George Orwell
once wrote, “If Liberty means anything at all, it means the right
to tell people what they do not want to hear.” In our
considerations of homeland security, it is important to understand
the goals of terrorists that rest in creating government
over-reaction, draining the American people’s economic resources
and provoking government responses that are perceived by the populace
as oppressive, undermining support for the targeted regime. For
purposes of this paper, I will attempt to answer the prompt from the
perspective of Homeland Security’s Privacy Office and office of
Civil Rights and Liberties. By showing more care and concern for
these offices the Department of Homeland Security can improve its
ability to achieve its five missions and improve its prioritization.
Congress has set clear goals for the Department of Homeland Security
and in the face of a challenging and complex operational environment
has made strides in achieving them; however, there is need to improve
and expand upon priorities for focus, that take into account a
changing situational context.
According to
the Rand Corporation and Henry H. Willis, Congress has provided the
Department of Homeland Security with “a set of five missions to
meet the evolving challenges faced by our country, including
preventing terrorism and enhancing security, securing and managing
borders, enforcing and administering immigration laws, safeguarding
and securing cyberspace and ensuring resilience to disasters.” The
primary mission as it relates to preventing terrorism revolves around
our ability to secure nuclear sights and other highly explosive
materials such as large natural gas or oil refinery sights, dangerous
chemicals and biological weapons. While there is still need for
Homeland Security, NSA and the FBI to monitor for potential terrorist
networks working within our country, a potential terrorist without
WMDs, is not nearly as dangerous and the risks can be managed through
traditional local and county law enforcement, and so by focusing on
increasing security around locations possessing these items the risk
of terrorist networks can be substantially reduced without having to
ferment a more invasive surveillance state, expansive role for the
federal government that causes other psychological consequences for
the public, that work against our interests of preventing terrorism,
insurrection or broader disruptive protests. While managing nuclear
sites that hold materials usable in dirty bombs is an obvious
priority, the safeguards are more developed and obvious, but often
overlooked risks live in expanding oil and natural gas. Oil and
Natural Gas are highly explosive items, even the explosion of trucks
transporting such substances can become a terrifying, news grabbing
event, that make them optimal targets for terrorists. Increasing
systematic visits by homeland security to natural gas and oil
refineries is important, as is the improved provision of resources,
technological and personnel, to such sights physical security. As
Faddiss writes about a local gas companies “LnG storage tank,
capable of holding 1 billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas”
in “Willful Neglect,” it is a “massive, thermal bomb on our
nation’s doorstep.” Nearly every municipality has a gas company
and while most contract to bigger companies that have every incentive
to provide the necessary security measures to protect against the
damages of lawsuits in the event of a disaster, it is an area where
clearer regulatory laws and systematic location visits by homeland
security can be of high value. Broader challenges rest in securing
such explosive materials in transport, a diesel truck with two beds
of explosive natural gas is an enticing target for a terrorist and
with so much in distribution, it is impossible for our Agency with
limited resources to be able to realistically protect such. As a
result larger plants closer to metropolitan areas need to be the
priority, with more pressure on private companies and corporations
controlling these plants to make the appropriate investments in
security.
Programs providing government guaranteed loans can help
free the economic resources to make these investments. There is a
need for such DHS programs then, to coordinate with the major banks
to incentivize such investments. The same is so for locations
handling potentially dangerous, common chemicals such as chlorine.
The Area where I believe there is the deepest need for concern, rests
around the security of biological organisms used by scientists in the
medical community that in the wrong hands can be used for purposes of
harm. The influenza for example, despite a low fatality rate, caused
more than 50 million deaths in 1918 and to provide effective flu
shots to control the risk of such a highly transmittable illness,
medical laboratories have to anticipate how strains are going to
evolve in an effort to stay ahead. Viruses and bacterias, basic
communicable illnesses are among the most dangerous killers and as a
result a massive industry and sprawling network of laboratories cross
cutting the private sector, hospitals, medical supplies and research
labs across campuses exist. There is often a high financial
incentive for diseases to be leaked into the public, if you are a lab
with the cure and in need of money. Saudi Arabia invests big money
in such labs across California’s university system and students on
visas radicalized by the internet or in cooperation with terrorist
cells could potentially access these sights without much actual
technological or database security measures. The threat, however, is
not necessarily Muslim, some the world’s most dangerous substances
are held in labs around the world, outside the United States and
larger beyond our control. Increasing awareness helps, technological
means of monitoring dangerous substances to augment protocol and
procedure can help, but the risk is real and our security is
illusionary, entirely reliant on white blood cells and the
development of antibodies.
While the
United States of America’s border security is significantly
stronger than most countries, there is an ongoing need to improve
detection capabilities, to monitor for corruption and intimidation by
the cartels and with DHS agents. Human, Drug and Weapons smuggling
are huge obstacles to security, but often, prohibitions and efforts
at law enforcement create larger financial incentives and rackets
that lead to escalations and increases in sophistication and danger
of operations on both side of the equation. Speaking with a leading
CIA agent from South America, the United States of
America has done a lot towards the supply side of drugs, but it does
not do nearly enough as it relates to demand. If demand is
consistent and our foreign policing policies are geared towards
complicating and reducing supply, than prices will increase bringing
additional threats to our homeland as social costs spiral as thefts,
home invasions and other short term criminal profit seeking are
exacerbated. Decriminalizing drug usage, regulating supply,
increasing funding for medical treatment and drug prevention by
effective educational programs and public service announcements will
dramatically undercut financial sources for organized criminal groups
and terrorists, significantly reducing the risks of cross border
trade and dramatically improve our overall security by undercutting
popular frustration with government and the law according to federal
statutes, and often at odds with local policy and state law. Such
shifts in policy will help lower incarceration costs, reduce the
prison population and provide value for border patrol and homeland
security, by taking less of a war footing and instead helping guide
individuals with drug or mental health problems to the appropriate
sources for support and medical care the security situation around
the border can begin to normalize and calm. There is obviously a
need for more resources at the border and a more diverse personnel
set, capable of providing for the human rights of refugees, asylum
seekers and others in the immigration process. With limited
resources, the US has to prioritize the laws it chooses to enforce
and while preventing the inflow of dangerous terrorists and criminals
is an obvious concern, hard-working individuals who share our
Abrahamic Judeao-Christian-Muslim values, looking for the opportunity
to have a better life and contribute to society is an entirely
different matter, particularly when close family members already have
legal status and are in a position to relieve dependence on state
resources and the assimilation process. Conservatives have to
recognize that many immigrants, share our values of hard-work and the
importance of family and fight against racist rhetoric, policies and
laws that harm the interests of our country, our economy and our
citizen’s right to be with family.
As it
relates to enforcing and administering Immigration laws, it is in the
interests of law and order, that immigrants have the opportunity for
hearings, to examine if they meet legal requirements for asylum or
refugee status. It is the interests of Justice that there is
reasonable representation by and for both sides of a case and an
impartial judge to hear the case. There is also a need for
humanitarian treatment and reasonable holding conditions when
individuals are awaiting for such hearings. There is a need for
adequate facilities and personnel to provide care for children,
health issues and dietary needs. Transportation needs to be
adequate, and at times coordinated with Governing authorities on the
receiving end with improved spending on programs with experts in
acclamation and integration into self-sustaining economic niches and
job roles. There is a need to enforce laws, but there is also a need to improve laws and create polices that balance administrative
feasibility with informed discretion on the part of agents and
authorities.
Safeguarding and securing cyber-space is a task that Homeland
Security is not really properly equipped to handle and private sector
innovations are often better, more adaptive and capable of providing
for the needs of cyber users. Facilitating the development and
awareness of such products is the appropriate role for Homeland
Security, while improving technical capabilities to defend against
those more dangerous cyber-attacks. Protecting vital
cyber-infrastructure is important and believe there is need for
improvements in the quality and form of information being routed
amongst government employs. There is also; however, a need to
protect our union and our citizens from libel and slander, there is
generally a legal right for everyone to have the opportunity to
answer to any administrative allegations for accuracy and context, to
avoid ongoing discrimination damaging to the corrections process
there needs to be improved measures surrounding the storage of
information, particularly relating to matters that have not been
proven in a court of law, Suspicious Activity Reports for example,
are vestiges of Eastern Germany and China, but am not sure that such
is appropriate for the United States of America when there are not
warrants, they target first amendment protected activities, and often
result from personnel or racial biases, ideological differences or
retaliatory efforts. The interests of preserving liberty and
expectations of free-state by constituents, tax payers and the voting
public require an open internet and net-neutrality, with improved
means for reasonable enforcement of common law and torts. Many of
America’s State constitutions define them as “Common Law States”
and as a Result the federal government needs to create policies that
conform to the rules of law in the states they operate. It is
important to understand that in common law, legislation is secondary
to legal precedents set by superior courts. Balance of power is an
underwriting principal to our Republic’s functionality, and
unfortunately it seems that ongoing deployment to war zones has
caused a war footing to be brought home in an inappropriate way that
has exacerbated tensions domestically, endangering our homeland
security. There needs to be more attention to psychological issues
relating to our military personnel and means of turning on and off
their training to help ease transition to civilian and office
environments.
Overall,
the Department of Homeland Security has done an exceptional job in
providing for security in the face of an overwhelming array of
threats and security risks, and balancing them with civil liberty and
concerns over privacy. The reality is that there have been
relatively few terrorist attacks and the Department of Justice has
done an exceptional job at shifting us away from the war on terror
and its slippery slope and back towards traditional contexts of law
enforcement, being authentic in efforts to address breaches of law by
the NSA and CIA and make the appropriate corrections to preserve the
free nature of Western Societies and protection of democratic
liberties. Domestically, it seems our biggest risks have stemmed
from “active shooter” scenarios and instances where otherwise
decent people have simply snapped and gone what in the pre- 9/11 era
we would have called, “going postal.” US citizens will always
have frustrations with “the Man” and the calming presence of
loved ones and better policies relating to down-time can help. From
experience, working in a Master’s in Homeland Security Program, the
feeling that we are always working and our work always needs to be
brought home with us, compounds the stress of the situation and
severely affects performance. I’m sure this true for the many,
particularly those in our program, and more needs to be invested in
stress management and the promotion of a healthier work life balance,
and adequate compensatory and benefits package for all citizens and
lawful residents. Overall, I would give 10/10 on the Intelligence
Communities ability to protect the home front and achieve the
congressionally defined goals. Multi-culturalism is an important
strength for California, and the natural order of things and the
common sense of our citizenry has made the jobs of homeland security
easier than ever.
Looking
to the future, I believe that homeland security’s role and focus
needs to improve beyond basic border security. With increasing
concerns over police brutality the Department of Homeland Securities
subordinate departments have a responsibility to improve training
relating policing practice. There is an obvious need to train and
create police forces that are demographically more similar to the
communities they police, have an understanding of cultural norms and
an open mind towards differing lifestyles. Post 9/11 the heavy
investment in technologies combined with experience in counter
insurgencies oversees has resulted in poor decision making
domestically. Allowing for peaceful assembly and protest, providing
locations for demonstrations and providing for food and entertainment
can prevent the need for more violent confrontations that gradually
erode support for the government, the police and our department.
There needs to be an improved look at soft power policing strategies,
such as providing police officers with alternatives to tickets, such
as food and medical treatment vouchers, doing such would retrain the
role of police officers in the community. If someone is starving and
police officers are someone who in addition to giving tickets also
has the ability to hand out a meal ticket, if someone is seriously
ill but lacks the ability to pay co-pays to get the medical care they
need and sheriffs can hand out redeemable vouchers to offset the
costs to emergency room visits, then both can become more loved and
valued members of any community and the role of government will be of
higher value because too often it is perceived as means for
domination and power, and therefore oppression in the minds of many
Americans in need.
