After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the American federal government saw the numerous vulnerabilities that their national security apparatus presented. This prompted one of the most significant reorganizations ever within the federal government that saw the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DHS was mandated to prevent and respond to manmade and natural disasters within the US. The government also formulated a committee that would provide oversight to DHS over its Ports and Borders security, Immigration, Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Security. The DHS thus is heavily dependent on the information presented to them by domestic intelligence. The DHS needs data to be readily available for them to be prepared to combat these disasters. The 9/11 Commission report showed that the biggest hurdle to analyzing data to connect dots is the systemic and human resistance of sharing information (The 9/11 commission report). These become evident when some people feel like their human rights are infringed upon, although the police are gathering information to protect American citizens. Although the DHS is not fully capable of mitigating all-natural and manmade disasters in the US, it is dependent on domestic intelligence capacity to share data with them to fulfill their mandate of protecting American citizens.
Capabilities of domestic intelligence efforts in supporting Homeland Security Enterprise
America has been faced with several terrorist attacks in the past that have made the citizens and the government question the law enforcement ability to counterterrorism. After the 9/11 attacks, one of the biggest reorganizations ever within the federal government occurred where the Homeland Security Act of 2002 became ratified (Homeland Security Governmental affairs, 2012). President Bush ratified the act in 2003, which saw the creation of the DHS (Homeland Security Governmental affairs, 2012). The DHS was mandated to prevent and respond to manmade and natural disasters within the US. After the 9/11 attacks, a commission report was formulated that brought to light the need for intelligence sharing reform to counterterrorism operations. The 9/11 commission saw the formulation of the Information Sharing Environment (Homeland Security Governmental affairs, 2012). The ISE, an all-encompassing approach to strengthening the sharing of information among various law enforcement agencies, has played an important role in increasing information sharing from domestic intelligence to homeland security (Brown, 2017).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Local law enforcement has taken major strides in trying to support homeland security enterprise. Intelligence-led policing is among the key capabilities within the domestic intelligence that builds on practices and strategies that have been advanced over the years from community policing (Brown, 2017). Community policing occurs when police work proactively with citizens to identify and solve problems within the same area. When police build trust with such citizens, the citizens offer the police information readily. Police officers are then able to practice intelligence-led policing, which allows them to get information from the citizens in case of any looming manmade disaster (Nojeim, 2009). These local police are then able to offer the DHS information on any disasters from the information shared to them by various members of the community.
Another capability of local law enforcement in aiding the DHS is seen through the state fusion centers. State fusion centers in the US serve as primary focal points for local and state environment. They gather, receive, analyze, and share all threats relates to information among the federal partners (Brown, 2017). These centers are uniquely placed to ensure that they can offer the needed help promptly. Local law enforcement through these centers can aid the Homeland Security Enterprise by providing interprofessional expertise that aids in the decision-making process of the DHS. It also helps the enterprise by providing situational awareness for the DHS to be able to work towards combatting terrorism. These local policing units are also known to cooperate in Joint Terrorism Task Forces that are geared towards investigating suspected terrorist activities (Nojeim, 2009). The information that they collect is then directed to the DHS, where they decide on how best to combat the threat to the country's security.
Limitations of domestic intelligence efforts in supporting Homeland Security Enterprise
Although domestic intelligence efforts have been seen to provide numerous chances for countering terrorism, some limitations bar the DHS in its mandate of securing the US (Brown, 2017). The first limitation seen in these domestic intelligence efforts is that different law enforcement agencies have unique goals. Each local law enforcement has a specific duty to serve regardless of any mandate or policy set. As such, each police will first look into fulfilling their duty before turning their efforts on countering terrorism. These individuals will, therefore, have less time to collect information on suspected terrorists, thus leaving the bulk of the work to the DHS (Costine Simmons, 2014). Although the DHS mandate is to prevent terrorism, they rely on information sharing to be more vigilant.
Local police officers are faced with the challenge of securing human rights and the challenge of securing the homeland. Local police also face the challenge of sharing information with the DHS as these agencies have to balance between their duty to the DHS and maintaining American citizens' civil liberties (Civil liberties and securing the homeland, 2017). There have been philosophical and political debates against each of these challenges and how best to maintain the balance. Local police officers might be involved in controversial practices as they try to acquire information that they share with the DHS to neutralize impending terrorist attacks (Civil liberties and securing the homeland, 2017). Americans may be against these practices claiming that their civil liberties are being infringed. These claims then make local police not able to provide accurate and actionable data to the DHS.
There is also an atmosphere of confusion and ambiguity in local police departments that hinders these policing units from aiding the DHS in its mandate (Nojeim, 2009). Local police officers are faced with numerous principles that are set to make them accountable. Unfortunately, these principles vary from those held by their supervisors to the principles of the DHS and FBI regarding counterterrorism (Nojeim, 2009). Local police officers are therefore met with challenges as they try to choose which goals they will be answerable to in their line of duty when dealing with terrorism. The DHS is then affected when local police officers decide to abide by policies that hinder them form collecting information that will aid them in counterterrorism.
Another challenge that the DHS faces regarding local intelligence is the issue of information asymmetry. Information asymmetry stems from the national security classifications that are known to limit the amount of information shared to line officers in local police departments (Nojeim, 2009). These local police are then left out on information from the federal government, although they play their part in providing information for the same. This has been known to lead to strained relations within the chain (Costine, & Simmons, 2014). It could also lead to discouraging the implementation of set policies, thus affecting the DHS's ability to counter terrorism as they have no current information from local police agencies.
Local law enforcement agencies are also faced with the limitation of increasing communication encryption techniques. Technology pauses a major challenge as there are novel ways of encrypting data to prevent it from being accessed by the unintended audience (Brown, 2017). Terrorist cells have become increasingly aware of encryption techniques that they use when communicating via the internet. They encrypt their information to prevent their plans from being known. These hinder local law enforcement efforts as they may not have the necessary manpower or facilities to decrypt such information (Nojeim, 2009). This, therefore, hinders the domestic policing agencies from aiding the DHS in countering terrorism.
The capability of Homeland Security Enterprise in adequately addressing and identifying future challenges
The DHS has established several committees that are directed towards realizing a safer country from all terrorist attacks. The office of intelligence in the DHS has laid out its goals, which have to be realized through various elements (Nojeim, 2009). Among the various elements created by the DHS are the state fusion centers that are a source of information for the enterprise where data is gathered, received, analyzes, and shared regarding all threats relates information among the federal partners (Brown, 2017). Such an initiative is beneficial to the DHS as it a sign of national integration of policing agencies and also facilitates the sharing of relevant information.
DHS has also created the Threat Assessment and Coordination Group that supplements the existing fusion centers. This group aids in information dissemination to local officials in a manner that they can understand (Costine, & Simmons, 2014). This helps the crucial responders to be knowledgeable about the situation. These responders and local officials are then able to protect American citizens, and infrastructure thus aiding the DHS in its mandate to protect the country against natural and manmade (Brown, 2017). The data collected and shared through these fusion centers is disseminated through this group to aids the DHS in identifying any looming disasters where they can extrapolate on future challenges and look for ways to mitigate them before they occur.
The USA Patriotic Act is another technique that aids the DHS in fulfilling its mandate. The act allows local and federal officials to tap-in-to and tracks electronic devices of individuals; these officials must have court orders. If the tracked individual changes mobile devices, the officials could continue tracking them (Costine, & Simmons, 2014). The act also has a provision that allows for the electronic monitoring of foreign individuals without necessarily being a terrorist or an agent of a foreign country. Another provision of the cat allows for business records searches, investigations, and seizes by designated officials (Costine, & Simmons, 2014). These three acts ensure that the DHS has enough information on suspects of terrorist activity and grants them latitude to operate and secure the country.
The capabilities of domestic intelligence in aiding the Homeland Security Enterprise in their mandate revolves around domestic intelligence capabilities of collecting and sharing information to counterterrorism. Since its inception, the homeland security enterprise has worked towards fulfilling its mandate by working with domestic policing agencies to get information that aids in their profiling and investigations. The DHS also has several groups, committees, and acts that ensure local officials provide actionable data that is shared to them when there occurs any natural or manmade disaster. All these have played their part in realizing the DHS goals and mandate of securing American citizens and infrastructure.
However, the US has taken notable steps in structuring the law enforcement agencies to provide information that is timely, actionable, and accurate to the DHS to prevent terrorism. However, I do not feel that the structure is fully efficient as there are noticeable challenges within the agencies. Different goals, information asymmetry, and different principles all hinder the timely provision of accurate and actionable data that can be used in supporting the DHS in its mandate to protect the US citizens from terrorist attacks. However, in the future, the DHS can be better suited to tackling terrorism by getting accurate data from local police if they continue to be vigilant and create more committees that will offer oversight to local policing departments. They will also become efficient if the DHS aligns its goals and principles relating to terrorism with those of local law enforcement while ensuring communication and information sharing is two way between the federal agencies and the local police agencies.
References
Brown, M. E. (2017). The reality of the homeland security enterprise Information Sharing Environment. Naval Postgraduate School Monterey United States.
Civil liberties and securing the homeland. (2017). https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/76594_Chapter_4.pdf
Costine, K. J., & Simmons, R. (2014). Capabilities and Limitations of Intelligence in supporting Homeland Security Efforts.
Homeland Security Governmental affairs. (2012). https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/issues/homeland-security
Nojeim, G. T. (2009). Homeland security intelligence: Its relevance and limitations. Testimony before the House committee on homeland security, subcommittee on intelligence, information sharing, and terrorism risk assessment. https://fas.org/irp/congress/2009_hr/hsin.html
The 9/11 commission report. https://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
