The Major Solutions to Defeat Homeland and National Security Loopholes in the USA - Research Paper Example

Major Solutions To Defeat Homeland And National Security Loopholes In The USA Introduction National security is a major topic of study and debate in many developed countries, the governments of which aim to keep the focus on how to safeguard the interests of its citizens and also see to it that critical information about the country does not leak out of the system. Homeland and National Security measures taken by countries like the US rely heavily on the precision of military intelligence and technical prowess . The present study tries to identify major setbacks, legal issues and vulnerabilities of the procedures and laws that are in place to meet this purpose. Home land security involves military intelligence and active field reporting to ensure that there is no offence within the country. Main forces of control include military, city police and special forces which work in tandem with regular regulatory bodies like the traffic and local police. The specificity of local populations makes it easy for the higher ups to ensure security and discipline in the sparsely populated states of America. The homeland security teams are also supported by medical, charitable and specially trained anti-bomb and homicide squads which rush to extend help on the spot in case of emergencies (Newmann, 2002, p.137). The technical decisions are taken by higher officials in the government and while the situation is mostly under control, the government uses extra care in ensuring that the right ammunition, vehicles, gadgets and technical requirements are available to the different squads to ensure that the nation is secure from terrorist attacks and threats to the aspirations and beliefs of the American system. The Homeland Security department is a cabinet that exercises heavy scrutiny on the different aspects of anti-terror mechanism in the states. It comprises of eminent military and senators and ministers of the state and came into existence after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center under the Bush administration which entrusted the Homeland security department of undertaking a multi-faceted approach in ensuring Homeland security (Bush, 2002, p.7). These include studies, innovations, research and applications in the field of emergency preparedness, domestic intelligence, international intelligence, critical infrastructure protection, perimeter protection, stopping child pornography, border security on land, country and maritime borders, transportation security, airtime security, maritime security, biodefense, radioactive element detection and research, radiological material usage, detection and research and overall research and development in next generation security and technologies that can be used to attain it. Homeland and National Security issues are of prime-most concern to the USA since there are multiple reports of treason, offensives amongst civilians, drug peddling and thefts and burglary, all of which are signs of a weak security system and a tendency of growth of negative forces detrimental to the American society (Newmann, 2002, p.129). The forces of terrorism plaguing many parts of the world today are entirely covered up by these minor incidents and while the authorities are busy handling these problems, the terrorist attacks on key parts of the society start taking over. There is therefore, a growing need in United States to keep the forces of indiscipline and terror under control through intense research and tracking. Sadly, it has been found that the approach of strict punishment and immediate execution of combatants is a wrong way adopted by the USA. While it is apt in many situations there many cases where wrong leads and terror reports have led to harassment of innocents be it in schools, colleges, airports or other public places. While these reports of harassments in public security areas come from doubts directed towards innocent people, the treatment meted out to them in the absence of concrete charges or complete proof of criminal intentions of the combatant. While such cases end up without any criminal prosecution, with the chief accused/s been given the free ticket to living in American society, the entire experience leaves a horrid impact on their psyches and makes them revengeful to the administration. Case studies Major reports of unwanted torture and prosecution came to the forefront after city police departments like the NYPD stormed schools and pinned down students of color on charges of drug peddling filed by the principle of a certain school. The entire experience was not just horrid for students who were pinned and searched, but also for their parents, teachers and classmates who watched in disbelief on the inhuman cruelty of the police departments that they so trusted in real life. Similar incidents of arrests from airports and subsequent torture in the Central Jail have been reported from several parts of the country, especially with those individuals who held a Muslim surname. These facts have put the Homeland and National Security departments in a bad light since almost eighty percent of these charges proved to be false (Newmann, 2002, p.132). Violations of Public Privacy and Information Security: After the Obama administration announced that it would be using drones to monitor areas and spy software to detect conversations going on over the internet, mobile connections and land phone connections, a new threat to the privacy of the common man was detected. People are now unsure as to what extent the government knows about their monetary investments, bank details, and private matters which are not considered socially shareable, including family tragedies, misunderstandings, fights, brawls, education status, work status, visa status, travel plans and much more. As a result, a person is unsure if he is safe from his own government since the reports generated out of these studies may go against him any time leading to the incidence of his arrest and prosecution even he has a contact with someone considered a threat in a remote way (McCoubrey, 1990, p.132). Legal Possibilities The Department of Homeland and National Security is solely created by the US government and does not fall under the Geneva Convention that defines international security laws. The main challenge f such an arrangement is that in many cases, there are serious conflicts in the level of authority that the Homeland and National security departments can use. While the departments actively combats forces of terrorism and criminal offense within the country, its search, arrest, and emergency protocols resemble the dictates of the Geneva Convention although it is not directly affiliated or granted permission to it. The cabinet therefore often receives criticism for extreme steps taken in minor issues like drug peddling or school complaints. According to the International security law that has been finalized in the Geneva Convention, such atrocities are not allowed in member countries. United States of America is one of the signatories to portions of the Geneva Convention and do not hold the authority to issue extreme orders to its internal security processes, the like of which have been observed rampantly after the September 11 attacks devastated a major part of the economy and led to the building of this system. According to many bodies of international law, the bodies of homeland and national security trespass their permitted modes of actions and use severity in its punishments in cases that must be initially tried by international courts. This often leads to premature sentencing or sometimes, to grant of freedom for key accused which then escape he harshness of international law and find a reason to flee from United States and go missing from the records of international law. What is being criticized heavily is the fact that according to the Geneva Conventions, when war takes place between two countries or there is illegal combatants reported from an outsider country, the subjects arrested fall under the judgment and jurisdiction of international law. While this is acceptable in the rest of the world, the United States of America has its own set of rules and regulations to try and sentence these candidates who cause havoc in their homeland. The sentences are of the gravity of war time and international killings and are carried out in America itself, without sufficient chance given to the representatives of the other country to support or present their countrymen. This is a stark contrast to the Third and Fourth Conventions in international relations and wartime justice. Thus, the main vulnerability in the laws that are in place to undertake intensive scrutiny of homeland security issues are vulnerable to their own severity. The US government by default punishes a combatant without considering the chances the combatant has when a trial is run on an international court. While this reduces processing time, there are reports of wrongs done in the so called fair system of trial and punishment. Policies The policies that are in place to support and put these laws into practice rely heavily on justice. According to the government, when a person is tried and found guilty, he is served punishment. However, if a person is tried and found not guilty of charges, the American policy does not have a steady path after release of the combatant (Berney et al, 1990, 141). Factors that need to be taken into consideration are emotional and mental loss, physical strain and harassment and financial downrush and unemployment, all of which result in the person’s life due to the number of years that he or she is made to spend in the American prisons. To add to this, there are secondary trials that are conducted to check if the accused can be framed with charges of minor offences like drug peddling or theft, in order to show to the world that the arrest and torture was not for no reason. In such cases also, the fact that many suffer undeserved punishment or come out free of charges is an unfortunate happening since after the combatant is out of the court, he is still regarded as one who has confronted he military and hence has been a criminal. At this point of legal action, American policies do not offer any sympathy or support to these tried individuals who were actually arrested in a haste or under doubtful circumstances. No medical or monetary aid is provided to the subjects (Layne & Beugelsdijk, 2003, 129). No declaration or certificate lets them enjoy a free life. In terms of public and private security, the information that is obtained from spying across phone records of common people in stored in obscure databases which if falls in wrong hands can lead to major havoc in terms of movement and liquidity of financial assets (Sargent, 1995, p.21). While the government sits on this landmine of information, the lack of transparency in processes further makes the procedure unwelcome to the common people who have voted these governments into power. Freedom of speech and expression is lost as people are more wary of what they share on social media or in public places. Procedures Domestic terrorism in Americas has comprised of left wing and right wing extremism, wherein the reaction of the government has been outright military action, torture and severe punishment if found guilty. The main facets of this approach have been to set an example of strict demeanor that does not allow people to entertain thoughts of combating the government or the American society. However, there have been a few serious vulnerabilities detected in the procedure. Firstly, important officials and military personnel have been found to compromise on insider information leading to the occurrence of severe incidents that threatened the peace of the American society. The lack of integrity in such officials was held responsible for increase in terror activities around the American society and one of the main goals of handling right wing extremism was eradication of such officials. However, detection of such traitors or gathering of data from intelligence systems that indicate presence of compromisers is a massive task and many loopholes have been detected in this field (Obama, 2010, p.16). The policy of no tolerance towards people who are thought to be combatants is unable to reach the desired levels of accuracy. Every man targeted is subjected to torture irrespective of whether it is the right man or the wrong man, without any promise of redemption to the person who s being wronged in the process. Solutions: Getting rid of such grave concerns around Homeland and National Security departments of America would be a great start to a bright future where, Americans can trust their government better than they have after the September 11 attacks. Students, employees and citizens of America can have trust in the department of Homeland Security only when the following solutions are incorporated in its system (Layne & Beugelsdijk, 2003, p.123). Speed Testing: The police and Special Forces work on top speed and while there is no doubt that this is one of the highlight factors of the Homeland Security departments, using precision and observation during the speed delivery of actions is highly important. This includes humanitarian considerations like not focusing on the eye of the child while searching him, not groping too harshly while searching men and women, sympathetic treatment to older men and women in the extremist group and strict adherence to soft skills while handling of dead people. Information Security: Since the information acquired in relation to a group of people considered a threat is highly sensitive, the authorities need to exercise tremendous control in securing the information. Details of the research must be secured using private databases, high definition storage protocols and in physical storages like vaults and safes, out of reach from even the lower designations in the military. Transparency In Judiciary: People being tried in different cases face different treatments in the court and while in custody. Complete transparency of the judiciary procedures of such cases would help the American system obtain approval of not just the masses, but also the critics who feel that the decisions are forced on illegal combatants against the international law. Types of Information Stored: The Homeland and National Security departments can release the exact types of information that they are storing about people through their spy software. The Obama administration will enjoy more support from within and outside the country if they outline details of the different types of personal, professional and legislative information of their citizens that they have stored and are planning to store in future. While this might give a header to the sleeper cells or terrorist groups which want to keep their records clean, it also gives an assurance to the public. Groups that are under doubt can be subjected to further spy investigations without the knowledge of the people involved to avoid abuse of this transparency. Benefit for Affected Individuals: While the non-tolerant policy of the USA is apt in anti-terrorism campaigns, the removal of negative charges from people who are found innocent is very important. The government must make special allowances for such people who have undergone the harassment and whose families have put up with the pain and ignominy of housing a traitor or a terrorist. There should be record clearance certificates, assurance of a job and monetary support provided to such individuals since many have complained that right after the torture, people are unable to come out of the distress and resume normal living. International Policy Change: While the Geneva Conventions govern a huge amount of wartime decisions and punishments between two countries, US has used an immediate punishment protocol that uses third degree torture to extract information from doubtful people right from the start. This approach is not welcome in domestic grounds, but helps in regulating problems like extremism and terrorism that is intrinsic to the country (Beard, 2007, 45). In short, if there is a certain amount of finesse and accuracy brought into the system, the Homeland and National Security departments set a good example of heightened security within a country. These can be followed by countries all over the world only of the international law and Geneva Conventions are re-evaluated and new agreements are signed by the members of the same board (Fitzpatrick, 2002, p.350). In short, revising and updating the international law in handling insurgencies during war and terror strikes separately will be the ideal way to bring the American practice to the world. Initiative from the US Government: To get amendments done in the international scenario, the US government has to take a complete initiative which involves not just standardizing the procedures as mentioned in the above pointers, but also bring the effectiveness of these measures to the notice of regulatory bodies of these conventions. Spreading step-by-step awareness of how to attain high precision through such a non-tolerant approach to war and terrorism alone will help other bodies take note of how effective this system is. And as a result, the ease with which this approach will be fine-tuned using suggestions from people abroad and incorporated in internal law would be appreciable, allowing, many countries to enjoy similar security. In all the above mentioned solutions, it is highly important for the American government to bring itself forward as one which does not threaten the peace of the average citizen by procuring private information or undertaking sudden school or locality raids. Instead, it has to take all the above measures to become a trusted source whose actions are irrefutable. Only then will it be able to excel as a judiciary power, whose suggestions will be acceptable to governments all over the world. Conclusion: As is evident from the study above, the American government has come under scrutiny time and again for the severe role it plays in removing terrorism from its country through the activities of the Homeland and National Security departments. Overall there is a need to have transparency at different levels of executing the orders generated during emergency and anti-terrorist processes in order to win the support of Americans and people of law outside America (Layne & Beugelsdijk, 2003, p.127). The decree of wartime judiciary that states that countries are supposed to follow a certain decorum during insurgencies and surrenders, do not allow for autonomous decisions. In spite of being on the regulatory board, USA has chosen to treat its offences by itself, irrespective of whether the violence or combat situations were of domestic or international origin. Since USA has adopted such a role, it is very important that it utilizes transparency to keep the critics from finding flaws or from subsequent negative history. Summary: The role of the Homeland and National Security department in the United States has grown in importance over the past ten years. Although they have landed in big trouble by buying a negative reputation caused by the torture inflicted on innocents that were arrested in their anti-terrorist campaigns, the department holds strong bases in information security and works in a highly efficient manner. However, a few important solutions like increased transparency, military soft skills, record retention and clearance for freed people, monetary benefit for those affected by judicial actions are important. In our study, we find that USA has been a powerful force in eradicating terrorism from its face and while it deals with intrinsic extremist group, the function of the Homeland security cabinet has helped reduce harsh and cruel incidents on the land of America to a great extent. In short, there is a requirement to exercise the regulatory actions of the body, but there needs to be several improvements. Amongst other solutions discussed, there are also a set of suggestions of making the Geneva Conventions more resilient to the US approach as it will allow many other countries like Russia, Europe, and more to regulate and take strict action in removing and controlling terror and violence individually. However, since USA is in a regulatory position both in the conventions and in the UN, it is upto the Obama administration to take the initiative and bring in the change in global wartime and anti-terrorism rules. References Beard, J. M. (2007). The Geneva Boomerang: The Military Commissions Act of 2006 and US Counterterror Operations. American Journal of International Law, 56-73. Bush, G. W. (2002). The national security strategy of the United States of America. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC. Berney, A. L., Banks, W. C., & Raven-Hansen, P. (1990). National security law(pp. 140-42). Boston: Little, Brown. Fitzpatrick, J. (2002). Jurisdiction of military commissions and the ambiguous war on terrorism. American Journal of International Law, 345-354. Layne, S. P., & Beugelsdijk, T. J. (2003). High-throughput laboratories for homeland and national security. Biosecurity and bioterrorism: biodefense strategy, practice, and science, 1(2), 123-130. McCoubrey, H. (1990). International Humanitarian Law: The Regulation of Armed Conflicts. Dartmouth Pub Co. Newmann, W. W. (2002). Reorganizing for national security and homeland security. Public Administration Review, 62(s1), 126-137. Obama, B. (2010). National Security Strategy of the United States (2010). DIANE Publishing. Sargent, L. T. (Ed.). (1995). Extremism in America: a reader. NYU Press. Read More