Changing Homeland Security: Conceptual Frameworks and Definitions

The Homeland Security Vision and Concept

• The vision of homeland security, articulated six years after the $September\,11,\,2001$ attacks in the $2007$ National Strategy, describes a concerted national effort to galvanize federal, state, local, and tribal governments, alongside the private sector, non-profits, communities, and individuals.

• The goal is to achieve a secure homeland that sustains the American way of life as a free, prosperous, and welcoming nation.

• This vision suggests both a noble hope and an innocence untainted by the realpolitik of globalism. However, the fundamental question remains: "What is homeland security?"

• There is no explicit agreement on a single definition. Instead, people often rely on preferred internal definitions, rarely explicitly stating what the term means during discourse.

• Defining homeland security is essential for guiding behaviors, identifying necessary programs, allocating resources, and measuring progress. Without a clear objective, it is difficult to determine if taxpayer funds are being spent effectively.

The Ecological Framework of Definitions

• There are at least seven defensible definitions of homeland security, which can be viewed as "ideal types" in the sense used by Max Weber. These types characterize central features of the concept without necessarily representing a normative "best."

• Metaphorically, each definition represents a set of interests claiming a niche in the homeland security ecosystem. These semantic entities struggle for resources (funding, policy attention, doctrinal preeminence) to grow and reproduce their point of view.

• As the ecosystem evolves, certain definitions or pieces of definitions confer more survival value and are selected for reproduction elsewhere in the system.

Seven Defensible Definitions of Homeland Security

1. Terrorism: A concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize damage while recovering from attacks that occur. It involves federal, state, and local governments, the private sector, and individuals.

2. All Hazards: A concerted national effort to prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks while also protecting against man-made and natural hazards, including response and recovery for all incidents.

3. Terrorism and Catastrophes: Focuses on what the Department of Homeland Security ($DHS$), supported by other federal agencies, does to prevent, respond to, and recover from terrorist and catastrophic events affecting U.S. security.

4. Jurisdictional Hazards: A locally-directed effort to prevent and prepare for incidents most likely to threaten the safety and security of specific citizens in a given jurisdiction. Definition varies by location.

5. Meta Hazards: A national effort to prevent or mitigate any social trend or threat disrupting the long-term stability of the American way of life, such as economic trends or climate issues.

6. National Security: An element of national security that works with other instruments of national power to protect the sovereignty, territory, population, and critical infrastructure against threats and aggression.

7. Security \u00dcber Alles: A symbol used to justify government efforts to curtail civil liberties, representing a dysfunctional reaction to fear.

Detailed Analysis: Homeland Security as Counter-Terrorism

• This definition corresponds to the ontology of the $September\,11,\,2001$ attacks, where four planes were hijacked, three flown into buildings, and one into the earth, resulting in thousands of deaths.

• A foundational truth of homeland security is ensuring such an attack never repeats. This commitment is enshrined in the original $2002$ and updated $2007$ National Strategy.

• The definition is straightforward: it is about preventing terrorism and responding when attacked. If a significant attack occurs again, discussions of alternative definitions likely vanish temporarily.

Detailed Analysis: The All Hazards Perspective

• Practitioners argue that focusing solely on terrorism is difficult because there is not enough domestic terrorism to justify billions of dollars in spending.

• State and local professionals have other daily duties. One police chief noted having $169$ murders in one year, none committed by Osama bin Laden.

• The skills, equipment, and knowledge needed for general emergency response (all hazards) are identical to those needed for terrorist response.

• The narrative that terrorism-focus undermined general preparedness was fueled by Hurricane Katrina.

• The Nuance of "All Hazards": This doctrine does not mean preparing for every possible hazard. Instead, it means identifying common elements in many disasters (e.g., mass evacuation, emergency warnings) to create a general response plan for unexpected events.

• Differences from Terrorism: Critics argue that terrorists are intelligently adaptive. Unlike natural hazards, terrorists use tactics like secondary devices. For example, on $January\,17,\,1997$, a bomb at an Atlanta family planning clinic was followed an hour later by a second bomb targeting responders. Similar tactics are used in Iraq.

• A dominant focus on all hazards may lead to the neglect of prevention efforts, with some claiming "no one knows what prevention is" or "we can't stop everything."

Detailed Analysis: Terrorism and Catastrophes (The Federal Focus)

• The National Strategy recognizes that certain non-terrorist catastrophic events have significant security implications, as they may erode citizen confidence in government.

• Homeland security is often conflated with the Department of Homeland Security ($DHS$). However, $DHS$ only accounts for slightly more than $50\%$ of total federal homeland security spending.

• Secretary Michael Chertoff has stated he is the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, not the Secretary of homeland security itself, warning against "Soviet-style" management where the federal government controls everything.

• Nuclear Detonation Scenario: A $2007$ exercise report suggested that for large-scale disasters like a nuclear detonation, the federal government should shoulder principal responsibility rather than just "supporting" local officials who would be quickly overwhelmed.

Detailed Analysis: Jurisdictional Hazards and "Dual Use"

• This view follows the philosophy of "Let every man be his own methodologist." Threats vary widely by geography:

  • Florida: Hurricanes.

  • Montana: Wildfires.

  • Ohio: Floods.

  • Arkansas: Tornadoes.

  • New York City: Terrorism.

• Local officials often practice "dual use," writing grant applications to satisfy federal guidelines while actually funding local emergency management priorities.

• FEMA Data ($September\,11,\,2001$ through $December\,31,\,2007$) on disaster types:

  • Wildfire: $336$

  • Severe Storms: $224$

  • Flooding: $202$

  • Hurricane: $105$

  • Winter Storm: $102$

  • Fire: $85$

  • Tornado: $78$

  • Mudslide/Landslide: $39$

  • Typhoon: $13$

  • Technological Events: $6$

  • Earthquake: $5$

  • Terrorism: $4$

  • Coastal Storm: $3$

  • Drought: $1$

  • Extreme Temperature: $1$

  • Industry Hardship: $1$

Detailed Analysis: Meta Hazards and Generational Threats

• This perspective focuses on hazards affecting the entire nation over long periods, referred to by Patrick Massey as "generational hazards."

• Threat List:

  1. Growing federal fiscal debt.

  2. Global warming.

  3. Inferior math, science, and engineering education.

  4. Decaying physical infrastructure.

  5. Privatization of government services.

  6. Dependence on foreign energy.

  7. Aging population.

• Additional concerns include obesity (a "too fat to fight" national security issue), SARS attacks on infrastructure, and drug-resistant diseases.

• This definition proposes that homeland security should address issues that fall through the cracks of other organizations.

Detailed Analysis: National Security Integration

• The term "national security" was rarely used before the late $1940s$. The National Security Act of $1947$ aimed for a comprehensive program for U.S. security.

• Historically, homeland security and defense were fused. Colonial legislation for $12$ of $13$ colonies required every adult male from $16$ to $60$ to own a weapon, train, and stand ready for repelling attacks.

• In $1997$, the Quadrennial Defense Review used "homeland defense." The Office of Homeland Security was established after $9/11$, and "security" was chosen partly because the Defense Department wanted to avoid jurisdictional confusion and budget sharing.

• DoD Joint Publication $3-26$ defines Homeland Security as the nation\u2019s first priority but maintains a distinction where $DHS$ is the lead, and DoD focuses on a broader range of threats.

Detailed Analysis: Security \u00dcber Alles and Civil Liberties

• This view treats homeland security as a "meme" representing government-induced fear and the curtailment of liberties.

• Concerns include the disappearance of Arabs after $9/11$, indefinite detention, invasive airport screening, secret watch lists, and racial profiling.

• The legal climate: The book "The Constitution is Not a Suicide Pact" by a federal judge suggests rights can be adjusted during emergencies.

• The 10 Steps to Dictatorship (Naomi Wolf):

  1. Invoke an external and internal threat.

  2. Establish secret prisons.

  3. Develop a paramilitary force.

  4. Surveil ordinary citizens.

  5. Infiltrate citizens\u2019 groups.

  6. Arbitrarily detain and release citizens.

  7. Target key individuals.

  8. Restrict the press.

  9. Cast criticism as \u201cespionage\u201d and dissent as \u201ctreason.\u201d

  10. Subvert the rule of law.

• Wolf argues Americans turn away from these threats leisurely, focused instead on Internet shopping or "American Idol."

Questions & Discussion

• Dialogue regarding transparency and evidence:

  • Writer: "The public is never going to see the evidence we have… How does a citizen become informed about the threat?"

  • FBI Agent: "I have access to the information. I have a lot of faith in the judgment of the common citizen. A lot of people understand the nature of the threat."

• Practitioner Perspectives: In a study of $50$ Naval Postgraduate School graduates, nearly $40\%$ could not define the term or gave a blended definition. Others prioritized All Hazards, Terrorism, and National Security in that order.

Philosophical Views of Truth in Homeland Security

• Pragmatic View: Definitions are activated at different times based on specific roles and scenarios.

• Correspondence View: Truth is found in what people actually do when they claim to be performing homeland security.

• Coherence View: Truth is defined by how well an idea adheres to the beliefs of a particular community of interest.

• Social Construction: Homeland security is a reality shaped by social processes and network conversations, best summarized by Richard Rorty\u2019s idea: "Truth is what your colleagues let you get away with."