• IN THIS SECTION

Senior Intelligence Officials: Attempted Terror Attack "Certain"

The five senior leaders of the U.S. intelligence community told a Senate panel they are "certain" that terrorists will attempt another attack on the United States in the next three to six months.

If true, why do you think the jihadists feel emboldened?

The Obama administration is seen as weak against terrorism.
Its continued backlash against the policies of the former Bush administration.
Not sure.

View results

May 22, 2008

Exclusive: Enemies in the Homeland

Tim Wilson

The United States has a proud history of welcoming immigrants with open arms, perhaps most famously espoused by the poem mounted on a bronze plaque inside the Statue of Liberty exhorting the old world to "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free". This attitude of welcome is a defining part of the American ideology, and a grand one. Unfortunately, like freedom itself (which must constantly be defended), it comes at a high cost, and under the present circumstances needs to be revisited in the light of the current threat to this great country.

The security of the population is the primary responsibility of the government. In times of war it may require extraordinary measures, some of which will affect basic freedoms. That's how it happened that, following the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, many thousands of U.S. citizens were interned in camps for the safety of the general public, even as some of their relatives were called up and served with great distinction in the Armed Services. It was unpleasant, unconstitutional and possibly even ineffective, but it was widely regarded as necessary.

I cite the above as an example of measures which may need to be taken to protect the public from danger. I do not suggest similar draconian measures are needed now, but a review of the security of this country shows gaping holes which have already been exploited by our enemies and which are still a major cause for concern. The "Open Arms" policy of welcoming visitors to this country needs to be balanced against security, and America today has arrived at a balance which is more dangerous than is comfortable. While there are numerous laws which would, if enforced, provide a greater level of protection, the lack of enforcement of border security, identification requirements and visa qualifications are among matters of grave concern.

Many of us are aware of some of the planned improvements to our national security such as the "Real ID" Act and the plans for both increasing Border Patrol Agents and the physical security of the southern border with Mexico, along with minor improvements along the northern border with Canada. These improvements are relatively cosmetic compared to the size of the problem. And that is only the beginning of dealing with the problems faced by those who are trying to protect us. It is worth remembering that all 19 of the 9/11 terrorists had obtained legal visas (although four were out of date by the time of the attack) and that they held 63 drivers licenses between them for ID. But the threat is not limited to illegal border crossings or fake IDs; some known problems are already here, in New York.

As a specific example of today's problems facing the law enforcement and homeland security agencies: one of the primary agencies involved in counterterrorism is the FBI which has a total of about 12,590 Special Agents for all of its tasks (which also include counter-intelligence, cyber-attack and cyber-crime, public corruption, civil rights, transnational and organized crime, major white-collar and violent crime and more). These Special Agents are spread across 457 sites in the U.S. and 60 international offices. It has a budget of just over $6 billion per year for this, somewhat less than the U.S. gives to the United Nations (UN) (and associated agencies) each year.

The UN also employs approximately 9,000 international staff in New York alone, a significant number of whom undoubtedly belong to the "security" services of their home nation! Of the 192 member states in the UN, Freedom House rates only 90 of them as "Free", with 60 "Partly Free" and 43 "Not Free" - it would be reasonable to assume that the latter nations mentor significant hostile intelligence actions through their delegations and nationals employed at the UN, all of whom operate with diplomatic immunity. The FBI has only a relatively tiny staff (probably less than 100 Special Agents) to monitor their activity.

What might these diplomats and "international civil servants" be up to? Recent history suggests everything from surveillance to influence peddling, bribery and blackmail, to running a procurement network for WMD. The thought of a valiant few counterterrorist and counterintelligence specialists trying to monitor the activities of thousands of potential spies and diplomats sympathetic to, or even working for, terrorist-linked regimes, including representatives from such nations as North Korea, Iran and Syria, does not evoke thoughts of a truly effective system. One can hope that the diplomatic nature of the UN system provides some security for New York, but the UN does pathetically little to vet employees itself, relying instead on the member nations to vouch for their candidates. It also has no input on the members of each diplomatic delegation.

While doing the best they can with their limited resources, this very real threat in our midst needs to be put in perspective. The UN is only one example of a gaping hole in our security, right in the heart of Manhattan. Under a worst case scenario, it is worth examining the FBI assessment in their 2004-2009 Strategic Plan which reads as follows: The global Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) threat to the United States and its interests is expected to increase significantly in the near term. We expect terrorists to exploit criminal organizations to develop and procure WMD capabilities. Globalization [authors highlight] will make it easier to transfer both WMD materiel and expertise throughout the world. The basic science and technologies necessary to produce WMD will be increasingly well understood. Similarly, raw materials will be more available and easier to obtain.

In this time of increased and increasing threat, we need greater resources for all aspects of protection. A consequence may be the lessening of the welcome to the poor and oppressed, and even to visitors, but this is a price we should consider seriously, perhaps even going so far as to upset some diplomats and other foreign nationals by limiting their freedoms while here in the U.S. At the very least we need to enforce the existing laws on such matters as immigration, visas and visitor identification. Perhaps most importantly we need sufficient resources to enable our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to apply the existing laws in a manner which provides a greatly enhanced chance of preventing the bad guys from attacking us here. They have done a remarkable job since 9/11, but deserve much greater support, of all kinds, from us all in order to have a chance of keeping us safe.

Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)

Print This E-mail This

Share It: