Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: ALL (Domestic AND (U.S.) AND Terrorism) in: title or summary
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).
-
Nonproliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament, and Extended Deterrence in the New Security Environment
"With the end of the Cold War, in a dramatically changed security environment, the advances in nonnuclear strategic capabilities along with reduced numbers and roles for nuclear forces have altered the calculus of deterrence and defense, at least for the United States. [...] In place of the old Soviet threat, there has been growing concern about proliferation and terrorism involving nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD), regional conflicts, global instability and increasingly serious new and emerging threats, including cyber attacks and attacks on satellites. For the United States at least, in this emerging environment, the political rationales for nuclear weapons, from deterrence to reassurance to alliance management, are changing and less central than during the Cold War to the security of the United States--and its friends and allies. Nuclear weapons remain important for the United States, but for a far more limited set of roles and missions. As the Perry-Schlesinger Commission report reveals, there is a domestic U.S. consensus on nuclear policy and posture at the highest level and for the near term, including the continued role of nuclear arms in deterring WMD use and in reassuring allies. Although the value of nuclear weapons has declined for the United States, the value of these weapons for Russia, China and so-called 'rogue' states is seen to be rising."
Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Contemporary Conflict
Pilat, Joseph F.
2009-09
-
Secretary Napolitano Announces Second Major Aviation Security Milestone this Month [June 24, 2010]
"Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced that 100 percent of passengers flying domestically and internationally on U.S. airlines are now being checked against government watch lists through the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) Secure Flight program--the second major step in fulfilling a key 9/11 Commission recommendation achieved this month. Today's announcement comes less than three weeks after TSA reached 100 percent watchlist checking for all passengers traveling within the United States and its territories through Secure Flight. Before TSA began implementing Secure Flight, airlines held responsibility for checking passengers against terrorist watchlists. 'Secure Flight fulfills a key recommendation of the of the 9/11 Commission Report, enabling TSA to screen passengers directly against government watchlists using passenger name, date of birth, and gender before a boarding pass is issued,' said Secretary Napolitano. 'This achievement significantly enhances one of our many layers of security--coordinated with our partners in the airline industry and governments around the world--that we leverage to protect the traveling public against threats of terrorism.'"
United States. Department of Homeland Security. Press Office
2010-06-24
-
Terrorist Threat To United States Military Bases - Are We On The Verge Of Another Pearl Harbor?
Each year the list of terrorist activities worldwide grows at a frightening rate. Not only are these terrorist acts occurring in countries which have traditionally been plagued by such activity, but they have begun filtering into our own borders. Although the number of terrorist attacks has actually declined slightly in recent years, the number of deaths and injuries has steadily increased. This is largely due to the increased severity of terrorist attacks. The United States military is certainly not immune to these cowardly acts. The Beirut Bombing and khobar Towers Bombing, two well-known terrorist attacks on U.S. forces, have claimed the lives of hundreds of our military men and women. Even with these events etched into our collective memory, we continue to believe that terrorist acts are not likely to happen on our military bases stateside. This unhealthy lack of concern over a real terrorist threat creates a weakness in security that could be exploited by international as well as domestic terrorists. This paper seeks to raise the level of consciousness among all military and civilian personnel who serve and work on bases within our nation's borders. It also offers recommendations to be incorporated into the Department of Defense structure to ensure that not only personnel awareness of the terrorist threat is increased but that our capabilities to combat terrorism is developed to a higher level of security.
Naval War College (U.S.)
Carter, John F.
1998-02-13
-
Applying Operational Art to Asymmetrical Threats Within United States
The United States position of military dominance has continually evolved since World War 2. While many factors are responsible for this elite status, perhaps the most important is the careful consideration given to jointness and operational effectiveness. Given the Unites States' seemingly overwhelming conventional military strength relative to foreseeable potential adversaries, it is likely that future foes will attempt to attack the United States in a more indirect manner by using asymmetrical warfare. Asymmetrical warfare focuses on defeating the superior with the inferior. Examples include terrorism, informational warfare, and the use of chemical, biological and nuclear (CBR) weapons. Potential asymmetrical attacks to the continental United States pose substantial challenges to the current operational structure from which so much of our military strength is derived. Examined are the elements that effect our preparedness in responding to a domestic asymmetrical attack: The complexities asymmetrical threats present in operational planning; unified command structuring; interagency coordination; and legal jurisdiction. A hypothetical scenario employing Red China's current asymmetrical warfare capabilities is depicted to reinforce the pertinence of the topic. This paper examines the current operational system, issues that inhibit the operational process and offers for consideration areas of potential improvement.
Naval War College (U.S.)
Sweet, Jon M.
1998-02-13
-
Post-Unified Korean Foreign Policy Options: Regional Implications
Following the prospective unification of Korea, presumably under Seoul's guidance, the government would face the choice between policies of alignment and nonalignment with each major Pacific power. This choice will be influenced by historical predispositions, the path of reunification, Korea's domestic situation, and its relations with each power. As long as the present North Korean threat continues to plague the political and security considerations of South Korea, the ROK has no other viable alternative than the U.S.-ROK security alliance. However, after the elimination of the North Korean threat, a unified Korea will be able to redefine its foreign policy options. Currently, given the predominance of the ongoing war on terrorism, the foreign policy options of a unified Korea are not a top consideration for Washington. This permits the People's Republic of China to play a larger role in the reunification process, which could predispose a unified Korea to tilt toward China. In order for the United States to anticipate and prepare for this event, this thesis analyzes foreign policy options of a unified Korea and the possible political, economic, and military ramifications within the realm of international relations that could conceivably occur with the unification of North and South Korea.
Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)
DeJong, Laura S.
2002-09
-
Guantanamo: Implications for U.S. Human Rights Leadership, Hearing Before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, June 21, 2007
From the opening statement of Alcee L. Hastings: "This is the Helsinki Commission's first hearing in some time examining an issue of domestic compliance, an area which will receive warranted attention during my chairmanship. As many people here know, in executing the Helsinki Commission's mandate, members of this Commission are engaged in a continual dialogue with representatives of other countries, including parliamentarians, on issues of concern, with a particular focus on human rights. [...] In organizing this hearing, it's painfully difficult to unpackage a whole set of issues related to our counterterrorism efforts: The offshore detention center at Guantanamo; the treatment of detainees in custody and the interrogation practices to which they may be subjected; the legal procedures for holding, trying and potentially convicting detainees of crimes; and the issue of extraordinary rendition, to name a few. Frankly, in my opinion, the United States has not covered itself with glory when it comes to most of these issues. I'm, of course, mindful of the fact that many other committees of both the House and Senate are actively engaged in oversight on many aspects of this subject. It's not our intention to duplicate those efforts. Rather, we hope to address the specific implications of Guantanamo for U.S. human rights leadership." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Alcee L. Hastings, Benjamin L. Cardin, Steny H. Hoyer, John B. Bellinger III, Anne-Marie Lizin, Tom Malinowski, Gabor Rona, Christopher J. Dodd, Hilda Solis, and the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights.
United States. Government Printing Office
2010
-
Combating Nuclear Smuggling: DHS's Cost-Benefit Analysis to Support the Purchase of New Radiation Detection Portal Monitors Was Not Based on Available Performance Data and Did Not Fully Evaluate All the Monitors' Costs and Benefits
"Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, combating terrorism has been one of the nation's highest priorities. As part of that effort, preventing nuclear and radioactive material from being smuggled into the United States- perhaps to be used by terrorists in a nuclear weapon or in a radiological dispersal device (a 'dirty bomb')- has become a key national security objective. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for providing radiation detection capabilities at U.S. ports-of-entry. Until April 2005, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) under DHS managed this program. However, on April 15, 2005, the president directed the establishment, within DHS, of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), whose duties include acquiring and supporting the deployment of radiation detection equipment."
United States. Government Accountability Office
2006-10-17
-
Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Inspector General
"On January 24, 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began operations. The creation of the department, representing the largest reorganization in Federal history since the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947, brings together 22 different Federal agencies and approximately 180,000 employees. The mission of the department (preventing terrorist attacks within the United States, reducing the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism, minimizing the death and destruction resulting from terrorist attacks, and assisting with the recovery from any such attack) is of paramount national importance. DHS is organized into five divisions or 'directorates.' The largest of the directorates, Border and Transportation Security, is responsible for maintaining the security of our nation's borders and transportation systems. It brings together the functions of the U.S. Customs Service, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the border security functions of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The Emergency Preparedness and Response directorate works to ensure that our nation is prepared for and able to recover from terrorist attacks and natural disasters. It assumes the work and role of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and it absorbs the functions of the Office of Domestic Preparedness in the Department of Justice (Justice). The Science and Technology directorate houses the department's research and development activities, which are designed to find ways and means to thwart terrorist attacks and to minimize their effects."
United States. Department of Defense. Office of the Inspector General
Ervin, Clark Kent
2003
-
U.S.-European Relations Pre- and Post September 11, 2001
From the thesis abstract: "Throughout the more than 50 years in which the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has secured peace and stability in Europe, relations between the US and its European allies remain a persistent paradox-unified, yet at considerable odds. It is a partnership that is consistent and strong, yet troubled and fragile. This thesis analyzes the emerging European-American relationships based on perceptions of key stakeholders, including pre- and post- September 11 attitudes, and persistent concerns Although history may repeat itself globalization of politics, finance and national security increasingly connect Europeans, Americans and other nations, The complexity of these relationships is studied to reveal common themes relevant to evolving European- American relations, This study reveals the following findings: France, Germany and the United Kingdom represent the overall voice of European policies; The interpersonal relations between prominent European and American stakeholders appear more substantial and influential than publicly acknowledged; European stakeholders perceive the current U.S. administration as generally reflective of a bygone era; The number of European partners are increasing and European voices are moving tentatively closer to a common voice on foreign and security issues; And important European domestic issues appear to dominate European concerns, often overshadowing the American preoccupation on terrorism."
Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)
Lange, Thomas
2002-03
-
Fact Sheet: Border Patrol Special Operations Group
"The Border Patrol recognizes the need for specialized teams capable of handling uncommon and dangerous situations. Such situations would be outside the normal scope of Border Patrol agent duties conducted while supporting the current U.S. Customs and Border Protection Strategic Plan to: 1. Prevent terrorism; 2. Strengthen control of the U.S. Borders; 3. Protect America and its citizens The Special Operations Group accomplishes these goals through planning, training, and deployment to domestic and international intelligence-driven and antiterrorism efforts, as well as disaster and humanitarian related special operations."
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
2009-05
-
Attorney General's Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations
This set of FBI guidelines lays out the methods by which the FBI operates with regard to the terrorist threat. "The general objective of these Guidelines is the full utilization of all authorities and investigative methods, consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, to protect the United States and its people from terrorism and other threats to the national security, to protect the United States and its people from victimization by all crimes in violation of federal law, and to further the foreign intelligence objectives of the United States. At the same time, it is axiomatic that the FBI must conduct its investigations and other activities in a lawful and reasonable manner that respects liberty and privacy and avoids unnecessary intrusions into the lives of law-abiding people. The purpose of these Guidelines, therefore, is to establish consistent policy in such matters. They will enable the FBI to perform its duties with effectiveness, certainty, and confidence, and will provide the American people with a firm assurance that the FBI is acting properly under the law. The issuance of these Guidelines represents the culmination of the historical evolution of the FBI and the policies governing its domestic operations subsequent to the September 11,2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. Reflecting decisions and directives of the President and the Attorney General, inquiries and enactments of Congress, and the conclusions of national commissions, it was recognized that the FBI's functions needed to be expanded and better integrated to meet contemporary realities[.]"
United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation
2008-09-28
-
Terrorists as Enemy Combatants: An Analysis of How the United States Applies the Law of Armed Conflict in the Global War on Terrorism
From the thesis abstract: "Commanders need to understand how the law of armed conflict applies to the various enemy forces they are likely to encounter while combating terrorism. Historically, terrorists have been regarded as bandits and held criminally responsible for their unlawful acts under domestic law. However, after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon in September 2001, the U.S. decided to engage transnational terrorists in armed conflict. As enemy combatants, terrorists may be lawfully killed by virtue of their membership in the enemy group rather than their individual conduct. If a nation's armed forces harbor or support terrorists, the facts will determine whether they are lawful or unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are protected under the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War and entitled to specific privileges while captured. Unlawful combatants have no such rights. The President has considerable latitude in identifying, detaining, and punishing them. As U.S. forces engage terrorists and the states that harbor them, we should expect to encounter both lawful and unlawful combatants. This paper explains what the difference is and why it matters."
Naval War College (U.S.)
Reid, Scott E.
2004-02-09
-
Adjusting U.S. Strategy Towards Iraq: Toward a Comprehensive Approach
"The terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington D.C. on September 11 reflected a level of brutality and ingenuity that horrified the entire world. Apart from those individuals who witnessed the destruction firsthand, many Americans continue to recall the harsh images flowing from millions of television sets that day and for weeks thereafter. These were ordinary Americans: falling out of buildings; burning to death; and running through narrow streets while being engulfed in smoke. President Bush's message soon after September 11 was understandably emotional, 'You're either with us . . . or with the terrorists.' This Presidential threat, coupled with the palpable anger of the American people, forced many nations to quickly digest the stakes of a 'global war on terrorism.' The purpose of this paper is not to argue that our nation's history requires that we "wait for threats to fully materialize, [increasing the risk that] we will have waited too long nor to downplay the dangers of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The objective is to review the nature of the threat posed by Iraq, the strategies and policy instruments presently employed and under consideration to address that threat, and, finally, to recommend adjustments where necessary. First, the Iraqi threat to the U.S and its allies has been grossly distorted and exaggerated. While exaggerating the nature and immediacy of the threat may regenerate homeland fears in such a way that sets in motion sympathy to oust Saddam, the actual commitment of American 'blood and treasure' will bear out the need for a far more convincing explanation of the 'why now?' issue. Second, the exhaustive failure to link Iraq directly to September 11 engendered an official yet public migration from preemption as the chief justification for an attack to an undefined strategic imperative to use force, causing international and domestic suspicion and confusion."
National War College (U.S.)
Kosak, Charles P.
2003
-
Energy Security: Challenges to National Security [powerpoint]
This presentation outlines energy-related trends impact on global security; the implications these trends hold for policy-makers, intelligence, and homeland security; and how the U.S. should respond to these emerging threats to our national security. In 2015, the global drivers of change: demographics, natural resources, science and technology, globalization, national/international governance, future conflict, and role of U.S. Global trends are: fossil fuel, renewable energy, nuclear energy and GNEP, and new energy sources. There is a global increase in energy consumption. It is at the crossroads of: proliferation, nuclear terrorism, resource competition in a unipolar world, environment, and science and technology. The wild cards: large scale/WMD terrorist attack, large scale disruption of energy supplies, global renaissance of nuclear specialties, and free exchange of ideas on the Internet. Practical solutions: Develop a comprehensive National Energy Security Strategy with a long term focus; fully integrate policy, intelligence and homeland security; develop a comprehensive collection strategy that unifies foreign and domestic intelligence; change culture; and promote the creativity and innovation required to find unique solutions to unique problems.
United States. Department of Energy
Mowatt-Larssen, Rolf
2006-10-06
-
South Asia and the Nuclear Future: Rethinking the Causes and Consequences of Nuclear Proliferation
"U.S. policy toward the nuclearization of India and Pakistan has shifted from sanctions and rollback to reluctant acceptance of their nuclear status. The United States now seeks to ensure that India and Pakistan become responsible nuclear powers and is emphasizing cooperative measures to prevent war, secure weapons and material from terrorist theft, and stop the further spread of nuclear weapons. Analyses of Indian and Pakistani nuclear behavior must consider the domestic political motivations of key decision makers and not just national security interests. Nuclear weapons in South Asia have both precipitated one limited war (Kargil 1999) and prevented another (the 2001-02 crisis). The lessons learned from these events in New Delhi and Islamabad may be dissimilar. India and Pakistan might be willing to cooperate with the broader nuclear nonproliferation regime, even if they cannot join the NPT as nuclear-weapons states. Such a step could be essential in bolstering efforts to prevent illicit nuclear assistance to new proliferating nations. The strategic effects of a potential Indian missile defense deployment are highly uncertain. The United States, India, and Pakistan have mutual interests in preventing nuclear terrorism, which could lead to deeper cooperation among the three countries."
Army War College (U.S.). Strategic Studies Institute
Sechser, Todd S.
2004-06
-
Budget Hearing-Federal Bureau of Investigation, Before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, One Hundred and Fourteenth Congress, March 25, 2015
This is a testimony compilation from the March 25, 2015 hearing titled "Budget Hearing - Federal Bureau of Investigation," held before the U.S. House of Representatives,Committee on Appropriations. The following is taken from the opening statement of Chairman Hal Rodgers: "The Chairman rightly stated that the FBI has a critical mission in protecting our homeland, and I extend my thanks to the 35,000 individuals under your charge: who support our county's counter-terrorism efforts; who protect us from hostile foreign intelligence agencies and espionage; who work tirelessly to beat back against the constant barrage of domestic and foreign cyber-threats; and who risk life and limb to put dangerous criminals here at home behind bars. The importance of these efforts to our national security and our economy cannot be understated. And yet, the Chairman also rightly stated that we are confronting an extremely difficult budgetary climate -- and every federal agency is therefore confronted with tough choices. It is extremely important for agencies like the FBI which rely so heavily on intelligence information to leverage and maximize the partnerships forged at the local, state and even international level to ensure that every penny the taxpayer spends is targeted, efficient and effective. I am pleased that the FBI has been taking strides in recent years to streamline and optimize its intelligence components, but I think we can all agree that much work is still to be done here. Last year, you requested and we granted permission to restructure the FBI's Intelligence Program to more seamlessly integrate intelligence and operations, and I hope you can provide the Committee with an update on these efforts -- particularly as we all begin to assess the report evaluating the FBI's implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations." Statements, letters and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James B Comey.
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations
2015-02-25
-
Examination of Terrestrial Nuclear Energy's Relevance to U.S. National Security
This thesis is in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Strategic Studies Degree. "This paper is an examination of the relevance that terrestrial nuclear energy has with regard to U.S. national security. Terrestrial nuclear energy is herein defined as energy produced from land-based nuclear reactors. The principal application for terrestrial nuclear reactors is in the generation of electricity. Maritime or space-vehicle propulsion reactors are excluded from this definition, as are nuclear weapons. While the national security implications of thermonuclear warheads and nuclear-powered warships are relatively direct, the national security implications of benign nuclear energy are less so. National security interest areas of energy independence, energy security, climate change, economics, public safety, and nuclear terrorism and proliferation are considered. The paper addresses both domestic nuclear energy and aspects of foreign nuclear energy. Through this examination, terrestrial nuclear energy is found to have both direct and indirect implications to U.S. national security interests."
Army War College (U.S.)
Raftery, Jr, James J.
2011-03-24
-
Serial No. 115-38: Looking North: Assessing the Current Threat at the U.S.-Canada Border, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, Second Session, November 14, 2017
This is November 14, 2017 hearing on "Looking North: Assessing the Current Threat at the U.S.-Canada Border," held before the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security of the Committee on Homeland Security. From the opening statement of Martha McSally: "When Congress talks about border security, it is usually in reference to the Southwest Border where my community is. However, we cannot ignore the threats we face along the Northern Border. At almost 4,000 miles long, including a long, liquid border with the Great Lakes, our shared border with Canada is a situational awareness challenge that requires a much different strategy than that on the Southwest Border. To address these challenges, DHS needs to develop a coherent Northern Border strategy and implementation plan to protect our northern frontier. Last year, Congressman John Katko led Congressional efforts to pass the Northern Border Threat Analysis Act. This legislation required DHS to focus its attention on National security threats that originate along our Northern Border. The Department finally released a threat analysis this past summer with plans to release the full strategy in January 2018, and an implementation plan to follow that shortly thereafter. Threats identified in the Northern Border analysis include domestic Canadian terror plots and radicalized individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally. Similar to the Southern Border, transnational criminal organizations that control the bidirectional flow of illicit drugs, such as cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, ecstasy, and marijuana, also pose a threat." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Dougherty, Scott A. Luck, Kevin Kelly, and Michael Marchand.
United States. Government Publishing Office
2018
-
Conference Report a Nation at War, Seventeenth Annual Strategy Conference Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, April 11-13, 2006
"The U.S. Army War College (USAWC) Strategy Conference each year addresses a major security issue of relevance to the United States and its allies. Recognizing that the ultimate symbol of the nation's commitment is 'boots on the ground,' the USAWC focuses the Strategy Conference on the subject's implications for ground power. The conference brings together top national security strategists, senior military leaders, media, university faculty, and the policy-making community to consider, discuss, and debate topics concerning America's national security strategy. The 2006 conference was designed to help frame vital questions that offer insights on the conference theme: 'A Nation at War.' The phrase 'A Nation at War' evokes images of mobilization of the nation's resources: military surely, but also the government, industry, and the population. Thus far in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), though, the mobilization has not been on the scale seen in past 'global' wars. As the Nation approached the 5-year mark of the start of the GWOT, the USAWC focused the attention of its Seventeenth Annual Strategy Conference on whether or not the evidence supports the continuing assumption that the Nation is really at war. Some would insist that the answer is obviously yes. The conference studied this question in depth with panels on the homeland security aspects, the international context, the legal foundation for the war, and the associated economic and domestic policy issues. The conclusion was that the answer to the question is not as clear as first thought. Much of the evidence suggests that the Nation--or at least some parts of it--is not at war."
Army War College (U.S.). Strategic Studies Institute
2007-01
-
Strategic Effects of the Conflict with Iraq: South Asia
India and Pakistan, the major countries of South Asia, have distanced themselves from the proposed U.S.-led military action in Iraq. Both countries remain concerned that a prolonged war would affect their domestic security situation and their economies adversely. This document analyzes four issues: the position that key states in the South Asia region are taking on U.S. military action against Iraq; the role of America in the region after the war with Iraq; the nature of security partnerships in the region after the war with Iraq; and the effect that war with Iraq will have on the war on terrorism in the region.
Army War College (U.S.). Strategic Studies Institute
Gupta, Amit Kumar
2003-05
-
Countering Terrorism in Heartland -- Can We Afford Posse Comitatus Any Longer?
National security policy makers have opened the debate on the necessity of revising the Posse Comitatus Act (Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1385) to confront extant threats to homeland security. A unique confluence of circumstances supports the timing of this debate: the events of 11 September 2001, with their pervasive influence on the Administration's new National Security Strategy; the recent National Strategy for Homeland Security and just- published National Strategy for Combating Terrorism; passage of the bill establishing a new Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security; and, within the Department of Defense, the establishment of Northern Command, a combatant command tagged with defense of the homeland. The Posse Comitatus Act is not the sacred cow it once may have been. Over time, Congress has gradually carved out exceptions to prohibitions on the use of the military for law enforcement. These legislative measures recognize that proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, with likely access by committed terrorist groups, changes the policy calculus. In a perfect world, local police enforce domestic law while soldiers fight enemies abroad. But the neat dichotomy between law enforcement and national security has blurred. In some cases, using military force in the United States to counter a threat by terrorists may indeed constitute the most effective means to preserve national security. Sections 1 and 2 of this paper present background information on the debate over the military's role in Homeland Security and a history of the Posse Comitatus Act. Subsequent sections discuss the individuals who are calling for a revision of the Act, a conceptual framework for revising or repealing the Act, the benefits of a revision, and the arguments against reform. The author is on the side of those who wish to revise or repeal the Act.
Army War College (U.S.)
Chipman, Dana K.
2003-04-07
-
President's Remarks on Intelligence Reform
President George W. Bush discusses the government's actions against the threat of terrorism. The U.S. government is working closely with other countries to gather intelligence and to make arrests and cut off terrorist finances. The United States is also using the best technologies to bear against the threat of chemical and biological warfare. Included in these efforts are the transformation of the FBI, the expansion of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the establishment of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center. President Bush announces his request for the creation of the position of a National Intelligence Director, who is to serve as the President's principal intelligence advisor and oversee and coordinate foreign and domestic activities of the intelligence committee. The President addresses specific questions concerning this new position.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2004-08-02
-
Broader Middle East Initiative: Requirements for Success in the Gulf
"One of the more significant developments following the 9/11 attacks is the growing realization in the United States and elsewhere that domestic conditions throughout the Middle East are a major cause of radicalization. More specifically this view sees radicalization and the growing terrorist threat in the region as stemming from a failed modernization process that has created weak states. In turn, these states have failed to provide for the needs of their populations, either economically through improved standards of living and opportunity or politically though increased voice and participation. In this regard, the adoption of the United States sponsored Broader Middle East and North African Initiative -BMEI (a later version of the Greater Middle East and North African Initiative-GMEI) by the Group of Eight Industrialized Nations (G-8) at their June 8-10 summit in Sea Island, Georgia, is seen by the Bush Administration as representing a milestone in the war on terrorism. The initiative has two key elements. The first is the launching of a "Partnership for Progress and a Common Future with the Region of the Broader Middle East and North Africa." The second is a plan for the G-8 countries to support reform in Arab countries. The purpose of this Strategic Insights article is to examine several of the operational issues raised by the Initiative. What are realistic goals for success? The key areas of reform needed to achieve these goals? The difficulties in implementation? In addressing these issues, several lessons from the transition economies of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union are found to be highly relevant."
Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Contemporary Conflict
Looney, Robert E.
2004-08
-
Challenges Confronting the Global Effort to Stop Terrorist Financing
This document provides a lecture that was given at a program in Austria in June of 2004. It addresses the challenges confronting the global effort to stop terrorist financing. Remarks are limited to the financial component of the U.S. government's anti-terrorism strategy, which is intended to identify, disrupt, and dismantle the financial networks of terrorist organizations that threaten the peace and security of the United States and the international community. The first section addresses the anti-terrorist financing strategy, including domestic blocking actions, international cooperation, and financial regulations. The second section discusses challenges ahead, most notably corrupt charities, accountability, and international cooperation.
United States. Embassy (Austria)
Gurul©, Jimmy
2004-06-07
-
Collins Center Update: Volume 1, Issue 1, March 1999
"This issue of The Collins Center Update focuses on five activities. The purpose of the workshop 'Nuclear South Asia: Implications for U.S. Policy' was to assess the new nuclear reality of South Asia and to develop possible policy options for the United States. Another workshop reported on was the annual 'Streamlining the Organization for National Security' workshop. The 1998 workshop brought together senior military leaders, business leaders, and congressional staffers who critically examined the statutory Title 10 responsibilities of the services in the post-Goldwater Nichols Act environment. The Center for Strategic Leadership's (CSL) annual environmental security game focused on the energy resources, geopolitics, and environmental security of the Caspian Basin, which represents new and potentially large oil reserves set within a politically unstable region. The newsletter also reports on the biennial Adjutants General National Security Seminar (AGNSS) that was held for military advisors to the State Governor. The seminar updated the Adjutants General on critical national security issues and gave them the opportunity to interact with each other, students, and faculty. A Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) lecture series addressed the significant aspects of the United States' number one security issue. Subject matter experts addressed critical issues, including legislative and treaty constraints on WMD threat management, domestic response to WMD terrorism, the proliferation of WMD to rogue states, and its operational effects on theater warfare. The final activity was the U.S. Army War College 'International Fellows' Coalition Operations in 2010' exercise. The newsletter also contains information on activities and upcoming events and CSL publications."
Army War College (U.S.). Center for Strategic Leadership
1999-03
-
Responding to a Terrorist Attack Involving Chemical Warfare Agents
"Because of their availability and relative ease of dispersal, toxic and often lethal chemicals are potentially attractive weapons for terrorists. A chemical agent attack could result in high casualties, especially if the release occurs in an office building, indoor stadium, airport, or train station. The economic losses would be significant as well because of the time involved to remediate the area following such an attack. Federal and state agencies are thus working with major transportation centers to strengthen plans for responding to the possible use of chemical warfare agents. […] At the Laboratory's Forensic Science Center (FSC), chemists have been working closely with chemical warfare agents since the early 1990s to support treaty verification and U.S. intelligence efforts. Founded in 1991, FSC supplies analytical expertise to counter terrorism, aid domestic law enforcement, and verify compliance with international treaties. FSC researchers analyze virtually every kind of chemical evidence, some of it no greater than a few billionths of a gram. In addition, the center is one of two U.S. laboratories internationally certified for identifying chemical warfare agents, sometimes referred to as the poor-man's atomic bomb. Since 2008, Lawrence Livermore has been working closely with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prepare for incidents involving chemical weapons. FSC serves as EPA's environmental reference laboratory for developing and validating reliable, accurate, and extremely sensitive methods to analyze chemical warfare agents and their degradation products. Laboratory researchers have also characterized many toxic industrial compounds because the molecular structure and health effects of these substances are similar to those of known chemical warfare agents."
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Heller, Arnie
2010-03
-
Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, March 27, 2007
From the opening statement of Patrick J. Leahy: "Almost 6 years after the September 11th attacks, it troubles all of us that the FBI has not yet lived up to its promise to be the world-class domestic intelligence agency the American people expect and need it to be. This morning we learn from a report in the Washington Post that the FBI has repeatedly submitted inaccurate information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in its efforts to obtain secret warrants in terrorism and espionage cases, severely undermining the government's credibility in the eyes of the Chief Judge of that court. When I read that last night online, they were talking about even considering making people who sent these reports in come in and appear under oath. That is a very problematical thing, and it bothers me very much. But from the FBI's illegal and improper use of National Security Letters, to the Bureau's failure to be accountable for securing its own computers and weapons, to the politically motivated dismissal of eight of the Nation's U.S. Attorneys, there are growing concerns about the competence of the FBI and the independence of the Department of Justice. This pattern of abuse of authority and mismanagement causes me and many others on both sides of the aisle to wonder whether the FBI and Department of Justice have been faithful trustees of the great trust that the Congress and American people have placed in them to keep our Nation safe, while respecting the privacy rights and civil liberties of all Americans." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Edward M. Kennedy; Patrick J. Leahy; Arlen Specter; Robert S. Mueller, III; Thomas E. Bush, III; William E. Moschella; Charles E. Grassley; and John Solomon.
United States. Government Printing Office
2009
-
U.S. Department of State: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2007
"Respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is, as President Bush has said, 'the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.' Today, on every continent, men and women are working, often against great odds and at great risk, to secure the basic rights to live in dignity, to follow their conscience and speak their minds without fear, to choose those who would govern them and hold their leaders accountable, and to obtain equal justice under the law. Increasingly, democracy is seen as the form of government capable of securing those rights and fundamental freedoms. No form of government is without flaws. Democracy is a system of government of, by, and for the people, based on the principle that human beings have the inherent right to shape their own future, but that they are flawed creatures and that therefore there must be built-in correctives. Our citizens claim a proud history of striving in every generation since our nation's founding to bring our democratic practices closer to our cherished principles, even as we are seeking to confront the injustices and challenges of each new age. As we publish these reports, the Department of State remains mindful of both international and domestic criticism of the United States' human rights record. The U.S. government will continue to hear and reply forthrightly to concerns about our own practices, including the actions we have taken to defend our nation from the global threat of terrorism. Our laws, policies, and practices have evolved considerably in recent years, and we continue to strive to protect innocent civilians from attack while honoring our longstanding commitment to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms. As part of this effort, the United States submits reports to international bodies in accordance with its obligations under various human rights treaties to which it is a party."
United States. Department of State. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2008-03-11
-
GTRI's Convert Program: Minimizing the Use of Highly Enriched Uranium
"In 2004, NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration] established the Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) in the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation to, as quickly as possible, identify, secure, remove and/or facilitate the disposition of high risk vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials around the world that pose a threat to the United States and the international community. GTRI's mission is to reduce and protect vulnerable nuclear and radiological material located at civilian sites worldwide. GTRI achieves its mission via three initiatives which provide a comprehensive approach to preventing terrorists' access to nuclear and radiological materials. As part of its mission, GTRI's Convert Program, working domestically and internationally, implements the long-standing U.S policy to minimize and eliminate the use of highly enriched uranium (HEU) in civilian applications by working to convert research and test reactors and isotope production facilities to the use of low enriched uranium (LEU). Taken together with NNSA's work to prevent proliferation and secure nuclear material, the Convert Program demonstrates GTRI's commitment to protecting the American people and the rest of the world from nuclear and radiological terrorism."
United States. National Nuclear Security Administration
2013-04-12
-
Counterterrorism Efforts to Combat a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Attack on the Homeland: Hearing Before the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 25, 2013
This testimony compilation is from the April 25, 2013 hearing, "Counterterrorism Efforts to Combat a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Attack on the Homeland," before the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. From the statement of Scott McAllister and Huban A. Gowadia: "We are pleased to testify today about the efforts of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) and the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) to enhance information sharing efforts with our state and local partners and protect against radiological and nuclear threats to the homeland. Our testimony today focuses on DHS' work and the ways we have sought to strengthen our collaboration with our state and local partners who are on the front lines protecting our communities. In the ten years since DHS was created, we have significantly improved our information sharing and operational collaboration as we work together to confront an evolving range of threats." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Richard Daddario, Huban Gowadia, Scott McAllister, and Leonard Cole.
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Homeland Security
2013-04-25
