Border Security: PMSC - Research Paper Example

Border Security: PMSC Introduction Recently, the department of defense came into the spotlight over the use of private military and security firms in its war against terror. The information caused outrage among the US citizens concerned with the integrity of their military in foreign countries. Since the information came into the limelight, more worrying stories have emerged. Stories of torture victims have been heard and the US government has had to defend itself against these horror stories. Pundits in defense matters have argued against and for the use of these private companies, also referred to as PMSCs (Greenland, 2014). PMSC stands for ‘Private Military Security Company.’ Those in favor of their use in the war against terror cite their numerous successful operations as their defense for supporting their use. Those against their use have also cited the horror stories that have emerged from victims of these security operations. Whichever the side one maybe, careful analysis into operations of the aforementioned private militaries has revealed that their use has been effective in some areas. This effectiveness cannot be matched by operations carried out by the government (Greenland, 2014). The main reason why the government contracted these security firms is the assets they have at their disposal. These assets have been instrumental in operations by these security firms. Whereas the government’s use of resources is constrained by political hurdles as well as foreign policies, the private companies can operate with little or no resistance. However, The United States is facing another major challenge in its borders with other countries. The Mexican border has presented a major challenge to the Homeland security department. Inflow of immigrants into the United States through the Mexican border has posed major logistic challenges to the United States. To make matters worse, the Mexican border is the main route through which drugs get into the United States (Hoffman, 2006). The war against drugs has dragged on for years. Drugs and immigrants are major problems that continue to face the United States. Debates on the best methods to use to solve the issue have also raged on for years. Use of private military groups in the war against terror proved to be successful, especially in its implementation. The assets, the personnel and the equipment used by these private groups were essential in their operations. Questions arising now are whether these security groups can be used in the cross border security and if these security firms can deploy their assets into the operations (Hoffman, 2006). The research paper tries to analyse option whether the private military and the security companies can still use the same assets they used in the defence department or they will have to change in order to reinforce security in homeland. Homeland security in the paper is described in the paper and its roles in detail. Homeland security in the paper is defined as the support given by the military and other security companies in reinforcing border security. The advantages and cons of making use of the military and security companies are discussed at length and their capacity weighed to see whether they can provide adequate security to counter terrorism which is a raising global concern. Abstract The dissertation below discusses at length issues concerning homeland security, whether or not the private military and the security companies can use the same assets they used in Department of Defence in Homeland Security. The homeland defence in the dissertation is defined as the support given by the military and other security companies in reinforcing border security. Terrorism is a matter of global concern and the U.S has implemented measures to address border insecurity. Homeland security was a measure that was reinforced by the country’s defence department after terrorism threats. Military and private security company fits the capacity to utilise their assets to help reinforce homeland security as they only come in handy when the situation is worse and is beyond the capacity of the other security departments to provide internal security. The research study gives the benefits of incorporating the military and security company in homeland security and the challenges that come with it. According to George Schwartz, he feels that the idea of involving military or the security firms is not a good idea. His argument is based on several facts but he eventually accepts that military background is an added advantage to homeland security. The study concludes that due to the alarming alerts of insecurity from terrorism, Homeland security needs the military support as well as the support of the security companies and therefore should be incorporated in the security measures. The dissertation identifies three major entries that are used by terrorists to enter into the country, smuggling of goods and finally illegal entrance of drugs. The identified areas include the ports, airports and land borders. With the support of the military and the security companies the homeland security will be in a position to manage the security situation of the United States of America. Contents Introduction 1 Abstract 2 Contents 3 Main Body 4 Outsourcing security operations 11 Challenges 12 Conclusion 13 Main Body Homeland security refers to the department in the US that deals with security measures to protect the state from any malicious terrorist attack that may occur within or along the border of the U.S. it acts on behalf of the government to protect the civilians and the state at large from any external attack. The country’s military has a significant role to play with regard to homeland defence as they are part and parcel of the homeland defence. Border defence is a large term that puts land, marine and air protection. The U.S. military is trained and divided into different sub unit that each deal with their own specific unit all in an objective to protect the country from any threats from external attacks. The forces consist of army who provide land security, navy, Marine Corps, air force who instil security measures in the air for example threats from missile attacks and coast guards. In defence support, the military is called in with its assets and personnel to reinforce security in cases normally handled by the civil authorities. Such cases may involve different kind of disasters which may be man-made or natural, law enforcement, and other duties assigned which are domestic in nature or in events. The Director of Military Support is always in charge of the discharging duties to military personnel when they are invited for reinforcement. The director stays in every state in the ‘Joint Operation Centre.’ The military together with private security companies should work closely in order to protect the civilians from external threats. This practice is encouraged and even policies and laws put in place to help manage security. The laws are there to dictate the manner in which the military should respond on a request for assistance. Military and private security company fits the capacity to utilise their assets to help reinforce homeland security as they only come in handy when the situation is worse and is beyond the capacity of the other security departments to provide internal security. It is easy to conduct such operations using the military as the assets remain in their command. Chain of command is the core principle that guides the military hence making it easy to manage. The military assets stand out as the last resort to be sought after all means have been exhausted and cannot be directed but rather may be requested. Homeland security is a wider perspective as compared to the duties assigned at the department of defence. The homeland security missions include the following; Ability to quickly respond to emergencies whether natural or man-made in order to be in a position to control the situation before is out of hand. Terrorism is also a factor to be considered in such scenarios. Military and other security firms largely depend on the chain of command and unless they are ordered to deal with the situation at an early stage it may be too late. Hence, measures of danger alert should be put in place to detect any such things from occurring. They both have capacity to provide civilian support only that orders should be made early in matters concerning emergency. It is the duty of the homeland security to maintain both domestic and international activities that may be required in security matters. The two forces have assets to capacitate the task as they have both land, aerial and marine surveillance and intelligence to deal with security measure. The military and private security companies are normally equipped with equipments and staffed with personnel that are qualified in conducting operations concerned with security. This as a task performed by the homeland security can also be done to curb security measures easily by the two parties. Fight on terrorism is a global fight and the security parameter needs to be large and capable. Including the military and other security is not a choice but the only option remaining to curb the menace of terrorism which is ready to work both domestically and internationally. Security need to be made stronger than in the previous century in order to manage the emerging threats. The fight between the U.S. and Afghanistan and Iraq gave it an upper hand as they developed new strategies of dealing with terrorist. The investment in training and purchasing of security equipment made by the government to have a strong guard towards external and internal threats is the way to go. U.S.A. is prone to terrorist attacks from its enemies and the civil agents would be helpless in these situations without the support of the military and the private security company. Public private partnership is essential for the well-being of the government as far as security is concerned and it can be achieved through the contribution of the security companies. The partnership between the federal government and the private security company may have a profit motive but driven towards a single objective which is to reinforce security and infrastructure at hand to be used. The private sector plays the role of supply chain management or service contracts and even a source of security information for the government. Homeland security needs the military support as well as the support of the security companies. A consistent supply of security to curb the menace is essential. The private security companies protects the infrastructure and offer services like public health, mitigation of cyber s (R., 2013) security to control rates of the cybercrimes, transportation security both in land, marine and over the air and other services assigned. It is therefore noted that the relationship between business and the federal government is healthy for the homeland security. There should be comprehensive understanding between the parties involved to help coordinate information, security plans and creating awareness between the parties. Homeland security is an important issue that will generate more benefit to the government than when it works independently. The security company assets have the capacity to manage homeland security because of the following reasons; security companies being a private institution contracted to deliver services offers better services than the government hence it is more efficient (Fass, 2012). Resource utilization – being a profit oriented organization it will efficiently utilize the resources at hand to achieve its set objective. Therefore resources given by the national government to homeland security will be well utilized hence a benefit to the government at large. Specialization – his will make the security company functions to be specialized in nature hence more accurate and effective in service delivery. This will give the government an easy task in accomplishing its tasks. Innovation – the partnership between the public, military and the security company will give them an easy way of getting technological innovation because of resource allocation both in terms of personnel and infrastructure. This will give the homeland security an upper hand over its enemies. This will help keep security tools for homeland security efficient and appropriate for the task. Despite the benefits of security companies to homeland security, several factors limit its potential. The limiting factors include the following: some functions can only be legally implemented by the federal government and, therefore, it is not possible to share with the security companies for security reasons. Sometimes, contracted companies fail to meet the recommendations of the government in meeting its security needs as agreed hence a setback (Fass, 2012). Border security incorporates security at different levels which include at the air ports, ports and land boarders to control illegal movement of immigrants, illegal goods or drugs from unwanted destination. The federal government has the mandate of monitoring the security situation and thus contracting the role to the military and the security companies will be a set towards instilling security measures. Terrorism and smuggling of goods will thus be controlled easily through such measures. The military and the security companies have diverse roles which include monitoring of illegal movement of weapons across the borders which cause insecurity in the concerned countries. Homeland security assures the civilians of safety hence encouraging investments resulting to economic growth. The protection also attracts international trades between different countries as members are assured of security. This is enough reason to encourage economic growth. Policies put in place to curb insecurity are crucial as passengers moving from one region to another carry identification documents something that will help control the terror threat. Another great concern to manage the terror attack is sighing of the international agreements with neighbouring countries. This allows the countries to share biometric information hence it is easy to monitor activities of the citizens or visitors with ease between the member countries (Fass, 2012). The facts that the military is increasing its personnel each year to boost security together with the security firms is a good thing as efficiency and effectiveness of roles is achieved. Aerial coverage is another important trait of the homeland security that is of importance as it protects the country from attack by missiles or other hazardous chemicals from the air. With the assets at hand, the military and the security companies have potential to create a safe and sound environment for the civilian. Homeland security’s core aspects that are able to manage secure conditions in the area such as intelligence reform. Chances of any future attacks happening are minimal as long as security measures have been put in place. The military reinforcement and security company are in a position to block all the illegal entries through which terrorist enter the country illegally. The main points of entry include: Land borders In order to protect the homeland, the Canadian borders and the Mexican Border should be protected by installing proper security measures including television monitoring. Transparency should be an aspect that will be observed at all levels to avoid corruption which may encourage smuggling through boarders. Ports The security threat is also experienced at the ports and the military through the support of the navy will help secure the ports to control the menace. Smuggling of drugs mainly enters the country the ports as drugs are hide in the cargo which is entering the country. Airports Air lines provide the major means through which most people enter the country. Argument Homeland security is ideally meant for helping support civilian responsibility with the help of the military. According to George Schwartz, he feels that the idea of involving military or the security firms is not a good idea. He traces the concept of homeland security to the September 11 attack in 2011 and Hurricane Katrina that led to many people losing lives and property in the two separate occasions. As a result, the Department of defence that is meant to a military institution was given extra role to work within the homeland (Callahan, 2014). George feels that the homeland activities should be organized by the local government or the state and not the military. The military should work under the directive of the civil agent and not vice versa. He feels that homeland defence is divided in its priorities. That is, whether to attack the enemy, or the government to reinforce its security for the sake of the Americans and finally whether the government should take measure to protect itself from future attacks by being prepared early. He felt that security personnel should be trained on emergency planning and its proper management. He recommended though that a military background was essential for such operations as they are properly trained. Security measures put in place are not enough as people in the U.S. are resistance to security. A closer comparison with Great Britain which uses television surveillance to monitor events might still not be accepted back in the U.S.A. Outsourcing security operations Outsourcing is a term that is often associated with business ventures and operations. The outsourcing term was coined in reference to the idea of using human personnel that are not physically present at the company. Often, it involves using services of other companies that are specialized in a particular service being outsourced. In business, the benefits of outsourcing include obtaining specialized personnel for a particular service and, therefore, the company need not train its own. Often, the use of outsourcing services is a cost-effective process as the company pays a lesser amount in terms of remuneration (Hoffman, 2006). With this knowledge in mind, the use of private military groups for security operations by the government is also being referred to as outsourcing of security operations. Since the ‘9/11’ incident in the United States, the government of the United States embarked upon a mission to fight terrorism and the various groups that were responsible for terrorizing people worldwide. George Bush, the former American president, initially declared a manhunt to capture Osama. The Manhunt was broadened to war against terror and regimes that supported terrorist groups (Callahan, 2014). Since the start of the manhunt against Osama Bin laden, the United States has been at war with this dictatorial regime after the other. The terror groups also gained momentum during this period. The momentum was probably as a result of the motivation from the successful operation by Osama in the United States. In 2004, as more troupes were sent out by the government into the foreign countries to fight the terrorist groups as well as obtain intelligence on the terrorist networks, it became increasingly difficult for the United States army to achieve this feat successfully. As from 2004, the use of private military security firms, both foreign and local was approved by the government. The government and these operations were not publicised as the government would not obtain approval from the senate (Callahan, 2014). These groups cannot be fully controlled by the government. The fact that the groups could not be controlled is a scary thought because of the potential that they hold. Challenges The future is unknown as a far as security is concerned. Best friends can be enemies as well and the best way to be safe is investing in security measure. The homeland provides residence for private citizens who need protection from the government but vulnerable from attacks. The military and security firms have been trained to use excessive power during their operations and are normally used for external defence to protect the country from malicious threats. Terrorism has been a menace in the current world and tends to attack a country in different forms that need intelligence to deal with. Terrorists live within the people that the state is meant to protect, and they therefore understand the state operations well to be able to develop plans on how to attack a country. The homeland defence therefore has a mandate to be in a position to identify the slightest alert on security issues. The military and the private companies will, therefore, not have the capacity to handle intellectual threats and may need assistance from such organizations like the FBIs and CIS which are trained to deal with such things. This organization act as detectives as they are trained to detect any security changes intelligently and in cases where situation is out of hand and cannot be managed by the civilians or the federal government. It is challenging sometimes for the military to deal with civilians as the use of excessive force in operations which may not be required. Another challenge may arise from the fact that military tend to behave superior than other forces hence will suppress other security agents hence are in most cases left to work on their own. Suppressing of other security forces works against the basic operations that these security forces are entrusted with by the law. Conclusion Private military and security companies are in a position to use the assets used in defence department at the Homeland security for many reasons. Security need is given the utmost priority by the government due to the emerging terrorist attack that is often unpredictable. Homeland security needs the military support as well as the support of the security companies. The military background alone gives an advantage to security personnel as they are highly trained hence able to offer their services efficiently and in an effective manner. Border security poses a major challenge that pose a threat to security threats that need a lot of concentration by the national government. According to George’s argument to discourage assigning of responsibilities of the civilians to the military, he sternly argues that it is not a good idea citing evidence but weighing the situation by way of threats that the state is currently facing and future predictions on the state of the affairs, it is worth accepting homeland security to be run with the current assets that they have. This would not impair the military from working on extra responsibility. Terrorism is a global concern and not an individual concern. This is why the concerns to train the forces on emergency management are important and the training should be done to the military personnel. In conclusion, it is possible for homeland security to be run by the military and security companies as they have the capacity to accomplish the task accordingly. Border security needs to be prioritised by any government to counter not only terrorism, but also smuggling of illegal good and drugs into the state. Use of the private security operations is a viable option for the United States given the success that has been achieved by the use of these groups on the war against terror. References Alden, E. (2008). Hoomeland Security Affairs . the Naval Postgraduate School Center For Homeland Defense and Security . B., a. (2007). Spying Blind: the CIA.the FBI, and the Origins of the 9/11. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Callahan, J. (2014, 11 11). Daily Local News . Retrieved 11 12, 2014, from Homeland Security is an Unesy Bridge between Millitary and Civilian Athories: http:/www.dailylocal.com/general-news-homeland-security-is-an-uneasy-bridge-between-millitary-and-civilian-authority Fass, J. (2012). Next-generation Homeland Securit: Network Federation and the Course to National Preparedness. Naval Insitute Press: Annapolis. Greenland, G. (2014). No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the Surveilance State. New York: Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt. Hoffman, B. (2006). Inside Terrorism . New York: Columbia University Press. Jennifer E., Burton L. (2005). Transforming the U.S. Inteligence . New York : Georgetown University Press. K., B. (2012). The End of Leadership. New York: Harper Business. R., J. (2013). Terrorism and Homeland Security. New York: CengageLearning. States, N. C. (2004). The 9/11 Commission Report: final report of the National Commision on Terrorist Attack Upon the United States. New York: Norton. Read More