The threat of senior government officials being assaulted, assassinated, or kidnapped is not new in the United States. For example, in 1901, President McKinley was assassinated while, in 1981, in Verona Italy, Brigadier General James L. Dozier was kidnapped by the Red Brigade (Gemza, 2014). These are some of the few acts that make it necessary for there to have continuous protection of the government's and the military's key and senior officials. A protective service detail ensures that a high-risk is safe from potential danger or is safely evacuated from a life-threatening situation. As early as 1772, top officials were being given protection, but by then, the Protective Service detail was not established. For instance, General Washington was being protected by the Dragoons in 1772 (Schoomaker, 2004). Around 1861, President Lincoln was under the protection of the Military units. Before retiring, President Lincoln enacted the United States Secret Service (USSS) in 1865, and it started protecting the Presidents in 1901 after the assassination of President McKinley. It was not until 1975 that USACIDC was tasked with the duty of offering personal protection to all visiting high-level foreign dignitaries (Schoomaker, 2004). As will be seen below, the relationship between leaders and other top officials and the American democratic society is always interrupted by the possibility of assaults and violence from defectors, but through the Protective Service Details (PSDs), this relationship is re-established.
Past
Protective services were first introduced during the height of the Vietnam War. During this period, it became very necessary to offer protection to the senior officials of the U.S. Army, and this task was delegated to the Office of the Provost Marshal General in 1967 (IBASP, 2013). The PSU agents coined the word "the principals" to refer to the people they protected, who included chief of staff and the secretary of the army. In 1971, the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command was given the responsibility of offering protective services, and the policy is contained in Field Manual 19-136 (Protective Services), thus the name 'Protective Service Detail' (IBASP, 2013). In the past, the only principals that were offered protection were seniors of the U.S. Army, who included chief of staff and the secretary of the army. However, things have changed in the present, and there many people who seek the services of PSDs. These people include all high-risk individuals and dignitaries.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The availability of a protective services detail (PSD) is a vital resource for a commander to effectively counter a likely danger. A PSD may entail M.P., USACIDC, or other law enforcement personnel (Global Security, 2005). This detail offers a quality response to possible threats that might endanger the lives of people within the commander’s scope of responsibility (Dangel, 2006). In most cases, the PM organizes, trains, equips and maintains the P.S. detail. There are instances where the PSD may be required on a full-time basis, while in most cases, protective services are only required on a part-time basis. For instance, when say, the secretary of defense, visits a region of military operations, a local commander may be required to only offer support to the PSD that escorts the visiting dignitaries. However, all U.S. Army systems are required to identify and train personnel that can be availed for protective services during the time of need.
Present
Presently, there are two categories of the Army PSD operations, and they include those steered by USACIDC and by M.P. allocated to a local PM office. The USACIDC category is responsible for providing security to specific individuals chosen by higher authority. Normally, the chain of command for the majority of USACIDC agents offering protective services stays within USACIDC (Global Security, 2005). The permission for PSD operations comes only from Chief or the Commanding General of the USACIDC, but in some cases, the filed elements may be summoned to assist in planning and in offering their ideas. The area commander, in which a dignitary lives or is visiting, is responsible for the Protective services (Hill, 2005). A commander of a given geographical area holds the responsibility of the security and safety of all high-risk individuals or dignitaries that might travel through that region. It has been a tradition in the PSD for the PM to protect dignitaries, but for that to be effective, he first commands his M.P. investigators to offer personal security to the high-risk individuals. The MPI relays any relevant information to the M.P., who, in turn, channels the information to the installation commander. The resources used during protective operations are usually controlled by the commander. He is responsible for committing his assets to such protective missions (Dangel, 2006).
In a protective service operation, the key contributors include the P.S. detail and the person being protected called "the principal." The PSD contains “a detail leader (DL), a personal security officer (PSO), an advance team, a protective team, a residence watch, a baggage team, and other security personnel that may be necessary” (Global Security, 2005). In a given operation, the individual members of a PSD may take part in several duties according to the nature of the situation. Individuals to be assigned PSD duties should have excellent physical and mental conditions. It is vital for such individuals to be on par with the established weight standards and Army weight. These individuals are required to be articulate, intelligent, and presentable in the way they appear. Also, it is necessary for them to prove that they are experts on effectively and efficiently using the weapons (Gemza, 2014). Furthermore, it is desired that these personnel have adequate skills in unarmed self-defense tactics. Although translators are in most cases provided by a host, it is required that an individual in the PSD be knowledgeable on the language of the principal. More importantly, all those involved in the operation should be aware of the innate risks and hardships of these operations (Gemza, 2014). The operation requires them to sacrifice their personal safety in order to ensure that the principal is protected, and in case of some engagement with the enemies, a candidate should be aware that he or she can be seriously injured or die.
Members of the PSD must have a thorough understanding of the itineraries, personal information, and protocol requirements. More importantly, before going into a mission, there must be a full briefing so that all those involved understand all the aspects of the operation (Gemza, 2014). Any emergency during the operation should be handled swiftly and suitably, which makes it important for all involved to be experienced in all aspects of protective service operations. Countering an attack that is aimed at the principal requires the P.S. detail to act professionally, smoothly, and in an organized manner. The training should be so efficient that even in an emergency situation, despite the extreme emotions and excitements involved, the security personnel must instinctively act accordingly (Gemza, 2014). The PSD personnel must show proficiency in employing special tactics that would help them to protect a person whether he is on a boat, aircraft, in a train, motor vehicle, or walking. Even when the principals are taking part in public activities, he must be protected effectively.
Impact on general population of US
The intimate connection between the citizens and their elected leaders shapes the American democratic society. However, the rebels and the dissatisfied of either extreme, left of right, attempts to detach public figures from the residents. In an era of looming attempts and movements that aim at embarrassing, kidnapping, or even assassinating these leaders, the majority of them have still bravely made efforts to meet and converse with the members of the public. They audaciously communicate with the residents despite the possible attacks, threats of violence, and protests. However, such incidents with potential violence are a source of fear for these leaders since they put their lives at danger and also affect the democratic relations and the conduct of business. It is vital for the rights of private and public officials to be respected, and it is necessary for leaders to be able to connect with people effectively. Leaders have the right to safely and freely associate with members of the public. Among the most effective methods of increasing personal safety and guaranteeing that exposure to violence is prevented or reduced is through the provision of "protective services."
The responsibility of defending dignitaries and other high-risk persons lies in the arms of U.S. Army commanders. Commanders are required to identify a threat and act swiftly and accordingly to provide professional personal protection. Since high-risk people, visiting dignitaries, and also their families are always vulnerable to attacks, and there is a need for their exposure to be offset (Global Security, 2005). In a situation where threat conditions such as location, position or grade of a person, or unique conditions present endanger the life and security of an individual, resources and protective services must be accessible. Furthermore, these protective services should be committed in a professional way to offer appropriate personal protection to offset any potential threat.
Changes needed for the future
There should be policies or programs ought to encourage team training of PSD personnel. Currently, the PSDs do not train together, and this may limit their effectiveness. Although it is challenging, it would be necessary if P.S. details trained together just like small Army units and special reaction teams do because, ideally, protection is more effective when teamwork is enhanced (Hill, 2005). Training together would make it easy for each individual member of a PSD to fully understand his role and also what to expect from his team counterparts in case a specific situation arises. Currently, there is no team training for the PSD members, and this is one aspect that needs to be improved to enhance the PSD's effectiveness. Lack of a geared team training makes it challenging for the Army agency to dispatch 5 to 7 PSD specialists at a go because these individuals are also responsible for other commitments. However, in a situation where personnel groups for full-time or part-time operations, it is necessary for them to intensively train together as a team to sharpen their coordination and individual skills.
Another suggestion is that the appropriate authorities should formulate definitive rules of engagement. Currently, there no established definitive rules of engagement, and this might negatively impact the reputation and also PSD's style of operation. Definitive rules are vital as they give the protection members a protocol on which to follow. The protocol is vital in ensuring that the members of the PSD team take defensive actions that are only for self-defense protective reasons rather than for law enforcement. Such definitive rules would require the PSD members to swiftly assess whether a given individual poses a threat to the principal before taking action. Subsequently, such definitive rules would also require the team to restrain the individual posing a threat using the appropriate force. The incident would then be reported to the right authorities. Therefore, establishing such rules and protocols would ensure that the PSD team acts properly and fulfills their responsibilities.
Normally, the PSD team might wonder how far they can exercise their duties without interfering with the daily principal’s activities and without exposing him to any potential threat. Therefore, this research suggests that the PSD team should adapt their operation to the suitability of their principal. They should evade actions that might interfere with the private or official activities of the principal. In addition, the principal must not find himself or herself in a situation where his or her freedom of action is disrupted. The team in action must always respect the principal's privacy because excessive interference with his activities might end up embarrassing him. In addition, personal information about the principal must not be released to individuals who are not involved in his security. Releasing such information even to the media can unpleasantly impact the mission's integrity. Therefore, adopting such measures would not only protect the principal but also ensure that his privacy is respected and his daily activities are not interrupted.
References
Schoomaker, P.J., (2004). Protective Services. Headquarters, Department of the Army. Protective_Services_FM_3_19_12_2004_pdf.pdf.pdf
Global Security (2005). Chapter 19: Protective Services. Protective Services Detail Responsibilities. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/19-10/Ch19.htm#s2
IBASP (2013). Protective Service Detail (PSD). International Bodyguard Association South Pacific. https://ibasouthpacific.com/index.php/project/protective-service-deatail-course/
Hill, B. (2005). In their own words: What does it mean to be on a team? U.S. Army https://www.army.mil/article/236241/in_their_own_words_what_does_it_mean_to_be_on_a_team
Dangel, J. (2006). PSD: Not your Everyday Job. U.S. Army. https://www.army.mil/article/358/psd_not_your_everyday_job
Gemza, E.J.M. (2014). Deploying small elements: a quick look at the 59th military police company’s mission to support strategic protective service detachments. Small War Journal. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/deploying-small-elements-a-quick-look-at-the-59th-military-police-company%E2%80%99s-mission-to-supp
