The history of fusion centers dates back to 2001 following the 9/11 terrorist attack. Most of the fusion centers were established between 2003 and 2007 with the role of complementing the federal agencies in curbing terrorism by ensuring greater intelligence sharing (The White House, 2012). Initially, the centers concentrated on addressing the issue of terrorism, but this has changed over time as some of them are collecting, analyzing and disseminating information related to drug trafficking and criminal gangs (Taylor & Swanson, 2016). This essay recommends several improvements that need to take place in order to ensure that the fusion centers achieve their objectives.
First, I recommend that laws that will monitor how the fusion centers operate to be enacted. For instance, the enacted Act should require reporting by these centers as a way of determining the type of data they are gathering, how the collected information is used, and with whom it will be shared (Abold, Guidetti, & Keyer, 2012). This will not only achieve accountability but will also address the violation of the citizen’s right concerns (Abold et al., 2012 ). Besides, the competition between the different state and urban centers is posing a major challenge to the efforts aimed at protecting the country from terrorism (Abold et al., 2012 ). On this note, I suggest that the fusion centers should not be affiliated to any single state or local jurisdiction. Instead, they should have a nation-wide jurisdiction.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
I believe that strengthening the ability of fusion centers to execute the COCs is critical to building an integrated national network of Fusion Centers capable of sharing information with the federal government and the other local and state entities. Currently, I think that the Fusion Centers are not in a better position to conduct a formal risk assessment. This is because these centers hardly get access to all the data they need to execute their mandates (Abold et al., 2012 ). One of the major challenges the centers are facing is the bureaucratic resistance by other institutions when it comes to information sharing ( Abold et al., 2012 ). According to Abold et al., (2012 ), when this happens, the ability of these institutions to conduct a formal risk assessment is complicated. However, if the ability of the fusion center to implement the COCs is strengthened, these institutions will have access to a wide range of expertise and more resources, and this will enable them to achieve higher levels of efficacy, accountability, and transparency ( Abold et al., 2012 ).
The second Critical Operational Capabilities emphasizes the need for the fusion centers to disseminate threat information collected by these institutions to other tribal, state, territorial, local, and private agencies within their jurisdiction (The White House, 2012). According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (2016), the second COC helped to stop a terrorist on May 3, 2015, when two persons opened fire at a crowd that had attended an event in Garland, Texas. Several weeks prior to the incident, the U.S Department of Homeland Security officers stationed at the fusion center in Texas had warned about a possible terror attack. The officers had raised the alarm after they had received information regarding a social media post that was suggesting that the event was likely to be disrupted by terrorists. This information helped the local law enforcement agencies to deal with the attackers (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2016).
Lastly, in recent years, the role of fusion centers been challenged by the public and private industries. Firstly, according to a report that was published by an investigative U.S Senate committee, no single fusion center has provided information that has been used to foil any terrorist attack (Abold et al., 2012 ). Hence, both the public and the private sector are not convinced that these institutions are playing any vital roles. However, this paper has established that the fusion center located in Texas played a huge role in the foiling of a terrorist attack targeting a crowd that had attended an event in Garland. Additionally, the public is concerned that the fusion centers are using the excuse of the national security to infringe on the citizen’s right to privacy (Taylor & Swanson, 2016). Despite this, the number of fusion centers is increasing every day, and their roles are changing rapidly.
References
Abold, J. L., Guidetti, R., & Keyer, D. (2012). Strengthening the value of the national network of fusion centers by leveraging specialization: Defining" centers of analytical excellence." Homeland Security Affairs, 8(1).
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2016). National Preparedness Report. Accessed on March 3, 2016. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1464356763498-cc1a0e3215765ac0668e65cd64f624a5/PreventionMAO_508c_050516.pdf
Taylor, R. W., & Swanson C. R. (2016). Terrorism, intelligence, and homeland security . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
The White House. (2012). 2012 National strategy for information sharing and safeguarding. Accessed on March 3, 2017. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012sharingstrategy_1.pdf
