[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S COUNTERTERRORISM BUREAU: BUDGET, PROGRAMS, AND
EVALUATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 10, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-163
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
88-288 WASHINGTON : 2014
____________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (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 ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
TED POE, Texas GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MATT SALMON, Arizona THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina KAREN BASS, California
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
MO BROOKS, Alabama DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
TOM COTTON, Arkansas ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
PAUL COOK, California JUAN VARGAS, California
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III,
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania Massachusetts
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas AMI BERA, California
RON DeSANTIS, Florida ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
TREY RADEL, Florida--resigned 1/27/ GRACE MENG, New York
14 deg. LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
DOUG COLLINS, Georgia TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TED S. YOHO, Florida
LUKE MESSER, Indiana--5/20/14
noon deg.
SEAN DUFFY, Wisconsin--5/
29/14 noon deg.
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade
TED POE, Texas, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina BRAD SHERMAN, California
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TOM COTTON, Arkansas JUAN VARGAS, California
PAUL COOK, California BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III,
TED S. YOHO, Florida Massachusetts
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESS
The Honorable Tina Kaidanow, Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator
for Counterterrorism, U.S. Department of State................. 4
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Tina Kaidanow: Prepared statement.................. 6
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 20
Hearing minutes.................................................. 21
Written responses from the Honorable Tina Kaidanow to questions
submitted for the record by the Honorable Adam Kinzinger, a
Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois.......... 22
THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S
COUNTERTERRORISM BUREAU: BUDGET,
PROGRAMS, AND EVALUATION
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2014
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:04 p.m., in
room 2200, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ted Poe
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Poe. The subcommittee will come to order.
Terrorism remains one of the most of the most dangerous
threats to U.S. national security and our interests worldwide.
A recent study by the RAND Corporation found that from 2010 to
2013, the number of jihadist groups worldwide grew 58 percent.
The number of jihadist fighters doubled to a high estimate of
over 100,000. The number of attacks by al-Qaeda affiliates
increased from 390 to 1,000 attacks.
Al-Qaeda remains a central part of this fight. Despite the
death of Osama bin Laden, the group operates in more territory
and has more safe havens than it did just 5 or 10 years ago. On
this map to my right shows the global threat of al-Qaeda, the
red being al-Qaeda and the blue being other terrorist groups,
the territory generally that they control in the regions.
Some estimates--well, in Syria, al-Qaeda affiliates have
grown by huge numbers, with jihadists from all over the world
coming to fight. It now appears that on the government side,
there are about 3,000 so-called terrorists, and on the so-
called rebel side there are about 8,000 fighters. Some
estimates put the number of foreign jihadists who have traveled
to Syria up to 11,000. These fighters may return home to wreak
havoc both in the United States and other Western countries.
In Iraq, ISIL seems to take over more cities and towns by
the day, carving out a terrorist ministate in the middle of the
chaos. Al-Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and Somalia remain focused
on U.S. interests. Some say AQAP is the strongest of all the
affiliates.
Boko Haram is on the rise in Nigeria, as seen through their
recent kidnappings and mass slaughter of innocent civilians
that the world knows about.
Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan remains determined to
make a comeback despite the erosion of the so-called al-Qaeda
core. The five senior Taliban leaders that we just exchanged
for Sergeant Bergdahl will not make Afghanistan a nicer place
to live.
This subcommittee has explored these issues in great detail
over the last 18 months, and it seems to me the situation is
getting worse, not better. The facts suggest that the fight
against al-Qaeda and their affiliates has gotten worse as well.
I added two amendments to the defense and intelligence
authorizations this year on this issue. The Director of the
National Intelligence must report back to Congress with a
comprehensive strategy to combat al-Qaeda and its affiliates,
including detailed definitions of how the administration views
these groups. The Secretary of Defense is also required to
contract out an independent assessment of U.S. Government's
efforts to combat al-Qaeda and their affiliates. This was
necessary because the administration's rhetoric on al-Qaeda has
been all over the map, literally ranging from nearly defeated
to a growing threat.
GAO will also be taking a much closer look at the CT Bureau
itself. I look forward to reading its findings sooner than
later.
Today we will hear from Ambassador Tina Kaidanow, the new
Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. Department of
State. The administration says counterterrorism is one of the
top foreign policy goals. If that is true, then it does not
make much sense to me that it left the Coordinator position
vacant for over a year. But now we have an Ambassador, and I am
glad to see that that position is filled.
The mission of the State Department's Counterterrorism
Bureau is to develop coordinated strategies to defeat
terrorists abroad and secure the cooperation of international
partners. It is an important mission, but it is not clear to me
that the Bureau and what it is doing are accomplishing it. That
is because very few of its resources are being spent on
evaluating taxpayer dollars.
Just three outside evaluations have been done since GAO
first pointed out the need for evaluations to then the Office
of Counterterrorism in 2008. The Bureau has yet to complete a
single impact evaluation, the most rigorous of evaluations to
truly measure whether or not money is making any difference. It
is not clear why it took the office so long to get those three
evaluations, and it is not clear to why the Bureau is still
underfunding evaluations, with only one external evaluation
currently on the docket.
So we are going to have plenty to talk about with our
Ambassador. Terrorism is an enemy that we cannot afford to
ignore or underestimate.
I now turn to the ranking member from California Mr.
Sherman for his opening statement.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding these
hearings. I want to thank our witness for coming, and I know
that she has to leave at 3:30 for an important international
trip.
Our efforts against terrorism can be divided into five
general categories: Military force and the threat of military
force, which is the responsibility chiefly of the Pentagon; our
sanctions activity, which the State Department is very involved
in, but is the focus of the Treasury Department; and our
Intelligence Community's efforts, both in terms of gathering
and analyzing intelligence, which, of course, the State
Department does as well; but also whatever black ops or
whatever that our Intel Community may engage in.
Finally, there are two areas where the State Department
takes the lead. One of those is assistance to our allies abroad
in terms of training, grants, et cetera; and the other is our
outreach on the ideological front, public diplomacy.
We are here today to focus on the Bureau of
Counterterrorism within the State Department, which directs
U.S. Government efforts to improve counterterrorism operation
with foreign governments and coordinates our overall U.S.
counterterrorism policy. This agency has its history going back
to 1972 after the Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes.
The budget has declined over the last few years, and I
believe the President's request is $22.65 million. Its key
programs include the Antiterrorism Assistance Program, which
trains foreign law enforcement in counterterrorism and offers
assistance to foreign governments on effective counterterrorism
techniques. I would hope that the Government of Nigeria, for
example, would be more anxious to take advantage of our efforts
in this area. And there is the Regional Security Initiative,
which strengthens the capacity of foreign governments to combat
terrorism through regional cooperation. Finally, there is the
Countering Violent Extremism Office that is part of our public
diplomacy efforts, and I would hope that the State Department
would have on staff and have consulting relationships with
Muslim scholars so that we are in a position to argue hadith
for hadith and Koranic verse for Koranic verse that such
actions as abducting hundreds of girls from a school is not
consistent with the teachings of the Muslim Prophet.
The Government Accountability Office has been critical to
monitoring our counterterrorism efforts as has the State
Department Inspector General. Currently 2 percent of the
Bureau's budget is spent on monitoring and evaluation.
Finally, I want to focus on the importance of sanctions,
which I realize may not be directly applied by your office. If
we don't take our own sanctions laws seriously and enforce
them, we can't expect the rest of the world to do the same. The
fact that Iran has been brought to the table is as a result of
sanctions policy. Now we have the French Banque Paribas, which
has been accused of a host of actions in violation of U.S.
sanctions law, particularly acting as the banker for the
Khartoum regime, a regime in Sudan that is a state sponsor of
terrorism.
One would hope that the State Department and your office,
Ambassador, would be pushing Treasury to be as tough as
possible in this instance and every instance. I know that they
are getting pushback from the French Foreign Ministry, and the
State Department should not be acting as the agent, as an
ambassador, for the French Ambassador or for French commercial
interests, but rather should, and hopefully with your voice, be
a strong voice for tough sanctions actually applied to those
who intentionally violate the law.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Poe. Thank the gentleman.
The Ambassador Tina Kaidanow is the Ambassador-at-Large and
Coordinator for Counterterrorism in the U.S. Department of
State. She previously served in various roles at the State
Department including assignments abroad in Afghanistan, Kosovo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia and Serbia.
As the ranking member mentioned, the Ambassador is on a
tight schedule, so I will dispense with the rest of the
introduction, although the resume is quite long and good, and I
will go straight to the witness for her statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TINA KAIDANOW, AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE
AND COORDINATOR FOR COUNTERTERRORISM, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ambassador Kaidanow. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
Ranking Member Sherman. It is actually up to you gentlemen
since there is so little time left, if you prefer it, I have
already submitted the testimony for the record, the longer
testimony; so if you care to, we can go straight into
questions. It is really your choice. I have some comments, and
I can certainly make some introductory remarks, but it is your
choice.
Mr. Poe. The Ambassador is correct. We have your written
statement, and it is filed. If you wish to go ahead and
summarize it and maybe mention some things that are not in it,
that is fine, and then we will go straight to questions.
Ambassador Kaidanow. Okay. I think the thing I would
highlight probably the most from the written testimony and what
I was prepared to present today is precisely what you
highlighted at the outset of your comments, and that is that
this really is an opportune moment for a hearing because it is
an incredibly important time in our counterterrorism efforts.
The changing and evolving nature of the threat that you spoke
about, I think, is really one that I would also highlight.
The threat that we face really continues to evolve from
something that was more centralized and hierarchical in terms
of the structure of the network toward something that is far
more diverse and diffuse in terms of its structure and its
components. I think we recognize, certainly in my Bureau, but
more broadly within the U.S. Government, that to succeed
against a more decentralized structure among the terrorists, we
also have to adapt our own approach; and we have to be
flexible, and we have to be nimble. That has become clearer
over time.
So I would just say that, you know, all the things that you
mentioned--you discussed an array of threats and a variety of
groups that concern us. You also mentioned Syria, which is
something, obviously, that continues to build as an issue and
that we are paying close attention to, but a whole variety of
affiliates of al-Qaeda, as well as what we call like-minded
groups. Not everyone is formally affiliated with al-Qaeda, but
a number of groups have expressed at least some sort of
institutional--affiliation is really too strong a word, but
they have indicated their sympathy. Let us put it that way.
So as I said, to succeed against a decentralized network,
but one that is geographically diffuse, we have implemented a
number of things programmatically but also in terms of our
policy that we believe address this threat as time goes on.
We can talk a little bit about the resources that we are
dedicating to this. You mentioned some of the programmatic
issues that relate to my Bureau, the kinds of programs that we
are putting forward. We have a whole array of programs that we
try and levy with our partners. I should say that, you know,
what the President has articulated is a model in which we are
moving from a very direct action-oriented kind of an approach;
in other words, where the United States was really doing the
bulk of the work on counterterrorism. We will continue,
obviously, to defend our interests robustly. We must.
With that said, what we are finding all across the globe is
that these groups, as I said, that are now more diverse and
diffuse are also posing challenges in local areas to local
partners that we have. We need to be working very closely with
them in order to find a commonalty of interest and to give them
the skills, the capacity and the kinds of resources that they
need in order to address that threat effectively, which is
really in their interest, but it is also in ours. I think that
by doing that, what we do is we position ourselves well down
the road so that we don't have to take on large military
efforts. We have ways of addressing that before we ever get to
that.
So, again, I am happy to talk about any of those things,
including some of the issues that you raised about the actual
implementation of our programs, depending on what your
interests are.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Kaidanow follows:]
----------
Mr. Poe. All right. A few questions. The ranking member
alluded to this during his opening statement directly about
sanctions, having them are only as good as the sanction
themselves. Haqqani network, how much money has the United
States Government frozen regarding their network? Do we know?
Ambassador Kaidanow. Well, the last published report that
we have is the terrorist asset report that we put out on an
annual basis. The last one we have is actually published as of
2012. It is retrospective, so unfortunately we don't have
figures that would encompass the latest.
As of the end of 2012, we had not frozen physically any
assets from the Haqqani network, at least not insofar as the
report details, but there are a couple things to bear in mind.
One is that that report tends to focus pretty heavily on the
state sponsors of terrorism. Of course, the Haqqani group is
not a state sponsor of terrorism; it is a different kind of
group, and it also operates pretty much outside the realm of
the United States banking system and those areas where we might
expect to find funds that we would either freeze or seize.
That said, I really want to highlight something; I think
the ranking member kind of alluded to this. The power of our
sanctions and the power of our designations lies not so much
always in how much money we freeze or we seize as assets here
in the United States. What it allows us to do is oftentimes we
take that designation, we move it to the U.N. We are able then
to mobilize a whole series of efforts that brings in the entire
international financial community, raises the cost to that
group or that entity or that individual so that no one is doing
business with them. And these are the kinds of things both from
a moral standpoint, but also from a very pragmatic standpoint
that we are able to do through our sanctions.
We regard them very seriously. I think our Treasury
colleagues would say the same. We are constantly talking to our
partners overseas in order to get them to take those
obligations seriously, and we also, through my Bureau in
particular, we put a lot of effort against giving countries the
skill set and the institutional structures they need to combat
terrorist finance.
Mr. Poe. Based on what you said, do you know if any nation,
organization, international organization has seized any assets
of the network?
Ambassador Kaidanow. You know, Congressman, I don't have
that information with me now. It may be hard to track, to be
honest with you, because I don't know that I have access to
every country's seizing or freezing of assets. As I said, we
will come back to you with as full an answer----
Mr. Poe. How about Boko Haram, same question.
Ambassador Kaidanow. Same question and a similar answer in
that because the information we have is as of 2012, and Boko
Haram was designated as an organization in 2013, I don't have
that information for you. But that said, again, we can try and
look and see whether certainly within the U.S. context or
outside of it we can provide you with that.
Mr. Poe. When will that report be updated?
Ambassador Kaidanow. It is done on an annual basis usually
in May, but for the preceding calendar year. Similar to the
Country Reports on Terrorism.
Mr. Poe. What does the money in your budget go for?
Ambassador Kaidanow. The money in the budget that we ask
for out of the CT Bureau? It goes for an array of programming.
We manage--and I just wanted to correct one thing that
Congressman Sherman had said. I am not sure where the 22-
million figure came from. For Fiscal Year 2015, we will be
asking for a total of around $221 million. We, the CT Bureau
ourselves, we manage roughly or we would manage out of the
request about $104 million. The rest of that is put through
regional bureaus and both regional and bilateral lines of
activity.
Mr. Poe. Ambassador, where does the money go? What does it
do? What does that money do? Taxpayer wants to know where that
$20 million, $21 million goes. They ask us. What do we say?
Ambassador Kaidanow. Absolutely. What it does is it builds
capacity among our counterterrorism partners all over the globe
to do the things we need them to do.
Mr. Poe. What does ``capacity'' mean?
Ambassador Kaidanow. It means a variety of things.
Mr. Poe. I am from Texas. Would you just keep it simple for
us? Tell us what ``capacity'' is.
Ambassador Kaidanow. It means that we have prosecutors who
can prosecute bad guys. It means that we have judges who will
judge those people within the rule of law.
Mr. Poe. Does it go to weapons?
Ambassador Kaidanow. Not the money that we provide. In some
cases the overall USG counterterrorism effort may involve some
of that, but not in the money that we, through the State
Department and through my Bureau, we are providing to our
partners.
What it will do is it will provide them with legal
assistance so that they can go after the money flows of
terrorists. It will counter the messaging that the terrorists
and extremists are putting out there. It will do a number of
things to empower women and youth, who are particularly
vulnerable to communities that are at risk to extremism. It
will go toward a whole array of programming on the multilateral
side. So, for example, we now support something called the
Global Counterterrorism Forum, which is a gathering of
countries that is specifically designed to address terrorism
issues and to put out best practices so that they are all
following a kind of a design, again, to combat terrorist flow
of money and all the other things that I just spoke of.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. I have to cut you off
because I want those gentlemen over here to ask questions.
The ranking member, I yield to him, 5 minutes.
Mr. Sherman. It was pointed out to me by subcommittee staff
that we did get these numbers from CRS. I want to thank you,
Ambassador, for setting the record straight.
Does your Department or Bureau or others in the State
Department have as full-time employees Islamic scholars?
Ambassador Kaidanow. We don't have--I don't think I would
class it quite that way, but what we do have is programming
that we support that brings in those voices, and we are intent
on expanding that programming as well.
Mr. Sherman. But you don't have a person on your staff--I
can see how you contract out some of this, but you need
somebody on staff who can then decide who to contract out to.
You wouldn't run a medical research part of the government
without a doctor on staff----
Ambassador Kaidanow. Understood.
Mr. Sherman [continuing]. Even though, of course, most of
your your money would go as grants to medical institutions,
because I think that the terrorists have contorted Islam, and
that it is not difficult to find within Islam and within its
holy writings repudiations for some of the barbaric behavior we
have seen.
Ambassador Kaidanow. Congressman, if you can let me point
to a slightly different but a very similar effort to what you
are talking about. It is housed within the State Department. It
is actually an interagency effort. It is something called the
Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications. It brings
together the State Department, the Defense Department, some of
our intelligence colleagues, and it is exactly designed to do
what you are talking about. It pushes back----
Mr. Sherman. Is there anybody working for the Federal
Government on these matters that has memorized the Koran?
Ambassador Kaidanow. I couldn't tell you if they have
memorized the Koran.
Mr. Sherman. At most madrasas there is a real focus on
that, or at many madrasas. But is anyone getting a government
salary because of their knowledge of Islamic scriptures?
Ambassador Kaidanow. I will have to get back to you on
that.
Mr. Sherman. Please do get back to me on that for the
record, because you can have all kinds of organization charts
and hundreds of millions of dollars in your budget; you can't
argue about what Islam teaches if you don't have somebody
capable of teaching Islam.
With the abduction of these schoolgirls, is the Nigerian
Government now open to all of the types of assistance that we
think that they ought to take from us?
Ambassador Kaidanow. It is a good question. We have levied
quite a bit of effort recently against trying to provide them
with assistance and information and an array of different kinds
of help, including, by the way, messaging help sort of in the
realm of what you are just talking about. They have accepted
that assistance and that advice. I will say, though, that we
have consistently urged them to take what we would call a
wholistic approach, because this is not going to be dealt with,
unfortunately, solely in the context of one unfortunate and
very, very tragic kidnapping. It is going to take an overall
effort that involves economic, developmental reform of some of
their security institutions. So it has got to be more than just
a question of retrieving the girls. It has got to be something
that is for the longer term, and that is something we are
continuing to work with them on.
Mr. Sherman. I yield back.
Mr. Poe. Thank the gentleman.
Mr. Vargas from California is recognized.
Mr. Vargas. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
I do have some questions, and again, thank you very much,
Ambassador, for being here. With respect to the unfortunate
unity government of the Palestinian Authority with Hamas, and,
as you know, for any Palestinian Government, they should meet
three conditions; that is, reject violence, recognize Israel,
and abide by the previous agreements with Israel. Could you
tell me a little bit now about Hamas and how they are
influencing the Palestinian Authority? Have they changed their
posture in any way?
Ambassador Kaidanow. Thank you, Congressman.
First of all, let me just say I know this has been the
subject of quite a lot of discussion. The State Department and
the U.S. Government have agreed for the time being to continue
to deal with the government that was put in place by President
Abbas on the condition, though, exactly as you outlined, that
they will abide by the principles that you just articulated,
including a commitment to nonviolence, including the
recognition of the State of Israel, and all the other things
that you mentioned.
I will say this. I don't think this is a free pass. I think
we are continuing to evaluate the actions of that government,
and we will see what their actions hold.
I would stress that with respect to Hamas itself, Hamas
continues to be, in our view, a designated foreign terrorist
organization. We do not deal with Hamas, we have not met with
members of Hamas, and we will not provide any assistance to
Hamas. So that is very clear.
The other thing I would say is that we are continuing to
consult with the Israelis on the kinds of security elements
that they may need with respect to taking mitigating measures
against Hamas and some of the things that have gone on even
just as recently as the last few months. As I said, I will be
actually going myself to Israel in the next week, and I will
have formal consultations with them. So we take that quite
seriously.
Mr. Vargas. And I was going to ask you about that. I am
glad you got to that. I do want to know, though, if any of the
unity government's money is going to Hamas.
Ambassador Kaidanow. I am not aware that it is, but, again,
I don't have that information at this moment.
Mr. Vargas. Okay. And how are we helping Israel to cope
with this changing situation? You mentioned it generally, but
how can we help more specifically? It does concern me, because
now you have a known terrorist organization formed in this
unity government that I think has a lot of capabilities, and I
think it creates a larger threat for the State of Israel and
for the whole Middle East.
Ambassador Kaidanow. I understand your apprehension, and I
understand certainly the Israelis'; and part of why I am going
to Israel is to have that conversation and to hear specifically
some of their concerns.
I think there is a question both for the Israelis and for
us in terms of what benefit is derived from cutting off
contacts with that government when the security element of what
goes on in the West Bank and Gaza is very much controlled by
the government. So I think we have to weigh all of these
considerations and decide for ourselves what is the right
course forward, but with clear parameters that you laid out and
that we are continuing to follow.
Mr. Vargas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Thank you, Ambassador.
Mr. Poe. Thank the gentleman.
We also have been joined by three other members of the
committee. For those coming in, the Ambassador has to catch an
airplane that is on time, and so she needs to leave at this
point.
Madam Ambassador, the gentlemen who have just come in,
members of the committee, will probably no doubt have questions
that they will submit to you, and reply in a timely manner in
writing if you would.
Ambassador Kaidanow. We absolutely will do that, of course.
Thank you very much, gentlemen. I really appreciate the
opportunity. I am sorry that we didn't have more time today.
Again, I would offer myself up at any time if you have
questions individually or otherwise.
Mr. Poe. Committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the RecordNotice deg.
\\ts\
s deg.