The most intricate relationship between terrorism and policing in the US followed the events of September 11. Since then, the relevant agencies at the federal and state levels continue to experience radical reforms intended to restructure them with the aim to ensure collaboration and efficiency in policing. Policymakers and scholars in the field of policing recognize the constant threat the US faces from international terrorist and extremist’s groups. The US has an elaborate national and foreign policy framework for pre-empting possible terror attacks directed at it from outside its borders. However, the possibility of such attacks being planned and executed by terror suspects within the US borders cannot be understated. Such possibilities inform the need for re-evaluation of internal security apparatus, with reforms largely directed towards policing. Terrorism is responsible for a number of recommendations to policing, including the intelligence-led policing through reform of regional law agencies (Ratcliffe, 2016; Schaible & Sheffield, 2012), and decentralization of some of Homeland Security operations to the regional and local context through integrated intelligence enterprises (Steiner, 2011). This paper argues that terrorism is responsible for the observed shift in policing from law enforcement to intelligence-based frameworks with punitive potential.
Terrorism and the Changes in Policing Strategies
Institution of reforms that followed the proliferation in terror activities sought to expand the number of stakeholders in the US national security system. Today, preventing terrorism is not a preserve of intelligence agencies. The private sector, police officers, and the public have all been enlisted in different capacities as stakeholders (Lewandowski, Carter, & Campbell, 2017). The move follows the perception of local agencies to be central in overcoming terrorists as conventional wisdom. Local activities are heralded as more important in the protection of the homeland than external efforts. However, questions remain about the exact roles that local agencies must play to secure the US from terrorists’ attacks from the inside. Each state in the US has its own unique challenges that influence law enforcement changes in countering terrorism. Nevertheless, the common and shared security concerns among states call for the perception of counterterrorism efforts as integrated. The recommendations to reform the law enforcement agencies adopt a similar approach.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In 2006, the “Council of State Governments” in collaboration with the “Eastern Kentucky University” conducted a study sponsored by the “US Department of Justice” with the objective to ascertain the extent to which terrorism impacted law enforcement policies and operations in different states. The report highlighted that states pursued a number of policy changes in conformity with the evolution in the role of law enforcement because of terrorism. Some states were in the process of pursuing intelligence-fusion centers and exploring the potential of using analysts. The report also brought to focus the integral role of Homeland Security, the value of integrating regional and federal planning, recognizing the shifting priorities of government agencies, intensification of highway and border operations, changes in approach to crime by the criminal justice system. The 2006 study done by the institutions mentioned above, demonstrated that terrorism was responsible for substantial changes in law polices and operations undertaken by states, hence, affecting policing dramatically.
The traditional role of policing has been to maintain law and order through prevention of crime, arrest, and arraignment of offenders among other functions. The evolution of the nature of internal threats faced by the US necessitated the transformation of the police, as their role shifted to collecting intelligence and analysis of information on terror threats. In a study to determine the extent of the perceived effect on terrorism on policing, Grillo (2011) established that out of the 21 police departments studied, 20 (95%) instituted dramatic reforms post-September 11. The changes covered areas such as the operational strategy to the establishment of bureaus to aid counterterrorism efforts. However, the most predominant changes undertaken by policing agencies were the setting up of dedicated terrorism units and the integration of homeland security functions into present intelligence departments (Grillo, 2011). The findings confirm the impact of terrorism on policing, evidenced through the shift from traditional operations of law enforcement to intelligence and counterterrorism.
The shift by the police towards policing framework founded on intelligence generation is corroborated in a number of studies. Ratcliffe (2016) and Schaible and Sheffield, (2012) noted that the modern police service regards the concept of policing that emphasizes intelligence as fundamental in its operations. Such is the dominant ideology despite the lack of clarity on the definition of the concept and its underlying principles (Ratcliffe, 2016). According to Schaible and Sheffield (2012), terrorism changed the operational dynamics of policing profoundly, with local law enforcement taking a central role. Police agencies are re-evaluating their operations to identify ways of integrating the demands of Homeland Security, and their traditional function of law enforcement. An “intelligence-led” approach to monitoring is a philosophy advanced as having the capability to tackle both the threats from terrorists and traditional crime issues (Schaible & Sheffield, 2012). Ratcliffe (2016) observed that the rise in the number of terror attacks called for a comprehensive framework with the potential to integrate multi-agency operations to achieve utmost efficiency. The adoption of the counter-terrorism based policing strategy owed to the demand gap in information and ineffectiveness of traditional policing. Moreover, the new framework makes use of the advancements in information technology, meets the need for greater professionalism in management, and is efficient in handling the threat posed by the growth in the complexity of modern types of crime (Ratcliffe, 2016).
Adoption of the intelligence-inspired philosophy is responsible for the restructuring of the police department at the regional level to accommodate additional of functions the Homeland Department. Steiner (2011) contended that to combat terrorism effectively, “a single, integrated intelligence enterprise with well-defined lanes-in-the-road for each large, complicated state” is imperative. The implication of Steiner’s (2011) recommendation is the evolution in the functioning of the national and regional security apparatus, and the subsequent transformation of policing. The setting up of the “Department of Homeland Security” obliterated the wall between traditional policing and intelligence, forcing some police departments to assume the function of intelligence. National and resident law enforcement institutions have limited structures and resources to implement the intelligence-led philosophy. Consequently, they have been forced to restructure the existing frameworks, an undertaking that had a negative effect on their effectiveness and efficiency to perform their primary function of policing. Institutionalization of the intelligence-led concept at all levels of law enforcement as a counter-terrorism strategy will inevitably impair the effectiveness of policing in dealing with traditional crime problems. Terrorism has had detrimental effects on policing in the US.
Implications for Policing
The consensus among people, who have interacted with the law enforcement agencies after the intensification of the crackdown on terror suspects within the US, is that the instituted reforms are highly punitive. Under the current policing law, everyone is a target, but the minorities, who are one of the largest disenfranchised population segments in the US being the most affected. The observations can be attributed to the misconception about the definition of the much-touted intelligence-led policing philosophy. According to Ratcliffe (2016), different stakeholders of Homeland Security have different connotations of the word intelligence and its associated tenets. To the public, the concept may suggest subterfuge conducted through clandestine and covert activities by officers of questionable character, and involving some level of moral and ethical conflict. To the segment of law enforcement, intelligence may imply involvement in a peripheral activity that has no relevance to the job. Similarly, regular police officers may regard intelligence-based activity as requiring performance of undercover operations, or other morally ambiguous roles, which is contradictory to their normal functions.
Terrorism is the primary reason for the concerted efforts intended to bring all stakeholders in Homeland Security together. Lewandowski et al., (2017) highlighted that the institutionalization of fusion centers is intended to facilitate the sharing of information between the public and the police. It is apparent that one of the fundamental tenets of the modern intelligence-related policing framework is a positive working relationship between the police and the public. However, the challenge exists in the realization of the goals. A case study of the US and Israel, examining the product of policing terrorism on social contexts found out that the police-community relations face challenges. The police lack clarity of which methods to use to reinforce the public feelings of safety, security, and legitimacy (Hasisi, Alpert, & Flynn, 2009). There is also a gap in understanding of how collaboration between the police and the public can lead to justice and combat terrorism. Furthermore, there exists little or no understanding of the public priorities concerning the policing of extremism. The challenges set a bad precedent in the implementation of terrorism policing.
In conclusion, the increase in a terror incident in the last two decades has been met with dramatic changes in the security apparatus in the US. The most notable development was the development of the Homeland Security agency, whose functions have been decentralized to the regional and local jurisdictions. Consequently, law enforcement agencies in these jurisdictions have been forced to undertake reforms to integrate the functions into their existing structures. The outcome has been the emergence of the intelligence focused policing concept as the most preferred in counterterrorism efforts. The philosophy has caused significant changes in the roles of police officers, a trend that impairs the efficiency of handling traditional crime. The misconception around the modern policing philosophy has the potential to cause animosity between the law enforcers and the public owing to the lack of clarity on implementation strategies. Overall, terrorism is responsible for the changes in policing that call for integrated approaches that have made the performance of the traditional role of the police difficult.
References
Council of State Governments, United States of America, Eastern Kentucky University, & United States of America. (2006). Impact of terrorism on state law enforcement: adjusting to new roles and changing conditions, final report June 2006. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/216642.pdf
Grillo, M. (2011). Police organizational change in a post-September 11 environment: rhetoric or reality? (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University-Graduate School-Newark). Retrieved from https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/33509/PDF/1/play/
Hasisi, B., Alpert, G. P., & Flynn, D. (2009). The impacts of policing terrorism on society: Lessons from Israel and the US. In To protect and To serve (pp. 177-202). New York: Springer.
Lewandowski, C., Carter, J. G., & Campbell, W. L. (2017). The role of people in information-sharing: Perceptions from an analytic unit of a regional fusion centre. Police Practice and Research , 18 (2), 174-193.
Ratcliffe, J. H. (2016). Intelligence-led policing . London: Routledge.
Schaible, L. M., & Sheffield, J. (2012). Intelligence-led policing and change in state law enforcement agencies. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management , 35 (4), 761-784.
Steiner, J. (2011). Improving homeland security at the state level. Central Intelligence Agency. Studies in Intelligence: Journal of the Intelligence Professional , 53 (3).
