Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Security Issues and Implications for U.S. Interests [Updated May 29, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The South Caucasus region has been the most unstable in the former Soviet Union in terms of the numbers, intensity, and length of ethnic and civil conflicts. Other emerging or full-blown security problems include crime, corruption, terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and narcotics trafficking. The regional governments have worked to bolster their security by combating terrorism, limiting political dissent they view as threatening, revamping their armed forces, and seeking outside assistance and allies. Most in Congress have supported U.S. assistance to bolster independence and reforms in the South Caucasus, but questions remain about the suitability, scope, emphasis, and effectiveness of U.S. involvement. Congressional support for the security of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh (NK; a breakaway region of Azerbaijan mostly populated by ethnic Armenians) led in 1992 to a ban on most U.S. government-to-government aid to Azerbaijan. Congress authorized a presidential waiver to the ban after the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, to facilitate U.S.-Azerbaijan anti-terrorism cooperation. Congressional support for U.S. engagement with the region was reflected in 'Silk Road Strategy' legislation in FY2000 (P.L.106-113) authorizing greater policy attention and aid for conflict amelioration, humanitarian needs, economic development, transport and communications, border control, democracy, and the creation of civil societies in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. Congress regularly has earmarked foreign aid to Armenia, funded a border and customs security program for Georgia, and upheld a South Caucasus funding category to encourage conflict resolution, provide for reconstruction assistance, and facilitate regional economic integration."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nichol, James P.

  2003-05-29
• New US Strategic Framework and Capabilities-based Planning: Application to Strategic Force Planning: Presented at the US-RU Confidence Building Measures Conference, Garmisch, Germany, 3-4 June 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This paper was presented by Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc., at a conference in Garmisch, Germany. The New Strategic Framework announced in the US Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) has moved force planning, including strategic forces, from a threat-based, country-specific approach to a non-country-specific continuum of capabilities from minimal force to nuclear weapons. This transformation has changed the basic US force planning philosophy to a capabilities-based planning approach (CBP), although new planning methodologies still need to be fully developed. Development and refinement of CBP methodologies is underway in a number of venues. A concept for applying CBP principles to strategic force planning, developed by Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. (SPA) for the Advanced Systems and Concepts Office (ASCO) of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), is discussed. Note: This document has been added to the Homeland Security Digital Library in agreement with the Project on Advanced Systems and Concepts for Countering WMD (PASCC) as part of the PASCC collection. Permission to download and/or retrieve this resource has been obtained through PASCC.

  Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc.

  Kahan, Jerome H.; Zavadil, Stephen W.; Tindal, Ralph L.

  2003-05-23
• Department of Homeland Security: Consolidation of Border and Transportation Security Agencies [Updated May 22, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) transferred several border and transportation security agencies to the newly established Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which became operational March 1, 2003, consolidating some of them in a Directorate of Border and Transportation Security. The Act charges this new directorate with securing the borders; territorial waters; terminals; waterways; and air, land and sea transportation systems of the United States; and managing the nations ports of entry. As in the past, the challenge for policymakers is to provide a level of border and transportation security that is commensurate with a multitude of threats, while facilitating legitimate travel and commerce, as well as protecting civil liberties. The success of the Directorate will depend in large measure on the effective and expedited coordination of transferred agencies and programs; development of a unified strategic vision for departmental and directorate operations; leverage of new and existing technologies to improve threat detection, but facilitate legitimate cross border travel and trade; adequate funding and staffing; efficient deployment of resources; and successful implementation of recently enacted border, port, and transportation security-related legislation."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Lake, Jennifer E.

  2003-05-22
• Border Security: Immigration Issues in the 108th Congress [Updated May 22, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Enhancing border security has emerged as a significant policy issue after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Prior to the terrorist attacks, the priorities for border security policy were beginning to shift from immigration-related issues to issues related to facilitating legitimate cross-border commerce. Several bills have been introduced in the 108th Congress (S. 539/H.R. 1096 and S. 6) that would authorize funding for increased personnel and technological improvements. S. 539/H.R. 1096 would require ongoing training for immigration personnel on how to use the new technology, an update of a port infrastructure assessment study, and demonstration projects on new technology at ports of entry, among other things. Another piece of legislation (H.R. 853) would establish a northern border coordinator within the Directorate of Border and Transportation Security in the Department of Homeland Security, among other things. The northern border coordinator would serve as a liaison to the Canadian government on border security-related issues. Although the 107th Congress enacted several pieces of legislation that dealt with enhancing immigration-related border security, legislation to strengthen the nations borders had been enacted as early as the 104th Congress. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA; P.L. 104-208) contained several immigration-related border security provisions that addressed illegal immigration and the smuggling of humans into the United States through the southwest border. IIRIRA also contained a provision that required the electronic tracking of every alien arriving in and departing from the United States."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Seghetti, Lisa M.

  2003-05-22
• Intelligence Support to Maritime Homeland Security

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the thesis abstract: "Intelligence is critical to resolving the competing interests of security and prosperity and is the basis for a risk management approach to security. This essay looks at intelligence and how it is or might be employed to help minimize the risk of a maritime terrorism and how the resources of the intelligence community contribute to reducing the force to space ratio. Integration of law enforcement and intelligence is fundamental to the success of homeland security. Terrorism does not recognize borders, but the U.S. division of responsibilities has created a seam in our defenses. Some aspects of globalization have resulted in blurring of traditional intelligence and law enforcement roles, but some additional fundamental changes are required. The Navy/Coast Guard counter-narcotics mission demonstrates a practical solution to joint military-law enforcement operations. The USA Patriot Act has facilitated greater sharing of law enforcement and intelligence information. Command and control plays an important part in properly using intelligence. The new Terrorist Threat Integration Center has been created at the strategic level; the Joint Interagency Task Force provides an excellent framework at the operational and tactical level. The Coast Guard has developed the Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) concept to reconcile security and prosperity issues in the man time environment. MDA begins overseas. Foreign intelligence operations, regional security cooperation, and leveraging regional relationships are critical to the doctrine of pre-emption and successful maritime homeland defense."

  Naval War College (U.S.)

  Nicholson, Brian D.

  2003-05-16
• Focusing the Interagency Effort in Homeland Security: The Terrorism-As-War Paradigm

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  We are at war. The United States has been attacked by a foreign enemy that has openly declared hostilities against us and is widely believed to be seeking to employ weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Despite this fact Homeland Security and Defense efforts are unnecessarily complicated by adherence to the "terrorism-as-crime" paradigm in pursuit of our interagency objectives. Capitalizing on cooperative law enforcement and emergency management methods the terrorism-as-crime" paradigm is not optimized for war. Reactive to events and defensive even passive - in their planning and preparations these arrangements yield the initiative to terrorist enemies within our borders. This contrasts sharply with the effective "terrorism-as-war" paradigm employed in joint, combined and interagency operations overseas, where offensive operations have been models of network-centric warfare success. Establishment of a comprehensive "Homeland Security Interagency Network," focusing military and interagency efforts towards a refined, offensively-oriented campaign plan aimed at defeating terrorist enemies may provide the answer. The Homeland Security Interagency Network consists of two major elements: Command and Control (C2) and Interagency Consultative. Oriented on an offensive objective, the new network would focus the interagency effort, while retaining the essential advantages of the current cooperative arrangement. It is also designed to preserve America's interjurisdictional, federalist tradition, in accordance with our Constitution.

  Naval War College (U.S.)

  Clements, William E.

  2003-05-16
• Providing for the Common Defense...Within Our Borders

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This paper examines the U.S. law regarding use of the U.S. Armed Forces in domestic affairs. A brief scenario involving a terrorist attack using a weapon of mass destruction introduces an example of the dangers inherent in the use of military forces to regain or maintain public law and order. The discussion of U.S. law begins with the history of Posse Comitatus and proceeds through the passage of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The Department of Homeland Security was created by this law and a subsequent action of establishing a unified commander with geographic responsibilities for the North American continent have been questioned as a breach of this law and a threat to civil liberties of American citizens. Upon examination of written law of the land and U.S. tradition, missions and functions of USNORTHCOM are consistent with U.S. law and the constitutional duty of the federal government. Despite compliance with the law, involvement of military forces within our borders is contrary to U.S. tradition raising public concerns with the application and involvement of military forces. Concerns for USNORTHCOM are addressed at the operational and national-strategic level regarding the interaction of military forces with the civilian populations and public relations."

  Naval War College (U.S.)

  Meadows, Thomas A.

  2003-05-16
• Visa Issuances: Policy, Issues, and Legislation [Updated May 16, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, considerable concern has been raised because the 19 terrorists were aliens who apparently entered the United States legally despite provisions in immigration laws that bar the admission of terrorists. Fears that lax enforcement of immigration laws regulating the admission of foreign nationals into the United States may continue to make the United States vulnerable to further terrorist attacks have led many to call for revisions in the policy as well as changes in who administers immigration law. Foreign nationals not already legally residing in the United States who wish to come to the United States generally must obtain a visa to be admitted, with certain exceptions noted in law. Prior to establishment of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), two departments -- the Department of State (DOS) Bureau of Consular Affairs and the Department of Justice (DOJ) Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) -- each played key roles in administering the law and policies on the admission of aliens. Although DOS Consular Affairs remains the agency responsible for issuing visas, DHS' Bureau of Citizenship and Immigrant Services approves immigrant petitions, and DHS's Bureau of Customs and Border protection inspects all people who enter the United States. In FY2002, DOS issued approximately 6.2 million visas and rejected over 2.2 million aliens seeking visas. The President's proposal for DHS, H.R. 5005 as introduced, would have bifurcated visa issuances so that DHS would set the policies, giving the DHS Secretary exclusive authority through the Secretary of State to issue or refuse to issue visas and retaining responsibility for implementation in DOS."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Wasem, Ruth Ellen

  2003-05-16
• Protecting Our Perimeter: 'Border Searches' under the Fourth Amendment [Updated May 14, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Many border security initiatives were developed after the events of September 11, 2001. Because security initiatives often maintain a search and seizure component, Fourth Amendment implications may arise. The Fourth Amendment establishes that a search or seizure conducted by a governmental agent must be reasonable, and that probable cause support any judicially granted warrant. An invalid 'search' is an infringement of an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable. A 'seizure' of a person occurs when a government official makes an individual reasonably believe that he or she is not at liberty to ignore the governments presence in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident. The Court has interpreted the Fourth Amendment to include a presumptive warrant requirement on all searches and seizures conducted by the government, and has ruled that any violations of this standard will result in the suppression of any information derived therefrom [sic]. The Court, however, has also recognized situations that render the obtainment of a warrant impractical or against the public's interest, and has accordingly crafted various exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Viña, Stephen R.

  2003-05-14
• Counterfeit Documents Used to Enter the United States from Certain Western Hemisphere Countries Not Detected, Statement of Robert J. Cramer, Managing Director, Office of Special Investigations, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims, House Committee on the Judiciary

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This report discusses the results of security tests performed in which agents of the Office of Special Investigations (OSI), acting in an undercover capacity, entered the United States from various countries in the Western Hemisphere using counterfeit documentation and fictitious identities. The purpose of these tests was to determine whether U. S. government officials conducting inspections at ports of entry would detect the counterfeit identification documents. The counterfeit identification documents were developed for our agents by using off-the-shelf computer graphic software that is available to any purchaser. The agents entered the United States from Jamaica, Barbados, Mexico, and Canada using fictitious names, counterfeit driver's licenses and birth certificates. Bureau of Customs & Border Protection (BCBP) staff never questioned the authenticity of the counterfeit documents, and the agents encountered no difficulty entering the country using them.

  United States. General Accounting Office

  Cramer, Robert J.

  2003-05-13
• S. Hrg. 108-72: Border Security: How are State and Local Officials Coping with the New Levels of Threat?: Hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, First Session, May 12, 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The purpose of this hearing is to discuss border security issues, specifically in border states. The hearing addresses a broad range of issues, including: how secure are our entry ports into Minnesota? What kinds of people and cargo are involved? What are the challenges handling these volumes? What has been the cost of handling these volumes? How is border security being conducted now? What procedures are in place? Who is responsible for what? What problems exist in maintaining border security at an acceptable cost, both in terms of government cost and delay at the border? What improvements can be made in how different agencies coordinate with each other and the private sector? Are local and State officials getting the support they need from the Federal Government, both in terms of advice and training and in terms of money? And finally, how should Federal money be distributed to the States and local governments, and are there problems with using the money the way it is currently distributed? Statements, witnesses and exhibits: Coleman, Collins, Dayton, Ardell Brede, Michael curry, John Hausladen, Steve Leqve, Anne Lombardi, Patrick McGowan, Paul Nevanen, Ray Skelton, Rich Stanek, and Thomas Heffelfinger. Statements, witnesses and exhibits: Coleman, Collins, Dayton, Ardell Brede, Michael curry, John Hausladen, Steve Leqve, Anne Lombardi, Patrick McGowan, Paul Nevanen, Ray Skelton, Rich Stanek, and Thomas Heffelfinger.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2003-05-12
• National Defense Transportation Day and National Transportation Week, 2003 [May 9, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From President Bush's proclamation: "Our 21st century transportation system safely and securely transports our citizens and delivers a wide range of goods throughout the country and the world. In times of war, our transportation system also moves troops and carries defense cargo efficiently. Preserving and enhancing our transportation resources makes that infrastructure safer, facilitates growth in business and industry, creates jobs, secures our Nation, and improves the quality of life of our citizens. […]. Through the newly created Department of Homeland Security, my Administration is working towards strengthening protections throughout our national transportation system. Designed to increase protections for America's citizens while maintaining the free flow of goods and people across our borders, our comprehensive national plan includes selective maritime restrictions, increased airport security, and improved railroad infrastructure security. We are also enforcing temporary flight restrictions and flying Combat Air Patrols over critical sites, increasing surveillance of hazardous material shipments within our country, and taking measures to keep hazardous materials away from places where large numbers of people gather. We are determined to defend the American homeland, and we will do all in our power to make sure our skies, rails, pipelines, waterways, and roads are safe from terror."

  United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary

  Bush, George W. (George Walker), 1946-

  2003-05-09
• Department of Homeland Security: State and Local Preparedness Issues [Updated May 5, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The Homeland Security Act transferred several federal entities administering preparedness programs to the new department of Homeland Security. In addition, the Justice Department's Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) will be transferred to the Border and Transportation Security directorate. ODP provides training, equipment grants, and technical assistance to states and localities. At least two bills have been introduced in the 108th Congress that would restructure DHS entities administering preparedness programs. The department's Office of State and Local Government Coordination, however, may have the necessary authority to develop a department-wide approach.The Homeland Security Act instructs FEMA to maintain its all-hazards focus, but some observers contend that, with the threat of terrorism, this approach may no longer apply.

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Canada, Ben

  2003-05-05
• U.S.-Mexico Border Partnership Joint Statement on Progress Achieved [April 24, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Our two governments are committed to building an efficient border that simultaneously facilitates legitimate travel, goods, and services on which our economies depend while assuring the security of our two nations. Both sides recognize that many challenges lie ahead. Nonetheless, we are confident that the Border Partnership accord is the vehicle to attain the spirit of cooperation of our two presidents. We will continue our joint work to increase security, minimize delays at ports of entry and build a border that keeps pace with our growing partnership."

  United States. Department of Homeland Security. Press Office

  2003-04-23
• Information Technology: Terrorist Watch Lists Should Be Consolidated to Promote Better Integration and Sharing, Report to Congressional Requesters

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Terrorist and criminal watch list systems--sometimes referred to as watchout, lookout, target, or tip-off systems--are important tools in controlling and protecting our nation's borders. The events of September 11, 2001, and other incidents since then, have highlighted the need to share these watch lists. In light of the importance of border security, GAO was asked to identify federal databases and systems that contain watch lists, the agencies that maintain and use them in protecting our nation's borders, the kind of data they contain, whether federal agencies are sharing information from these lists with each other and with state and local governments and private organizations, the structural characteristics of those lists that are automated, and whether opportunities exist to consolidate these watch lists. GAO recommends that the Secretary of DHS, in collaboration with the heads of the other departments and agencies that have and use watch lists, lead an effort to consolidate and standardize the federal government's watch list structures and policies. DHS and other departments involved in this study generally agreed with GAO's findings and recommendations.

  United States. General Accounting Office

  2003-04-15
• Serial No. 108-70: Impact of the Drug Trade on Border Security: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, First Session, April 15, 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  On April 15, 2003, the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform holds a hearing regarding the Drug Trade on Border Security. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Paul Beeson of the U.S. Border Patrol; Frank Dekert of the National Park Service; Sandalio Gonzalez Drug Enforcement Administration; David Longoria of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection; Bob Cook of the Greater El Paso Chamber of Commerce; Ruben Garcia of the Ysleta Independent School District; Jose Luis Soria of the Aliviane Drug Treatment Center; Carlos Leon of the El Paso Police Department; and Leo Samaneigo of the El Paso Police Department. Chairman Mark Sonder explains that, "Since the summer of 2001, this subcommittee has been making a comprehensive study of our Nation's borders. The subcommittee has focused particular attention on the effectiveness of the Federal law enforcement agencies entrusted with protecting and administering our Nation's borders and ports of entry." He adds that "Today's hearing is intended to focus on the problem of illegal drug smuggling along the southern border, and the related crime and damage caused by that smuggling. The southern border still sees far more illegal activity than the northern border and it presents severe challenges for effective law enforcement. The southern border runs through deserts, mountains and rivers, through unpopulated areas as well as cities and suburbs, through National Parks, wildlife refuges, Native American reservations, and even military bases. Questions of overlapping law enforcement agency jurisdiction can come into play, and we intend to address those issues today."

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2003-04-15
• Homeland Security: Challenges to Implementing the Immigration Interior Enforcement Strategy, Statement of Richard M. Stana, Director Homeland Security and Justice, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In this testimony, the following points are made: INS's interior enforcement strategy was designed to address (1) the detention and removal of criminal aliens, (2) the dismantling and diminishing of alien smuggling operations, (3) community complaints about illegal immigration, (4) immigration benefit and document fraud, and (5) employers' access to undocumented workers. These components remain in the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (BICE) strategy. INS faced numerous challenges in implementing the strategy. For example, INS lacked reliable data to determine staff needs, reliable information technology, clear and consistent guidelines and procedures for working-level staff, effective collaboration and coordination within INS and with other agencies, and appropriate performance measures to help assess program results. As BICE assumes responsibility for strategy implementation, it should consider how to address these challenges by improving resource allocation, information technology, program guidance, and performance measurement. The creation of DHS has focused attention on other challenges to implementing the strategy. For example, BICE needs to coordinate and collaborate with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS) for the timely and proper adjudication of benefit applications, and with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (BCBP) to assist in antismuggling investigations and sharing intelligence. In addition, BICE needs to assure that training and internal controls are sufficient to govern investigators' antiterrorism activities when dealing with citizens and aliens.

  United States. General Accounting Office

  2003-04-10
• Providing for the Common Defense: Securing the Southwest Border

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The Southwest border of the United States provides multiple threats to public safety. The region is influenced by long-standing and unresolved, economic, political and social concerns, that are aggravated by pervasive institutional corruption on both sides of the border. The 9/11 attacks, the presence of multiple terrorists organizations in the Western Hemisphere and the availability of Weapons of Mass Destruction, require us to address Southwest border security shortfalls. Securing the Southwest border is an attainable objective. Border control strategies employed during the last decade achieved some success. Consolidating government border agencies, adding additional personnel, building additional border infrastructure, and employing emerging technologies are the long-term steps needed to secure the Southwest border. In the near-term, military support can bridge the gap until resources and programs fully implemented. Properly resourced, these measures can protect the Homeland from terrorists, narco-terrorists and other threats currently endemic along the Southwest border. The current border security strategy outlined in The National Strategy for Homeland Security does not provide sufficient resources to address the threat from our open borders. While securing our borders entails a significant expenditure of resources, in the long run, this is the most cost- effective and prudent expenditure we can make.

  Army War College (U.S.)

  Diminyatz, Kerry L.

  2003-04-07
• Inner Asia: Making a Long-Term U.S. Commitment

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This paper discusses the Bush Administration's National Security Strategy goals and their application to Inner Asia and the importance of the U.S. to make a long-term commitment. The primary focus will be on the Inner Asia countries of the former Soviet Republics of Central Asia, but will also look at the influences of China and the border region of the western Chinese Xinjiang province, Iran, and Afghanistan. Current U.S. policy is analyzed for each National Security goal to include U.S. involvement with the international community and provide recommendations. The paper concludes that the United States does not have a strategic vision for Inner Asia and that it must develop a long-term multilateral regional strategy."

  Army War College (U.S.)

  Clair, Carol D.

  2003-04-07
• Globalization and State Sovereignty

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The nation-state, the basis of international relations and main framework for the existence and exercise of sovereignty and democracy of modern- day human communities, has been challenged by the phenomenon of globalization. Unprecedented changes in communications, transportation, and computer technology have given new impetus to economy. Globalized capital is reorganizing business firms and undermining national politics. Globalization creates vast new markets and gigantic new wealth, as well as widespread suffering, disorder and unrest. Under the condition of globalization, local', national and continental, political, social, and economic space is reformed in a way so that it is no longer necessarily coterminous with established legal and territorial boundaries. Although the nation-state continues to remain as the principal unit of analysis in the changing context of globalization, it now needs to be examined. The proposition that globalization make states unnecessary, is even less credible than the idea that it makes states impotent. The state normally defines identity. A sense of belonging is part of people's sense of security, and one that most people would not want to give up, even in the age of globalization. Finally, as the world economy continues to integrate and cross- border flows become more important, global governance must be improved. Global governance will come not at the expense of the state but rather as an expression of the interests that the state embodies. As the source of order and basis of governance, the state in future will remain as effective, and will be as essential, as it has ever been.

  Army War College (U.S.)

  Islam, Mainul

  2003-04-07
• Improving Security Ties with India

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "India has entered a new era as a rising regional power in Asia. The sub-continent lies along one of the world's most dangerous flash-points: the Kashmir Border with Pakistan and China. The long-standing crisis in the Kashmir area has the potential to destabilize the entire region. This underscores the need for US mediation between Pakistan and India, as the consequences of either a nuclear or non-nuclear war there would be disastrous for the US Global War on Terrorism. India as a democracy with a large economic base is an increasingly important ally in the region, although rising Hindu fundamentalism does pose a danger to the secular framework of modern India. India sees itself as a dominant power in the region and shares many common goals with the United States in South Asia. These goals include: Managing the consequences of instability; Eliminating the ideological and financial sources of terrorism; Protecting the sea lanes of communication; Securing a stable and free access to energy sources/markets in the region; Preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The United States must make a more concerted effort to enhance relations with India to foster peace and stability in South Asia, while maintaining a balance with its neighbor, Pakistan. The purpose of this paper is to examine common US-Indian goals, India's domestic concerns that shape its foreign policy, as well as explore India's role in the South Asian region vis-à-vis its neighbors, and the evolution of US-Indian relations since independence and their impact on today's relations. This paper will also recommend options for the United States to improve its security ties with India by increasing bilateral efforts through diplomatic, informational, military and economic means."

  Army War College (U.S.)

  McLaughlin, W. P.

  2003-04-07
• Central Asia's Security: Issues and Implications for U.S. Interests [Updated April 3, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Central Asian states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) face common security challenges from crime, corruption, terrorism, and faltering commitments to economic and democratic reforms. Security in the region is likely in the near term to vary by country, since cooperation among them remains halting. Kyrgyzstan's and Tajikistan's futures are most clouded by ethnic and regional tensions, and corruption in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan could spoil benefits from the development of their ample energy resources. Kyrgyzstan's emerging civil society may help the relatively small nation to safeguard its independence, and Turkmenistan's ethnic homogeneity and ample energy resources could put it in good stead, but both contain fractious regions and clans. Uzbekistan is the most likely to become a regional power able to take the lead on policy issues common to Central Asia and to resist undue influence from more powerful outside powers, because of its large territory and population (57 million) and energy and other resources. However, tensions between Uzbekistan and other Central Asian states stymy regional cooperation. Internal political developments in several bordering or close-by states may have a large impact on Central Asian security. These developments include a possibly more authoritarian and globalist Russia, ethnic and political instability in China, political liberalization in Iran, or re-surging drug production and Islamic extremism in Afghanistan."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nichol, James P.

  2003-04-03
• First Public Hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States: Statement of Gerald Dillingham, April 1, 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The first public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States was held on March 31-April 1, 2003 at the Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House in New York City, NY. The purpose of this public hearing was to engage those whose lives were forever changed by the events of September 11 in a public dialogue about the Commission's goals and priorities. The Commission also sought to learn about work already completed and the state of current knowledge, in order to identify the most important issues and questions requiring further investigation. This testimony was part of a panel entitled "Borders, Money, and Transportation Security". Dr. Dillingham is currently serving as the director of civil aviation issues for the U.S. General Accounting Office. In his testimony, Dillingham "addresses (1) transportation security before September 2001; (2) what the federal government has done since September 11 to strengthen transportation security, particularly aviation, mass transit, and port security; and (3) the long-term institutional challenges that face the federal agencies responsible for transportation security."

  National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

  2003-04-01
• American Foreign Policy Toward the Sudan: From Isolation to Engagement, Why the Bush Administration Turned Around U.S. Sudan Policy, January 2001 - December 2002

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American policy toward the Sudan was redirected in 2000 from the isolationist policies of President Clinton to the intensive engagement of the Bush Administration. In the 1990s, Sudan was perceived as posing a serious security threat to the U.S. Following the 1989 Islamist revolution, U.S. attention focused on Khartoum's support for terrorism, the long running civil war, regular humanitarian crises, and egregious human rights abuses. American security concerns were also raised by regional instability fomented by the Sudan's support for cross-border insurgencies. The Clinton Administration's effort to isolate the Sudan failed for lack of multilateral cooperation. By 2000, President-elect Bush intended to focus only on U.S. vital interests and core relationships rather than on peripheral areas such as Africa. Candidate Bush even remarked that, 'While Africa may be important, it doesn't fit into the national strategic interests.' When President Bush entered office he did not view the Sudan as a priority country because no vital U.S. national interests were at risk and Sudan had no capacity to threaten the U.S. Nevertheless, influences from various constituencies converged to alter this view in the first year of Bush's tenure. These influences resulted in Sudan being designated a priority country for U.S. policy in Africa."

  National War College (U.S.)

  Brown, Raymond L.

  2003-04
• First Public Hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States: Day Two, April 1, 2003 [Transcript]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the transcript of day two of the the first public hearing of the 9/11 Commission. Day two addressed the following topics: "Borders, Money, and Transportation Security" with testimony from Glenn Fine, Lee Wolosky and Gerald Dillingham; "Law Enforcement, Domestic Intelligence, and Homeland Security" with testimony from Michel Wermuth, Zoe Baird, and Randy Larsen; and "Immediate Response to the Attacks" with testimony from Shawn Kelley, William Baker, and Ken Holden.

  National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

  2003-04-01
• First Public Hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States: Statement of Glenn Fine, April 1, 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The first public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States was held on March 31-April 1, 2003 at the Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House in New York City, NY. The purpose of this public hearing was to engage those whose lives were forever changed by the events of September 11 in a public dialogue about the Commission's goals and priorities. The Commission also sought to learn about work already completed and the state of current knowledge, in order to identify the most important issues and questions requiring further investigation. This testimony was part of a panel entitled "Borders, Money, and Transportation Security". Glenn A. Fine was confirmed by the United States Senate as the inspector general of the Department of Justice on December 15, 2000. Topics covered in his testimony deal with the Office of the Inspector general reviews relating to border security issues and include such issues as: the INS's contacts with two September 11 terrorists, Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) follow-up review, efforts to control the northern border, nonimmigrant overstays, the INS's automated I-94 system, final orders of removal, the institutional removal program, the visa waiver program, passenger inspections at airports, security at airport facilities, and the Resendez-Ramirez Case.

  National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

  2003-04-01
• First Public Hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States: Statement of Lee S. Wolosky, April 1, 2003

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  The first public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States was held on March 31-April 1, 2003 at the Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House in New York City, NY. The purpose of this public hearing was to engage those whose lives were forever changed by the events of September 11 in a public dialogue about the Commission's goals and priorities. The Commission also sought to learn about work already completed and the state of current knowledge, in order to identify the most important issues and questions requiring further investigation. This testimony was part of a panel entitled "Borders, Money, and Transportation Security". Lee S. Wolosky is an adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). He testified on the subject of terrorist financing.

  National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

  2003-04-01
• Central Asia's New States: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [April 1, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States recognized the independence of all the former Central Asian republics and established diplomatic relations with each by mid-March 1992. The United States also supported their admission to the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and other Western organizations, and elicited Turkish support in countering Iranian influence in the region. Congress was at the forefront in urging the formation of coherent U.S. policies for aiding these and other Eurasian states of the former Soviet Union, and approved the Freedom Support Act and other legislation for this purpose. Soon after the terrorist attacks on America on September 11, 2001, all the Central Asian states offered overflight and other support to coalition anti-terrorist efforts in Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan have hosted coalition troops and provided access to airbases. After 9/11, the United States boosted its security assistance throughout the region for anti-terrorism, counter-narcotics, non-proliferation, border and customs, and defense cooperation programs, while also increasing aid for democratization and free market reforms. U.S. policy goals in Central Asia include fostering stability, democratization, free market economies, free trade and transport throughout the Eurasian corridor, denuclearization in the non-Russian states, and adherence to international human rights standards."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nichol, James P.

  2003-04-01
• President Updates America on Operations Liberty Shield and Iraqi Freedom [March 31, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  In this speech, President Bush discusses the progress the U.S. has made in Iraq in the first 11 days of the invasion. The President also outlines the five areas of focus for homeland security; border control, better surveillance in the national transportation system, of terrorism suspects, greater infrastructure protection, and a ensuring the public health system is prepared for attacks.

  United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary

  2003-03-31
• U.S.-Mexico Border Environment 2002: Sixth Report of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board to the President and Congress of the United States

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This 6th report of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB) focuses "on four areas: water resources; power plants; human health; and conservation of natural resources. We also briefly address four issues that merit continued attention; BECC-NADBank [Border Environment Cooperation Commission-North American Development Bank] Reform; the Border 2012 program; the effect of security measures on the border-region environment; and progress in building dialogue with the Board's counterpart advisory groups for the northern border of Mexico, the Consejos."

  United States. Environmental Protection Agency

  United States. Good Neighbor Environmental Board

  2003-04