[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
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
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
99-553PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
_________________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
MATT SALMON, Arizona KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
MO BROOKS, Alabama AMI BERA, California
PAUL COOK, California ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
RON DeSANTIS, Florida TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TED S. YOHO, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
CURT CLAWSON, Florida BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
DANIEL DONOVAN, New York
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 ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
MATT SALMON, Arizona GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
RON DeSANTIS, Florida ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
TED S. YOHO, Florida ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
DANIEL DONOVAN, New York
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
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 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 Pena 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 coordination, 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:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
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 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:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
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 address
significant joint law enforcement threats throughout the
hemisphere. Through this program, ICE attaches 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 attaches 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:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
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 tri-border 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
Secretary 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.
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 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 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.
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 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 incarcerated 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 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, 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.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]