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

99–757PDF 2016

COUNTERING EXTREMISM AND THE THREAT OF

ISIS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 13, 2016

Serial No. 114–160

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 ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

MATT SALMON, Arizona Chairman 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

AMI BERA, California 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

GRACE MENG, New York 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. W. Patrick Murphy, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asia 

and the Pacific, U.S. Department of State ......................................................... 4

Marie Richards, Ph.D., Deputy Counterterrorism Coordinator for Regional 

and Multilateral Affairs, Bureau of Counterterrorism, U.S. Department 

of State .................................................................................................................. 5

Ms. Gloria Steele, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Asia, 

U.S. Agency for International Development ...................................................... 16

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. W. Patrick Murphy and Marie Richards, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ......... 8

Ms. Gloria Steele: Prepared statement .................................................................. 18

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 32

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 33

Written responses to questions submitted for the record by members of the 

subcommittee ........................................................................................................ 34

(1)

COUNTERING EXTREMISM AND THE THREAT 

OF ISIS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

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

room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Matt Salmon 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SALMON. This subcommittee will come to order. Members 

present will be permitted to submit written statements to be included in the official hearing record. Without objection, the hearing 

record will remain open for 5 calendar days to allow statements, 

questions, and extraneous materials for the record, subject to the 

length limitation in the rules. 

In recent months, violent attacks in Europe and expanding 

jihadist networks in Northern Africa have provided tragic and 

senseless reminders of the threat that terrorism and extremism 

pose to the world. As we discuss the global fight against the threat 

of terrorism, we don’t first think of Southeast Asia. But this vibrant region, home to nearly 40 percent of the world’s Muslim population, is also a crucial part of the global war on terror. Southeast 

Asia captures less U.S. media attention than other headline-grabbing flash points, but the region’s efforts to combat extremism are 

vital to maintaining stability in some of the world’s most successful 

Muslim majority states and ultimately to protecting the security of 

our homeland. 

Today, we will discuss Southeast Asia’s efforts to counter the 

threat of violent extremism, many of them successful, as well as 

possible opportunities for improvement. In this hearing, we will 

focus on the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia, but Southeast 

Asia as a whole is at particular risk for extremist activity. 

This area is home to a large Muslim population, very porous borders, and persistent governance challenges and development needs. 

Militant Islamic separatists and terrorists have operated in the region for decades, but the fight against such groups has yielded 

some successes for the United States and our partners. 

The Southern Philippine Islands have long been home to active 

Islamist separatist and terrorist organizations. President Bush included the Philippines as part of the front lines of the global war 

on terror following 9/11 and launched an effort that helped the Filipinos significantly degrade these groups. These are due, in large 

2

part, to joint counterterror operations between Philippine and U.S. 

Armed Forces as well as close integration between our counterterrorism and development assistance. 

The Aquino administration has also made significant progress toward settling Islamic separatist violence in Mindanao with the 

signing of the comprehensive agreement on the Bangsamoro despite the Philippine Congress’ slow progress toward implementing 

the terms of the agreement. 

Although the Philippines has enjoyed some success, it continues 

to feel the pain of extremist activities. Eighteen Filipino soldiers 

were killed earlier this week in a clash with the Abu Sayyaf Group. 

Islamist militancy has similarly been a decades-long challenge 

for Indonesia. Indonesia has seen more than its share of domestic 

terrorist attacks, including the horrific Bali bombings in 2002 and 

several other attacks in the following years. In response, the Government of Indonesia has built up formidable counterterror capabilities in its military and its police force thanks, in part, to the 

considerable U.S. capacity building. It has taken great strides in 

countering military recruitment by marginalizing those who advocate violence and convincing the vast majority of Indonesians that 

such acts run counter to the teachings of Islam. 

However, the Muslim majority nation of 253 million people continues to suffer tragic terrorist attacks, most recently the bomb and 

gunfire attack in Jakarta in January of this year. Observers credit 

the Indonesian Government, including the gift leadership of President Jokowi for the comparatively minor damage that the attack 

caused. 

While Malaysia doesn’t have a history of indigenous separatists 

or insurgencies carrying out terrorist attacks, its government has 

recognized the rising threat posed by global Islamic radicalism and 

has taken significant measures to counteract this threat. Malaysia 

continues to promote the moderate practice of Islam and has shifted resources to preventing militancy from taking root in its outlying provinces. Malaysia also continues to step up its counterterrorism cooperation multilaterally and bilaterally including support 

from ASEAN and participation in the Global Coalition to Counter 

ISIL. 

We have got to ensure that the positive momentum in the fight 

against extremism in Southeast Asia is not lost. Unfortunately, 

these successes have been put at risk by changes in the landscape 

of extremism. Most concerning is the influence of Islamic State, its 

malicious and viral technology and the internationalization of violence that it promotes. Hundreds of Southeast Asians have joined 

the Islamic State’s ranks in Syria and Iraq to forge new 

transnational links between the Islamic State and indigenous 

Southeast Asian extremists. The Islamic State has reached out to 

Southeast Asians through social media encouraging acts of violence. There is no formal Islamic State affiliate in Southeast Asia 

today, but there is a threat. The linkage of the Islamic State could 

empower militants and rekindle a broader terrorist threat in the 

region. 

As global terror and extremism evolves, our strategy must do the 

same. Today, we are going to discuss how these new challenges will 

affect counterterror and counter violent extremism in the region. 

3

I was just recently in Indonesia within the last couple of weeks 

and I met with the newly-appointed Minister of Counterterrorism, 

an upgrade, I guess, from being the Chief of Police. And I can tell 

you that this is front and center on their minds and they are very, 

very concerned about potential calamities in addition to the ones 

they have already had. But I was able to go to one of the madrasas 

and meet with some of the student leaders and I was really impressed with the caliber of these young people that I met and the 

fact that they stand with us against extreme factions with Islam. 

I look forward to hearing from our distinguished panel to develop 

a better understanding of the administration’s strategy for this crucial aspect of U.S. foreign policy and to identify further concerns 

that may need attention from the committee. And I would like to 

recognize the ranking member today, Ms. Gabbard. 

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate 

you and Ranking Member Sherman for putting together this important hearing today and for our panelists for coming to share their 

insights and their thoughts. 

While the world focuses on Islamic extremist threats that are 

facing countries in the Middle East and North Africa, it is critical 

that we not ignore this growing threat that we are seeing in other 

countries, in particular, in Southeast Asia which speaks to why 

this hearing is important. 

The chairman talked about Indonesia where we saw an ISISlinked attack in the capital of Jakarta with eight people being 

killed last January. Other countries in the region, also being very 

densely populated, where the concern is that continued attacks 

could lead to extensive casualties as well as great damage to those 

communities. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about what the U.S. 

is doing to help stop the spread of extremism in these countries. 

While it is not directly within this region, I do also want to mention Bangladesh, a country that continues to face growing violent 

jihadist problem. Last week, Nazimuddin Samad, a secular activist, 

was hacked to death in Dhaka following a horrific pattern that we 

have seen there now for the last year. 

A few months ago, I introduced a resolution calling on the Government of Bangladesh to protect the rights of all of its religious 

minorities including Christians, Hindus, atheists, and others from 

these kinds of attacks. We must take action in these countries 

while there still is a chance to prevent groups like ISIS and their 

extremist ideology from growing. 

Thank you very much again for being here. I look forward to 

hearing from you. I yield back. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. We are joined today by Mr. W. Patrick 

Murphy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Southeast Asia in 

the Department of State’s Bureau of East Asia and the Pacific; Dr. 

Marie Richards, Deputy Counterterrorism Coordinator for Regional 

and Multilateral Affairs in the Department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism; and Ms. Gloria Steele, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator in the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Bureau 

for Asia. 

And we are really grateful to have all of these witnesses today, 

and we look forward to learning more about what is going on withVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:24 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AP\041316\99757 SHIRL
4

in the administration to deal with these issues and we will first 

turn to Mr. Murphy. 

STATEMENT OF MR. W. PATRICK MURPHY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, BUREAU OF EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. MURPHY. Chairman Salmon, Ranking Member Gabbard, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for 

the opportunity to testify today on the very important and timely 

issue of countering violent extremism in Southeast Asia. 

I also thank the committee for its sustained support of our broad 

engagement across the East Asia-Pacific region exemplified by the 

chairman’s recent travel. Thank you very much for visiting us. 

The United States and our partners across Southeast Asia work 

together to address challenges that transcend borders, including infectious disease, trafficking in persons, wildlife, illicit narcotics, organized crime, and of course, terrorism. 

As President Obama told his ASEAN counterparts at the 

Sunnylands Summit just this February, our global counterterrorism strategy is informed in no small part by the successes over 

many years of Southeast Asian nations in disrupting terrorist 

plots, arresting sympathizers of terrorist organizations, and establishing mechanisms to counter extremist narratives. 

The January attack in Jakarta referred to by the chairman and 

the ranking member and other recent attacks around the world, 

however, demonstrate that terrorist organizations, including ISIL, 

can support and inspire violence almost anywhere. That is why we 

are building partnerships with the countries in Southeast Asia facing the most active terrorist threats including Indonesia, Malaysia, 

the Philippines and others as well as regional organizations like 

ASEAN. 

Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim majority democracy, has seen success using a rule of law based approach to counterterrorism. Government and civil society leaders have forcibly denounced ISIL. Still, according to Indonesian officials, there are 

about 300 Indonesians actively fighting in Iraq and in Syria. While 

this is a small fraction of Indonesia’s 250 million plus population, 

the existence of such fighters and the January 14th attack in Jakarta underscore ISIL’s ability to attract recruits and inspire violence in that country. In response, the Indonesian Government recently introduced legislation that would give it better tools to counterterrorism. 

Indonesia is an active member of the Global Counterterrorism 

Forum. The country’s active civil society promotes the local practice 

of Islam as a positive and tolerant alternative to violent extremist 

ideologies. 

To support these efforts, we are working with Indonesia across 

a range of activities including training law enforcement and judicial sector officials, sharing information to prevent terrorist travel, 

providing technical advice on prisoner management, and supporting local counter-messaging efforts. 

In Malaysia, we are also concerned about ISIL’s influence, particularly through online messaging. Since 2013, Malaysian authorities have arrested over 175 terrorist suspects, primarily ISIL supVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:24 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AP\041316\99757 SHIRL
5

porters under the country’s national security legislation. Malaysia 

joined the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL last September and announced that it will establish a regional center to counter ISIL 

messaging. We support these efforts and we look forward to attending the Center’s opening in the coming months. 

We have also strengthened technical assistance since Malaysian 

Deputy Prime Minister Zahid and Secretary of State John Kerry 

signed a terrorist watch list sharing arrangement this past October. 

In the Philippines, terrorist and criminal elements such as the 

Abu Sayyaf group, exploit the security environment in the Southern Mindanao region. Although some terrorist groups have pledged 

allegiance to ISIL, most are focused on criminality and lack strong 

ideological motivations. We provide, train, and equip programs to 

support law enforcement and military forces in the Southern Philippines which have strengthened local capabilities. We are also 

watching the stalled Mindanao peace process which will be important for achieving a sustainable political solution and improving 

the security environment for local populations. 

Finally, I highlight the excellent work that ASEAN has done to 

strengthen collaboration in meeting these challenges, including its 

leading role in achieving East Asia Summit statements on ISIL in 

2014 and on countering violent extremism in 2015. We are committed to working into the future with ASEAN on information 

sharing, border security and law enforcement cooperation. 

Mr. Chairman, these partnerships demonstrate the strong and 

growing commitment in Southeast Asia to push back against ISIL’s 

hateful ideology in all forms of violent extremism. With continued 

U.S. engagement, backed by congressional support, we are confident the countries in the region will maintain a commitment to 

tackling terrorism and extremism. 

Thank you, and I will be happy to answer your questions. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. Dr. Richards. 

STATEMENT OF MARIE RICHARDS, PH.D., DEPUTY COUNTERTERRORISM COORDINATOR FOR REGIONAL AND MULTILATERAL AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF COUNTERTERRORISM, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ms. RICHARDS. Chairman Salmon, Ranking Member Gabbard, 

distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. 

As you know, in the world today, we face an increasingly dynamic, diffused, and geographically decentralized set of terrorist 

threats. While the United States and our partners have made significant progress in reducing and denying terrorist safe havens, 

terrorist groups are still able to exploit local conditions and 21st 

century technology to attract, recruit, and conduct attacks. This is 

also true for Southeast Asia. 

Globally, since 2012, we estimate that at least 36,000 foreign terrorist fighters from more than 120 countries have traveled to Syria 

and Iraq, including countries in Southeast Asia, particularly Indonesia and Malaysia. Some of these fighters have returned home, 

some are arrested, but as the trends continue, they are a danger 

to their own countries. It is clear that ISIL is inspiring terrorist acVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:24 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AP\041316\99757 SHIRL
6

tivity in Southeast Asia. As the ranking member has mentioned, 

ISIL claimed responsibility via its English language online magazine Dabiq for the tragic attack in Jakarta this past January which 

was carried out by local pro-ISIS supporters. 

And as the chairman has noted, our Southeast Asia partners 

take this threat very seriously. The law enforcement agencies have 

performed remarkably well in their efforts to arrest and disrupt 

terrorist activity. As the chairman said, the Jakarta attack could 

have been much deadlier if not for the effectiveness of Indonesian 

authorities. 

That said, as President Obama has noted, we must develop more 

effective partnerships and tools to holistically address the evolving 

terrorist threat environment. We use the framework established by 

the U.N. Security Council Resolution 2174 which was passed in the 

U.N. General Assembly in 2014, sponsored by the United States. 

We use this as a framework for working with our partners including in Southeast Asia to put in place the fundamental reforms that 

will stem the flow of foreign fighters and counter violent extremism 

over the longer term. These points include: Increasing information 

sharing among countries; strengthening aviation and border security; implementing or enhancing counterterrorism legislation and 

supporting prosecutions and investigations; and increasing efforts 

to counter violent extremism particularly through strengthening 

community partnerships. 

I will give you a few examples of how we are implementing this 

approach. To counter the flow of foreign terrorist fighters to conflict 

zones and returning from them, we are helping our partners 

strengthen their connectivity with Interpol. Malaysia just very recently began systematically reporting to Interpol lost and stolen 

travel document data. And they recently submitted 12,000 names 

for lost and stolen passports. 

We are working with our Southeast Asia partners to build justice 

sector capacity. So as you know, Chairman, from your recent visit, 

Indonesia’s improved capacity led to the conviction of Jemaah 

Islamiah, founder of Abu Bakar Bashir as well as the Bali bomb 

maker, Umar Patek, and they are both now in prison. 

In the Philippines, the State Department is supporting the FBI 

which is assisting the Philippine Government in building terrorist 

financed investigations capacity. And we have had some success 

there as well. But even as we work to enhance security capacity, 

we must also work to prevent support for countering violent extremism and recruitment to violence. 

So throughout Southeast Asia, we are focused on building the capacity of locally based, civil society actors in order to counteract 

terrorist recruitment. We are particularly looking at radicalization 

to violence in prisons and we are just at the beginning of this process, but we believe it is important because many people are 

radicalized in prison, so we are beginning to implement coming up 

with some pilot projects to identify terrorist prisoners, to track 

them through and to figure out how to remove the threat. Also, 

when they are brought back into the community, how do we handle 

that. 

I will also say in closing that overall, we strongly believe that a 

whole of government, integrated, and coordinated approach is the 

7

only way to effectively address these threats over the longer term 

and our partnerships in Southeast Asia are vitally important as 

you have mentioned to our collective effort to counterterrorism 

globally as well as in the region. 

I look forward to discussing these important issues with you 

today and thank you for holding this hearing. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Murphy and Ms. Richards follows:]

8


99757b-1.eps
9


99757b-2.eps
10


99757b-3.eps
11


99757b-4.eps
12


99757b-5.eps
13


99757b-6.eps
14


99757b-7.eps
15


99757b-8.eps
16

Mr. SALMON. Thanks, Dr. Richards. Ms. Steele. 

STATEMENT OF MS. GLORIA STEELE, SENIOR DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR ASIA, U.S. AGENCY FOR 

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Ms. STEELE. Chairman Salmon, Ranking Member Gabbard, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for 

the opportunity to testify on USAID’s role in addressing the drivers 

of violent extremism in Southeast Asia. 

Around the world, violent conflict, fragility and violent extremism pose significant threats to regional and global security. The 

costs of conflict in a developmental, economic and human sense are 

extraordinary. By neglecting the factors that drive conflict, we ignore the plight of 11⁄2 billion people living in conflict and fragility 

around the world. 

Knowing that violent extremists can exploit conditions of conflict 

and fragility, the United States Government has integrated the 

prevention and mitigation of conflict and the promotion of resilient, 

democratic societies as a key part of its defense, diplomacy and development efforts. Through this approach, and in coordination with 

our host countries and other donors, we help ensure progress in a 

broad range of priorities, including eradicating extreme poverty, 

while advancing the U.S.’s own security and prosperity. 

At USAID, we focus on addressing the underlying socio-economic 

drivers of violent conflict, fragility, and violent extremism. Our 

multi-faceted approach considers host country commitment and capacity, builds local systems and local capacity to address the causes 

of violent extremism and conflict and includes women as partners 

in preventing conflict and building peace. Through analysis and 

monitoring, we ensure that our programs are effectively addressing 

the drivers of conflict in each unique country setting. 

In the Asia-Pacific, we continue to see rapid economic growth lifting millions of people out of poverty. At the same time, growing inequality, weak governance—including corruption, social 

marginalization and violations of human rights are resulting in unequal access to justice and social services, particularly for members 

of marginalized populations. All of these issues can be drivers of instability and contribute to radicalization to violence. 

USAID’s work to advance democracy and promote human rights 

and good governance, helps to address these destabilizing factors. 

We encourage governments to provide all of their citizens with the 

space to engage in political processes, and we support civil society 

in voicing citizens’ concerns. We work to strengthen the rule of law 

and government accountability in order to reduce corruption and 

impunity. We also build capacity for local governments to deliver 

health and education services. The lack of such services can create 

opportunities for service provision by extremist groups. 

We also know that violent extremism respects no boundaries nor 

is it limited to any specific ideology. In countries like Burma and 

Sri Lanka, Muslims are also victims of violent extremism. In both 

countries, we are promoting tolerance and countering violence 

against minority, ethnic, and religious groups by encouraging the 

development of a balanced media and building civil society support 

for tolerant and inclusive speech. 

17

Next, I will provide overviews of the three Southeast Asian countries where USAID is addressing drivers of conflict and violent extremism. 

In Indonesia, impressive democratic and economic progress remains challenged by fragile institutions, corruption, and—as we 

saw with Jakarta’s January terrorist attack—the threat of terrorism. Informed by our assessment of the drivers of violent extremism, USAID is providing access to justice and social services for 

the poor and most vulnerable, helping combat corruption and developing the capacity of civil society and the government to address 

the grievances of members of marginalized populations. We are, in 

addition, fostering pluralism and tolerance in Indonesia. 

In the Philippines, despite significant economic and development 

gains, a resilient democracy and a strong civil society, the country 

continues to grapple with recurring insurgencies, politically motivated violence and some remaining terrorist organizations. Weak 

governance, including corruption, and high levels of 

marginalization and fragmentation have made the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao particularly vulnerable. 

In line with recent assessments, USAID focuses on improving 

local governments’ ability to deliver social services in order to improve their legitimacy. We also focus on fostering greater transparency and accountability in government operations, and on fostering stronger civic engagement among local communities. We are 

helping 20,000 out-of-school youth to engage productively in civic 

and economic activities. 

And finally, in southern Thailand, home to one of the most violent conflicts in the Asia-Pacific region, USAID is working to increase trust and common understanding among conflicting communities and in fostering religious tolerance. 

Mr. Chairman, by addressing these destabilizing factors, our development assistance is helping to lay the foundation for security 

and peace for all populations in the Asia-Pacific and also the 

United States. 

I appreciate the opportunity to testify today and look forward to 

your counsel and your questions. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Steele follows:]

18


99757c-1.eps
19


99757c-2.eps
20


99757c-3.eps
21


99757c-4.eps
22


99757c-5.eps
23

Mr. SALMON. Thank you very much. We will begin with some 

questions. Southeast Asian nations have very porous borders, making it difficult to track terrorists and challenging to prevent the 

movement of terror groups. What capabilities do the governments 

in Southeast Asian countries have to track foreign terrorists who 

are entering their borders, domestic terrorists moving within a 

country, and domestic terrorists going abroad for training? What is 

the current level of information also that is being shared between 

the United States and Southeast Asia nations? 

Can I start with you, Mr. Murphy? 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a great question. 

As you experienced in Indonesia, this is an archipelago. The same 

could be said for the Philippines, and parts of Malaysia. Borders 

throughout the region are described as porous, lacking in the infrastructure. So the key task from our perspective is information sharing, both with established international organizations among 

ASEAN members and across borders. 

And as we heard earlier, the President announced an initiative 

on our part in February to increase information sharing through a 

$2-million program working with Interpol. And we are already seeing results, particularly in Malaysia. I can’t underestimate the success of a program that automatically updates data on a daily basis 

to capture those last passports and identification materials. 

We are also collaborating on a bilateral basis with these countries to improve information sharing and through our training programs, whether it is through my colleague’s Bureau of Counterterrorism, through our anti-terrorism assistance programs, how can 

we improve local law enforcement capabilities, border controls, immigration standards, etcetera. And we are starting to see success. 

There is room for improvement and you have identified, in particular, the challenge with the geography of this region. 

Mr. SALMON. Dr. Richards, did you want to comment also? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, thank you. Thank you for the question which 

is absolutely essential to what we are trying to do, particularly on 

stopping the flow of foreign fighters, but also in preventing safe havens that could protect all sorts of terrorists. 

We have sponsored a number of regional training opportunities 

so that countries can come together and talk about their problems 

and how to work together. But I would like to highlight that we 

recently sent our special advisor for foreign terrorist fighters, Ambassador Jake Wallace, out to Indonesia and Malaysia to talk 

about the full range of improvements they might make to their own 

homeland security system, how we can work together, how we can 

implement things like this Interpol initiative. So we are working 

very closely with the governments, talking to them frequently to 

identify their gaps. This is in coordination with the DHS, Department of Homeland Security, here, and with the NCTC which, of 

course, looks at the threat information and can focus for where the 

threat is. 

Mr. SALMON. That kind of segues to my next question because 

the United States and Australia have contributed extensive assistance to the development of Indonesia’s elite counter terrorism unit, 

Detachment 88. How do you assess the track record of Detachment 

88? And how can the United States further assist this unit? Is it 

24

successful enough that we could try to duplicate it in other countries? And do you believe that Indonesia’s counterterrorism efforts 

and particularly Detachment 88 have demonstrated sufficient regard for human rights and legal processes. Mr. Murphy? 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The success of Detachment 88 is quite symbolic of the approach that Indonesia is taking 

to tackle the terrorism challenge. This is a civilian led, rule of law 

based approach. And this reflects a real transition in the way countries are tackling the challenge. And with our help and contributions, Detachment 88 is a specialized, effective, police entity to 

tackle counterterrorism and it has produced many arrests, successful prosecutions; I think even more importantly the thwarting of 

attacks and threats before they materialize. And so it is something 

for others to take note of and we are very pleased with the success 

and want to encourage more like it. 

Mr. SALMON. So what can we do to maybe—maybe not exact duplicates, but similar approaches in other countries or would that be 

productive? 

Mr. MURPHY. Well, to some degree, I think, Mr. Chairman, we 

are seeing similar approaches in other countries, particularly this 

model of emphasizing a rule of law based approach to counterterrorism, empowering civilian-led agencies to have the lead to coordinate across agencies, much like we do here in the United States. 

This is proving to be more effective. And Detachment 88, as I noted 

before having succeeded with numerous arrests, and in the case of 

the January attack that several of you cited, it could have been 

much worse. Deeply tragic, the loss of life, in particular, the four 

civilians, but I think many analysts see that it could have been 

much worse. This is the success of this rule of law based approach 

that Indonesia has been taking. 

Mr. SALMON. Well, my time has expired. So I will turn to Representative Gabbard. 

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, we have 

heard numbers, estimated numbers, in particular, coming from Europe with regards to the numbers of foreign fighters who leave that 

region and go to places like Syria and Iraq to fight. Do you have 

similar estimates for Southeast Asia along those same lines? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have a few numbers in there, included in the 

written testimony. Essentially, we have seen about 300 foreign 

fighters going to Indonesia. They bring their families so the actual 

number is higher, and a smaller number from Malaysia, about 75. 

This is, of course, Indonesia is an enormous country, so per capita 

it is a relatively small number and much smaller than some European countries and particularly some North African countries. But 

one person or one small group of people can cause a lot of damage. 

So although the numbers are relatively small, we take them very 

seriously. 

Ms. GABBARD. Dr. Richards, you talked about radicalization in 

prisons which I think is an important area that hasn’t often been 

addressed when looking at this issue. And I wonder if you can 

speak in a little bit more detail about the pilot projects that you 

are looking at, if you have seen places where you have gotten best 

practices or lessons learned and I am interested to hear a little bit 

25

more about what you are looking at and what these different countries are looking at. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, I would be happy to. I will mention that I 

was in Australia last—about 6 months ago, I think, for a working 

group meeting of the Global Counterterrorism Forum which was 

mentioned here which Australia leads this working group, together 

with Indonesia, specifically on the question of deradicalization and 

reintegration. So we had representatives from a number of Southeast Asian countries. I happened to sit at a table with a Filipino 

prison official, but also from African countries and some other 

countries which face this threat. It is very dependent on the capacity of these countries, frankly. 

In many of these countries, the prisons are overcrowded. There 

have traditionally not been ways of separating out prisoners. They 

don’t have the capacity to provide real training, job employment 

prospects. They don’t traditionally follow people after their release 

from prison and reintegrate into the society. 

So the countries are working together and we are working very 

closely with them. We have identified best practices that would 

work within their societies, given their means. And this is has not 

being proposed as an action plan. We are doing trainings, the 

GCTF is doing trainings. 

In addition, the United States sponsors a Department of Justice 

specialist, prison specialist in Indonesia, who has been working intensively with the Indonesian prison officials, as I said, starting 

with a fairly small population, but to provide a model for how we 

can—they can identify these prisoners and gradually, ideally 

deradicalize them, but at least keep them from radicalizing within 

the prison community. 

Ms. GABBARD. You mentioned some of the lack of resources in 

tracking or following people when they leave. With the relatively 

small number of foreign fighters who leave and then come back to 

whether it is Indonesia or Malaysia, are they—do they have the resources and are they tracking and identifying who these individuals are? 

Ms. RICHARDS. In the case of foreign fighters, I am not sure there 

is a problem. In the case of Malaysia, for example, they have arrested all the foreign fighters they have identified who came back. 

It is eight of them. And they are all in prison. 

We are more concerned about some of the terrorists who have 

been in prison for a while, particularly the Bali bomber terrorists 

who are due to be released. In fact, their on-going release is now. 

So we, as the United States, and also the Indonesian Government, 

the Australian Government, throughout the region, they are very 

concerned about what these people could do when they are on the 

outside. 

Ms. GABBARD. You mentioned the 300 though from Indonesia, for 

example. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, the 300 went. Sixty have been stopped. They 

have been stopped through this kind of information sharing. Obviously, these are rough numbers and there may be some out there 

that we are not aware of. But the problem is more a long-term 

problem that we see as with many of these issues. 

26

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you. And Mr. Murphy, I think you spoke 

about the online messaging issue and a counter online messaging 

initiative that is being implemented. Can you speak about this and 

how they have seen where it has worked and what they are modeling this after? 

Mr. MURPHY. Yes, thank you, Congresswoman. Online messaging 

is one of those tools that ISIL has used to some effect in Southeast 

Asia with its messages of falsehoods, of mischaracterizing Islam 

and supposed threats against Islam. 

Ms. GABBARD. This is something that we see here, as well. 

Mr. MURPHY. That is correct. It is a global challenge. So Southeast Asia is not immune from it. The countries that we partner 

with in this region understand that very, very well. Malaysia, with 

its stepped-up cooperation with the international community initiated on its own a messaging center that will have regional reach. 

They plan to stand that up in the coming months in Kuala Lumpur 

and we look forward to being there, being there and supporting 

this process. It takes a lot of work to counter the messaging and 

it has to be from our perspective a local effort. That can’t be done 

from the United States or elsewhere. We have good partners, not 

just in government, but in civil society. I will give you an example, 

Congresswoman. In Indonesia, two of the largest Islamic civil society organizations in the world are located there and are some of 

the most vocal voices when it comes to condemning ISIL and the 

message of hatred. Those are the kind of partners we are looking 

at empowering, working with to help with this counter messaging 

kind of effort. 

Ms. GABBARD. Yes, Dr. Richards. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congresswoman, I just want to take a very short 

moment to address your comment on Bangladesh because we completely agree with you. The State Department will be sending a 

high-level team out to Bangladesh next month to consult with them 

on what their problem is and how we can help them and we are 

doing quite a lot in Bangladesh. We can discuss separately. 

Ms. GABBARD. Thank you. I appreciate you mentioning that. 

Thanks. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I 

appreciate you taking the time and effort to make sure that this 

hearing happened today on a very significant issue. I remember 

that back in 2001, the first real attack that I heard of after 9/11 

happened in Bali where—and I happen to represent Surf City USA, 

Huntington Beach, and we took that very seriously, where just a 

group of surfers who were frankly enjoying themselves in the 

evening at one of their local bars, it was blown up and these are 

people who were no threat to anyone which indicated that we were, 

the world, when you combine that with what happened on 9/11, 

that the world was into a new challenge that we have faced and 

the good people of the world. 

I will have to say that there is some skepticism on the part of 

some of us as to the way the administration is handling this 

unique challenge that we face. And I will say there are hints of 

that today, although let me just say that I have no doubt that each 

one of you are doing the very best job you can and I am grateful 

27

for it. I have three children who I want to live in a safer world. 

But I think that quite often this administration is mistaking the 

fight against radical Islamic terrorists, by the way a phrase which 

I have to note doesn’t seem to be able to be spoken not only by our 

President, but even by the witnesses who come to Congress. I never 

heard that radical Islamic terrorism or just even Islamic terrorism. 

Instead, I hear about violent extremists as if we are not talking 

about Islamic terrorists at all. We are talking about extremists, 

whoever they are. No, what has happened is radical Islamic terrorists have declared war on the United States and on Western civilization, meaning our allies in this world. And I am sorry that you 

can’t use those words because it takes away from the confidence 

that we could have in your efforts. 

And in the fact that that seems to be something that indicates 

something, that it would be in my mind that you are taking a lawenforcement approach versus a counterterrorism approach. And 

law enforcement is a great deal different than counterterrorism. 

Law enforcement is that you basically will try to find out who has 

committed a crime and punish them for it and maybe to go out and 

to find out who is in a gang and try to get a message as you have 

described, and messages from people in Indonesia who are speaking out, Muslims are speaking out against this terrorism. But counterterrorism is you are dealing with monsters who kill innocent 

women and children, target them in order to terrorize a population. 

It is different than law enforcement. Totally different—not totally, 

but major differences in those approaches. 

Let me ask you specifically, and again, I am afraid this administration and what I have heard today does not sway me from my 

apprehension that there is a problem there in the definition of 

what we are trying to do and the definition of who we are trying 

to get to or who we are trying to eliminate. Because we are not trying to eliminate violent extremists. That is not what is attacking 

our families and people throughout the world. It is radical Islamic 

terrorists. 

Let me ask you about the Philippines, which I have spent a great 

deal of time in over the years. I understand there was recently an 

Abu Sayyaf terrorist attack in the Philippines. Is that correct? Can 

you give me some details on that? 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Congressman. Indeed, a subunit, a 

splinter group of the ASG was involved in a conflict with Filipino 

security forces over the weekend. We understand this cost the lives 

of several dozen Filipino security force members and we express 

our deepest condolences. This kind of violence, kind of conflict, 

costs real in terms of human lives and local security. 

However, it does not diminish the fact that the Philippines has 

had success in recent years in degrading the capabilities of this 

particular group. Small numbers are left. They are a threat. The 

Philippines is taking it very seriously, but achieving success. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes, we had a special forces team there for 

a number of years and they did a great job. And let me also note 

the State Department is focused on that part of the Philippines and 

has done a good job as well. And we should remember that Ramzi 

Yousef, after planning the first terrorist attack on the World Trade 

Center, where he ended up. He ended up in the Philippines and he 

28

was there—I am still trying to find evidence that was in some way 

associated with the Abu Sayyaf terrorist network and other people 

who are affiliated with that. 

This is a major threat in the world today. This region is not immune. It could get a lot worse. I have reports that the situation in 

Mindanao is a lot worse than those of us who have been watching 

and believed it to be. So I look forward to working with you, as well 

as with our chairman, to make sure we all do our best to defeat 

the radical Islamic terrorists who want to murder us. Thank you 

very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SALMON. If you don’t mind, I would like to ask one more 

question. I mentioned that when I was over there I visited one of 

the madrasas. I think when a lot of my constituents hear the term 

madrasa, they conjure up something in their mind because some of 

these madrasas in the Middle East have been used for recruiting 

purposes and indoctrinating purposes. But I learned while I was 

there that the term madrasa just means boarding school. That is 

the term that they use and it is a very typical way of educating 

the children. 

You mentioned, Mr. Murphy, that you are very concerned about 

the radicalization, the recruiting that happens in prison. Are you 

concerned about that possibly happening in some of the schools? 

And how well do you think these governments are doing at dealing 

with those threats as well? 

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I will again thank you for leading 

a delegation out to Indonesia and would encourage all members of 

the committee to visit Southeast Asia. Our embassies and consulates will take good care of you and you can see first hand our 

engagement across the board in Southeast Asia which is really——

Mr. SALMON. If I could just say, the folks in our embassy there 

were second to none. They were amazing, really, really talented, 

wonderful individuals and I couldn’t be prouder. But every time I 

go across the world and I visit an embassy, I always feel the same. 

I think that they are the brightest and the best that we have to 

offer in our society and I really appreciate the great work that they 

do. 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will carry that message directly to Jakarta in a week and a half when I will be with 

our Ambassador Blake and his team. Thank you very much for 

that. 

You know, you have identified one of the issues that we watch 

very closely and that is what are the vulnerabilities to extremism? 

And what are the drivers? And there are a whole host and my colleagues can speak to that as well in terms of social inequities, economic opportunities. For some, it might be religious related. I think 

the important thing to look at from the U.S. perspective is our 

whole of government broad approach to Southeast Asia, our rebalance to Asia under this administration, but our engagement in so 

many different areas. Youth is one of them, youth and education. 

We have a young, Southeast Asia leadership initiative, YSEALI, 

that has been enormously successful in drawing over 50,000 Southeast Asian youth to partner with our missions, with our President, 

to engage in a whole host of opportunities, innovation, technology, 

29

education exchanges. These are the future leaders of the region and 

the youth hold a lot of promise. 

I don’t think we see any particular vulnerabilities in religious 

faith-based schools and education institutions, but we do see a very 

broad need for local governments, local entities to message very 

carefully to counter the false messaging that is coming from ISIL. 

And schools and youth would be no exception. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. Representative Gabbard, did you have 

another question? No. Well, thank you very, very much. This has 

been very, very helpful. We appreciate you coming and sharing 

what the administration is doing in Southeast Asia about global 

terrorism. So thank you very much. We appreciate it and without 

further ado, this meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:08 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(31)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

32

f


99757n.eps
33

f


99757m.eps
34


99757d-1.eps
35


99757d-2.eps
36


99757d-3.eps
37


99757d-4.eps
38


99757d-5.eps
39


99757d-6.eps
40


99757d-7.eps
41


99757d-8.eps
42


99757d-9.eps
43


99757d-10.eps
44


99757d-11.eps
45

Æ


99757d-12.eps