ISCR Case 20-00881

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 20-00881

deniedNov 18, 2022· Hon. Ross D. Hyams· hearing

Summary

A 61-year-old U.S. citizen, originally from Jordan, was denied a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) due to his close ties with family and friends residing in Jordan, Lebanon, and Kuwait. The applicant admitted to all allegations detailed in the Statement of Reasons.

Specifically, the applicant maintained weekly phone contact with two sisters, one a Jordanian citizen in Kuwait and the other a citizen and resident of Jordan. He also had occasional phone and in-person contact with a Lebanese citizen friend in Kuwait, and another friend who is a dual citizen of Turkey and Lebanon, resides in Kuwait, and works for the Turkish Ambassador there. Furthermore, after becoming a U.S. citizen in August 1989, the applicant lived in Kuwait from September 1989 to October 1990, and again from March 2002 to June 2017, citing his father's illness and a job offer as reasons for these moves.

Despite the application of some mitigating conditions, the judge concluded that the applicant failed to sufficiently mitigate concerns regarding divided allegiance stemming from his frequent contact with foreign nationals in countries with heightened security risks. His longstanding connections to Kuwait were also identified as presenting a conflict of interest, ultimately leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to having frequent contact with family members and friends in countries with heightened security risks.
The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate concerns about divided allegiance due to his foreign contacts.
The applicant's longstanding connections to Kuwait presented a conflict of interest.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections Creating Potential Conflict of Interest

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedNature of Relationships with Foreign PersonsThe applicant failed to demonstrate that it is unlikely he will be placed in a position of having to choose between foreign interests and U.S. interests.
AG ¶ 8(b)rejectedNo Conflict of Interest Due to Minimal AllegianceThe applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to show minimal allegiance to foreign contacts.
AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual or Infrequent Contact with Foreign CitizensThe applicant maintains frequent contact with his sisters, indicating a strong bond.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 31, 2021
Answer filedOct 13, 2021
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateNov 18, 2022

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Impact of Foreign Contacts on Security Clearance Eligibility
Importance of Demonstrating Ties to the U.S. to Mitigate Foreign Influence Risks

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	One of Applicant’s sisters is a Jordanian citizen residing in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having weekly contact with her by phone.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Kuwait HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.b	One of Applicant’s sisters is a citizen and resident of Jordan. He admits the allegation. He reported having weekly contact with her by phone.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Jordan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.c	Applicant maintains contact with a friend who is a Lebanese citizen, and who resides in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having occasional contact with him by phone and in person.	Against Applicant	Friend in Foreign Country Friend	Kuwait HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.d	Applicant maintains contact with a friend who is a dual citizen of Turkey and Lebanon, and who resides in Kuwait. This friend also works for the Turkish Ambassador at the Turkish Embassy in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having occasional contact with him by phone and in person.	Against Applicant	Friend in Foreign Country Friend GOVT-AFFILIATED	Kuwait HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.e	After becoming a U.S. citizen in August 1989, Applicant returned to live in Kuwait from September 1989 – October 1990, and from March 2002 – June 2017. He admits the allegation. He stated that he moved because his father was sick in 1989, and in 2002, he was offered a job.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Kuwait HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

One of Applicant’s sisters is a Jordanian citizen residing in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having weekly contact with her by phone.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Kuwait

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.b

One of Applicant’s sisters is a citizen and resident of Jordan. He admits the allegation. He reported having weekly contact with her by phone.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Jordan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.c

Applicant maintains contact with a friend who is a Lebanese citizen, and who resides in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having occasional contact with him by phone and in person.

Against Applicant

Friend in Foreign Country

Friend

Kuwait

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.d

Applicant maintains contact with a friend who is a dual citizen of Turkey and Lebanon, and who resides in Kuwait. This friend also works for the Turkish Ambassador at the Turkish Embassy in Kuwait. He admits the allegation. He reported having occasional contact with him by phone and in person.

Against Applicant

Friend in Foreign Country

Friend

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Kuwait

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.e

After becoming a U.S. citizen in August 1989, Applicant returned to live in Kuwait from September 1989 – October 1990, and from March 2002 – June 2017. He admits the allegation. He stated that he moved because his father was sick in 1989, and in 2002, he was offered a job.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Kuwait

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION