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

99–553PDF 2016

POTENTIAL TERRORIST THREATS:

BORDER SECURITY CHALLENGES IN

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MARCH 22, 2016

Serial No. 114–155

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 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

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 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Juan Gonzalez, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State .......................................................... 2

The Honorable Alan D. Bersin, Assistant Secretary for International Affairs 

and Chief Diplomatic Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security .......... 8

Mr. Lev Kubiak, Assistant Director for International Operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security . 19

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Juan Gonzalez: Prepared statement ............................................................... 4

The Honorable Alan D. Bersin: Prepared statement ............................................ 10

Mr. Lev Kubiak: Prepared statement .................................................................... 21

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 40

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 41

The Honorable Jeff Duncan, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of South Carolina, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere: Prepared statement ................................................................................ 42

The Honorable Albio Sires, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New Jersey: Prepared statement .................................................................... 44

(1)

POTENTIAL TERRORIST THREATS: BORDER 

SECURITY CHALLENGES IN LATIN AMERICA 

AND THE CARIBBEAN 

TUESDAY, MARCH 22, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o’clock p.m., in room 

2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jeff Duncan (chairman 

of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. DUNCAN. A quorum being present, the subcommittee will 

come to order. We have an eight-vote series that will require the 

subcommittee to recess for about 45 minutes as soon as votes are 

called. I understand that Assistant Secretary Bersin has a hard 

stop at 4 o’clock, so we will return immediately after votes to conclude the opening portion of the hearing and to move to a classified 

setting. Following testimonies and members’ questions, we will conclude there and we will conclude our time today. 

So I am going to, in the essence of time, skip over my opening 

statement, but I want to start off with just saying a couple of 

things. First off, I am deeply saddened by the loss of life in Brussels today at the hands of evil men. I want to dedicate today’s hearing to the victims of today’s attacks and their families. I led my 

first congressional delegation trip to Brussels in 2014 to look exactly at foreign fighter flow, foreign fighter threat, and the ways 

that the U.S. and our European allies could better cooperate on 

homeland security issues. And only a day before my visit, an ISIS 

foreign fighter had returned to Brussels and shot up a Jewish museum killing four people before he tried to flee to Africa. So today’s 

depraved acts in Brussels, following the Paris attack, demonstrate 

again that evil and evil men’s intentions continue to rip apart the 

fabric of free Western societies through acts of terror and fear. 

It brings to mind Winston Churchill’s words. Let us learn our 

lessons. Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and 

easy. Always remember, however, as sure as you are that you can 

easily win, that there would not be a war if the other man did not 

think he also had a chance. So we must show enemies that they 

have no chance of victory and we do that, in part, through strong 

defenses and secure borders. 

So I want to start the hearing. We are going to jump right in and 

submit our opening statements for the record. The ranking member 

2

agrees with me, so I would just go ahead and recognize Mr. Gonzalez for his opening statement. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JUAN GONZALEZ, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, BUREAU OF WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. GONZALEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, 

and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the 

opportunity to testify before you on border security and 

vulnerabilities in Latin America and the Caribbean. It is an honor 

to be here with my colleague and friends from the Department of 

Homeland Security. 

First, just to summarize my oral remarks, I wanted to first thank 

this committee in my capacity as Deputy Assistant Secretary of 

State for Central America and the Caribbean for its bipartisan support for our strategy in Central America. You allowed us to increase funding for Fiscal Year 2015 and supported the President’s 

Fiscal Year 2016 request for $750 million, providing us with the 

tools to help these governments make a real difference on the 

ground. So thank you and I look forward to continue working with 

you on this. 

Now effective border management in Latin America and the Caribbean is vital to our economic prosperity and national security. 

Throughout the hemisphere, we are working with governments to 

eliminate trade barriers, integrate electricity grids and energy markets, connect national infrastructures, and cement commercial relationships. As evidence, I offer that our trillion dollar trade relationship and over 3 million American jobs, supported by our economic 

relationship with Canada and Mexico, demonstrate what is possible 

when governments collaborate actively. 

At the same time that we are using our border cooperation to 

promote prosperity, we are equally determined to use them to safeguard the homeland and to ensure safe, legal, and orderly migration to the United States. Border security was a focus of the recent 

Canada state visit. We always share travel information with Canada, including our respective no-fly lists. And the President and 

Prime Minister Trudeau used their meeting to discuss what more 

we can do to secure our borders while actively promoting commerce. 

We are also working with Mexico on border enforcement at both 

its northern and southern border to regulate migration, combat 

smuggling, and target narco-traffickers and our counterterrorism 

cooperation with Mexico is excellent. 

During his fourth visit to Mexico under this administration, Vice 

President Biden discussed border security with President Pen ̃ a 

Nieto as he chaired at the same time the third meeting of the U.S.-

Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue. 

Border security has also been at the front and center in the Vice 

President’s active engagement on Central America since 2014. During his latest meeting with Northern Triangle leaders here in 

Washington on February 24th, the three Presidents reaffirmed 

their commitment to continue awareness campaigns about the risks 

of undocumented migration, deepening the fight against human 

smuggling and trafficking, continued regional border security coVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:38 Apr 28, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\032216\99553 SHIRL
3

ordination, the strengthening of task forces and development of 

joint intelligence and border security facilities, and facilitate with 

the return, repatriation, and especially the reintegration of migrants who do not qualify for humanitarian protection in the 

United States. 

Our efforts in the Caribbean are aimed at combating the drug 

trade and other transnational criminal threats and work in lock 

step with the U.S. Coast Guard, the Department of Defense, and 

Department of Homeland Security to support regional maritime 

and aerial domain awareness by improving radar coverage and information sharing between partner nations. Caribbean governments are using U.S.-provided equipment and training to identify 

threats and carry out interdiction operations. And the U.N. Office 

on Drugs and Crime Container Control Programme is establishing 

dedicated container profiling units to improve port security. 

In South America, the Tri-Border Area of Brazil, Argentina, and 

Paraguay is a focus for regional law enforcement efforts, as you 

know from your recent congressional delegation. Governments in 

the region have long been concerned about arms and drug smuggling, document fraud, money laundering, trafficking in persons, 

and the manufacture and movement of contraband goods through 

the Tri-Border Area. We are working with all three governments 

on their efforts to improve border management and combat smuggling. We brought justice and police officials from Paraguay to regional conferences on money laundering conducted with the Department of Justice. 

Mr. Chairman, to conclude, throughout our efforts in the hemisphere, U.S. strategy development and program design has been an 

active exercise of coordination between the Departments of State, 

Homeland Security, Justice, Commerce, USAID, and others. Indeed, funding from the Department of State and USAID supports 

a lot of the work of our partner agencies. At the same time, the 

expertise and experience of our DHS colleagues, as well as others 

in the departments and agencies, have helped us refine our approach and we continue to look for ways to maximize our coordination. 

And I will close where I began, Mr. Chairman. The U.S. Congress is a vital partner to the administration and we look forward 

to engaging with you on our discussion today on border security 

and vulnerabilities in Latin America and the Caribbean. Thank 

you for holding this important hearing and I look forward to engaging in the discussion. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gonzalez follows:]

4


99553a-1.eps
5


99553a-2.eps
6


99553a-3.eps
7


99553a-4.eps
8

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you so much. 

Secretary Bersin. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ALAN D. BERSIN, ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND CHIEF DIPLOMATIC OFFICER, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. BERSIN. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Sires, Mr. Yoho, 

thank you for the opportunity to appear before you once again, particularly in the company of my distinguished colleagues, Misters 

Gonzalez and Kubiak. 

I wanted to express our gratitude, certainly mine, for the comments you made with regard to the events in Brussels. I think in 

retrospect it will be seen in terms of European security and the effect on its borders as a game changer, building on what happened 

in Paris in January. 

I was at a meeting of the European Institute today in which people were reacting to the events in Brussels and I thought it would 

be useful in the context of the hearing that you and your staff have 

structured, to offer some comments that I offered there. Because in 

fact, Europe is in the midst of a confluence of migration, refugees, 

asylum seekers, and terrorists. And in fact, it has set the European 

market on its back in the eurozone and the Schengen zone and it 

is placed them at great risk. 

And in looking at the way in which the European nations have 

reacted to the crisis that they face with respect to border security, 

we begin to see them shutting down their individual borders, renouncing the Schengen zone, and generally hunkering down in 

ways that were reminiscent of the way in which we handled border 

security in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 when we shut down 

our airports. We shut down our seaports. We actually backed traffic 

south into Mexico and north into Canada by 10 to 20 miles as we 

looked at every trunk and we processed every passenger. 

And I thought, reflected, for our European colleagues today how 

different our border security looks. To be sure, we are not seamless 

and we are not perfect and we are in a mode of continuous improvement as the discussion in the SCIF will undoubtedly focus on 

some of the issues that we should not take up in public session. 

But think about the difference in the way in which we handle border security from 15 years ago. 

We used to see borders as lines on a map, the line that separated 

us from Mexico or Canada. And in fact, we now come to see because, in fact, we have learned that homeland security is intrinsically transnational. That is to say there is hardly an event that affects us inside our homeland that does not have a cause or effect 

that originates outside the homeland. 

So we start to look at border security in terms of not just in 

lines, but in flows. And in the global world that makes a lot of 

sense in terms of the constant movement of migrants, capital labor, 

electrons, goods, and people, constantly back and forth across the 

line. 

So we have come to see the fact that our ports of entry, the 327 

airports, seaports, and land ports, are not the first line of defense, 

but rather they are the last line of defense. And what we have to 

9

do is secure the flow of goods and people toward the border lines, 

toward our homeland, as far away from them as possible, and as 

early in time before the arrival at the border. And we have implemented that as the testimony of my colleagues and I today will 

again document, but with which the chairman and Ranking Member Yoho are familiar. 

The second thing that was pointed out, so that, in fact, don’t 

move away from your—don’t just hunker down at your border line, 

but manage the flows. And think our testimony will show that we 

do that. 

Second is don’t fragment your border agencies. I know that in the 

1990s there were at each of our ports of entry there were three separate port managers, one from Treasury, for Customs; one for Justice, for Immigration; and one from Agriculture for agricultural inspection. As a result of the creation of DHS, we have actually created an integrated set of missions that will improve over time as 

the Defense Department has to actually perform a single border security function effectively. 

Third, we recognize that you cannot stop everything. We are 

looking for a needle in a haystack, because in fact, 97, 98 or more 

percent of the passing of people and goods are perfectly lawful and 

legitimate. And when we look for the needle in the haystack, we 

have developed means and methods of doing it, but we recognize 

that it is based on risk management and making assessments and 

managing our borders, not seamlessly, but with the data that we 

have and the intelligence that we can garner. 

Lastly, we have learned that we cannot do this alone, that we 

have to do it in partnership not only inside the government, among 

the agencies of the United States Government, but also with foreign partners. And a lot of our border security today with regard 

to migration, as well as drugs, as well as intellectual property protection, as well as counterterrorist activity depends on the partnerships that we have created with our foreign partners. 

As Mr. Gonzalez indicated, we have just embarked on a massive 

effort in partnership with Central America. It will not solve the 

problem overnight. These problems are in the making over generations, but we have actually taken, and I take it during the course 

of the hearing, we can explore some of the departures that bode 

well and work well than the situation we have seen. 

With regard to the Caribbean, we have similar efforts of partnership and I hope to be able to take those up, Mr. Chairman, in the 

course of the questions and answers. 

So in conclusion, the challenge of our times is that the future is 

not what it used to be, as the French poet said. But we have 

changed the way in which we manage the border and I look forward to answering your questions so we can explore where there 

have been improvements and where there remains work to be done. 

Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bersin follows:]

10


99553b-1.eps
11


99553b-2.eps
12


99553b-3.eps
13


99553b-4.eps
14


99553b-5.eps
15


99553b-6.eps
16


99553b-7.eps
17


99553b-8.eps
18


99553b-9.eps
19

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Kubiak. 

STATEMENT OF MR. LEV KUBIAK, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR 

INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. KUBIAK. In the immediate wake of the tragic attacks today 

in Belgium, I am strengthened by the fact that our international 

law enforcement collaboration and our effectiveness grows stronger 

every day. In my more than 20 years as a Federal law enforcement 

officer, ICE has never had greater capability to partner internationally to protect our nation. 

Over 400 ICE personnel are assigned to 62 offices in 46 countries 

and each year we augment that staff with hundreds of agents and 

analysts on temporary detail. As today’s attacks demonstrate, the 

threat continues to evolve and challenge our law enforcement response, but I am confident our strong global partnerships build our 

capability to identify criminals, terrorists, and those networks that 

support their actions. 

As the goal of the hearing is today to address Western Hemisphere affairs, I will focus specifically on that area, but the accomplishments and programs that will be discussed today are representative of our efforts globally. 

In the Western Hemisphere, ICE has 23 offices in 9 countries, 

staffed by about 111 people who work on capacity building and exchange of best practices with our law enforcement counterparts and 

then operationalize those capabilities through joint investigations 

covering a full range of ICE’s broad investigative authorities and 

work with our partner nations to repatriate their nationals. 

We are, at our core, a border law enforcement agency, and partner with our foreign law enforcement counterparts, Immigration 

and Customs officers around the world, to investigate transnational 

criminal organizations operating globally. Thanks to the additional 

appropriated funds from Congress in Fiscal Year 2015 and continued funding support from the Department of State and the Department of Defense, we have expanded critically important programs 

like the Transnational Criminal Investigative Units, our Biometric 

Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program, and the 

Trade Transparency Units. 

We continue to build our capacity and the capacity of our host 

country counterparts through training programs such as our Cross 

Border Financial Investigations Program, and our Strategic Trade 

Control Workshops. We put these programs and training to work 

through ambitious international and multilateral whole of U.S. 

Government joint investigative enforcement operations such as Operation Citadel. 

ICE’s Transnational Criminal Investigative Units investigate all 

forms of illicit trade, travel, and finance. TCIUs are comprised of 

foreign law enforcement officials, customs officers, immigration officers, and prosecutors, who undergo a strict vetting process and 

complete a prerequisite 3-week training course at our Federal law 

enforcement training center in Glynco, Georgia. Once trained, the 

TCIU members work collaboratively with our attache ́ personnel to 

20

address significant joint law enforcement threats throughout the 

hemisphere. Through this program, ICE attache ́s share law enforcement intelligence, conduct joint investigations, and assist in 

prosecutions of transnational criminal organizations both in the 

host country and in the United States. 

TCIUs are currently operational in nine countries and comprise 

more than 250 vetted foreign trained law enforcement officers who 

in 2015 alone, Fiscal Year 2015 alone, disrupted and dismantled 

criminal organizations through the arrest of almost 700 suspects, 

the seizure of nearly 17,000 pounds of cocaine, the seizure of more 

than $6.7 million in illicit cash, and $13 million worth of counterfeit merchandise, not to mention numerous firearms, ammunition, 

vehicles, and vessels. 

One of ICE’s highest priorities in the region is investigating 

human smuggling and trafficking. The Human Smuggling Cell 

serves as the U.S. Government’s coordination center for all human 

smuggling investigations and through it ICE and CBP together 

harness DHS’s unique access to immigration border and financial 

data to advance efforts to counter these organizations. The cell provides intelligence coordination and supports U.S. and foreign investigations to more effectively address the specific regional threat. 

For the last 4 consecutive years, as an example, ICE led Operation Citadel, a regional, multilateral, and multi-agency effort to 

address our transnational criminal organization operations, but 

with the specific focus on human smuggling. This operation coordinated attache ́s and TCIUs in the region and combined partner national capacity building, training, and real-time intelligence, interdiction and investigative operations at international seaports, airports, land borders, and in the interior of those countries. 

In Fiscal Year 2015, Operation Citadel dismantled several large 

transnational human smuggling organizations. Most significantly, 

one investigation coordinated collaborative investigations at the 

same time in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and the 

United States, dismantling a prolific transnational criminal organization operating throughout Central America and throughout the 

hemisphere. As a result, 14 separate human smuggling routes were 

identified and disrupted, including routes used by smugglers to 

move third country nationals from the Eastern Hemisphere 

through the Western Hemisphere and into the United States across 

the southwest border. In total, Citadel’s 2015 results included 210 

arrests, the recovery of 51 unaccompanied minors, the seizure of 

$2.1 million in currency, over 2100 biometric collections or enrollments and the initiation of 68 new and on-going investigations. 

There is much work still to do and the need to continue to 

strengthen international partnerships through training and joint 

operations, but ICE is fully engaged in addressing current and future threats. I am confident that we will continue to build upon 

this momentum and generate additional considerable operational 

achievements as we move forward. Thank you for the opportunity 

to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kubiak follows:]

21


99553c-1.eps
22


99553c-2.eps
23


99553c-3.eps
24


99553c-4.eps
25


99553c-5.eps
26


99553c-6.eps
27


99553c-7.eps
28


99553c-8.eps
29

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. We will move into the question portion 

of the hearing and we will try to get through as much of the question portion as we can. When we break for votes, we are just going 

to end the portion of the committee hearing here. When we come 

back for votes, we will go straight to the SCIF, so I would ask the 

panelists to head on down to the SCIF when we leave for votes. 

Mr. Gonzalez, following the Paris attack in November, there 

were press reports that indicated that the EU was considering 

tighter and systematic ID checks. Let me back up. Press reports 

and other reports surfaced that a Syrian individual, under investigation for participating in the attacks, had traveled to Brazil, Ecuador, and Colombia in July before bribing a Colombian official to 

leave the country. INTERPOL stated in November that the estimated 25,000 foreign terrorist combatants thought to be operating 

across the globe, only 5,600 have been identified by law enforcement agents. 

So what can you tell me about the individual that may have 

traveled to Colombia and Ecuador and Brazil and him leaving the 

country? And I would also like for you to talk about the fact that 

we have a lot of folks from Syria and other places traveling the triborder region on falsified or fake documents, exchanging those documents, and then transiting Latin America either to come here or 

to go in other places. 

We just traveled, and we heard from the Paraguayans, and this 

continues to be the case. We saw the five Syrians that were apprehended in Honduras. So we know folks are traveling to this area. 

We know one of the Paris attackers possibly did. I would like for 

you to talk about that briefly, if you can. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, thank you for 

taking that trip because I know this is an initiative you have been 

active on and it is something I know our whole government is actively devoting resources and time into. On this particular case, sir, 

we looked into, we heard the same reports. We looked into it and 

we had nothing to actually corroborate that it was somebody that 

was associated with the Paris attacks. In fact, what we did find 

was that it may have been a woman that was there fleeing violence 

from Syria. But it is something that we will continue to actually 

look into given the seriousness of the case and we can expand on 

this in the classified setting definitely. 

Now with regard to the tri-border region, it is a place as you saw 

when you visited Ciudad del Este, that it is a place that does not 

have active border controls and it is incredibly concerning. We actually talk about perhaps issues that you have actually been very 

active on as well around Hezbollah. What we have found is that 

it is a place that illegal actors will use actively for financing, right? 

So that is definitely obvious. 

What we have not been able to find is whether it is actually organized or whether it has actually been used as a stopping off point 

for any sort of organized attack or any sort of terrorist activity. 

However, it is a source of migration as the migration patterns 

throughout South America are incredibly complicated. 

And the way that we would approach this, Mr. Chairman, is because we are in March, I am going to use the March Madness analogies. We are using man-on-man defense. As the Assistant SecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:38 Apr 28, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\032216\99553 SHIRL
30

retary Alan Bersin said, it is a needle in a haystack and we are 

actually actively looking for individuals that might pose a threat. 

And then on Central America and the Caribbean where I have 

played a more active role, we are playing zone defense where what 

we have been doing is investing resources to make sure that there 

is a presence of the state and that the rule of law is something that 

is being advanced. And that helps us whether it is migration, 

whether it is trafficking in persons, whether it is narco-traffickers. 

If you are actually working to support the governments of the 

northern triangle, the southern triangle and other parts in the Caribbean as well, and on the maritime, on the aviation, on border 

controls, something that we partner with DHS on, but also more 

importantly not just regarding the physical border as the area 

where we would focus, but with the judicial sector, strengthening 

police, and actually working to address crime and violence, we have 

actually seen amazing results. And in fact, we have had a couple 

of operations recently where we have been able to intercept special 

interests, aliens from different parts of the world, and of course, 

getting these countries to defend against undocumented migration. 

I will say, sir, just my last point on this is that the majority of 

individuals that are traveling, be they from special interest alien 

countries or other places, we found the large majority of these individuals are actually fleeing violence from other parts of the world, 

but of course, we have to be very vigilant and we are looking at 

those individuals that might actually pose a threat and when we 

do, we actively work with these governments to respond. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you for that. And we saw very clearly that 

there are no border controls between Brazil and Paraguay. In fact, 

in Ciudad del Este it was wide open. An armed guard or two, but 

that is about it. We learned from the Paraguayans that there is no 

border control north of there anyway. In fact, a county road dissects the border and so when you are driving down the road, you 

might be in Brazil, you might be in Paraguay. So I guess I appreciate State and DHS working very well with the Paraguayans on 

counter-narcotics and counterterrorism efforts and I want to continue that. 

So if we have episodes of say these five Syrians that were apprehended in Honduras and I think those were just the ones we know 

about that were caught, Secretary Bersin, you talked about a secure border. I agree that at our border checkpoints where we are 

pulling agriculture out to inspect it, we are trying to identify those 

coming across the border and at the border checkpoints, absolutely 

we are doing it a lot better than we ever have. 

My concern on our southern border is all the areas that we are 

not patrolling, we are not fencing, we are not apprehending anyone. We are actually allowing interior enforcement to have a lead 

role in that. But then the administration is actually relaxed with 

interior enforcement, as well as policies of the administration I 

hope change in the next administration. But if someone can transit 

through Latin America through the tri-border region, hoping to do 

nefarious aims in the United States, then they could get to Mexico, 

just like the unaccompanied children or all the migrant workers 

that come into this country enter our southern border, without 

going through a border checkpoint that you talk about. 

31

So I would like for you to talk a little bit about what the agency 

is doing on not the border checkpoints, not in Laredo or Nogales, 

I am talking about all those areas between the two. And whatever 

you can tell us in that because I will tell you this, my constituents 

are concerned that the soft underbelly of this nation is our southern border that is unsecured. If you can speak to that. 

Mr. BERSIN. Mr. Chairman, so remembering our last exchange, 

we have a different set of experiences. I remember when this border was absolutely out of control when I became the U.S. Attorney, 

the so-called Border Czar in the 1990s, we were arresting one million, a million two, a million four unlawful migrants to the United 

States every year. That was an era when we had 3,000 border patrol agents, no cameras, no technology, and as a result of a bipartisan effort of President Clinton, President Bush, and President 

Obama, we invested $18 billion a year. And I simply disagree with 

the notion that there has been no difference in our southwest border. And we have 22,000 agents, 19,000 of whom are on the southern border. 

So we have a difference of view of the relative state of the border. 

And I just think we should agree that no one claimed that we are 

ever going to seal this border like the Berlin Wall tried to seal people from leaving West Berlin, but no one should claim that it is a 

seamless border. That is to say that it is not susceptible to smuggling of people, but I can assure you with the number of apprehensions down at a 70-year low, at a time when we have 10 times the 

number of agents that I remember being on that border, the border 

is not what it used to be. 

But let me take up the——

Mr. DUNCAN. Let me just speak to one comment you have made. 

If I am playing a football game, I can affect the score by not scoring. Apprehensions are down. I agree with you. But the border patrol people I talk to say the apprehensions are down because the 

administration wants them to be down. 

I still think that we have people cross our border and we can disagree, but you can affect the score two ways. I yield back to you. 

Mr. BERSIN. I have talked to some of those border patrol union 

officials over the 20 years I have been involved in border patrol and 

respectfully, you should look at the axe that there is to grind there. 

The fact is that it is a disservice to the men and women of the 

United States Border Patrol, sir, to claim that they are not doing 

their job on the border. They do. But let us leave that argument 

for another day. I think I understand your point. 

But I would like to take up the five Syrians because I think they 

actually demonstrate good points and bad points of our contemporary situation. So on November 17 of 2015, five Syrians were encountered in Tegucigalpa, Honduras in Toncontin. They had arrived on a flight from Costa Rica and they presented photo altered 

Greek passports. Records checks indicated that the Greek passports had been reported stolen from Athens, Greece, and they were 

interviewed by HSI Transnational Criminal Investigative Unit 

agents stationed in Honduras, the TCI Units that Mr. Kubiak referred to. And the Syrians indicated that they were en route to the 

United States. They were placed in Honduran jails for 17 days and 

they were eventually released because of local laws that limited the 

32

amount of time that you could hold someone based on the administrative violation and the local asylum laws. 

Subjects then proceeded by bus to Guatemala and on March 20th 

of 2016, four of the subjects were encountered at Laredo, Texas and 

they requested asylum. They were interviewed, processed, and 

transported by the border patrol and then by ERO to the Rio 

Grande Detention Center and are currently detained pending outcome of their asylum claims. 

So here are the good points. We are doing a lot of work beyond 

the border with foreign partners to actually identify threats, particularly when they come from so-called special interest areas. But 

we did not have the capacity to take any action to either assist the 

Hondurans to continue to detain and then to transport people because of lack of authority. People then got to the border and 

claimed asylum. And as you know, because of the lack of resources 

provided to the Immigration Courts, those hearings will not take 

place in an expedited time so that we can take action. 

But by the same token, they were not released simply to go into 

the country because—not because we had discovered any facts 

about any terrorist ties that they have because, in fact, they were 

fully vetted, but they were held because, in fact, we do not want 

to risk any danger from this particular population at this particular time. 

So I think the case is actually a good indicator of progress that 

we have made, but an enormous amount of work we have to do, 

both to assist our foreign partners to develop border control capacities, but also frankly, to mend our immigration processes here at 

home. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you for that. I am going to turn to the ranking member. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Chairman. I just want to say the chairman put together a great codel, which was very informative for me. 

We certainly learned a lot about especially border crossing in some 

of these areas that have nothing. They just go back and forth without any kind of scrutiny. 

Can you define for me or discuss how the U.S. Government defines special interest aliens? How do you do that? 

Mr. BERSIN. If I might, I would ask Mr. Gonzalez or Mr. Kubiak 

to add. There are actually different definitions in part, depending 

on different agencies, but they all tend to be outside the Western 

Hemisphere. They tend to be either a listing of countries. I have 

seen listings up to 35 countries. Other agencies take up a more restricted terrorist-related or a terrorist-centric view of the definition. 

But I take your point. 

We have no standard definition of special interest aliens, but I 

will tell you that consistent with Mr. Kubiak’s point, when it comes 

to the checks that DHS personnel are making in Panama and Mexico, we take the biometrics of every person who is from outside the 

hemisphere so that we can check them against the holdings of the 

United States Government. 

Mr. SIRES. Because I am thinking we were in Costa Rica. We 

went with the President and obviously, Costa Rica is going through 

this issue with the Cubans and the Costa Rica Government coming 

through, but only 60 percent of those people going through there 

33

are Cubans. They said 40 percent were basically other nationalities, from Africa, from Bangladesh, Pakistan. Do you determine—

how do you determine there which ones are of special interest to 

us? 

Mr. BERSIN. First, Mr. Sires, with due respect, I was corrected 

recently in preparation for the hearing on the proportion of special 

interest aliens. In fact, the large majority of people who are coming 

up from Panama into Costa Rica are actually Cubans. Three quarters of the flows are actually Cubans at this juncture and the number of special interest aliens from outside the hemisphere are actually a relatively smaller percentage. And a small number in terms 

of we are talking about 4,000 or 5,000. 

Mr. SIRES. In my view, a smaller number is easier to get through 

our borders because you tend to pile them up together with the 

other people. 

Mr. BERSIN. So in fact, having visited, then in fact, I would urge 

because I agree with Mr. Gonzalez and the chairman and you, 

Ranking Member, that visiting the five border areas is an eye 

opener and an important insight for American public servants, legislators, and Executive Branch alike, I suggest that you consider 

going down to Meteti in the Darien in Panama to view the work 

that is being done by HSI and Customs and Border Protection in 

concert with the American Embassy and Ambassador John Feeley 

in Panama. 

It is interesting, but the arrangement we have there, Mr. Sires, 

is that we stop people, the Panamanians stop, detain people, for 7 

or 10 days or longer depending on whether or not they come from 

a particular country, so that we can actually take their fingerprints 

and then check them so that, in fact, we can identify any high-risk 

persons coming through. But most of those people coming up 

through Panama are not special interest aliens. 

Mr. SIRES. But you know my concern, right? Sometimes they get 

bundled in with the rest. But you said, did I hear you correctly? 

You said special interest aliens, you have one set of definitions, you 

have another set of definitions. There is no one set definition. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. So Congressman, I think first to your other question, if I may, sir, I think part of the migration issue that we are 

facing, and Mr. Kubiak has some excellent examples of, we are cooperating with DHS and HSI to address the issues. Regardless of 

the definition of special interest aliens, in some regards, the flows 

that are coming through are ones that are taking up bandwidth for 

border officials, right? And a lot of this is a result of what I would 

say is less than strict immigration standards in some of these countries that actually led to what you saw as the almost 8,000 Cubans 

that ended up stuck in Costa Rica. 

So one of the things that we have been doing is working with 

Costa Rica, Panama, and Colombia and even Ecuador to try to get 

them to implement stricter visa standards to actually stamp the 

passports so that when they are traveling through, in some of these 

countries, Costa Rica, for example, by law has to deport an immigrant to the country they were just in, but if their passport is not 

stamped, it makes it complicated because they don’t actually show 

what their travel route is. 

34

So we are actually working with them on the kind of reforms 

that they have to undertake. But then when they actually are—

there are third country nationals that are in the country, what we 

will do is we will work with DHS and others to try to see if there 

is anybody of interest in that group that we need to actually—that 

poses a law enforcement challenge. And we can dive into this in the 

classified briefing to a certain extent, but it has been a two-pronged 

approach. 

And to your question, sir, just on the special interest aliens is 

DoD has a larger definition than the State Department does and 

a lot of it has to do with where the—I think our number is either 

38—36 or 38, and I can confirm that. And DoD has a 39 number. 

DHS has a more expansive number. And a lot of it has to do with 

countries that you see as posing a risk. So I think DHS poses a 

wider net because of the migration issues that they, of course, are 

working on. 

Mr. KUBIAK. Sir, it is exactly your question for the reason I 

didn’t use special interest alien in my opening statement because 

we are trying to get away from that term, specific terminology, because of this inherent problem that you have just identified. What 

we are referring to is third country nationals not from the Western 

Hemisphere, in other words, people from outside of our regional 

world. And it is specific because we are not necessarily worried 

about specific nationalities although there is some higher threat in 

certain areas of the world. 

What we are worried about are bad actors within those communities, to your point exactly, and it is the ones and twos along the 

way that may have some intentional bad harm that we need to ferret out as Mr. Bersin said, shrink the haystack to make sure that 

we have really the best information possible about those that intend harm to the United States or to the region. And so it is programs like bitmap and our Transnational Criminal Investigative 

Units that we have worked in partnership with the other government agencies that allow us, and in the classified setting, I will get 

into much more detail in a couple of examples to give you how this 

exactly is working, but we are able to identify individuals to collect 

biometrics long before they get to the United States. Mr. Bersin did 

hint at even in some cases when we are able to do that, we are 

not able to then stop their forward and onward progression to the 

United States where they can show up at a port of entry and claim 

some form of relief. 

Mr. SIRES. I have other questions, but we will get to it later. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Yoho. 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate all of you 

being here. Mr. Bersin, I appreciate the briefing before we went 

down to South America. It was a great trip. And I thought it was 

interesting when we were talking about the border security there 

in the tri-border area how they were telling us how lax it was, but 

when we met with some of the dignitaries, they said oh, no, we 

have got good border security. I saw a disconnect there. 

I think we are all in agreement that border security is a national 

security issue. That is something we all take seriously. Obviously, 

you do, but yet we see the lapses, and I appreciate the work that 

35

you guys have done from the 1990s to today, but it is a different 

game today. Back then, we were worried more about people coming 

into this country wanting jobs, wanting a better life, wanting opportunity and the drug trafficking. Today, we have got people that 

want to do us harm and it is like a cake. You only need one drop 

of kerosene to mess up the whole batter and we can’t afford any 

of that. And certainly we have seen that in what is going on in the 

European Union with Brussels, with Paris, with these attacks that 

like you said, is going to shut down our whole economy. It is their 

9/11. Can we afford another one? Or do we want another one of 

those here in the United States? 

And you are talking about the control. Before 9/11, we were pretty lax. 9/11 taught us a lesson. Now we have got TSA. Now we are 

doing checks at the curb, more perimeter checks before they even 

get into the airport. Where do we go next? Do the people just—five 

miles out from the airport? Or is it people coming into the cities, 

the people coming into a state? At what point do we say enough 

is enough and really crack down or find a different way to crack 

down? 

Border security to me is a national security issue that has to be 

done. And I disagree with Mr. Trump wanting to build a wall. I 

don’t think we need that. I think we have the technology, the personnel, and resources that we can do a good job, but it can’t be 

done by itself. It has to be done with enforcement of the laws already on the book. Because right now there is a global policy 

around the world. People say there is a magnet, it is a global policy 

of unenforcement of immigration laws, that if you get to this area 

you get in and you get your pass go card, pass jail free card. It is 

the lottery for so many people. And they are struggling to do whatever they can to get here and if we can change some things and 

this is what I would like to hear from you guys. 

Mr. Kubiak, you were talking about what you guys are doing on 

immigration and customs. I visited the Jacksonville Custom and 

Border Patrol people and they gave me several cases of where people were picked up. They took them back, put them on the plane 

to Honduras. A week later, they see them on I-10 driving by the 

same guy that deported them and the guy is smiling at our Custom 

and Border Patrol agent and it happens over and over again. They 

had several cases they showed me of convicted felons, whether it 

was DUIs or whether it was drugs or robbery that were deported, 

but they are back in this country because there is a revolving door. 

Plus, we were told there were directives coming out of the DHS 

and out of the White House and it was called PEP, the Presidential 

Enforcement Preference, where they are not enforcing or being told 

to let these people go. 

So we can do all the right things and I commend the Custom and 

Border Patrol agents. They are doing the right thing, but when you 

have policies that are counter-productive, it is putting American 

lives at risk. All we have to do is look at the story of Kate Steinle, 

the young lady that was murdered out in San Francisco in a sanctuary city. We are working on defunding those kinds of cities, but 

not holding these people accountable and not allowing them back 

in. And when they are brought back in, they either need to be inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:38 Apr 28, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\032216\99553 SHIRL
36

carcerated or they need to make sure their host country keeps 

them in there. 

We just saw what happened over the weekend in the Farmington 

neighborhood up here in Maryland where four people, three of 

them I think had already been deported one or two times, they are 

back in this area, causing crimes on American citizens. This is 

something that until we change, have a paradigm shift in how we 

deal with this. It is going to continue, and then God forbid that terrorist comes in illegally that should have been stopped, like you 

brought up in Honduras that didn’t make it into Texas, luckily four 

of them got picked up. Was there one that didn’t get picked up? 

So they picked the one up, but how many have come through 

that haven’t been picked up? 

So what would you do, what would you recommend to us and I 

heard you, Mr. Bersin, say that until we change how these other 

countries deal with the people that were picked up and how we can 

deport them, what needs to change on this end to force those countries to do that? Is it withholding foreign aid? It is changing laws 

on our books? I would like to hear from both of you on that, what 

we need to do here to put an end to this because right now I see 

a revolving door on too many things and it is just a matter of time 

before somebody comes in and we have a problem. 

Mr. KUBIAK. Thank you, sir. Thank you for the questions and for 

the opportunity to address. So just to answer your question first, 

the last question first, part of what I am seeing and that I mentioned in the opening statement to a degree is as you mentioned 

in the 1990s, prior to 9/11, we had different border strategy and 

we have changed that a lot over time. What I am seeing through 

our international partnership and engagement with our foreign 

counterparts and through our collaboration with State Department 

is that that is changing as well down in Central America, South 

America, and Mexico. 

Specifically, in Mexico, we have seen an increased engagement 

over the last 2 years unlike I have ever seen before where they are 

attempting to address and they have a long way to go like we did 

pre-9/11 to the situation that we are today. But I think one of the 

things that we can do from here is a continued and constant capability building. We are never going to be able to enforce our way 

out of the illegal immigration floor solely. We have to have some 

impact on what we refer to as the push and pull factors that cause 

immigration. And so as you know, I am sure from your visit, a lot 

of the push factors are involved with reducing violence in the countries from which people are coming, Syria being the most tragic example, I think, and what is driving people out of that country. To 

continue to grow their economies so that we don’t get as many economic migrants moving this way, and then to also work on reducing, as Mr. Bersin said, some of the immigration challenges that 

we have in the United States and some of the loopholes that we 

are able to address. 

Mr. YOHO. Well, just along that line, the ‘‘ag’’ guest worker program, the H-1B visa, we have got farmers in our district that are 

going through the right process, they are recruiting the worker, 

they are going through the visa process. They get them into the 

United States. The workers know that the rules aren’t going to be 

37

enforced, so they leave that farm and go into a different field of operation. Our farmers are calling ICE and ICE says nothing we can 

do. Those policies need to change on this end because it will put 

a stop on the change of people coming over here. And until we do 

that, people are just saying hey, get to America, they are not going 

to enforce that. Don’t worry about it. 

Those are the things that I want to see changed. And what do 

you need to do in your agency, who is preventing you from enforcing those laws on the book? Is it a directive coming out the White 

House? 

Mr. KUBIAK. Sir, nobody is preventing us. We have resources. 

The priorities have been set by the Secretary. 

Mr. YOHO. Secretary of? 

Mr. KUBIAK. Secretary Johnson. 

Mr. YOHO. Okay. 

Mr. KUBIAK. Department of Homeland Security, that outlines the 

way that immigration——

Mr. YOHO. Why would they allow people to leave those H-1B visa 

that the farmer goes through to accomplish to get that person here 

legally? Why would they allow that not to be enforced? 

Mr. KUBIAK. Sir, I am not——

Mr. YOHO. I’m sorry, it is H2-A visa. 

Mr. KUBIAK. Yes, I apologize. I am not familiar specifically with 

that particular issue. I did spend some time as a special agent in 

charge in Northern New York where I worked with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and we did do work in that——

Mr. YOHO. Those are the things that if we can change them and 

enforce it, it would stop that magnet and that pool of people saying, 

hey, don’t worry about it, man. They are slack on that. They are 

not going to do anything. And then you are going to get this—the 

radical jihadist terrorist that is going to come through on a work 

visa and they are going to come in that way and that is—you know, 

I want to know who is going to be held accountable for that, what 

agency, what department? Who is going to answer to the kids, to 

the family, or the parents that got damaged in that attack? Yes, 

we should have enforced those laws, but we didn’t. We are all going 

to have to answer to that and I don’t want to answer that. 

Let us see. And then the other thing that was brought up when 

I was visiting there, there was 1200 miles of coastline in Florida. 

We have 90 CBP, Custom Border Patrol agents, 70 boots on the 

ground. They did 4,000 arrests in the State of Florida or in that 

whole district. And they need more agents is what I was told, but 

there is some Northeast states that have 400 agents and they do 

50 arrests a year. And is there a way to adjust those for need? 

Mr. BERSIN. I am probably best equipped to respond to that. So 

the allocation formulas by region, Mr. Yoho, depend on a variety 

of factors. Arrests are one, but you could imagine a colleague in 

Vermont or Michigan, North Dakota, South Dakota that would still 

be concerned about having a sufficient number of agents there to 

patrol the territory they are responsible for. 

So arrests are one, but not—I think CBP and Commissioner 

Kerlikowske can speak or Deputy McAleenan more directly to current practice. There is a pretty sophisticated workforce allocation 

model that takes into account a variety of matters which accounts, 

38

frankly, for the fact that of the 22,000 Border Patrol agents, 19,000 

are in the 6 states—the 4 states of the Southwest border. 

If I might though, address two issues on what we could be doing 

abroad. So when, in fact, the CBP and HSI officers in Panama and 

Meteti are running against special interest aliens or third country 

nationals, there is no capacity of the Panamanians right now to 

hold and detain large numbers. And the problem that we run into 

all the way up toward the Southwest border is that we often have 

trouble getting travel documents to be able to deport and to assist. 

There is no funding to support Panama or the Central American 

countries to do their own deportations in a systematic way. As we 

know from our experience, it takes a system to actually apprehend, 

detain, care for, and then deport a person who has no lawful right 

to be in a particular country. The Central American countries are 

at the very threshold of being able to develop that. But it would 

help, actually, and I could go into specifics with you and I would 

be happy to do it offline. There are a number of authorities at DRO 

that ICE does not have acting abroad that would permit it to actually assist in the deportation of people other than from the United 

States. 

The second point, I have to go back and remind you that we have 

243 Immigration Judges in this country, and we have 2000 Federal 

Judges. You cannot get the job done in a lawful, speedy, secure way 

with the paucity of resources. And when President Obama in 2014 

asked the Congress for the resources to build an Immigration 

Court, we know what happened to that bill. The problems we have 

to address internally as well as abroad, sir. I grant you that 

premise. 

Mr. DUNCAN. We will stand in recess. We will reconvene in the 

SCIF after votes. 

[Whereupon, at 2:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(39)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

40

f


99553n.eps
41

f


99553m.eps
42


99553d-1.eps
43

f


99553d-2.eps
44


99553e-1.eps
45


99553e-2.eps
46

Æ


99553e-3.eps