Summary
A 26-year-old U.S. citizen and linguist, originally from Afghanistan, was denied a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited extensive family ties in Afghanistan, including parents, two brothers, and four sisters, all citizens and residents of Afghanistan. Additionally, one brother is a citizen and resident of Uzbekistan, and a step-brother is an Afghan citizen residing in Russia.
The applicant's travel history included a trip to Uzbekistan in 2008 and a six-month stay in Afghanistan from April to October 2008. He also sends approximately $1,000 annually to his family in Afghanistan. These facts raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guideline (AG) ¶ 7(a) and AG ¶ 7(b).
Despite the application of mitigating conditions under AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b), and AG ¶ 8(c), the judge determined that the applicant's close contact and financial support to his family in Afghanistan created a significant risk of foreign exploitation. The applicant failed to demonstrate that his loyalty to the United States outweighed his obligations to his family, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant has extensive family ties in Afghanistan, raising concerns of foreign influence.
- He failed to demonstrate that his loyalty to the United States outweighs his obligations to his family in Afghanistan.
- The applicant's frequent communication and financial support to his family create a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with a Foreign Family Member, Business or Professional Associate, Friend, or Other Person Who Is a Citizen of or Resident in a Foreign Country If That Contact Creates a Heightened Risk of Foreign Exploitation, Inducement, Manipulation, Pressure, or Coercion
- AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to a Foreign Person, Group, Government, or Country That Create a Potential Conflict of Interest Between the Individual’s Obligation to Protect Sensitive Information or Technology and the Individual’s Desire to Help a Foreign Person, Group, or Country by Providing That Information
- AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedThe Nature of the Relationships with Foreign Persons, the Country in Which These Persons Are Located, or the Positions or Activities of Those Persons in That Country Are Such That It Is Unlikely the Individual Will Be Placed in a Position of Having to Choose Between the Interests of a Foreign Individual, Group, Organization, or Government and the Interests of the U.S.The applicant's close ties to his family in Afghanistan create a significant risk of divided loyalties.
- AG ¶ 8(b)rejectedThere Is No Conflict of Interest, Either Because the Individual’s Sense of Loyalty or Obligation to the Foreign Person, Group, Government, or Country Is so Minimal, or the Individual Has Such Deep and Longstanding Relationships and Loyalties in the U.S., That the Individual Can Be Expected to Resolve Any Conflict of Interest in Favor of the U.S. InterestThe applicant's strong family ties in Afghanistan suggest a potential conflict of interest.
- AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedContact or Communication with Foreign Citizens Is so Casual or Infrequent That There Is Little Likelihood That It Could Create a Risk for Foreign Influence or ExploitationThe applicant's frequent communication with his family in Afghanistan is not casual or infrequent.
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedApr 26, 2010
- Answer filedMay 10, 2010
- Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the matter decided on the written record.
- Decision dateNov 22, 2010
Cite For
- Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Extensive Family Ties in a Foreign Country
- The Burden of Proof on the Applicant to Mitigate Security Concerns
- The Impact of Familial Obligations on National Security Interests