THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY. WHERE DID IT COME FROM AND WHAT IS IT UP TO NOW?
I was reviewing a few of the stories posted on one of my
favorite websites, one that covers events in Mexico; Borderland Beat.
When I came across this story, one that centers on perspective
many in Mexico and the perceptions the US Department of Homeland Security has
with the people of Mexico. Before I get started, I fully accept the argument
that many in Mexico are not near as negative as those who deal with the Drug
War on a daily bases when it comes to the actions of the US and the agencies
from the US that interact with Mexico. But, I would be willing to bet the
perception of the US Department of Homeland Security in Mexico is not a
positive conversation.
Back in 2001, when the concept of the Department of Homeland
Security was being developed, I was one of those who openly argued it was an
ineffective idea at best. It was and still is my opinion the concept of The
Department of Homeland Security / DHS / was and is redundant. I was not in the
minority at the time, but the events of 2001 were such that arguing against doing
something that would combine multiple US federal agencies, who at the time were
truly stovepipe operations, well, it simply wasn’t worth the effort. It wasn’t
going to impact the organization I was working within and frankly, I had other
issues that were far more pressing then worrying about yet another US federal government
program.
Countless stories, research papers, documentaries have been placed
in front of the American people on just how DHS came into existence and what
roles does the agency really play in the
day to day lives of the typical US citizen. But, if I had to summarize in one
sentence what took place, this is what I would write down. The US Department of
Homeland Security was initially designed to give the American people reassurance
the nation was looking internally for newly understood threats to the overall
safety of the county. Twitter version…. It was about perception management.
In the early stages of its conceptual development, a process
that for the most part took place in Congress, it seemed the political energy was
being spent on finding a way to explain to the public why such an event as the attack on September
11th could have happened. Was
there a sound, strategic review of what changes might need to take place? No.
Sorry, but the answer is no, at least, not in the normal sense of program
development. Yes, there was little time to reset the American public’s
confidence and yes, part of the explanation for why 9-11 took place was going
to involve the word “failure” at a colossal level on several key federal
agencies. So in the end, the foundation for the second largest federal agency
in the US government was poorly planned and the repercussions of this poorly
designed program is continuing to have an impact on the US with each passing day.
But, that was not the most critical failure!
After months of wrangling and political backroom discussions
the Department of Homeland Security was ready to be briefed to the American
Public. The picture was going to be that of unity and synergy and yes, even cost
effectiveness. That last concept is the one that gets me the most! The goal was clear, the process of developing
the pathway to this goal was fatally flawed.
What went wrong? Why was the concept of the Department of
Homeland Security destined for ineffective action? Politics. Imagine that.
Politics guaranteed a bloated, bureaucratic money pit that was only going to
grow in size and cost given that is all the US political leadership
understands. If you spend more, it must get better! Let me give you just one example of the bureaucracy
this new super agency was going to execute under. I had a conversation with a FBI
agent, who was a neighbor of mine, soon after DHS was actually operational. I
hadn’t had a great deal of time to realize this concept was underway and it
wasn’t until I had returned from the Middle East that I had the opportunity to
even think about what in the world “DHS” was and how it worked. When I asked my
neighbor how the relationship between his agency and this new agency was going
to work and how it would impact his agency’s efforts to figure what threats
were out there, his answer was more than stunning. I cannot remember his exact
words, but the meaning was clear. They, the FBI was going to continue to do
what they do, just the way they do it and DHS just needed to stay out of their
way.! Now, mind you the official response from DC as to how the attack of 911 happened
was based on “lack of coordinated” information / intelligence. That federal
agencies didn’t work together, didn’t share!
Was this true? Yes. Was it the reason 9-11 took place? No, but that is a
conversation for another day. I must
admit, knowing the FBI the way I did, I was not surprised by the answer my
neighbor gave, but his explanation, now that amazed me.
The Department of Homeland Security was concept based on consolidation
and at its face value, to the typical US citizen, that was a logical concept. To
consolidate the actions of agencies to insure the unity of effort is achievable,
that just made sense. But, go back to my comment about backroom, political
dealings and the flaw again shows itself. My neighbors explanation was this, most
of the supervisory positions in the newly formed Department of Homeland
Security were structured around interagency .transfers. A large proportion of
the line supervisors came from the other collapsed federal agencies. To put it
in the simplest terms, political leadership agreed that rank structures inside
of the collapsing federal agencies would have a minimum impact on the people in
those agencies. If a GS15 in the Department of Transpiration was going to fill
a newly formed GS 15 slot in the Department of Homeland Security, then the
person filling that part would not take a reduction in pay. So, what did that
mean? How did that impact the effectiveness of this newly formed agency?
Armature hour! In the world of identifying, tracking and
countering threats to the US, threats other than bad food or spiders riding on
bundles of bananas shipped to the US, the new “leadership” of DHS was
laughable; laughable in the eyes of the agencies who had been in this business
for decades. Now, is this a fair assessment? Was DHS really a conglomeration of
federal employees that had little experience in the world they were now thrust
into? Remember the purpose of this politically driven agency. Perception
management! Make the American people believe they are safer now than before the
events of 9-11. Here is what the political leaders had not realized. Those who
were already deeply involved in the process of keeping the US safe from hostile
acts, the same ones the political leaders blamed for 9-11, they were now being
forced to work with yet another agency, but this one was run by people who were………well………armatures!
Yep, perception management goes both ways. Somehow, the political leadership of
the US truly believed they could blame those who truly do defend the nation and
then force them to work side by side with a brand new group of “experts” who
for the most part knew little to nothing about human threats. In 2002, an FBI
Assistant Special Agent in Charge of a regional office was on a peer level with
a DHS supervisor who had less experience than a rookie Police Officer. Was this
true across the country? Again….that word….perception. Had political leadership
comprehended what was the ramifications would be if the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA and DoD
was told to work hand in hand with people who didn’t understand the job in
front of them? No. Did they care? No! The presentation to the American public
on what DHS was and what it was tasked to do was far more important than
putting into place process that would make the department functional. It was
the US postal service on steroids or so the FBI and others thought! They still
do, they just won’t say it in public
It’s been over fifteen years since this bureaucratic,
kneejerk reaction took place and guess what? It’s grown in size and cost with
each passing year! Imagine that, the US federal government spending money
faster than the printing presses can make it and all in the name of keeping the
country safe! You’re not against keep the US safe are you? Yep, that is the
explanation the US public hears year after year!
Okay, I started this by referencing the Mexican viewpoint of
DHS. Now that I’ve given my version of the history of DHS, let me address the
real issue and it’s not just about Mexico’s perception of the US Department of
Homeland Security.
Somewhere around 2010 the US public perception of DHS began
to change. At first it was just the fringe elements that perceived DHS as too
powerful, too intrusive and too arrogant. Soon it became much more mainstream to
read or hear stories of how DHS was “intrusive”. I can’t remember what movie I
was watching, but there was a moment when a city Police Detective said, “Okay,
let’s leave this guy up to ‘Homeland’, they will want to talk to him’! I sat
there for a moment and thought to myself,” who is ‘Homeland’ and why would a
Detective deliberately turn an active case over to them and not the FBI”? In
the movie, a Homeland Security Investigator takes charge of interviewing a
suspect. Now, I knew Hollywood has a long history of screwing up how real
Police work takes place, so I just let this part of the movie go. A few days
later, I was talking with a retired FBI Agent. I was telling him about this
movie and I asked him if DHS really had investigators. To my shock his answer
was yes! “So, you mean DHS has people who were a badge and gun out in public? I
thought they just watched the borders and inspected vehicles. I thought they
worked at airports making sure little old ladies didn’t have liquids in their
purse. You mean to tell me DHS has a Law Enforcement branch”? I know I was
behind the times on the actions of DHS, but I was stunned the US government had
taken, in my mind, such a huge leap! By the time my FBI friend finished explain
to me what changes had taken place in DHS, I officially join the ranks of the
concerned! What was going on? Why was
the federal government expanding the authority of this agency? Soon after that,
my work brought me back into daily contact with a few other federal law enforcement
agencies along with a state level agency. It seemed that DHS had quietly executed
the classic “Mission Creep”.
It’s 2016 and the US Department of Homeland Security is
charged with what? If you stopped the average American citizen on the streets
and asked them, “What is the mission of Homeland Security”, what would they
tell you? Does anyone really know? In the past several years, there is an unquestionable
growing fear of the federal government in the United States. It’s not held by
everyone and the percentage is still below a majority, but fear and mistrust
are poison to sound governance and that fear is growing. What examples are
being touted as the proof of a federal government becoming too intrusive? Is
DHS one of the key examples? Remember the key word in this post, “Perception”!
Final analysis:
The US Department of Homeland Security was a kneejerk
reaction of political leadership, on both sides of the US political arena,
based upon not having sound answers for the US public as to why the attacks of
9-11 took place. It was not a strategically developed concept, regardless of
what any political leader might argue.
In 2016, the American public must ask itself a series of
very important questions.
1.
Has the agency expanded its initial charter? If
so, by who’s approval / authority? Did the US citizenship get a vote?
2.
Could the country survive without it? Would the ability
to keep the US safe be degraded? If so, quantify the defense.
3.
Is the agency redundant in any area? If so, why?
It’s sad to say the Department of Homeland Security has been
a political tool from its inception, but then again, almost all federal agencies
have become political tools! The most recent example of the Department of
Justice and Hillary Clinton’s actions is a frightening example.
Finally as you sit and ponder this growing federal agency, remember
this.
There is a very fine line between security and tyranny!
No comments:
Post a Comment