Subscribe to our RSS feed
By Matthew Levitt, Guest Contributor
Recently, the Palestinian Authority (PA) shut down several Islamic charity committees in the West Bank, stating that Hamas was using them as a means to transfer funds to the group’s activists there. Meanwhile, on October 22, the U.S. federal trial of the Dallas-based Holy Land Foundation (HLF) and several of its officers — accused of financing Hamas (a U.S.-designated terrorist group) by funding some of these same charities — ended in mistrial.
Public Order operations, such as those that are currently challenging the French police in some suburbs of Paris, are about the pro-active policing of order. Their goal is to gather intelligence and work through liasion to shape both the ground and community relations and prevent matters from escalating to violence. This requires hard work by the community, the police and politicians alike. Especially as matters come to a head, clear, positive actions by the police are essential. If violence does occur, then it must be dealt with in an appropriate and professional manner.
With all due respect to our friends championing the green cause and saving our planet, it sometimes seems as though their fight treats other, equally worthy issues too dismissively. Take, for example, this new lawsuit brought against DHS Secretary Chertoff. The complaint alleges that the REAL ID act is unconstitutional because it gives the secretary the authority to void any law that would impede construction of a border fence. Defenders of Wildlife filed this suit after Chertoff voided laws that would force an environmental impact survey of plans to build the fence across the San Pedro River. They argue that striking a law is the same as changing it, which thereby violates the principle of separation of powers.
Outgoing Homeland Security adviser Frances Townsend and former DHS Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson say that there is a need for both a Homeland Security Secretary as well as White House Homeland Security Adviser. Some academics, such as David Heyman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, disagree.
The Department of Homeland Security is testing a program with the New York City Fire Department to share intelligence so firefighters are better prepared when they respond to emergency calls. DHS trains FDNY personnel in how to identify material and/or behavior that may indicate terrorist activity. When entering a location, the firefighters are instructed to be alert for hostile, uncooperative and resistant behavior; chemicals or materials that seem out of place; surveillance equipment; little or no furniture; and other signs that could indicate a terrorist hideout. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says using firefighters to gather intelligence is another step towards lost privacy rights.
Fran Townsend did an exceptional job in a very difficult position for the President as his Homeland Security Advisor. One area of debate has been whether the U.S. should have the office of the Homeland Security Advisor merged with the office of the National Security Advisor so that homeland security work is done under the leadership of the NSA. I think that would be a step backward. It would be difficult for one key advisor to concentrate on international challenges like we’re seeing in Pakistan with Musharraf and Bhutto versus the homeland security challenges that we face domestically.
Not a day goes by in Washington or elsewhere in this country when there is not some headline or piece in the media decrying all of the problems that bemoan the Department of Homeland Security. In truth, those problem go beyond the federal department and are shared by other public and private sector players that work in the ‘homeland arena’ as well. There is no doubt that the problems that all of these people work are complex and prolific. In fact, all of the issues and problems they are contending with are frustrating and - in many cases - outright terrifying. But for everything going wrong that we document time and again, there are a number of things that are going right.
With Lieberman and Collins both supporting Myers nomination, the nation’s chief immigration and smuggling enforcement officer wins the patina of bipartisanship. This will make it more difficult — though by new means impossible — for senators like Claire McCaskill of Missouri to rally enough opposition to block her nomination.
A significant reorganization like the one proposed by Elaine Kamarck at Harvard would effectively set back FEMA two to four years in terms of defining lanes of responsibility and building the relationships that make an organization work. It is an rearrangement that might look good on the white board of a classroom or a Power Point slide, but it is a rearrangement the nation can’t afford.
There is a need for Americans to redirect the debate over GITMO, since an answer that involves merely closing the facility in Cuba does not mean that a similar compound here in the United States would be immune to criticism. Instead, the focus at the heart of the debate over Guantanamo should be on how the U.S. government treats its detainees and how we prosecute the war on terrorism. If America succeeds in this respect, location will prove to be an ancillary concern.
Security DeBrief contributor Asa Hutchinson shares his insights on yesterday’s announcement that Frances Townsend is stepping down as the White House’s top official on terrorism. Listen to his interview from Federal News Radio to hear his thoughts on how the Administration will fill this important position to ensure coordination among the top federal agencies on national security issues.
As DHS gets its feet beneath it and becomes increasingly more efficient at enforcing immigration laws, those who oppose those laws become proportionately more vocal in their criticisms of the Department. But DHS shouldn’t be the target. DHS didn’t draft the nation’s immigration laws. Congress did.
Last week in a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee, Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) made statements that shed light on the potentially problematic process of implementing a 100% screening requirement for cargo containers.
In addition to raising valid questions about the technological feasibility of the mandate, Thompson’s statements should also prompt a re-examination of the much more important security implications of a 100% cargo scanning system. We are similarly lacking evidence that shows replacing the current risk-based system of security with a “100%” approach will actually make our country’s ports safer. In fact, most of the evidence we do have says just the opposite.
Recently, former Clinton administration official Elain Kamarck made headlines by recommending that DHS reorganize itself to be able to focus only on border security. In particular, her call to take FEMA out from under DHS’s umbrella has generated a great deal of debate and speculation about what the next Administration will do in regards to the Department’s mission and structure. Security DeBrief contributor Rich Cooper - formerly of DHS’ Private Sector Office - reacts and offers analysis on Federal News Radio.
Michigan lawmakers introduce legislation that would make it a felony to hire an illegal immigrant.
Politicians like Eliot Spitzer of New York prefer the politically popular tact of criticizing the federal government for not enforcing the nation’s immigration laws even while they keep attempting to pass other laws and regulations (like legal driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants) that undermine the federal govenrment’s ability to enforce the immigration laws currently on the books.
While Pakistan has been a loyal if sometimes hesitant ally of the United States under the leadership of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, his misjudgments of late — including his transparent effort to maintain political power even if by force of arms against legitimate political opposition such as Benazir Bhutto — have eroded his support among the public. In order for Pakistan to sustain a long-term fight against terrorism, there must be a leader with a public mandate.
I laugh and then cringe when I hear talk about efforts to increase immigration enforcement in our country. Don’t misread me; we need to enforce our immigration laws and remove people who have violated those laws after they have had their day (not days or years) in court. However, the current immigration removal process is complicated and fragile. Any number of events and actions can delay the process for inordinate amounts of time or stop it dead in its tracks.