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with DOS and the Department 

of Justice (DOJ), to expeditiously remove unjust impediments to U.S. resettlement by 

implementing discretionary authority to grant exemptions from overly broad terrorism related 

inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) of U.S. immigration law. 

I. Catholic Social Teaching 

The Catholic Church is a migrant and refugee church. The Catholic Church in the United States, for 

example, is made up of more than 58 ethnic groups from throughout the world, including Europe, the 

Middle East, the Near East, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. 

We have a long history of involvement in refugee and child protection both in the advocacy arena and in 

welcoming and integrating waves of immigrants and refugees who have helped build our nation as one 

that embraces ethnic diversity while sharing common values. The work of the USCCB's Committee on 

Migration is carried out by the Migration and Refugee Services (USCCB/MRS), which is the largest U.S. 

refugee resettlement agency, resettling one million of the three million refugees who have come to our 

country since 1975. It is a national leader in caring for unaccompanied refugee and migrant children and 

works with over I 00 Catholic Charities across the United States to welcome and serve refugees and 

unaccompanied refugee and migrant children. 

The U.S. Catholic Church also relates closely with the Catholic Church in countries throughout the world, 

where our worldwide Catholic communion serves the needs of the most marginalized regardless of 

nationality or religious affiliation. We serve many refugees, internally displaced persons, and host 

nations straining under the large influx of people fleeing persecution and war. The Church's deep 

experience in combating poverty and forced migration and their root causes in the Middle East also 

includes the work of, among others, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the official overseas relief and 

development agency of the U.S. Catholic bishops, the International Catholic Migration Commission 

(ICMC), of which USCCB is the largest member, Caritas International, Jesuit Refugee Services (JRS), 

and the Catholic Near East Welfare Association (CNEWA). 

The Catholic Church's work of assisting all migrants everywhere stems from the belief that every person 

is created in God's image. In the Old Testament, God calls upon his people to care for the alien because 

of their own experience as aliens: "So, you, too, must befriend the alien, for you were once aliens 

yourselves in the land of Egypt" (Deut. I 0: 17-19). In the New Testament, the image of the migrant is seen 

in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. In his own life and work, Jesus identified himself with 

newcomers and with other marginalized persons in a special way: "I was a stranger and you welcomed 

me" (Mt. 25:35). Jesus himself was an itinerant preacher without a home of his own, and as noted above, 

a refugee fleeing to Egypt to avoid persecution and death (Mt. 2: 15). 

In modem times, popes over the last 100 years have developed the Church's teaching on 

migration, teaching that has been frequently applied by church leaders. Pope Pius XII reaffirmed the 

Catholic Church's commitment to caring for pilgrims, aliens, exiles, refugees, and migrants of every kind, 

4 
206 

affirming that all peoples have the right to conditions worthy of human life and, if these conditions are not 

present, the right to migrate. 1 

In our joint pastoral letter, Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope, A Pastoral Letter 

Concerning Migration," January 23, 2003, the U.S. and Mexican Catholic bishops call for nations to 

work toward a "globalization of solidarity." "Refugees and asylum seekers should be afforded protection. 

Those who flee wars and persecution should be protected by the global community. No. 99. Also, 

"]b]ecause of their heightened vulnerability, unaccompanied minors require special consideration and 

care" No. 82. 

Recently, Pope Francis defended the rights of refugees and migrants, traveling to Lampedusa, Italy, to 

call for their protection. He decried the "globalization of indifference" and the "throwaway culture" that 

leads to the disregard of those fleeing persecution in order to seek refuge or a better life. Regarding 

Syrian refugees drowning at sea as they flee the crisis, he later exhmted the international community, 

"We cannot allow the Mediterranean to become a vast cemetery!" He urged solidarity with refugees and 

cooperation among the nations to address this challenge. During his recent trip to the United States, he 

spoke about the need to welcome refugees and migrants, urging Congress and the American people, "to 

respond in a way which is always just, humane, and fraternal", remembering the Golden Rule and helping 

refugees, not viewing them as a problem. 

II. Overview of the Ongoing Syrian Refugee Crisis 

"War is like fire. Afire eats everything before it. So does war. There is no peace anywhere," 

says a Syrian Christian refogee woman in Lebanon served by a Catholic aid group. 

The Syrian refugee crisis deserves the full attention and mobilization of the international community. The 

anned conflict has continued to escalate across Syria and has spread into Iraq. It has brought ongoing 

large-scale destruction, human suffering, and death inside the country and threatens destabilization of the 

whole region. The size, scope, rapid growth and complexity of Syria's forced migration are reasons for 

deep concern. With the brutal conflict and ever-growing forced migration, there is a serious lack of 

livelihood, shelter, food, water, sanitation, education, health care, and protection inside Syria and in 

neighboring countries that host Syrian refugees. 

Protection, humanitarian support, and pursuit of durable solutions for refugees are important for 

humanitarian reasons but also as part of a strategy for maintaining the stability of the host countries and 

the region. This requires responsibility sharing by the international community both through generous 

assistance to support refugees in the host countries and also by providing refuge for some of those fleeing 

the crisis. Safe and secure refugee resettlement plays a relatively small, but important, role in the overall 

strategy to address the crisis. Before detailing the role of safe and secure resettlement, we want to 

describe the overall challenge facing the international community. 

The conflict has led to the forced displacement of some 50% of the Syrian population, including some 8 

million internally displaced people (IDP). 

The Syrian Christian woman quoted above is among the some 4.3 million Syrian refugees forced to flee 

their country, with 1.1 million seeking refuge in Lebanon, 634,000 in Jordan, 2.2 million in Turkey, 

244,000 in Iraq, 127,000 in Egypt, and the several hundred thousand who have fled to Europe seeking 

'Pope Pius XII, Exsul Familia (On the Spiritual Care of Migrants), September, 1952. 

5 
207 

asylum.' Besides the increase of Syrian refugees to neighboring countries, those countries also host large 

refugee populations of non-Syrians, including many Iraqis, Afghans, and others. 

One UNHCR official in Turkey explained to the USCCB/COM delegation the impact of the refugee 

arrivals there over the last four years, "It began as a migration emergency, became a protracted refugee 

situation, and is now a social crisis for our country." Some 20% of the Lebanese population is refugees 

and some 8% of Jordan's. Although very high, those numbers alone do not capture the challenge for host 

nations and communities. During the first two-days of the most recent trip to Turkey, some 130,000 

Syrian Kurds fled from ISIS in Kobane, Syria, into southern Turkey, where Turkey generously provided 

them protection and humanitarian care. To use a local community example, in Arsal, Lebanon, the city of 

35,000 has already welcomed 39,000 Syrian refugees, including 20,000 in November 2013 alone.' 

An enormous additional humanitarian and refugee protection challenge arises because over 85% of Syrian 

refugees in the region are so-called urban refugees who reside outside of camps, seeking refuge in widely 

dispersed local communities. 

Some 75% of the Syrian refugees are women and children. Many, especially women and girls, face 

serious problems with gender-based and sexual violence in Syria and also often in the host countries. 

UNHCR reports that around half of the refugees are children, with 75% of them less than 12 years old. 4 

Some 60% do not attend school, including 80% in Lebanon and more than 50% in Jordan.' Only 70% of 

Syrian, urban refugee children attend school in Turkey. This is due both to lack of education 

infrastructure and also because of widespread child labor-a strategy Syrian families have had to resort to 

for family survival. USCCB/COM also heard disturbing accounts of young girls being subjected to early 

marriage and bride selling. 

The most vulnerable refugees are unaccompanied children. UNHCR has so far identified 3760 

unaccompanied refugee minors (URMs) among the refugees in Lebanon and Jordan. 6 The 

USCCB/COM delegation saw indications of many more than that during their recent trips. These are 

children alone in the world whose parents have died or who have been separated from their parents. 

We turn last to the vulnerability of some Syrian minorities. While 75% of people in Syria7 and 90% of 

registered refugees fleeing from Syria are Sunni Muslims, 8 there are also several ethnic and religious 

minority groups, including Christians, who are at risk. Christians make up some 10% of the Syrian 

population, totaling about 2.2 million9 These are among the most ancient and venerable Christian 

communities in the world that have a history of peaceful coexistence with their Muslim neighbors. They 

long to remain in Syria. 

A growing number of ethnic and religious minorities from both Syria and Iraq are now fleeing as a result 

of ISIS violence. Besides the ethnic Kurds from Syria described above, the USCCB/COM delegation met 

many refugees during their trip who were fleeing religious persecution. Iraqi Christians had fled to 

Turkey from villages near Mosul, Iraq. They reported that they, as Christians, were given an ultimatum by 

2 Syrian Refugee Response Regional overview, accessed Nov.17, 2105, at http:/ /data.unhcr.arg/syrianrefugeesfregional.php 

J Assistant Secretary of State Anne Richard, Testimony, December 10, 2013. 4UNHCR, The Future of Syria: Children in Crisis, December 2013, p. 9. 

s Assistant Secretary Anne Richard, Testimony, December 101 2013. 

'UNHCR. The Future of Syria: Children in Crisis, December 2013, p. 9 [2440 URMs in Lebanon, 1320 in fordan). 7 USC!RF, Special Report Protecting and Promoting Religious Freedom in Syria, April2013, p. 1 (available at 

vvww.uscirf.gov). 

8 USCIRF, Fact Sheet Syria; Syria's Refugee Crisis and its Implications, fuly 2013, p. 1 [available at www.uscirf.gov). 9USClRF, Special Report: Protecting and Promoting Religious Freedom in Syria, April2013, p.l (available at 

www.uscirf.gov). 

6 
208 

ISIS to convert, pay a penalty for being Christian, or die. They understood the seriousness of the threat 

when the severed head of one of their noncompliant Christian neighbors was left on his doorstep. "I fled 

my country for Jesus Christ," explained one middle-aged man. "I left so I could freely follow Jesus." The 

delegation also met a young Syrian Christian convert seeking refuge in Bulgaria whose whole family had 

been killed after he explained to ISIS fighters why he had converted to Christianity. My fellow Bishop 

Oscar Cantu, Chairman ofUSCCB's Committee on International Justice and Peace, rightly called 

religious persecution the "crisis within a crisis" in recent Senate testimony. 10 

III. Recommendations 

We commend the peoples and governments of the refugee host countries for their generous welcome of 

their Syrian brothers and sisters. We commend the donor countries of humanitarian assistance led by the 

United States, UN agencies led by UNHCR, nongovernmental organizations, and other humanitarian 

actors. Yet with the escalating brutality of the conflict in Syria, the continued reports of crimes against 

humanity by the Syrian government and ISIS, and the thousands of Syrians fleeing for their lives every 

week, an even greater effort is needed. We urge a comprehensive approach to addressing the crisis that 

recognizes the important role that humanitarian interventions play in addressing the safety and security of 

the region. As you will note, we urge a still modest, but much more significant, role for U.S. resettlement 

as part of the solution. Up to now, the United States has resettled only some 2,000 Syrians. 

Mr. Chairman, we will provide details now of our three sets of recommendations for Congress-the first 

regarding safe and secure resettlement, the second regarding the need for an inclusive peace in Syria, and 

the third regarding the need for taking a comprehensive approach by including sufficient humanitarian 

and development support for the refugees and host countries. 

A. Increase U.S. refugee resettlement of the most vulnerable refugees and encourage other 

resettlement nations to do so as well. 

International refugee protection has three durable solutions to refugee situations: voluntary repatriation in 

safety and dignity back to one's home when peace comes, local integration into the host country, and safe 

and secure resettlement to a third country.ln most refugee situations and in the case of Syria, voluntary 

repatriation is the most viable solution for the vast majority of refugees. To make this possible, the 

international community needs to support neighboring host countries to be able to safely and humanely 

host refugees until peace arrives. An inclusive peace in Syria and Iraq would enable all the refugees in 

neighboring countries, including ethnic and religious minorities, to be able to pursue voluntary return to 

their home countries. Such return is very important to most of the refugees. For many Catholic and 

Christian leaders and Catholic and Christian communities forced to flee from Syria and Iraq, it would be a 

cherished opportunity to return and rebuild their ancient communities and maintain the vital and 

impmtant role of Christianity in the region that is traditionally diverse both in ethnicity and religion. For 

some refugees, with the permission of the host countries, they will be able to pursue the second durable 

solution and make a new life permanently in the neighboring host countries. For a very small percentage 

of the refugees, especially the most vulnerable and those most victimized and traumatized, the most 

viable and humane durable solution is resettlement. The most vulnerable Syrian refugees includes people 

from the majority and also from the minority ethnic and religious groups. 

10 Testimony by Bishop Oscar CantU, Chairman of the Committee on International Justice and Peace on behalf of the 

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops before the Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related 

Programs of the Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate, March 11, 2015. 

7 
209 

In addition to providing robust humanitarian support for refugees in host countries, the United States, a 

nation of immigrants and refugees, often demonstrates solidarity with refugees and host countries in faraway crises like Syria's by providing strategic refugee resettlement for the most vulnerable refugees. It is 

strategic for the most vulnerable refugees because removing them from danger keeps their vulnerable 

situation from becoming catastrophic. It is strategic for host nations because it often removes vulnerable 

people who otherwise cause a disproportionate drain on the host's already strained resources. It is 

strategic for the overall crisis because it shares the responsibilities and spurs other nations to do 

likewise--either to provide aid or to agree to do resettlement or another durable solution. The U.S. 

generally resettles as many refugees as all other resettlement countries in the world combined. 

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urges the United States to make strategic use of resettlement for 

the most vulnerable Syrian and Iraqi refugees. UNHCR says that because of their extreme vulnerabilities 

about l 0% of the Syrians need to be resettled. Among the most vulnerable are unaccompanied refugee 

minors (URMs) whose parents have died or who are separated from their parents. There is a great risk 

that many other URMs, as urban refugees, will not be identified at all and their needs will go unnoticed 

by the overwhelmed host government and international staff. There is a strong need for community-based 

systems to identify vulnerable, at-risk refugees, especially unaccompanied children, to screen them, to 

provide protection and care, and to prepare for resettlement or whatever durable solutions is in each 

child's best interest. URMs should receive "best interest determinations" (BIDs) and ongoing support 

from social workers. 

I must also call attention to religious minorities from Syria and Iraq as being among the most vulnerable 

refugees. As described earlier, it continues to be the hope and plan for many Catholic and Christian 

refugees to return home in the future. But for others, their vulnerability, trauma, and loss is such that the 

most viable and humane durable solution for them is resettlement. Other at-risk groups for whom 

resettlement is most viable include women and children at risk, refugees with serious health concerns, the 

elderly, victims of torture and/or trauma, those with affiliations with the U.S. government or U.S. based 

NGOs/media/companies; members of other minority persecuted groups, and refugees in immediate 

physical danger. 

Mr. Chairman, before turning to recommendations regarding resettlement, we want to focus on 

maintaining the security and integrity of the refugee program, a goal that we share with this 

subcommittee. Before, and especially since, September 11,2001, Congress has been vigilant about 

barring bad actors from U.S. asylum and refugee protection, particularly those involved in crime or 

terrorism. Among other bars, asylum or refugee protection in the United States cannot be granted to 

anyone who has persecuted others, been convicted of a particularly serious crime in the United States or a 

serious, nonpolitical crime in another country, engaged in terrorist activity, been a member of a terrorist 

organization, or otherwise posed a security threat to the United States. 

Compliance with these bars are maintained through numerous and arduous interviews, administrative 

reviews, security checks, and background checks built into the refugee resettlement screening process. 11 

Initially, most resettlement cases first involve a UNHCR refugee determination interview process that 

screens out individuals who have no grounds for refugee protection or who have committed heinous 

actions that fall under the exclusion clauses of the 1951 Refugee Convention. UNHCR (or sometimes the 

n"Security Screening of Refugees Admitted to the United States: A Detailed, Rigorous Process," U.S. 

Committee for Immigrants and Refugees, accessed May 19, 2015, at 

http:/ /www.rcusa.orgjuploads/pdfs/Refugeeo/o20resettlemento/o20-o/o20stepo/o20by%20stepo/o20USCRI.pdf; 

"Bars & Security Screening in the Asylum & Refugee Process," Human Rights First, accessed May 19, 2015, 

http:/ jwww.humanrightsfirst.orgjwp-contentjuploadsjHRF-Security-Safeguards.pdf 

8 
210 

U.S. Embassy or a trained staff from a nongovernment organization) refers the refugee applicant to a 

Resettlement Support Center (RSC) overseen by the U.S. Department of State (DOS), where detailed 

biographical and personal information is gathered that will be used for in-person interviews by the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and for security and background checks. DOS submits the 

names of all refugees through the Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS). Further security 

checks are done through U.S. interagency checks that have been conducted since 2010. If needed, a 

Security Advisory Opinion (SAO) is submitted to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies. When 

DHS arrives for in-person interviews, they take fingerprints and photos that are run through certain U.S. 

government data bases. If the person demonstrates grounds for asylum and no security problems, DHS 

grants a conditional approval, pending final security and medical screening. Prior to departure, another 

U.S. interagency security check is conducted. If the person passes, he/she travels to the United States 

where another check is done by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the Port of Entry. If any of 

these checks reveal information that disqualifY the person that ends the person's ability to be admitted to 

the United States as a refugee. 

At the point of applying for legal permanent residency another round of security and background checks 

is conducted for refugees. At the point of applying for U.S. citizenship another round is conducted. If 

above described security problems are revealed, they will bar the person from gaining the status they seek 

and subject the person to removal. As is clear from the arduous process, DOS and DHS have put in many 

layers of security to help assure the security and integrity of the program that both provides a new life to 

deserving refugees and assures the safety of the U.S. communities that welcome them. 

Despite Congress' best intentions, Republicans and Democrats alike have noted that certain U.S. security 

provisions create the unintended consequence of keeping certain deserving refugees from securing 

resettlement in the United States. For U.S. resettlement of Syrians and Iraqis and for virtually any other 

refugee population that is fleeing an armed conflict, the set of overly broad U.S. immigration law 

provisions that bar entry to the United States, so-called TRIG (terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds). 

While having a laudable goal, TRlG provisions have been written and applied in such an overly broad 

way that they have delayed or barred admission of many deserving refugees who have no connection to 

terrorism. 

Under the provisions, if a country has an armed, nongovernmental opposition group fighting against the 

government, that group is deemed to be involved in "terrorist activities." It does not matter if the 

opposition includes noble freedom fighters supported by the U.S. government to fight against a brutal 

regime that the U.S. condemns. If someone is a member, solicits funds or provides material support for 

the armed opposition group, or has a parent or spouse so involved, that person is barred from entering the 

United States. It does not matter if the person never violated any rules of war or criminal laws or has a 

neutral, nonmilitary role in the community such as providing humanitarian assistance or healthcare or 

retail sales. It does not matter that the person poses no danger or threat to our country. 

In Syria's refugee crisis, there are armed opposition groups fighting against the Syrian government, a 

government that the UN has condemned for committing crimes against humanity. The opposition groups 

include some who have received nonmilitary aid from the U.S. government. Because of these and other 

aspects of the Syrian crisis, the overly broad and unfair application of the TRJG provisions pose a serious 

impediment for the resettlement of Syrians unless the Administration uses its exemption powers. These 

are measures painstakingly drawn up by a multi-agency, high level team from the Departments of 

Homeland Security, State, and Justice. They are also meant to be carefully, judiciously applied during the 

resettlement screening process. DHS officials have told us that exemptions tailored to the Syrian crisis 

have been completed and are awaiting the final authorization. 

9 
211 

Mr. Chairman, to facilitate the small, but important, role of resettlement in addressing the massive 

humanitarian refugee crisis caused by the Syrian conflict, we urge the United States to: 

Assure that the increased resettlement is done in a safe, secure, and timely manner by: 

o Maintaining the rigorous security and background checks in the resettlement process 

while assuring that Congress appropriates and the Administration, through DHS and 

other security screening agencies, allocates sufficient resources and staff to increase the 

number people for whom security checks can be expeditiously conducted, thereby 

speeding up the process for refugees facing significant risks. 

o Increasing the nongovernmental and community capacity to identify and screen the most 

vulnerable urban refugees in host countries, including URMs, to meet their immediate 

protection and humanitarian needs, and to prepare for their durable solutions; 

o Increasing UNHCR's capacity for refugee status detennination, resettlement, and BIDs; 

and for U.S. Resettlement Support Centers' refugee and URM processing capacity; 

o Facilitating Best Interest Determinations (BIDs) for the 3760 unaccompanied refugee 

minors identified in Jordan and Lebanon and for all URMs identified in the region, and 

use BIDs to pursue their short-term protection and durable solutions; 

o Increasing DHS' capacity to do circuit rides to the region to interview Syrian and other 

refugees for potential resettlement; and 

o Allowing Syrians with noncurrent visa petitions to receive refugee interviews while 

maintaining the same strict security processing measures (this was one of the successful 

strategies to facilitate Iraqi resettlement). 

Fully fund the U.S. Departments of State, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services to 

securely vet and humanely resettle 85,000 refugees admitted under the Presidential Determination 

(PO) for Fiscal Year 2016, I 00,000 refugees admitted under the PO for the Fiscal Year 2017, and 

additionally, the US should carry out its usual role as international human rights and refugee 

protection leader and assure that we do our fair share of safe, humane resettlement of Syrians. 

Encourage the Department of State (DOS) to focus especially on the most vulnerable refugees, 

including unaccompanied refugee minors (URMs), other children at risk, women at risk, refugees 

with serious health concerns, the elderly, victims of torture and/or trauma, those with affiliations 

with the U.S. government or U.S. based NGOs, media, and companies; members of persecuted 

minority ethnic and religious groups; and refugees in immediate danger. 

Increase U.S. resettlement of vulnerable non-Syrian refugees in the region, such as Iraqis, and 

urge other nations to do likewise and thereby share the refugee protection responsibility with the 

host countries. 

Increase U.S. resettlement of vulnerable, non-Syrian refugees in the region, such as Iraqis, and 

urge other resettlement nations to do the same, and thereby further share the burden with host 

countries. 

10 
212 

Urge DHS, in consultation with DOS and DOJ, to proactively and expeditiously remove unjust 

impediments to U.S. resettlement by fully authorizing the discretionary authority to grant 

exemptions from TRIG provisions of U.S. immigration law currently awaiting approval at DHS 

and by judiciously interpreting the meaning of the "material support" bar. 

B. Pursue an inclusive peace in Syria. 

While resettlement is the main focus of this hearing, it is very important to also recognize the other 

elements that contribute to a holistic response to the crisis. During a public appearance on August 25, 

2013, Pope Francis denounced and called for an end to the "multiplication of massacres and atrocious 

acts" in Syria. Later, Pope Francis urged "the international community to make every effort to promote 

clear proposals for peace without further delay, a peace based on dialogue and negotiation, for the good of 

the entire Syrian people. May no effort be spared in guaranteeing humanitarian assistance to those 

wounded by this terrible conflict, in particular those forced to flee and the many refugees in nearby 

countries." 

Mr. Chairman, we urge Congress to 

Work with other governments to obtain a ceasefire, initiate serious peace negotiations, provide 

increased impartial humanitarian assistance and allow safe passage for this assistance within 

Syria and Iraq, especially for internally displaced people (lOPs), and establish a peace that builds 

an inclusive society in Syria and Iraq that protects the rights of all its citizens, including 

Christians and other minorities, enabling them to return in the future with safety and dignity to 

their home land. 

C Support host countries to maintain generous protection and humanitarian care for refugees, 

especially children. 

Given the huge influx of refugees, international support and special vigilance are needed to maintain 

border and migration enforcement and asylum policies that safeguard refugee protection and related 

humanitarian care for Syrians and also for Iraqis, and other refugees, while also maintaining the safety 

and security of the refugee host countries. 

Beyond maintaining protection at the border, there are enormous political and logistical challenges 

involved in protecting and serving the 85% of Syrians who are urban refugees. When refugees reside in 

camps, the international community generally partners with host nations to create the camps' 

infrastructure and service delivery system parallel to that of local communities, with refugees and 

communities remaining insulated from one another. With urban refugees, the international community 

partners with the host country and local communities to expand local infrastructure and services and 

facilitates face-to-face interactions, problem solving, conflict resolution, and collaboration between the 

local communities and refugees. 

Lack of housing continues to be a chronic issue for Syrian urban refugees, many of whom were hardworking, middle-class people when they fled the conflict. Some fortunately still live with host families or 

friends. Others who lived in apartments--often 4-5 families per apartment-- have already spent down 

what savings they had, and with few jobs, have insufficient money for rent. They, as welt as new arrivals, 

are forced to find shelter in abandoned or unfinished buildings, or to create settlements of makeshift tents 

provided by NGOs. Especially over the last year, many are also fleeing onward on dangerous maritime 

routes to seek refuge in Europe and beyond, with thousands losing their lives at sea. 

Mr. Chairman, regarding the neighboring countries who host Syrian refugees, we urge Congress to 

11 
213 

Encourage host countries in the region to maintain secure border and migration enforcement 

policies and practices but at the same time refugee protection policies and practices that enable 

Syrians and other refugee groups (such as Iraqis) to safely tlee from Syria and Iraq to find 

humane protection and care without improper rejection at the border, deportation, or arbitrary 

detention in poor conditions. 

Provide more U.S. support and encourage more international humanitarian and development 

support for refugees in the region, especially children, for their basic necessities of life, 

immediate protection, primary and secondary education, and systems that lay the groundwork for 

durable solutions, including employment for adults; and provide host countries additional 

housing, food, water, sanitation, health, education, and transportation infrastructure to allow them 

to host these large numbers of refugees. 

Conclusion 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to share our observations and recommendations. 

12 
214 

~> uusc 

UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST SERVICE COMMITTEE STATEMENT 

to the Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee 

pertaining to the hearing 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

Thursday, November 19, 2015 

The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee was founded 75 years ago to assist 

refugees escaping the atrocities and violence of Nazism in war-torn Europe. Today, 

we face a global refugee crisis of similar magnitude, and a U.S. public invited once 

again to live cowered by fear, religious and ethnic bigotry, and xenophobia. We call 

upon all members of this committee, indeed, all of our elected officials, to take the 

higher ground in this public debate and defend our highest ideals -to protect the 

liberty and human rights of all, to be a country that understands its strength and 

abundance have come as a result of welcoming waves of immigrants from many 

lands. It is only by taking the higher ground that we can maintain our integrity as a 

nation and our moral standing as a world power. It is only by taking this higher 

ground that we can win people's hearts and minds in the midst of ISIS terrorism. 

The United States has traditionally been a leader in refugee protection and 

resettlement and needs to show bold leadership now. The United States can and 

should resettle at least 100.000 Syrian refugees this coming fiscal year. in addition 

to increasing our total resettlement commitment from 70.000 to 100,000 refugees 

from all parts of the world. The administration's initial announcement about 

resettling 10,000 is far from what is needed. 

Rejecting refugees will make us less safe: Ignoring the plight of refugees, who can 

be potential allies, and denying them safe haven will drive them back to Syria. There 

they will face the dangerous regime of Bashar al-As sad that they fled in the first 

place. Some refugees, in a desperate search for any safety, will seek out ISIS as an 

ally against Assad. 

UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST SERVICE COMMITTEE 

689 Massachusetts Avenue • Cambridge, MA 02139-3302 • 617-868-6600 • fax: 617-868-7102 •uusc.org 
215 

There is no need to implement additional security safeguards as the United 

States already possesses an excellent screening system. Refugees are not 

terrorists. Since 1980, the United States has invited in millions of refugees, including 

hundreds of thousands from the Middle East, and not one of them has committed an 

act of terror in this country. All of the 9/11 hijackers, for example, used student or 

tourist visas. 

The simple fact is that those who successfully obtain refugee status are not 

terrorists. They are often the victims of terrorism in their home countries just as 

surely as those who lie dead in Paris are. 

To become a refugee in the United States, one undergoes a multi-stage vetting 

process and only after receiving U.N. designation by trained officers in the field. This 

process takes on average 18 to 24 months. Refugee status is the single most difficult 

way to come to the United States. It makes no sense for a terrorist to try to use the 

resettlement process for an attack. 

Instead of tightening our controls, the United States needs to encourage Europe 

to coordinate the reception and registration of arriving refugees to ensure that 

security concerns and needs for protection are being met simultaneously. 

Without a comprehensive collaborative response with burden-sharing agreements 

in place, Europe will not be safe from ISIS threats of infiltration. The United States 

should increase its humanitarian assistance to UNHCR and bilateral aid to do our 

part to meet this great challenge. Our best chance for preventing future devastating 

acts of terror is to act decisively and to work with the international community and 

within the collective framework of international law to address the critical human 

rights violations. 
216 

Women for Common Sense Immigration ReftJrm 

Statement of Andrea Cristina Mercado and Mir-iam Yeung, co·chairs of We Belong Together 

Submitted to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary 

Hearing on ''lessons from the Paris Terror-ist Attacks; Ramifications for the Homeland and 

Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Leahy and members of the Committee, we arc Andrea 

Cristina Mercado and Miriam Yeung, co-chairs of We Belong Together. Thank you for the 

opportunity to submit testimony for inclusion in rhc record for today's hearing. 

We Belong Together is a campaign co-anchoreJ by the National Domestic Workers Alliance and 

the National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum to mobilize women in support of common· 

sense immigration policies that will keep families together and empower women. We Belong 

Together was launched on Mother's Day in 2010 and has exposed the dangerous impoct of 

immigration enforcement on women anJ families, advocated for comprehensive immigration 

reforrn. legislation and campaigned President Obama to take executive action to improve the 

broken immigration systern. 

We stand in solidarity with the people ofBeirur, Paris and all around the world who have 

experienced the pain and tragedy of senseless violence. We also stand in solidarity with all 

refugees around our world who, in order to escape violent conflicts and danger, escape to 

uncertain furures seeking safety and protection. Currently, Syria is experiencing a humanitarian 

crisis with 4 million refugees fleeing the country and 8 million internally displaced persons. Over 

75% of rhese refugees are women and children and more than half are under the age of 18. 

We urge the UniteJ States to act as a true global leader and offer protection to refugees from Syria 

and from around the world. This Committee should ensure that growing anti-immigrant and antiMuslim sentiment do not guide policy decisions this would be un-American, inhumane and 

dishonorable to the dignity of rnigrants seeking safety and protection in the U.S. 
217 

Welcoming America's Statement to the U.S. Senate's Homeland Security Committee Hearing on 

lessons from the Paris Terrorists Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement 

November 19, 2015 

We are deeply saddened by the tragic events in Paris, Beirut and other parts of the world in the past 

week. lives were lost to senseless acts of violence, but now more than ever, we must lead with 

compassion and open our doors and hearts to families fleeing from war-torn countries whose daily lives 

are plagued by strife. By definition, refugees are people who are here because they face a threat to their 

safety in their former homes. How we respond as a community, how we treat and welcome the most 

vulnerable, demonstrates how we live up to our values and who we are as Americans. And we are very 

heartened that leaders from across the country are speaking positively about being welcoming to Syrian 

refugees. 

Families from Syria who are seeking a better life embody American values that have guided our country 

since its founding -- packing up everything and moving to a new place takes courage and resilience. 

They've defied all odds to arrive in a safe place, and we have the opportunity to reaffirm our values by 

responding with compassion. Moreover, communities are stronger when they become welcoming. For 

instance, a recent study in Columbus, Ohio, found that the central Ohio community reaps an annual 

economic impact of $1.6 billion from refugee resettlement Additionally, a report in Tennessee found 

that refugees contributed almost twice as much in tax revenues as they consumed in state-funded 

services in the past two decades. 

By working together, we can make sure that our nation stands on the better side of history. Throughout 

our country's history, we have welcomed those seeking refuge regardless of where they were born or 

what religion they practice, and we have thrived because of it. We must continue to create inclusive 

communities where everyone has the opportunity to prosper and is treated with dignity and respect. 

When we look back 10 or 20 years from now, we will remember that we weren't hindered by our fears. 

Instead, we invited diverse new neighbors to join us in building a stronger community, and we all 

became better for it 
218 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Assistant Secretary Anne C. Richard by 

Senator Rob Portman (#1) 

Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee 

November 19, 2015 

Question: 

1. Assistant Secretary Richard: What changes do you recommend for the 

Visa Waiver program? 

Answer: 

My bureau, the Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration is not 

responsible for any portion of the Visa Waiver Program. The Department of 

Homeland Security, in consultation with the Department of State's Bureau 

of Consular Affairs, administers the Visa Waiver Program. The United 

States' long-term interests and security are served by protecting our country 

from those who seek to do us harm while continuing the flow of commerce 

and ideas that are the foundations of our prosperity and security. The Visa 

Waiver Program is the key to realizing both of these vital pillars of our 

national security, identifying those who pose a threat to our nation long 

before they seek to board a plane, while enabling ever-increasing numbers of 

visitors to experience U.S. culture and contribute to our economy. In 2014, 

visitors from VWP countries collectively spent nearly $84.2 billion on goods 
219 

and services in the United States, injecting nearly $231 million a day into 

local economies across the country. 

Through the VWP, we have built strong partnerships throughout the 

interagency and with our international partners to ensure the real-time flow 

of information necessary for keeping our borders secure. VWP traveler 

screening is reinforced by the requirement that VWP countries enter into 

agreements/arrangements to regularly share information with the United 

States pertaining to known and suspected terrorists, serious criminals, and 

lost and stolen passports. These agreements and arrangements augment 

existing information sharing between the United States and VWP countries' 

security services that we otherwise would not have. We will work with our 

partners at DHS, the White House, and Congress to discuss expectations and 

set goals for a VWP review to make sure it is as effective as possible. 
220 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Assistant Secretary Anne C. Richard by 

Senator Rob Portman (#2) 

Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee 

November 19, 2015 

Question: 

2. Assistant Secretary Richard: Concerning the refugee program, in previous 

hearings I pointed out that there are gaps in our intelligence collection and 

sharing processes that posed great risk. In response, Director Corney stated: 

"Senator, there is risk associated with bringing anybody in from the outside, 

but especially from a conflict zone like that. .. My concern there is that there 

are certain gaps that I do not want to talk about publicly in the data available 

to us." 

• To your knowledge, what steps are being taken to make sure that 

terrorists do not exploit our Visa Waiver Program? 

• Do intelligence and vetting gaps in the refugee process still exist? If 

so, what is being done to fix them? 

Answer: 

My bureau, the Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration is not 

responsible for any portion of the Visa Waiver Program. The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Department of State's 

Bureau of Consular Affairs, continuously adapts the VWP to address current 

threats. Over the last year, the Department of Homeland Security and the 

Department of State, in coordination with several other federal agencies, 

have made a number of significant enhancements to the VWP to ensure our 

security apparatus continues to adapt in the face of evolving threats. 
221 

• DHS introduced additional data fields to the EST A application 

in November 2014 that already have produced security benefits. 

• DHS introduced new traveler screening and information sharing 

requirements for VWP countries in August 2015 specifically to 

address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters. 

• DHS and the Department of State are working with VWP 

partners to implement the new VWP requirements, which will 

strengthen U.S. security and the security of our partners. 

These security enhancements are part of our continuing assessments 

of U.S. security in the face of evolving threats and challenges, and our 

determination to stay one step ahead of those threats and challenges. 

In regards to refugee admissions, all refugees of all nationalities 

considered for admission to the United States undergo the most intensive 

level of security screening of any category of traveler to the United States 

involving multiple federal intelligence, security and law enforcement 

agencies, including the National Counterterrorism Center, the Federal 

Bureau oflnvestigation, and the Departments of Homeland Security, State 

and Defense, in order to ensure that those admitted are not known to pose a 

threat to our country. 
222 

These safeguards include biometric (fingerprint) and biographic 

checks, and a lengthy in-depth interview by specially trained DHS officers 

who scrutinize the applicant's explanation of individual circumstances to 

ensure the applicant is a bona fide refugee and is not known to present 

security concerns to the United States. (The classified details of the refugee 

security screening process are regularly shared with relevant Congressional 

Committees.) 

The burden of proof in the refugee application process is on the 

refugee- the refugee must show he or she qualifies for refugee status. U.S. 

law and regulations require that applicants provide DHS/USCIS with 

information that enables our law enforcement and intelligence communities 

to confirm their identity and assess whether they present a security risk. A 

lack of derogatory information on an applicant is not in and of itself 

sufficient evidence to pass the security clearance. IfDHS' expert screeners 

are not satisfied with the information provided, the applicant will not be 

permitted to travel to the United States. 

Mindful of the particular conditions of the Syria crisis, Syrian 

refugees go through yet additional forms of security screening. The 

screening process is multi-layered and recurrent and involves a rigorous 

security review. We check extensively against law enforcement and 
223 

intelligence community holdings-and those holdings are regularly updated 

and enhanced to ensure we have the most up-to-date and accurate 

information possible. 

DHS has full discretion to deny admission to any refugee including on 

national security grounds and has done so in numerous cases. DHS' 

decisions are guided by the key principle directed by the President and 

affirmed throughout the U.S. government- that the safety and security of 

the American people must always come first. 
224 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Assistant Secretary Anne C. Richard by 

Senator Joni Ernst (#1) 

Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee 

November 19, 2015 

Question: 

In remarks to the American Society for International Law in 2003, your 

predecessor, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees and Migration 

Arthur Dewey, stated: "With 9/11, the admissions program came under the 

same scrutiny that other immigration programs did. And, in our view, rightly 

so: we owed it to the American people to do everything we could to prevent 

any avenue from being used by terrorists to infiltrate the United States ... 

. Thus, after 9/11, a freeze on refugee admissions was put into effect for over 

two months while a comprehensive review of procedures was undertaken. A 

number of new security measures were adopted as a result of this review .... " 

Following the attacks in Paris, don't we also owe it to the American people 

to do everything we can to prevent any avenue from being used by terrorists 

to infiltrate the United States? If there were improvements to the refugee 

admissions process that were made after a post-9/11 freeze and review (and 

again after a six-month pause in processing Iraqi refugees in 2011 following 

the arrest on terrorism-related charges of two Iraqi refugees living in 

Bowling Green, Kentucky), isn't it possible that there are also improvements 

to the system that could be made now? 

Answer: 

The Administration made the decision to participate in the global 

effort to resettle Syrian refugees only after concluding that we could do so 

safely and consistent with U.S. national security. This remains our guiding 

principle. 
225 

In 2001, before the events of 9/11, refugees were subject to far fewer 

security checks than they are today. Following the 9/11 attacks, President 

Bush delayed the signing of the annual determination on refugee admissions 

until late November while the White House led an interagency process to 

review whether security checks for refugees should be expanded-a process 

which resulted in expanded security checks for some nationalities. 

In late 2008, in association with the larger scale admission oflraqi 

refugees, we launched a new interagency security check. In 2010, the 

Administration undertook measures to further enhance security screening of 

refugees to the current intensive level. Refugees are now subject to the 

highest level of checks of any category of traveler to the United States. The 

enhancements made over the last several years included expanding the 

number of vetting partners in order to screen against heretofore untapped 

sources of information and enhanced our biometric (fingerprint) data. 

The increased number of security checks required by the expanded 

process led to a temporary slowdown and decrease in arrivals in early 2011 

while these checks were being implemented, which has been mistakenly 

referred to as a pause in admissions. Refugee admissions fell in March and 

April of2011 to about 2,000 per month, compared to about 5,000 per month 
226 

for the first five months of that fiscal year. By June of 2011, arrival numbers 

had returned to normal levels. 

In June 2015 we began performing "continuous checks" of all refugee 

applications against collected terrorism data holdings. This automated, 

recurrent vetting is performed to compare the latest information that has 

been added to U.S. government holdings against refugee applications. When 

new matches are identified an automated alert triggers a review. Positive 

matches are passed to US CIS and the Department of State to ensure refugees 

are prevented from traveling to the United States until a new eligibility 

determination is made. We have also automated and expanded the process 

to vet information against known and suspected terrorist holdings and we 

continue to work with our partners around the world to improve information 

sharing. The details of this process have been shared with Members of 

Congress in classified briefings by the Administration. 

The lessons of the Iraqi refugee admissions experience have 

significantly informed our screening processes for all refugee applicants for 

U.S. admission. All Syrian refugees currently being processed are screened 

against the enhanced security screening protocol, with additional 

enhancements specifically for the Syrian population designed to safeguard 

against the admittance of refugees who pose security concerns. 
227 

Post-Hearing Questions for the Record 

Submitted to Hon. Leon Rodriguez 

From Senator Rob Portman 

"Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and 

Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

Question#: I 

Topic: Visa Waiver program 

Hearing: Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and 

Refugee Resettlement 

Primary: Senator Rob Portman 

Committee: HOMELAND SECURITY (SENATE) 

Question: Director Rodriguez: What changes do you recommend for the Visa Waiver 

program? 

Response: I support DHS's work to continuously adapt the Visa Waiver Program 

(VWP) to address evolving security threats. In November 2014, DHS added enhanced 

data fields to the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (EST A) application to 

improve our knowledge of individuals who travel to the United States. In August 2015, 

DHS introduced requirements for all VWP travelers to usee-passports and for all VWP 

countries to screen travelers against INTERPOL's Stolen and Lost Travel Document 

Database and implement the information sharing agreements that all VWP countries are 

required to sign. DHS identified further administrative actions in November 2015 to 

strengthen the security of the VWP, such as modifying ESTA to capture information 

from VWP travelers regarding past travel to countries constituting a terrorist safe haven. 

These efforts have been most successful when working in concert with our partners in 

Congress. 
228 

Question#: 2 

Topic: Refugee Program 

Hearing: Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and 

Refugee Resettlement 

Primary: Senator Rob Portman 

Committee: HOMELAND SECURITY (SENATE) 

Question: Director Rodriguez: Concerning the refugee program, In previous hearings I 

pointed out that there are gaps in our intelligence collection and sharing processes that 

posed great risk. In response, Director Corney stated: "Senator, there is risk associated 

with bringing anybody in from the outside, but especially from a conflict zone like that... 

My concern there is that there are certain gaps that I do not want to talk about publicly in 

the data available to us." 

To your knowledge, what steps are being taken to make sure that terrorists do not exploit 

our Visa Waiver Program? 

Response: The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DI-IS) continuously adapts the 

Visa Waiver Program (VWP) to address evolving security threats. In November 2014, 

the Department announced that a number of enhanced data fields-to include such 

information as contact information (email, phone number, and points of contact) and 

parents' names-would be added to the Electronic System for Travel Authorization 

(EST A) application that VWP travelers must complete before boarding a plane or boat to 

the United States. The enhanced ESTA data fields have enabled U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) and its interagency partners, including the National 

Counterterrorism Center, to identify a substantially larger number of applicants with 

potential connections to terrorism than would have been possible using the old EST A 

application. 

In August 2015, DHS introduced a series of security enhancements to the VWP. These 

measures include requirements for all VWP travelers to use e-passports and for VWP 

countries to screen travelers against INTERPOL's Stolen and Lost Travel Document 

(SL TD) Database and implement the information sharing agreements that all VWP 

countries are required to sign with the United States. 

Finally, the Administration announced in November 2015 a series of administrative steps 

it would take to further strengthen the VWP, to include: modifying ESTA to capture 

information from VWP travelers regarding past travel to countries constituting a terrorist 

safe haven as determined by the Visa Waiver Improvement and Terrorist Travel 

Prevention Act (H.R. 2029); exploring possible pilot programs designed to assess the 

collection and use of biometrics in the VWP; and identifying any VWP partner countries 

that are deficient in key areas of cooperation, along with considering options to engender 

compliance using a range of penalties and incentives available under the Secretary of 

Homeland Security's current authority. 
229 

Question#: 2 

Topic: Refugee Program 

Hearing: Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and 

Refugee Resettlement 

Primary: Senator Rob Portman 

Committee: HOMELAND SECURITY (SENATE) 

On December 18,2015, the "Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel 

Prevention Act of 2015" was enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act (PL 

114-113 ). This legislation includes provisions that codify in law policy requirements 

introduced by DRS in August 2015 that VWP countries screen all travelers against the 

INTERPOL SL TD Database and implement the VWP information sharing arrangements. 

The legislation also contains new requirements for individual VWP travelers, including 

the requirement that all VWP travelers use secure, electronic passports beginning April 1, 

2016. 

Question: Do intelligence and vetting gaps in the refugee process still exist? If so, what 

is being done to fix them? 

Response: Refugees are subject to the highest level of security checks of any category of 

traveler to the United States. Screening includes the involvement of the National 

Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, DRS, and the Department 

of Defense. It is the most robust screening process for any category of individuals 

seeking admission into the United States. Screening procedures have been expanded 

over time to include a broader range of applicants and records. 

We continually evaluate whether additional enhancements are necessary. Mindful of the 

particular conditions of the Syria crisis, Syrian refugees go through additional forms of 

security screening. If national security concerns are revealed during the interview or 

through the screening process, Syrian refugee applications are handled according to the 

same adjudicative processes as all other refugee benefit applications with identified 

national security concerns. We continue to examine options for further enhancements for 

screening Syrian refugees, the details of which are classified. 

We are deeply committed to safeguarding the American public, just as we are committed 

to providing refuge to some of the world's most vulnerable people. We do not believe 

these goals are mutually exclusive, or that either has to be pursued at the expense of the 

other. We have admitted three million refugees since 1975 and have a great deal of 

experience in safely admitting vulnerable refugees from around the world. 
230 

September 1 7, 20 l 5 

President Barack Obama 

The White House 

Senator Mitch McConnell 

Senate Majority Leader 

U.S. Senate 

Senator Harry Reid 

Senate Minority Leader 

U.S. Senate 

Representative John Boehner 

Speaker of the House 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Representative Nancy Pelosi 

House Minority Leader 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Dear Mr. President, Senator McConnell, Senator Reid, Representative Boehner and 

Representative Pelosi: 

As former national security, international humanitarian and human rights appointees of both 

Democratic and Republican administrations, we write to strongly urge greater U.S. leadership in the 

effort to provide a resolution to the conflict in Syria, and to meet the humanitarian needs of millions 

of Syrian refugees and internally displaced persons. 

W c appreciate that the United States has been the largest provider of humanitarian assistance 

to Syrians, but current efforts are not adequate. Humanitarian aid is falling short in the face 

of unspeakable suffering, and putting enonnous pressure on governments in the region that 

are hosting refugees. In addition, as the United States encourages governments in Europe and the 

Middle East to treat refugees humanely, we must demonstrate a willingness to do more. 

First, we urge that you announce support for a refugee admissions goal of I 00,000 Syrian refugees 

on an extraordinary basis, over and above the current worldwide refugee ceiling of 70,000. With 

some four million Syrian refugees in neighboring countries and hundreds of thousands 

of Syrian asylum-seekers in Europe, this would be a responsible exercise in burden-sharing that 

would help to alleviate the suffering of vulnerable refugees most in need of resettlement. Moreover, 

this kind of leadership is in our nation's best traditions and would send a powerful signal to 

governments in Europe and the Middle East about their obligations to do more. 

Second, we hope that the Administration and Congress will work together to make more resources 

available, on an exceptional basis, to meet this challenge. We urge the additional allocation of up to 

two billion dollars to support the admission and resettlement of Syrians and to provide more support 

for underfunded international appeals. And we encourage the Administration to bring governments 

together in an international effort to meet funding shortfalls. 
231 

2 

Finally, we urge you to take extraordinary measures, as were taken for refugees from Vietnam, 

Northern Iraq and Kosovo, to provide expedited yet secure processing measures to ensure that this 

is a rescue program. We do not underestimate the challenges of a more robust U.S. response, but as 

officials who are familiar with U.S. government capacities- in fact, several of us participated in 

prior emergency rescue and resettlement operations- we are confident the United States has the 

capacity to implement this recommendation. History has demonstrated that these earlier rescue 

efforts strengthened not only the fabric of our society, but also our leadership role in the world. 

For these reasons, we urge that you take prompt action on this critical issue. 

Sincerely, 

(Names in alphabetical order) 

Mmion I. Abramowitz 

Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Thailand 

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research 

Gordon Adams 

Fonner Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget 

J. Brian Atwood 

Former Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development 

Fonner Undersecretary of State for Management 

Derek Chollet 

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs 

Roberta Cohen 

Fonner Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights 

Lome Craner 

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor 

Former Member, National Security Council Staff 

Ryan Crocker 

Fonner U.S. Ambassador to Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Kuwait and Lebanon 

Paula Dobriansky 

Former Undersecretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs 

Michele Flournoy 

Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy 

Richard Fontaine 

Former Member, National Security Council staff 
232 

3 

Robert Ford 

Former U.S. Ambassador to Syria and to Algeria 

Robert P. George 

Former Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 

Morton Halperin 

Fonner Director of Policy Planning, U.S. Department of State 

Former NSC Senior Director for Democracy 

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 

L. Craig Johnstone 

Fonner Director for Resources, Plans and Policy, Department of State 

Fonner U.S. Ambassador to Algeria 

Harold Hongju Koh 

Former State Department Legal Advisor 

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor 

David J. Kramer 

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 

Mark P. Lagon 

Former Ambassador-at-Large to Combat Trafficking in Persons 

Stephen Rickard 

Fonner Senior Advisor for South Asian Affairs, Department of State 

Kori Schake 

Former Deputy Director for Policy Planning, Department of State 

Former NSC Director for Defense Strategy and Requirements 

Eric P. Schwartz 

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration 

Former NSC Senior Director for Multilateral and Humanitarian Affairs 

Kristen Silverberg 

Fonner Assistant Secretary of State for lntemational Organization Affairs 

Former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union 

Paul Wolfowitz 

Former Deputy Secretary of Defense 

Fonner U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia 
233 

Post-Hearing Question for the Record 

Submitted to Peter Bergen 

From Senator Joni Ernst 

"The Impact of ISIS on the Homeland and Refugee Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

I. In your \\Titten testimony, you listed twelve action items for defeating ISIS. I'm 

interested in asking about some of the items you listed witb respect to countering the ISIS 

propaganda machine - including amplifying the work of former jihadists, enlisting ISIS 

defectors, and supporting the work of clerics in the United States. Can you provide me 

with some additional detail on how you would recommend implementing these proposed 

action items? 

Responses to questions submitted for the record were not received at time of printing. 

When received, they will be on file in the committee offices. 
234 

Æ 

Post-Hearing Questions for the Record 

Submitted to Peter Bergen 

From Senator Rob Portman 

"Lessons from the Paris Terrorist Attacks: Ramifications for the Homeland and Refugee 

Resettlement" 

November 19, 2015 

1. Mr. Bergen, in your testimony you seem to indicate that the visa waiver program poses a greater 

threat than the refugee system. The Title II law provides an "Emergency Termination" clause the 

wherein countries can be immediately terminated from the VWP if an emergency occurs in the 

country that the Secretary of Homeland Security in consultation with the Secretary of State 

determines threatens the law enforcement or security interest of the United States. 

Do you think that the event in Paris, the refugee crisis in Europe and/or the growth of terrorist 

extremism in Europe and the Middle East meet the threshold for consideration of invoking this 

clause on any visa waiver member country? 

Responses to questions submitted for the record were not received at time of printing. 

When received, they will be on file in the committee offices.