U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

88–288PDF 2014

THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S COUNTERTERRORISM

BUREAU: BUDGET, PROGRAMS, AND EVALUATION

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, 

NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JUNE 10, 2014

Serial No. 113–163

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

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

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

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

PAUL COOK, California 

GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

DOUG COLLINS, Georgia 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

SEAN DUFFY, Wisconsin 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE

TED POE, Texas, Chairman 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

PAUL COOK, California 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESS 

The Honorable Tina Kaidanow, Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator for 

Counterterrorism, U.S. Department of State .................................................... 4

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Tina Kaidanow: Prepared statement ........................................... 6

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 20

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 21

Written responses from the Honorable Tina Kaidanow to questions submitted 

for the record by the Honorable Adam Kinzinger, a Representative in 

Congress from the State of Illinois ..................................................................... 22

(1)

THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S 

COUNTERTERRORISM BUREAU: BUDGET, 

PROGRAMS, AND EVALUATION 

TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2014

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:04 p.m., in room 

2200, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ted Poe (chairman of 

the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. POE. The subcommittee will come to order. 

Terrorism remains one of the most of the most dangerous threats 

to U.S. national security and our interests worldwide. A recent 

study by the RAND Corporation found that from 2010 to 2013, the 

number of jihadist groups worldwide grew 58 percent. The number 

of jihadist fighters doubled to a high estimate of over 100,000. The 

number of attacks by al-Qaeda affiliates increased from 390 to 

1,000 attacks. 

Al-Qaeda remains a central part of this fight. Despite the death 

of Osama bin Laden, the group operates in more territory and has 

more safe havens than it did just 5 or 10 years ago. On this map 

to my right shows the global threat of al-Qaeda, the red being alQaeda and the blue being other terrorist groups, the territory generally that they control in the regions. 

Some estimates—well, in Syria, al-Qaeda affiliates have grown 

by huge numbers, with jihadists from all over the world coming to 

fight. It now appears that on the government side, there are about 

3,000 so-called terrorists, and on the so-called rebel side there are 

about 8,000 fighters. Some estimates put the number of foreign 

jihadists who have traveled to Syria up to 11,000. These fighters 

may return home to wreak havoc both in the United States and 

other Western countries. 

In Iraq, ISIL seems to take over more cities and towns by the 

day, carving out a terrorist ministate in the middle of the chaos. 

Al-Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and Somalia remain focused on U.S. 

interests. Some say AQAP is the strongest of all the affiliates. 

Boko Haram is on the rise in Nigeria, as seen through their recent kidnappings and mass slaughter of innocent civilians that the 

world knows about. 

Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan remains determined to 

make a comeback despite the erosion of the so-called al-Qaeda core. 

2

The five senior Taliban leaders that we just exchanged for Sergeant Bergdahl will not make Afghanistan a nicer place to live. 

This subcommittee has explored these issues in great detail over 

the last 18 months, and it seems to me the situation is getting 

worse, not better. The facts suggest that the fight against al-Qaeda 

and their affiliates has gotten worse as well. 

I added two amendments to the defense and intelligence authorizations this year on this issue. The Director of the National Intelligence must report back to Congress with a comprehensive strategy to combat al-Qaeda and its affiliates, including detailed definitions of how the administration views these groups. The Secretary 

of Defense is also required to contract out an independent assessment of U.S. Government’s efforts to combat al-Qaeda and their affiliates. This was necessary because the administration’s rhetoric 

on al-Qaeda has been all over the map, literally ranging from nearly defeated to a growing threat. 

GAO will also be taking a much closer look at the CT Bureau 

itself. I look forward to reading its findings sooner than later. 

Today we will hear from Ambassador Tina Kaidanow, the new 

Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. Department of State. 

The administration says counterterrorism is one of the top foreign 

policy goals. If that is true, then it does not make much sense to 

me that it left the Coordinator position vacant for over a year. But 

now we have an Ambassador, and I am glad to see that that position is filled. 

The mission of the State Department’s Counterterrorism Bureau 

is to develop coordinated strategies to defeat terrorists abroad and 

secure the cooperation of international partners. It is an important 

mission, but it is not clear to me that the Bureau and what it is 

doing are accomplishing it. That is because very few of its resources are being spent on evaluating taxpayer dollars. 

Just three outside evaluations have been done since GAO first 

pointed out the need for evaluations to then the Office of Counterterrorism in 2008. The Bureau has yet to complete a single impact 

evaluation, the most rigorous of evaluations to truly measure 

whether or not money is making any difference. It is not clear why 

it took the office so long to get those three evaluations, and it is 

not clear to why the Bureau is still underfunding evaluations, with 

only one external evaluation currently on the docket. 

So we are going to have plenty to talk about with our Ambassador. Terrorism is an enemy that we cannot afford to ignore or underestimate. 

I now turn to the ranking member from California Mr. Sherman 

for his opening statement. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding these hearings. I want to thank our witness for coming, and I know that she 

has to leave at 3:30 for an important international trip. 

Our efforts against terrorism can be divided into five general categories: Military force and the threat of military force, which is the 

responsibility chiefly of the Pentagon; our sanctions activity, which 

the State Department is very involved in, but is the focus of the 

Treasury Department; and our Intelligence Community’s efforts, 

both in terms of gathering and analyzing intelligence, which, of 

3

course, the State Department does as well; but also whatever black 

ops or whatever that our Intel Community may engage in. 

Finally, there are two areas where the State Department takes 

the lead. One of those is assistance to our allies abroad in terms 

of training, grants, et cetera; and the other is our outreach on the 

ideological front, public diplomacy. 

We are here today to focus on the Bureau of Counterterrorism 

within the State Department, which directs U.S. Government efforts to improve counterterrorism operation with foreign governments and coordinates our overall U.S. counterterrorism policy. 

This agency has its history going back to 1972 after the Munich 

massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes. 

The budget has declined over the last few years, and I believe the President’s request is $22.65 million. Its key programs include 

the Antiterrorism Assistance Program, which trains foreign law enforcement in counterterrorism and offers assistance to foreign governments on effective counterterrorism techniques. I would hope 

that the Government of Nigeria, for example, would be more anxious to take advantage of our efforts in this area. And there is the 

Regional Security Initiative, which strengthens the capacity of foreign governments to combat terrorism through regional cooperation. Finally, there is the Countering Violent Extremism Office that 

is part of our public diplomacy efforts, and I would hope that the 

State Department would have on staff and have consulting relationships with Muslim scholars so that we are in a position to 

argue hadith for hadith and Koranic verse for Koranic verse that 

such actions as abducting hundreds of girls from a school is not 

consistent with the teachings of the Muslim Prophet. 

The Government Accountability Office has been critical to monitoring our counterterrorism efforts as has the State Department Inspector General. Currently 2 percent of the Bureau’s budget is 

spent on monitoring and evaluation. 

Finally, I want to focus on the importance of sanctions, which I 

realize may not be directly applied by your office. If we don’t take 

our own sanctions laws seriously and enforce them, we can’t expect 

the rest of the world to do the same. The fact that Iran has been 

brought to the table is as a result of sanctions policy. Now we have 

the French Banque Paribas, which has been accused of a host of 

actions in violation of U.S. sanctions law, particularly acting as the 

banker for the Khartoum regime, a regime in Sudan that is a state 

sponsor of terrorism. 

One would hope that the State Department and your office, Ambassador, would be pushing Treasury to be as tough as possible in 

this instance and every instance. I know that they are getting 

pushback from the French Foreign Ministry, and the State Department should not be acting as the agent, as an ambassador, for the 

French Ambassador or for French commercial interests, but rather 

should, and hopefully with your voice, be a strong voice for tough 

sanctions actually applied to those who intentionally violate the 

law. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. POE. Thank the gentleman. 

The Ambassador Tina Kaidanow is the Ambassador-at-Large and 

Coordinator for Counterterrorism in the U.S. Department of State. 

4

She previously served in various roles at the State Department including assignments abroad in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia and 

Herzegovina, Macedonia and Serbia. 

As the ranking member mentioned, the Ambassador is on a tight 

schedule, so I will dispense with the rest of the introduction, although the resume is quite long and good, and I will go straight 

to the witness for her statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TINA KAIDANOW, AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE AND COORDINATOR FOR COUNTERTERRORISM, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 

Ranking Member Sherman. It is actually up to you gentlemen since 

there is so little time left, if you prefer it, I have already submitted 

the testimony for the record, the longer testimony; so if you care 

to, we can go straight into questions. It is really your choice. I have 

some comments, and I can certainly make some introductory remarks, but it is your choice. 

Mr. POE. The Ambassador is correct. We have your written statement, and it is filed. If you wish to go ahead and summarize it and 

maybe mention some things that are not in it, that is fine, and 

then we will go straight to questions. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Okay. I think the thing I would highlight probably the most from the written testimony and what I was 

prepared to present today is precisely what you highlighted at the 

outset of your comments, and that is that this really is an opportune moment for a hearing because it is an incredibly important 

time in our counterterrorism efforts. The changing and evolving nature of the threat that you spoke about, I think, is really one that 

I would also highlight. 

The threat that we face really continues to evolve from something that was more centralized and hierarchical in terms of the 

structure of the network toward something that is far more diverse 

and diffuse in terms of its structure and its components. I think we 

recognize, certainly in my Bureau, but more broadly within the 

U.S. Government, that to succeed against a more decentralized 

structure among the terrorists, we also have to adapt our own approach; and we have to be flexible, and we have to be nimble. That 

has become clearer over time. 

So I would just say that, you know, all the things that you mentioned—you discussed an array of threats and a variety of groups 

that concern us. You also mentioned Syria, which is something, obviously, that continues to build as an issue and that we are paying 

close attention to, but a whole variety of affiliates of al-Qaeda, as 

well as what we call like-minded groups. Not everyone is formally 

affiliated with al-Qaeda, but a number of groups have expressed at 

least some sort of institutional—affiliation is really too strong a 

word, but they have indicated their sympathy. Let us put it that 

way. 

So as I said, to succeed against a decentralized network, but one 

that is geographically diffuse, we have implemented a number of 

things programmatically but also in terms of our policy that we believe address this threat as time goes on. 

5

We can talk a little bit about the resources that we are dedicating to this. You mentioned some of the programmatic issues that 

relate to my Bureau, the kinds of programs that we are putting forward. We have a whole array of programs that we try and levy 

with our partners. I should say that, you know, what the President 

has articulated is a model in which we are moving from a very direct action-oriented kind of an approach; in other words, where the 

United States was really doing the bulk of the work on counterterrorism. We will continue, obviously, to defend our interests 

robustly. We must. 

With that said, what we are finding all across the globe is that 

these groups, as I said, that are now more diverse and diffuse are 

also posing challenges in local areas to local partners that we have. 

We need to be working very closely with them in order to find a 

commonalty of interest and to give them the skills, the capacity 

and the kinds of resources that they need in order to address that 

threat effectively, which is really in their interest, but it is also in 

ours. I think that by doing that, what we do is we position ourselves well down the road so that we don’t have to take on large 

military efforts. We have ways of addressing that before we ever 

get to that. 

So, again, I am happy to talk about any of those things, including some of the issues that you raised about the actual implementation of our programs, depending on what your interests are. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Kaidanow follows:]

6


88288a-1.eps
7


88288a-2.eps
8


88288a-3.eps
9


88288a-4.eps
10


88288a-5.eps
11


88288a-6.eps
12


88288a-7.eps
13


88288a-8.eps
14

Mr. POE. All right. A few questions. The ranking member alluded 

to this during his opening statement directly about sanctions, having them are only as good as the sanction themselves. Haqqani network, how much money has the United States Government frozen 

regarding their network? Do we know? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Well, the last published report that we 

have is the terrorist asset report that we put out on an annual 

basis. The last one we have is actually published as of 2012. It is 

retrospective, so unfortunately we don’t have figures that would encompass the latest. 

As of the end of 2012, we had not frozen physically any assets 

from the Haqqani network, at least not insofar as the report details, but there are a couple things to bear in mind. One is that 

that report tends to focus pretty heavily on the state sponsors of 

terrorism. Of course, the Haqqani group is not a state sponsor of 

terrorism; it is a different kind of group, and it also operates pretty 

much outside the realm of the United States banking system and 

those areas where we might expect to find funds that we would either freeze or seize. 

That said, I really want to highlight something; I think the ranking member kind of alluded to this. The power of our sanctions and 

the power of our designations lies not so much always in how much 

money we freeze or we seize as assets here in the United States. 

What it allows us to do is oftentimes we take that designation, we 

move it to the U.N. We are able then to mobilize a whole series 

of efforts that brings in the entire international financial community, raises the cost to that group or that entity or that individual 

so that no one is doing business with them. And these are the 

kinds of things both from a moral standpoint, but also from a very 

pragmatic standpoint that we are able to do through our sanctions. 

We regard them very seriously. I think our Treasury colleagues 

would say the same. We are constantly talking to our partners 

overseas in order to get them to take those obligations seriously, 

and we also, through my Bureau in particular, we put a lot of effort 

against giving countries the skill set and the institutional structures they need to combat terrorist finance. 

Mr. POE. Based on what you said, do you know if any nation, organization, international organization has seized any assets of the 

network? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. You know, Congressman, I don’t have 

that information with me now. It may be hard to track, to be honest with you, because I don’t know that I have access to every country’s seizing or freezing of assets. As I said, we will come back to 

you with as full an answer——

Mr. POE. How about Boko Haram, same question. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Same question and a similar answer in 

that because the information we have is as of 2012, and Boko 

Haram was designated as an organization in 2013, I don’t have 

that information for you. But that said, again, we can try and look 

and see whether certainly within the U.S. context or outside of it 

we can provide you with that. 

Mr. POE. When will that report be updated? 

15

Ambassador KAIDANOW. It is done on an annual basis usually in 

May, but for the preceding calendar year. Similar to the Country 

Reports on Terrorism. 

Mr. POE. What does the money in your budget go for? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. The money in the budget that we ask for 

out of the CT Bureau? It goes for an array of programming. We 

manage—and I just wanted to correct one thing that Congressman 

Sherman had said. I am not sure where the 22-million figure came 

from. For Fiscal Year 2015, we will be asking for a total of around 

$221 million. We, the CT Bureau ourselves, we manage roughly or 

we would manage out of the request about $104 million. The rest 

of that is put through regional bureaus and both regional and bilateral lines of activity. 

Mr. POE. Ambassador, where does the money go? What does it 

do? What does that money do? Taxpayer wants to know where that 

$20 million, $21 million goes. They ask us. What do we say? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Absolutely. What it does is it builds capacity among our counterterrorism partners all over the globe to do 

the things we need them to do. 

Mr. POE. What does ‘‘capacity’’ mean? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. It means a variety of things. 

Mr. POE. I am from Texas. Would you just keep it simple for us? 

Tell us what ‘‘capacity’’ is. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. It means that we have prosecutors who 

can prosecute bad guys. It means that we have judges who will 

judge those people within the rule of law. 

Mr. POE. Does it go to weapons? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Not the money that we provide. In some 

cases the overall USG counterterrorism effort may involve some of 

that, but not in the money that we, through the State Department 

and through my Bureau, we are providing to our partners. 

What it will do is it will provide them with legal assistance so 

that they can go after the money flows of terrorists. It will counter 

the messaging that the terrorists and extremists are putting out 

there. It will do a number of things to empower women and youth, 

who are particularly vulnerable to communities that are at risk to 

extremism. It will go toward a whole array of programming on the 

multilateral side. So, for example, we now support something called 

the Global Counterterrorism Forum, which is a gathering of countries that is specifically designed to address terrorism issues and 

to put out best practices so that they are all following a kind of a 

design, again, to combat terrorist flow of money and all the other 

things that I just spoke of. 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. I have to cut you off 

because I want those gentlemen over here to ask questions. 

The ranking member, I yield to him, 5 minutes. 

Mr. SHERMAN. It was pointed out to me by subcommittee staff 

that we did get these numbers from CRS. I want to thank you, Ambassador, for setting the record straight. 

Does your Department or Bureau or others in the State Department have as full-time employees Islamic scholars? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. We don’t have—I don’t think I would 

class it quite that way, but what we do have is programming that 

16

we support that brings in those voices, and we are intent on expanding that programming as well. 

Mr. SHERMAN. But you don’t have a person on your staff—I can 

see how you contract out some of this, but you need somebody on 

staff who can then decide who to contract out to. You wouldn’t run 

a medical research part of the government without a doctor on 

staff——

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Understood. 

Mr. SHERMAN [continuing]. Even though, of course, most of your 

your money would go as grants to medical institutions, because I 

think that the terrorists have contorted Islam, and that it is not 

difficult to find within Islam and within its holy writings repudiations for some of the barbaric behavior we have seen. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Congressman, if you can let me point to 

a slightly different but a very similar effort to what you are talking 

about. It is housed within the State Department. It is actually an 

interagency effort. It is something called the Center for Strategic 

Counterterrorism Communications. It brings together the State Department, the Defense Department, some of our intelligence colleagues, and it is exactly designed to do what you are talking 

about. It pushes back——

Mr. SHERMAN. Is there anybody working for the Federal Government on these matters that has memorized the Koran? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. I couldn’t tell you if they have memorized the Koran. 

Mr. SHERMAN. At most madrasas there is a real focus on that, 

or at many madrasas. But is anyone getting a government salary 

because of their knowledge of Islamic scriptures? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. I will have to get back to you on that. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Please do get back to me on that for the record, 

because you can have all kinds of organization charts and hundreds of millions of dollars in your budget; you can’t argue about 

what Islam teaches if you don’t have somebody capable of teaching 

Islam. 

With the abduction of these schoolgirls, is the Nigerian Government now open to all of the types of assistance that we think that 

they ought to take from us? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. It is a good question. We have levied 

quite a bit of effort recently against trying to provide them with assistance and information and an array of different kinds of help, 

including, by the way, messaging help sort of in the realm of what 

you are just talking about. They have accepted that assistance and 

that advice. I will say, though, that we have consistently urged 

them to take what we would call a wholistic approach, because this 

is not going to be dealt with, unfortunately, solely in the context 

of one unfortunate and very, very tragic kidnapping. It is going to 

take an overall effort that involves economic, developmental reform 

of some of their security institutions. So it has got to be more than 

just a question of retrieving the girls. It has got to be something 

that is for the longer term, and that is something we are continuing to work with them on. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I yield back. 

Mr. POE. Thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Vargas from California is recognized. 

17

Mr. VARGAS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

I do have some questions, and again, thank you very much, Ambassador, for being here. With respect to the unfortunate unity government of the Palestinian Authority with Hamas, and, as you 

know, for any Palestinian Government, they should meet three conditions; that is, reject violence, recognize Israel, and abide by the 

previous agreements with Israel. Could you tell me a little bit now 

about Hamas and how they are influencing the Palestinian Authority? Have they changed their posture in any way? 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. Thank you, Congressman. 

First of all, let me just say I know this has been the subject of 

quite a lot of discussion. The State Department and the U.S. Government have agreed for the time being to continue to deal with 

the government that was put in place by President Abbas on the 

condition, though, exactly as you outlined, that they will abide by 

the principles that you just articulated, including a commitment to 

nonviolence, including the recognition of the State of Israel, and all 

the other things that you mentioned. 

I will say this. I don’t think this is a free pass. I think we are 

continuing to evaluate the actions of that government, and we will 

see what their actions hold. 

I would stress that with respect to Hamas itself, Hamas continues to be, in our view, a designated foreign terrorist organization. We do not deal with Hamas, we have not met with members 

of Hamas, and we will not provide any assistance to Hamas. So 

that is very clear. 

The other thing I would say is that we are continuing to consult 

with the Israelis on the kinds of security elements that they may 

need with respect to taking mitigating measures against Hamas 

and some of the things that have gone on even just as recently as 

the last few months. As I said, I will be actually going myself to 

Israel in the next week, and I will have formal consultations with 

them. So we take that quite seriously. 

Mr. VARGAS. And I was going to ask you about that. I am glad 

you got to that. I do want to know, though, if any of the unity government’s money is going to Hamas. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. I am not aware that it is, but, again, I 

don’t have that information at this moment. 

Mr. VARGAS. Okay. And how are we helping Israel to cope with 

this changing situation? You mentioned it generally, but how can 

we help more specifically? It does concern me, because now you 

have a known terrorist organization formed in this unity government that I think has a lot of capabilities, and I think it creates 

a larger threat for the State of Israel and for the whole Middle 

East. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. I understand your apprehension, and I 

understand certainly the Israelis’; and part of why I am going to 

Israel is to have that conversation and to hear specifically some of 

their concerns. 

I think there is a question both for the Israelis and for us in 

terms of what benefit is derived from cutting off contacts with that 

government when the security element of what goes on in the West 

Bank and Gaza is very much controlled by the government. So I 

think we have to weigh all of these considerations and decide for 

18

ourselves what is the right course forward, but with clear parameters that you laid out and that we are continuing to follow. 

Mr. VARGAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Thank you, Ambassador. 

Mr. POE. Thank the gentleman. 

We also have been joined by three other members of the committee. For those coming in, the Ambassador has to catch an airplane that is on time, and so she needs to leave at this point. 

Madam Ambassador, the gentlemen who have just come in, 

members of the committee, will probably no doubt have questions 

that they will submit to you, and reply in a timely manner in writing if you would. 

Ambassador KAIDANOW. We absolutely will do that, of course. 

Thank you very much, gentlemen. I really appreciate the opportunity. I am sorry that we didn’t have more time today. Again, I 

would offer myself up at any time if you have questions individually or otherwise. 

Mr. POE. Committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(19)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

20

f


88288n.eps
21

f


88288m.eps
22


88288b-1.eps
23


88288b-2.eps
24

Æ


88288b-3.eps