Today, the United States faces threats to its security. Terrorist groups that are based in foreign lands and lone-wolf attackers are among the security threats that the country faces. The nation has developed policies and institutions to tackle these threats (Burkett, 2009). Various security, law enforcement and intelligence agencies are now coordinating effort as they seek to keep the homeland secure. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense are among the government entities that collaborate in an effort to tackle security threats (Burkett, 2009). This essay examines the missions and the operations of the two departments.
Bottom-up approach
The United States has developed an elaborate system for responding to threats and emergencies. The bottom-up approach is a key element of this system. Essentially, this approach involves local authorities taking charge of preparing for and responding to emergencies. The state and federal authorities only become involved when the local authorities are overwhelmed (Burkett, 2009). The bottom-up approach enhances the capabilities of communities and local authorities to respond to emergencies. It would be expected that in emergency, individuals who possess more knowledge and authority should be placed in command. This expectation is reasonable. However, it is important to recognize that junior officials who are not necessarily experienced can be given the authority to command. Consider a situation where tragedy has occurred in a remote place. Junior officials are the only ones who are able to access the place. Additionally, these officials have a better grasp of the situation. In this situation, it would be wise to place these officials in charge instead of giving authority to an official who is more experienced and possesses deeper knowledge.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
C2 options
As part of its preparation for disasters and emergencies, the United States has developed four command and control (C2) options. State command is one of these options (Burkett, 2009). This option is exercised by state governments which can activate the National Guard to respond to disasters or other emergencies. For instance, in the event that a hurricane strikes, the government of the affected state can fund and deploy the National Guard to rescue people and deliver aid. Parallel command is the second C2 option. In this option, the federal government partners with state authorities in responding to a situation (Burkett, 2009). The state National Guard and the federal military join forces and are brought under the command of the US Northern Command. An example of parallel command would be a state activating its own National Guard then appealing for federal support when it realizes that it is overwhelmed.
Dual status and federal command are the other c2 options (Burkett, 2009). The dual command option authorizes one individual to control both state and parallel commands. As opposed to the parallel command where the state National Guard and federal military operate as two distinct forces, the dual status command brings these entities under a single command. For the dual-command option to be understood clearly, it is important to consider an example. Suppose that a state Governor wishes to engage the help of the federal government without losing his authority to direct the matters of the state. The dual status command option allows the Governor to receive federal support while still commanding the state National Guard. Federal command is the fourth C2 option. This option is engaged in extreme cases where state and local authorities are simply unable to respond to a situation (Burkett, 2009). When the federal command option is activated, all officers in the National Guard come under the command of the federal government. They receive directions from the US Northern Command. An example of the federal command is a situation where flooding has engulfed a state and the state government is unable to respond. The federal government takes charge of this situation.
Military involvement in terrorist attack
Since the 9/11 attacks that rocked the US, the military has become increasingly involved in terrorist attacks. Guidelines have been developed to provide insight on the involvement of the military in a terrorist attack. The military, through the DOD, can become involved when it receives a request from another agency or state government (“Civil Support”, 2009). Local authorities and communities can also appeal for DOD involvement. The military may also become involved when instructed by the President. The US President enjoys the discretion to determine how the DOD operates and when it can become involved in responding to a terrorist attack (“Civil Support”, 2009). Generally, the military intervenes when lives and property are at risk. However, there are clear guidelines and procedures that must be adhered to before deploying military officers.
DHS missions and DOD involvement
The DHS’s primary mandate is to secure Americans within the nation’s borders. To execute this mandate, the department pursues five key missions. Tackling terrorism and safeguarding national security is the first of these missions (“Strategic Plan for Fiscal”, 2015). The department also secures America’s borders and enforces immigration laws. Protecting the cyberspace and building capacities to respond to disasters are the other missions of the DHS (“Strategic Plan for Fiscal”, 2015). Some of these missions are exclusive to the DHS. However, there are others which such entities as the DOD may help to achieve. Tackling terrorism and promoting security is one of the missions that can call for the involvement of the DOD. The DOD may be called in to respond to terrorist threats in the country. The DOD may also take part in programs aimed at making sure that the nation is able to prepare for and respond to disasters.
In conclusion, the United States has developed one of the most sophisticated systems for responding to disasters and emergencies. This system is composed of guidelines and frameworks that allow different agencies and organizations to cooperate. The local, state and federal governments can work together to ensure that the devastation resulting from disasters is minimized. Any nation that wishes to revamp its preparedness should borrow the practices of the United States.
References
Burkett, J. W. (2009). Command and Control: Command and Control of Military Forces in the Homeland. Retrieved 25 th May 2017 from
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_10-16-ch03.htm
Civil Support and the U.S Army Newsletter. (2009). Retrieved 25 th May 2017 from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_10-16-ch01.htm
Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2012-2016. (2015). Retrieved 25 th May 2017 from https://www.dhs.gov/strategic-plan-fiscal-years-fy-2012-2016
