Completed a twenty-page policy paper that presented three options confronting the threat from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria in the United States: 1. maintain the status quo 2. target known ISIS sympathizers within the US 3. enhanced border restrictions. Analyzed and researched current approaches by federal government to domestic terrorism Presented research in a twenty five-slide PowerPoint to thirty students and two faculty members

1. Brett Champlin Page !1
Policy Paper: Confronting the ISIS Threat in the United States
Introduction/Background
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is an extremist self-proclaimed caliphate
that is seeking to establish an Islamic state in modern day Iraq and Syria. First formed in 1999,
ISIL was originally a part of Al-Qaeda; however, the two terrorist organizations had a falling out
and split apart because of differences in opinion regarding violence and brutality. Led by the
mysterious Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ISIL has played an integral role in the Syrian Civil War,
where it is estimated that the organization has 25000-35000 fighters in Iraq and Syria. Not only
have American citizens traveled to Iraq and Syria to join ISIS, but also sympathizers remain in
the United States. Instead of leaving the US to join ISIS, these extremists could choose to launch
attacks within our national borders. Within the last several months, ISIS has taken the fight di-
rectly to America by condemning the air strikes and beheading multiple journalists. On the do-
mestic front, the recent shooting by Michael Zehaf-Bibeau in Canada, where a military reservist
was killed, highlights the threat of ISIS attacking inside the US. While authorities have yet to
address whether or not Bibeau had connections to ISIS, they have stated that he had become rad-
icalized. With the rise in lone wolf attacks, it becomes even more important that the US looks at
its strategy for addressing the ISIS threat within our border. Consequently, this report analyzes
three policy options that the US could adopt for confronting ISIS on American soil.
Problem Statement:
ISIS poses a direct threat to US domestic security. As a result, this paper will address spe-
cific policy options to answer the following question: Should the US initiate an internal security
program within our national border to address the ISIS threat?

2. Brett Champlin Page !2
Analysis of Options
The following policy options represent three approaches to addressing the ISIS threat in
the United States.
A. Do Nothing and Maintain the Status Quo
Because ISIS has yet to launch a legitimate terrorist strike in the US, the government
could adopt a strategy of complacency by not reacting to the threat. With this option, all current
policies regarding border inspections, air travel restrictions and surveillance of known terrorists
would continue; however, no new changes would be made. The advantages of not changing cur-
rent policies include not alarming the general public that an attack by ISIS is possible and not
increasing the defense budget. Given that the United States has remained relatively isolated from
terrorist attacks on our border, with the exception of the Boston Marathon Bombing, maintaining
the status quo is a viable option.
Maintaining the status quo may sound like a negative prospect because it does not in-
volve making security enhancements; however, our current levels of protection may be enough
to mitigate the likelihood of an ISIS threat. Although ISIS has established themselves as a domi-
nant extremist organization in the Middle East, they have yet to prove themselves capable of
launching a terrorist strike against a western target in a foreign nation. As a result, changing the
status quo may be seen as an alarmist measure that is not necessary.
B. Target Known ISIS Sympathizers within the United States

3. Brett Champlin Page !3
In addition to increased border restrictions, the US should consider adopting a more
stringent policy regarding surveillance and targeting of known ISIS sympathizers already resid-
ing in the US. Although the US already utilizes the Terrorist Surveillance Program, this may not
be enough to address the threat from ISIS. Given that ISIS sympathizers have been conducting
“lone wolf” attacks in Canada and the US against police officers and military personnel, it is ap-
parent that not enough is being done. Unlike a traditional terrorist attack that takes months of
preparation to conduct, a lone wolf attack is significantly harder to detect and prevent. Because it
is a random act of violence and it can be done without access to expensive weaponry, the preven-
tion of a lone wolf attack requires pre-existing knowledge of individuals who have direct connec-
tions with ISIS.
Preventing a “lone wolf” attack requires greater coordination between federal, state and
local law enforcement officers. Because it is impossible to monitor and surveil every person in
the US, increased surveillance should occur in areas that are known to be frequented by extrem-
ists. For example, if it is known that a mosque in Boston or Los Angeles is known to have ex-
tremist individuals in attendance then it should be placed under more surveillance. While this
may seem like a drastic measure because it could be argued that it infringes on the constitutional
rights of American citizens, it is a necessary step to prevent an ISIS attack in the US. Further-
more, several Americans have been arrested and charged with attempting to leave the US to fight
on behalf of ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Because these individuals tend to be younger and active on
social media platforms, it is important to monitor Internet usage. In order to determine who to
monitor, the US should focus their efforts on areas with large Muslim populations or with resi-
dents from countries like Syria and Iraq.

4. Brett Champlin Page !4
While this recommendation is likely to make it difficult for an ISIS attack to be launched
in the US, it is not without significant drawbacks. For starters, increased surveillance is not inex-
pensive and the additional cost may prove prohibitive for the federal government. More impor-
tantly, the issue of surveilling American citizens has been a hotly debated topic. On one side,
critics of surveillance argue that it infringes on our Constitutional rights to privacy and freedom
of speech. On the other side, proponents argue for an expansion of surveillance practices like
wiretapping and Internet monitoring because it helps to prevent terrorist attacks. Since former
NSA employee leaked Edward Snowden leaked classified information to the press detailing the
mass electronic surveillance practices of the US government, programs like PRISM have come
under fire. Given that PRISM is the number one source of raw intelligence, it is imperative that
the program be expanded to monitor any individuals with ties to ISIS.
C. Increased Border Restrictions
On a daily basis, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) is responsible for screening an esti-
mated 1 million visitors and nearly 100,000 cargo containers. With more than 60,000 employees,
the CBP is one of the largest law enforcement agencies in the world and is responsible for not
only preventing illicit drugs, weapons and other contraband materials from entering the US, but
also terrorists and illegal aliens. With the increased threat of ISIS, it is the responsibility of CBP
agents to prevent any known sympathizers from entering our borders. The CBP has a strong track
record of preventing drugs and dangerous individuals from entering the US; however, all it takes
is one mistake to allow a terrorist to slip through. Consequently, this option recommends adopt-
ing stringent border restrictions and calls for increased scrutiny of individuals with Western
passports who are entering the US from Middle Eastern nations.

5. Brett Champlin Page !5
Prior to arriving in the United States, the majority of foreign nationals are required to
have obtained a visa from an embassy or consulate. The visa allows a person to enter the US for
a specific time period and for a designated purpose such as attending a university or for work.
Because the number of people applying for entrance to the US far exceeds the number of em-
ployees available to screen them, it is imperative that CBP works closely with Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of State (DOS) and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Given that ISIS has made it known that they would like sympathizers to target
military personnel and law enforcement officers, it is important that any individuals with ties to
the organization receive greater scrutiny. Individuals applying for a visa from known terrorist
sympathizing countries like Syria, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan should be the target of an in-depth
investigation. Officers from ICE, CBP, DHS and DOS should be assigned to a joint task force
that works cooperatively to share intelligence and conduct in-depth background investigations of
these high-risk visa applicants.
Additionally, even if a high-risk individual is granted a visa to stay in the US once he/she
arrives they should be subject to additional monitoring and surveillance by the FBI. Because a
visa does not allow for an indefinite stay in the US, it is crucial that the appropriate federal agen-
cies know where these individuals are at all times. Because the vast majority of travelers enter
the US through a commercial airline, it is necessary for the establishment of a pre-departure tar-
geting program. Federal agencies should use pre-existing technology or adopt technology from
allies that allows them to screen passengers more efficiently when they arrive for a flight. Using
biometric technology and having employees trained in reading a person’s facial expression and
behavior are all useful tools in preventing an ISIS terrorist from entering the US. As noted earli-

6. Brett Champlin Page !6
er, the greatest threat is from an individual who already possesses a western passport because
they will most likely receive less scrutiny from a law enforcement officer. Because it is impossi-
ble to give every person with a western passport increased inspection, it is important that CBP
has officers on the ground in locations that receive international flights and connections. Given
that many flights originating in the Middle East require a transfer in Europe, the US should focus
on strengthening relationships with these nations and having officers assigned to the airport.
These officers would be able to speak with travelers whose flights originated in terrorist locales
and inspect their baggage.
The adoption of increased border restrictions will enable the US to better protect itself
from an ISIS terrorist entering the country from abroad. However, this recommendation does
have significant drawbacks. For starters, the cost of implementing increased scrutinization of
foreign travelers may be prohibitive. It will require a substantial investment from the federal
government to hire new employees, purchase new technology and open additional screening lo-
cations in foreign nations.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the first option, do nothing, not be adopted because it is not a suf-
ficient response to the ISIS threat. While it presents the most cost beneficial option, doing noth-
ing leaves the US too vulnerable to an ISIS attack. Furthermore, not responding to the recent
lone wolf attacks with an increased law enforcement presence and additional security may signal
to ISIS leaders that the US is complacent. If this occurs, ISIS may adopt a more violent strategy
towards US citizens in an effort to raise awareness for their organization and cause.

7. Brett Champlin Page !7
Furthermore, a complete adoption of option B, targeting of known ISIS sympathizers in
the US, is not feasible. Not only would this recommendation require an increased budget to ac-
commodate the hiring of new agents to conduct these operations, but also it could lead to mass
hysteria and paranoia amongst the general population. The revelations of Edward Snowden and
other whistleblowers has led to concerns that the US government has infringed on the Constitu-
tional rights of American citizens. Consequently, the adoption of a strategy that condones in-
creased surveillance is likely to be meant with skepticism and criticism.
Because the CBP already employs more than 60,000 individuals, it is difficult to foresee a
scenario where the agency could effectively hire enough people to adopt option C in the near fu-
ture. With that said, increased cooperation and sharing among intelligence agencies throughout
the world is crucial in confronting the ISIS threat. Because ISIS has stated a desire to attack
western interests throughout the world, it is imperative that intelligence agencies work together
by sharing information to prevent a terrorist attack. Any flight originating from the Middle East,
in particular Syria, Iran or Iraq, with individuals on board who possess a Western passport should
receive additional security. A person with a western passport poses the greatest threat because
they are often able to pass through security with little more than a cursory inspection. Additional-
ly, foreign nationals from high value nations who have entered the US through a visa should be
closely monitored to ensure that they remain in compliance with the parameters of their student
or work agreement. Furthermore, a visa stipulates a specific time period that a person can remain
in the US before returning to their home country. The US must remain vigilant in ensuring that
applicants adhere to the time period of their visa and do not get lost in the shuffle of other immi-
grants. If an ISIS terrorist was able to enter the US through a visa and slip through the cracks of

8. Brett Champlin Page !8
the existing structure, they would be able to operate without supervision by the federal govern-
ment.
In addition to adopting several of the policy recommendations outlined in option C, the
US should increase their surveillance efforts of only known ISIS targets currently within our
borders. By only targeting known sympathizers, the US will be limiting their exposure to public
outcry about invasion of personal property and space. Furthermore, by isolating the list to a se-
lect few individuals the US is better able to monitor, analyze and provide actionable intelligence
about their activities. Because the vast majority of visitors enter the US via air travel, it is imper-
ative that the TSA, ICE, DHS and other federal law enforcement agencies work with their in-
ternational counterparts to share intelligence and information.
In conclusion, by adopting a combining of option B and C, the US will be able to effec-
tively address the threat that ISIS poses within our borders and mitigate the likelihood of a terror-
ist attack.