Mitigation and Response Plan - Research Paper Example

? Mitigation and Response Plan Insert Topic: Department of Homeland security traces its existence way back in 2001, when the Federal government started to institutionalize priorities and initiatives that were aimed at increasing preparedness and consequent strengthening of its security against any attack. These efforts are as a result of the 2001 terrorist attack on American soils. Homeland security offers protection to the citizens of the United States of America on different and numerous fronts. This department was incepted in 2003. Its inception follows the enactment of the new statutory authorities and issuance of national policies .The DHS through its program has endeavored to carry out the following core responsibilities in its bid to assure the security of the American people (Richard 2004). The first priority of this program is to protect the America from terrorist attacks and coercion. Second on the list is to ensure secure national borders both the south and the North. Moreover it ensures laws governing immigration are followed to later. This department prosecutes those who go against the country laws. And finally, it assists communities to plan, respond and recuperate from disasters.DHS believes in the homeland security enterprise. This refers to the collective responsibility of Federal, state, local, tribal, private sector entities, non-governmental organizations, individuals and communities to beef up security abilities. These parties share a common interest in safeguarding and assuring security to the American population. Existence of sophisticated communication network between these parties and agencies provides crucial information that step up security measures across the country’s borders (Jean, 2003). Essentially, the ultimate goal of DHS is to ensure a safe homeland where citizens are assured of their liberties and protection of their privacy.DHS is among the most crucial element of the national enterprise. This department possesses unique abilities and responsibilities in securing and managing borders and systems of immigration.DHS undertakes leadership and stewardship roles in areas relating to critical infrastructure protection and emergency management On the other hand, DHS in liaison with other departments and agencies have key roles and responsibilities to undertake on areas like defense, diplomacy and counterterrorism. Some of these departments or agencies include justice, Defense and state, the National Counterterrorism Center and Federal Bureau of Investigation. On policy making, the white house plays a key role in giving direction and helps in coordinating (Jean, 2003). This plan intends to explicitly outline mitigation and response actions towards averting a terrorist crime on borders and the possible measures and effective strategic plan to be embraced to manage risks on the national borders. It is notable that chapter 2, subsection 6 of the USA constitution provides that, the main responsibility is to defend the United States of America and its territories. Some of the risks that face the United States today, include Al-Qaeda and global terrorism, wide-scale cyber attacks, pandemics and major accidents, illicit trafficking and smaller scale terrorist attacks (Jean, 2003). This plan intends to use Al-Qaeda and Taliban global terrorist attack as an example of a crisis in this case study. Terrorist attack has become a major shock wave in the United States of America. Focus on the plan‘s suitability and efficiency on mitigating and responding to the crisis shall be considered. There has been several Al-Qaeda and Taliban attempted attacks on America before and after 11 2001.For instance, on 12 October 2000. Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in Yemen. This incident occurred on the port of Aden. One year Later this al-Qaeda directed a very serious attack on several buildings in America, which left many people dead. This remains memorable and listed among the worst terrorist attack in the world. After the 2001 terrorist attack, al-Qaeda has since then directed attacks on the USA interests outside its soils. For example, on 8th October 2002 Al-Qaeda reportedly attacked America military personnel in Kuwait. One person was killed and another one injured. Similar attacks in Mombasa Kenya, Bali Indonesia, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, and Casablanca, Madrid were reportedly directed by this terrorist attack. Majorly, the attacks intended to sabotage the American interests (Tom & Robert, 2009) These attacks are carried out from very safe haven build by these groups. The Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) remains the most dangerous area in the globe for America. This haven mainly enables the terrorist group to plan and prepare on how to attack the United States. Reliable sources indicate that, more than three terrorist attacks that were thwarted in England, Scotland and Germany since 2005, had close link with the FATA. It is notable that, the terrorist forces sneak secretly across the border to attack the USA and NATO army and destroy infrastructure. They then run back through this border which the American troops don’t cross. The steps to mitigate and respond to the attacks, depends entirely on deep investigation on the leaders of these groups and more importantly, the funders .It is believed that the groups have vast financial bases that make them carry out the numerous attacks without any financial constraints. Additionally, the mitigation plan should focus on the best way to man the borders both on the seas, air and physical (Tom & Robert, 2009) This plan on mitigating the crisis focuses on the sources of finances and the ardent supporters and leaders of these groups. It is notable that, the Taliban groups collect huge sums of money from the sale of opium. Opium production is estimated to be 98% in the southern region of Afghanistan is vastly controlled by the Taliban Group (Richard 2004). This mitigation plan intends to describe on how the finance base of the se group can be subverted and eliminated. Similarly, the arrest of the group leaders and destruction of their haven (Fata) is fundamental in averting a terrorist crisis. The homeland security department in coordination with the navy should embark on destroying the opium fields. These can be attained by either manually or aerial spraying of glyphosate. On doing this the financial base of the terrorist group would have reduced drastically. Similarly the American government should encourage the Afghani farmers by offering high prices to wheat. It is believed that poor farmers in Afghanistan are associated with cultivation of opium; this belief has since been disapproved by the former cabinet secretary for counternarcotics Habibullah Qatari. He admitted that poverty is not the major reason of growing opium. Opium is grown simply to support the terrorist activities financially. Increase of wheat prices and use of crop exchange programs will change the psychological mindset and will help in converting the farmers to this crop (Tom & Robert, 2009). Moreover, the DHS should embark on destroying the terrorist haven (FATA).This process might be inconsequential if Pakistan is not involved. Pakistan is an important ally in this war against terror by USA. It is notable that for the success of Homeland security to demolish these safe havens, Pakistan must be well funded, to improve their weapons and use them to exclusively eliminate the Al Qaeda and Taliban troops. It is advisable for the Congress to pass legislation for such funding and any call to withhold military aid to a potential ally should be discouraged and unheeded. (Tom & Robert, 2009) argues that the Pakistan government should be encouraged to participate actively in the fight against terrorism from its soil. As a director of homeland security department would advice the federal government on the need for a well equipped Pakistan intelligence agency (ISI).This will promote high degree of investigation and consequently availability of vital information on the operations of the terrorist network. From the criminal justice point of view, advocating for a strong criminal justice system is inevitable. A system that is guided by a normative legal structure and entrenched in the hub principles of the rule of law and follows the due process and upholds respect for human rights should be appreciated. On this regard, for Homeland security department to respond effectively to terrorism, it needs to advice the federal government and the public at large to appreciate and the need for counter-terrorism regimes and equally important criminal justice systems. Additionally, it is of critical importance the United States of America government to effectively and genuinely cooperate with other stakeholders across the globe in the fight against this vice (Jean 2003). Moreover, international criminal justice cooperation remains fundamental in this process. On similar note, the DHS’S role in facilitating the endorsement and execution of the collective legal instruments against terrorism is of great importance, as it will promote strengthening of the rule of law governing terrorism across the globe. The fact that terrorism is not confined to the USA only and its ever-changing trend in terms of support systems, preference of targets and methods of attacks, it is remarkable that, collective responsibility and cooperation is required to avert this networked and well organized groups Criminal justice systems across the globe address challenges differently depending on the set up structures, institutional sophistication, level of development and most importantly, the circumstances of occurrence of the attacks. (Jean 2003) argues that Homeland security system should appreciate the ever-changing sophistication of terrorist operations and embrace considerable devotion towards increasing the efficiency level of their measures on terrorism. DHS’s structures of criminal justice should be expanded and improved to higher sophistication level for better and quick counter-terrorism operations. Moreover, DHS should form ample structure of substantive offences, exploratory powers for undoubted investigation processes and rules guiding evidentiary process. It is for this reason advocating for financial and moral support towards the United Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by DHS remains a fundamental element and priority. UNODC, besides the normal ways of averting crime (prevention measures), it uniquely examines areas such as the social-economical and political environment that is conducive for the wide spread of terrorism. This plan also, examines the role of criminal justice in the fight against terrorism by observing the need of upholding the rule of law. (Jean 2003) indicates that terrorism threatens mutually the rule of law and the essential freedoms of the citizens. Improper and inefficient counter terrorism responses greatly dent the rule of law and human rights values.DHS has a great responsibility to observe the minimum threshold requirement set by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights. This includes the international human rights, immigrant and humanitarian law.DHS in its quest to avert and fight terrorism must be guided by the rule of law since respect for human rights while on a counter terrorism mission is not only a legal obligation but also a key element and inspiration to any successful counter terrorism strategy. This is a vivid indication that, on any counter terrorism mission, the measures applied must comply with the international law.DHS, has a great responsibility of monitoring and ensuring non-compliance of national and international law is acted upon in its quest to gain confidence and its counter terrorism mission (Jean 2003). Another element of the criminal justice role to be appreciated by DHS’S director is the acceptance and recognition of the universal legal regime against terrorism. It is evident that, the international community has not fully agreed on the universal definition of terrorism but it is on record that 16 legal instruments on terrorism were formed under the directive and guidance of United Nation specialized agencies. DHS’s director needs to enlighten other stakeholders on the elements and guidelines attached to these legal instruments. (Stuart 2006) asserts that there is need to the federal government and the department of defense to underscore the need for condemning international terrorism since it endangers international safety and world tranquility. It is of critical importance to observe that the legal instruments have paved way to hunting down of terrorists who conduct criminal activities on assumption that they can not be investigated and prosecuted on the basis of national borders insulation. The DHS director has a great responsibility of enlightening the rest of the parties on the contribution made by legal instruments in the quest to international cooperation. Finally, the DHS, director remains a key element in any policy making. A good policy on terrorism is a contributing factor to averting terrorism. It is observable that, it is in these policies and legal frameworks; counter terrorism role is exercised by the criminal justice system. Additionally, effective criminalization of diverse acts allied to terrorist activities forms a formidable prerequisite to intrusion by the criminal justice system. It is remarkable that, the success of any counter terrorism strategy entirely depends on the strength of the foundations that forms the relevant polices. This process may include periodic review of legislation. This is to ensure proper scrutiny of legislations that may have been hurriedly adopted by the state to subvert a pressing circumstance. The DHS director should ensure the relevant agencies of the government in coordination with DHS have scrutinized such legislation and appropriate corrections made (Stuart, 2006). As the director of DHS, the aforementioned measures can have consequences to the parties involved both internally (nationally) and externally (internationally).The federal government being the major player in this case will be compelled to adopt new policies and develop legislation that complies with the ever-changing structure of international law governing terrorism. Additionally, the federal government remains the sole body that will convince the congress on any move to fund programs intended to curb terrorism inside and outside the American soils. Moreover, it is a sole responsibility of the federal government to direct any offensive action against an enemy. Before such action is carried out as per this plan the federal body is required to consider consequences to the masses especially on human rights and freedoms (Stuart, 2006). The federal government might find it technical to avert a terrorist attack and comply with the laid rules that govern human rights. It critical to note that, this is a major challenge to many governments across the globe, but it should also be appreciated that however much terrorists must be fought, protection of fundamental rights of the masses counts in any successful terrorism strategy . Department of defense is one of the key parties in any process of terrorism aversion. (Stuart 2006) indicates that this department helps in logistical organization of the army or police and the required resources in terms of equipment. It is notable that, this plan requires the generals and the army leaders to acquaint themselves with new policies proposed in their bid to restore calm and achieve internal and external peace. This is in line with international law. This plan affects greatly, the normal culture and tradition of the army in averting terrorist activity. This is in reference to chapter six, sub section 41 of the USA constitution which requires the army to acquaint themselves on the geopolitical knowledge and beliefs of the country in which, the organization is operating. Another department is the National Counterterrorism Center and Federal Bureau of Investigation. This center is greatly affected by director of DHS. This center remains critical in war against terrorism. This plan affects its undertakings on the ways of carrying out investigations. High level methods of investigation need to be applied by this center. This enables the center to cope up with the new ways used by terrorists to hide and commit crimes (Stuart 2006). This center must be operating smartly, swiftly and diligently for it to curb the clever and tricky undertakings of the terrorist gangs. It is noteworthy that, the manpower in this center needs to undergo training on more sophisticated ways of investigation. The justice system or department is also a fundamental organ that is affected by the DHS plan. As directed earlier in this plan, any success on terrorism greatly depends on the strength of the justice system. (Benjamin 2009) indicates that the justice system has to go an extra mile to improve its strength based on the mechanisms used to prosecute and deliver justice. Finally, the private sector, non-governmental organization and communities form a group that has to change its culture and embrace a tradition that is geared to achieving the safety of the American people as whole. This plan requires this group of individuals to embrace the spirit of care for each other and dissemination of crucial information that can help relevant authorities avert a terrorist activity in time. Possible outcomes on actions of the DHS director are diverse depending on the circumstance and the region of occurrence of the terrorist attack. They include destruction of property and loss of lives. For instance in the case of destroying the FATA, it is factual that violent attacks against the Taliban group will lead to loss of property and lives. Similarly a reasonable cost is incurred in financing the war. Another possible outcome is change of culture and perception on the way of fighting terrorism (Benjamin 2009). It is notable that the rule of law should be adhered to the later especially on respecting and protecting human rights. Additionally, the army will endeavor in achieving a high caliber of organizational skills and knowledge on using new and sophisticated equipment in reference to chapter 5 and 6 of the USA constitution. Improved and well structured criminal justice systems are inevitable on application of this plan. A strong legal framework governed by the rule of law is a characteristic of such system. On similar argument, it is observable that, this approach is likely to cause political and economical instability in the countries suspected to support terrorism. This is in case they become the target of attack on offensive mission (Richard, 2004). In an after report, it should be noted that, war on terrorism remains a global challenge because of several factors. They include different structures of legal frameworks, which hinder proper prosecution of criminals. Also reluctance of countries adopting legal instruments outlined and governed by the international law. (Richard, 2004) asserts it is great impediment on achieving a successful terrorist strategy which abhors respect and protection of human rights. Additionally, international cooperation should be embraced because it remains the major ingredient in the war against terrorism. Similarly, the army, civilian leaders should embrace the interpersonal tactics, that include recognizing diversity, innovation, sound judgment, mental agility, health fitness, physical fitness, confidence and self control as outlined in chapter six of the USA. It is evident that a resilient army will recover quickly from adversity and injuries while focusing on the mission agenda. Funding of organizations and programs intended to make the world a peaceful place should be put into consideration (Jean 2003). References Benjamin, W (2009). Legislating the War on Terror: An Agenda for Reform. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Jean, E (2003). Just War Against Terror: The Burden of America Power in a Violent World. New York. Basic Books. Richard, C (2004). Against all Enemies: Inside America‘s War on Terror. New York: Free Press. Stuart, C (2006).Culture, Crisis and America‘s War on Terror. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press Tom, L & Robert, W (2009). .America’s War on Terror.2nd ed. Farnham, England, VT: Ashgate. Read More