homeland security - MIT OpenCourseWare · Since September 11, 2001, our Nation has taken great...

n a t i o n a l s t r a t e g y f o r

h o m e l a n ds e c u r i t y

o f f i c e o f h o m e l a n d s e c u r i t y

j u l y 2 0 0 2

My fellow Americans:

Since September 11, 2001, our Nation has taken great strides to improve homeland security.Citizens, industry, and government leaders from across the political spectrum have cooperatedto a degree rarely seen in American history. Congress has passed important laws that havestrengthened the ability of our law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute terroristsand those who support them. We have formed a global coalition that has defeated terroristsand their supporters in Afghanistan and other parts of the world. More than 60,000 Americantroops are deployed around the world in the war on terrorism. We have strengthened ouraviation security and tightened our borders. We have stockpiled medicines to defend againstbioterrorism and improved our ability to combat weapons of mass destruction. We haveimproved information sharing among our intelligence agencies, and we have taken importantsteps to protect our critical infrastructure.

We are today a Nation at risk to a new and changing threat. The terrorist threat to Americatakes many forms, has many places to hide, and is often invisible. Yet the need for homelandsecurity is not tied solely to today’s terrorist threat. The need for homeland security is tied toour enduring vulnerability. Terrorists wish to attack us and exploit our vulnerabilities because ofthe freedoms we hold dear.

The U.S. government has no more important mission than protecting the homeland from futureterrorist attacks. Yet the country has never had a comprehensive and shared vision of how bestto achieve this goal. On October 8, I established the Office of Homeland Security within theWhite House and, as its first responsibility, directed it to produce the first National Strategy forHomeland Security.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is the product of more than eight months of intenseconsultation across the United States. My Administration has talked to literally thousands ofpeople–governors and mayors, state legislators and Members of Congress, concerned citizensand foreign leaders, professors and soldiers, firefighters and police officers, doctors and scien-tists, airline pilots and farmers, business leaders and civic activists, journalists and veterans, andthe victims and their families. We have listened carefully. This is a national strategy, not afederal strategy.

We must rally our entire society to overcome a new and very complex challenge. Homelandsecurity is a shared responsibility. In addition to a national strategy, we need compatible,

the white housewashington

mutually supporting state, local, and private-sector strategies. Individual volunteers mustchannel their energy and commitment in support of the national and local strategies. Myintent in publishing the National Strategy for Homeland Security is to help Americans achieve ashared cooperation in the area of homeland security for years to come. The Strategy seeks to doso by answering four basic questions:

• What is “homeland security” and what missions does it entail?

• What do we seek to accomplish, and what are the most important goals of homelandsecurity?

• What is the federal executive branch doing now to accomplish these goals and what should itdo in the future?

• What should non-federal governments, the private sector, and citizens do to help secure thehomeland?

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is a beginning. It calls for bold and necessary steps.It creates a comprehensive plan for using America’s talents and resources to enhance ourprotection and reduce our vulnerability to terrorist attacks. We have produced a comprehensivenational strategy that is based on the principles of cooperation and partnership. As a result ofthis Strategy, firefighters will be better equipped to fight fires, police officers better armed tofight crime, businesses better able to protect their data and information systems, and scientistsbetter able to fight Mother Nature’s deadliest diseases. We will not achieve these goalsovernight… but we will achieve them.

Our enemy is smart and resolute. We are smarter and more resolute. We will prevail against allwho believe they can stand in the way of America’s commitment to freedom, liberty, and ourway of life.

GEORGE W. BUSHTHE WHITE HOUSEJuly 16, 2002

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y v

Table of Contents

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................vii

Introduction...............................................................................................................................1Threat and Vulnerability ...........................................................................................................7Organizing for a Secure Homeland.........................................................................................11

Critical Mission AreasIntelligence and Warning ........................................................................................................15Border and Transportation Security ........................................................................................21Domestic Counterterrorism ....................................................................................................25Protecting Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets..................................................................29Defending against Catastrophic Threats .................................................................................37Emergency Preparedness and Response ..................................................................................41

FoundationsLaw..........................................................................................................................................47Science and Technology ..........................................................................................................51Information Sharing and Systems ...........................................................................................55International Cooperation .......................................................................................................59

Costs of Homeland Security ...................................................................................................63Conclusion: Priorities for the Future.......................................................................................67

Acronyms.................................................................................................................................71Appendix: September 11 and America’s Response ...............................................................A-1

This document is the first National Strategy forHomeland Security. The purpose of the Strategy is tomobilize and organize our Nation to secure the U.S.homeland from terrorist attacks. This is an exceedinglycomplex mission that requires coordinated and focusedeffort from our entire society—the federal government,state and local governments, the private sector, and theAmerican people.1

People and organizations all across the United Stateshave taken many steps to improve our security sincethe September 11 attacks, but a great deal of workremains. The National Strategy for Homeland Securitywill help to prepare our Nation for the work ahead inseveral ways. It provides direction to the federalgovernment departments and agencies that have a rolein homeland security. It suggests steps that state andlocal governments, private companies and organiza-tions, and individual Americans can take to improveour security and offers incentives for them to do so. Itrecommends certain actions to the Congress. In thisway, the Strategy provides a framework for the contri-butions that we all can make to secure our homeland.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is thebeginning of what will be a long struggle to protect ourNation from terrorism. It establishes a foundationupon which to organize our efforts and provides initialguidance to prioritize the work ahead. The Strategy willbe adjusted and amended over time. We must beprepared to adapt as our enemies in the war onterrorism alter their means of attack.

Strategic Objectives

The strategic objectives of homeland security in orderof priority are to:

• Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States;

• Reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism; and

• Minimize the damage and recover from attacks thatdo occur.

Threat and Vulnerability

Unless we act to prevent it, a new wave of terrorism,potentially involving the world’s most destructiveweapons, looms in America’s future. It is a challenge asformidable as any ever faced by our Nation. But we arenot daunted. We possess the determination and the

resources to defeat our enemies and secure ourhomeland against the threats they pose.

One fact dominates all homeland security threatassessments: terrorists are strategic actors. They choosetheir targets deliberately based on the weaknesses theyobserve in our defenses and our preparedness. We mustdefend ourselves against a wide range of means andmethods of attack. Our enemies are working to obtainchemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weaponsfor the purpose of wreaking unprecedented damage onAmerica. Terrorists continue to employ conventionalmeans of attack, while at the same time gainingexpertise in less traditional means, such as cyberattacks. Our society presents an almost infinite array ofpotential targets that can be attacked through a varietyof methods.

Our enemies seek to remain invisible, lurking in theshadows. We are actively engaged in uncovering them.Al-Qaeda remains America’s most immediate andserious threat despite our success in disrupting itsnetwork in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Other interna-tional terrorist organizations, as well as domesticterrorist groups, possess the will and capability toattack the United States.

Organizing for a Secure Homeland

In response to the homeland security challenge facingus, the President has proposed, and the Congress ispresently considering, the most extensive reorgani-zation of the federal government in the past fifty years.The establishment of a new Department of HomelandSecurity would ensure greater accountability overcritical homeland security missions and unity ofpurpose among the agencies responsible for them.2

American democracy is rooted in the precepts of feder-alism—a system of government in which our stategovernments share power with federal institutions. Ourstructure of overlapping federal, state, and local gover-nance—our country has more than 87,000 differentjurisdictions—provides unique opportunity andchallenges for our homeland security efforts. Theopportunity comes from the expertise and commitmentof local agencies and organizations involved inhomeland security. The challenge is to develop inter-connected and complementary systems that arereinforcing rather than duplicative and that ensureessential requirements are met. A national strategyrequires a national effort.

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y vii

Executive Summary

State and local governments have critical roles to playin homeland security. Indeed, the closest relationshipthe average citizen has with government is at the locallevel. State and local levels of government haveprimary responsibility for funding, preparing, andoperating the emergency services that would respondin the event of a terrorist attack. Local units are thefirst to respond, and the last to leave the scene. Alldisasters are ultimately local events.

The private sector—the Nation’s principal provider ofgoods and services and owner of 85 percent of ourinfrastructure—is a key homeland security partner. Ithas a wealth of information that is important to thetask of protecting the United States from terrorism. Itscreative genius will develop the information systems,vaccines, detection devices, and other technologies andinnovations that will secure our homeland.

An informed and proactive citizenry is an invaluableasset for our country in times of war and peace.Volunteers enhance community coordination andaction, whether at the national or local level. Thiscoordination will prove critical as we work to build thecommunication and delivery systems indispensable toour national effort to detect, prevent, and, if need be,respond to terrorist attack.

Critical Mission Areas

The National Strategy for Homeland Security aligns andfocuses homeland security functions into six criticalmission areas: intelligence and warning, border andtransportation security, domestic counterterrorism,protecting critical infrastructure, defending againstcatastrophic terrorism, and emergency preparednessand response. The first three mission areas focusprimarily on preventing terrorist attacks; the next twoon reducing our Nation’s vulnerabilities; and the finalone on minimizing the damage and recovering fromattacks that do occur. The Strategy provides aframework to align the resources of the federal budgetdirectly to the task of securing the homeland.

Intelligence and Warning. Terrorism depends onsurprise. With it, a terrorist attack has the potential todo massive damage to an unwitting and unpreparedtarget. Without it, the terrorists stand a good chance ofbeing preempted by authorities, and even if they arenot, the damage that results from their attacks is likelyto be less severe. The United States will take everynecessary action to avoid being surprised by anotherterrorist attack. We must have an intelligence andwarning system that can detect terrorist activity beforeit manifests itself in an attack so that properpreemptive, preventive, and protective action can betaken.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifiesfive major initiatives in this area:

• Enhance the analytic capabilities of the FBI;

• Build new capabilities through the InformationAnalysis and Infrastructure Protection Division ofthe proposed Department of Homeland Security;

• Implement the Homeland Security AdvisorySystem;

• Utilize dual-use analysis to prevent attacks; and

• Employ “red team” techniques.

Border and Transportation Security. America historicallyhas relied heavily on two vast oceans and two friendlyneighbors for border security, and on the private sectorfor most forms of domestic transportation security. Theincreasing mobility and destructive potential of modernterrorism has required the United States to rethink andrenovate fundamentally its systems for border andtransportation security. Indeed, we must now begin toconceive of border security and transportation securityas fully integrated requirements because our domestictransportation systems are inextricably intertwinedwith the global transport infrastructure. Virtually everycommunity in America is connected to the globaltransportation network by the seaports, airports,highways, pipelines, railroads, and waterways thatmove people and goods into, within, and out of theNation. We must therefore promote the efficient andreliable flow of people, goods, and services acrossborders, while preventing terrorists from using trans-portation conveyances or systems to deliver implementsof destruction.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifiessix major initiatives in this area:

• Ensure accountability in border and transportationsecurity;

• Create “smart borders”;

• Increase the security of international shippingcontainers;

• Implement the Aviation and TransportationSecurity Act of 2001;

• Recapitalize the U.S. Coast Guard; and

• Reform immigration services.

The President proposed to Congress that the principalborder and transportation security agencies—theImmigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S.Customs Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Animaland Plant Health Inspection Service, and the

viii T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

Transportation Security Agency—be transferred to thenew Department of Homeland Security. This organizational reform will greatly assist in the implementation of all the above initiatives.

Domestic Counterterrorism. The attacks of September 11and the catastrophic loss of life and property thatresulted have redefined the mission of federal, state,and local law enforcement authorities. While lawenforcement agencies will continue to investigate andprosecute criminal activity, they should now assignpriority to preventing and interdicting terrorist activitywithin the United States. The Nation’s state and locallaw enforcement officers will be critical in this effort.Our Nation will use all legal means—both traditionaland nontraditional—to identify, halt, and, whereappropriate, prosecute terrorists in the United States.We will pursue not only the individuals directlyinvolved in terrorist activity but also their sources ofsupport: the people and organizations that knowinglyfund the terrorists and those that provide them withlogistical assistance.

Effectively reorienting law enforcement organizationsto focus on counterterrorism objectives requiresdecisive action in a number of areas. The NationalStrategy for Homeland Security identifies six majorinitiatives in this area:

• Improve intergovernmental law enforcement coordination;

• Facilitate apprehension of potential terrorists;

• Continue ongoing investigations and prosecutions;

• Complete FBI restructuring to emphasizeprevention of terrorist attacks;

• Target and attack terrorist financing; and

• Track foreign terrorists and bring them to justice.

Protecting Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets. Oursociety and modern way of life are dependent onnetworks of infrastructure—both physical networkssuch as our energy and transportation systems andvirtual networks such as the Internet. If terroristsattack one or more pieces of our critical infrastructure,they may disrupt entire systems and cause significantdamage to the Nation. We must therefore improveprotection of the individual pieces and interconnectingsystems that make up our critical infrastructure.Protecting America’s critical infrastructure and keyassets will not only make us more secure from terroristattack, but will also reduce our vulnerability to naturaldisasters, organized crime, and computer hackers.

America’s critical infrastructure encompasses a largenumber of sectors. The U.S. government will seek to

deny terrorists the opportunity to inflict lasting harmto our Nation by protecting the assets, systems, andfunctions vital to our national security, governance,public health and safety, economy, and national morale.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifieseight major initiatives in this area:

• Unify America’s infrastructure protection effort inthe Department of Homeland Security;

• Build and maintain a complete and accurateassessment of America’s critical infrastructure andkey assets;

• Enable effective partnership with state and localgovernments and the private sector;

• Develop a national infrastructure protection plan;

• Secure cyberspace;

• Harness the best analytic and modeling tools todevelop effective protective solutions;

• Guard America’s critical infrastructure and keyassets against “inside” threats; and

• Partner with the international community to protectour transnational infrastructure.

Defending against Catastrophic Threats. The expertise,technology, and material needed to build the mostdeadly weapons known to mankind—includingchemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons—are spreading inexorably. If our enemies acquirethese weapons, they are likely to try to use them. Theconsequences of such an attack could be far moredevastating than those we suffered on September 11—a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear terroristattack in the United States could cause large numbersof casualties, mass psychological disruption, contami-nation and significant economic damage, and couldoverwhelm local medical capabilities.

Currently, chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear detection capabilities are modest and responsecapabilities are dispersed throughout the country atevery level of government. While current arrangementshave proven adequate for a variety of natural disastersand even the September 11 attacks, the threat ofterrorist attacks using chemical, biological, radiological,and nuclear weapons requires new approaches, afocused strategy, and a new organization.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifiessix major initiatives in this area:

• Prevent terrorist use of nuclear weapons throughbetter sensors and procedures;

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y ix

x T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

• Detect chemical and biological materials andattacks;

• Improve chemical sensors and decontaminationtechniques;

• Develop broad spectrum vaccines, antimicrobials,and antidotes;

• Harness the scientific knowledge and tools tocounter terrorism; and

• Implement the Select Agent Program.

Emergency Preparedness and Response. We must prepareto minimize the damage and recover from any futureterrorist attacks that may occur despite our best effortsat prevention. An effective response to a major terroristincident—as well as a natural disaster—depends onbeing prepared. Therefore, we need a comprehensivenational system to bring together and coordinate allnecessary response assets quickly and effectively. Wemust plan, equip, train, and exercise many differentresponse units to mobilize without warning for anyemergency.

Many pieces of this national emergency responsesystem are already in place. America’s first line ofdefense in the aftermath of any terrorist attack is itsfirst responder community—police officers, firefighters,emergency medical providers, public works personnel,and emergency management officials. Nearly threemillion state and local first responders regularly puttheir lives on the line to save the lives of others andmake our country safer.

Yet multiple plans currently govern the federalgovernment’s support of first responders during anincident of national significance. These plans and thegovernment’s overarching policy for counterterrorismare based on an artificial and unnecessary distinctionbetween “crisis management” and “consequencemanagement.” Under the President’s proposal, theDepartment of Homeland Security will consolidatefederal response plans and build a national system forincident management in cooperation with state andlocal government. Our federal, state, and local govern-ments would ensure that all response personnel andorganizations are properly equipped, trained, andexercised to respond to all terrorist threats and attacksin the United States. Our emergency preparedness andresponse efforts would also engage the private sectorand the American people.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifiestwelve major initiatives in this area:

• Integrate separate federal response plans into asingle all-discipline incident management plan;

• Create a national incident management system;

• Improve tactical counterterrorist capabilities;

• Enable seamless communication among allresponders;

• Prepare health care providers for catastrophicterrorism;

• Augment America’s pharmaceutical and vaccinestockpiles;

• Prepare for chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear decontamination;

• Plan for military support to civil authorities;

• Build the Citizen Corps;

• Implement the First Responder Initiative of theFiscal Year 2003 Budget;

• Build a national training and evaluation system; and

• Enhance the victim support system.

The Foundations of Homeland Security

The National Strategy for Homeland Security alsodescribes four foundations—unique Americanstrengths that cut across all of the mission areas, acrossall levels of government, and across all sectors of oursociety. These foundations—law, science andtechnology, information sharing and systems, andinternational cooperation—provide a useful frameworkfor evaluating our homeland security investmentsacross the federal government.

Law. Throughout our Nation’s history, we have usedlaws to promote and safeguard our security and ourliberty. The law will both provide mechanisms for thegovernment to act and will define the appropriatelimits of action.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security outlineslegislative actions that would help enable our countryto fight the war on terrorism more effectively. Newfederal laws should not preempt state law unnecessarilyor overly federalize the war on terrorism. We shouldguard scrupulously against incursions on our freedoms.

The Strategy identifies twelve major initiatives in thisarea:

Federal level

• Enable critical infrastructure information sharing;

• Streamline information sharing among intelligenceand law enforcement agencies;

• Expand existing extradition authorities;

• Review authority for military assistance in domesticsecurity;

• Revive the President’s reorganization authority; and

• Provide substantial management flexibility for theDepartment of Homeland Security.

State level

• Coordinate suggested minimum standards for statedriver’s licenses;

• Enhance market capacity for terrorism insurance;

• Train for prevention of cyber attacks;

• Suppress money laundering;

• Ensure continuity of the judiciary; and

• Review quarantine authorities.

Science and Technology. The Nation’s advantage inscience and technology is a key to securing thehomeland. New technologies for analysis, informationsharing, detection of attacks, and countering chemical,biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons will helpprevent and minimize the damage from future terroristattacks. Just as science has helped us defeat pastenemies overseas, so too will it help us defeat theefforts of terrorists to attack our homeland and disruptour way of life.

The federal government is launching a systematicnational effort to harness science and technology insupport of homeland security. We will build a nationalresearch and development enterprise for homelandsecurity sufficient to mitigate the risk posed by modernterrorism. The federal government will consolidatemost federally funded homeland security research anddevelopment under the Department of HomelandSecurity to ensure strategic direction and avoidduplicative efforts. We will create and implement along-term research and development plan that includesinvestment in revolutionary capabilities with highpayoff potential. The federal government will also seekto harness the energy and ingenuity of the privatesector to develop and produce the devices and systemsneeded for homeland security.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifieseleven major initiatives in this area:

• Develop chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear countermeasures;

• Develop systems for detecting hostile intent;

• Apply biometric technology to identification devices;

• Improve the technical capabilities of firstresponders;

• Coordinate research and development of thehomeland security apparatus;

• Establish a national laboratory for homelandsecurity;

• Solicit independent and private analysis for scienceand technology research;

• Establish a mechanism for rapidly producing prototypes;

• Conduct demonstrations and pilot deployments;

• Set standards for homeland security technology; and

• Establish a system for high-risk, high-payoffhomeland security research.

Information Sharing and Systems. Information systemscontribute to every aspect of homeland security.Although American information technology is themost advanced in the world, our country’s informationsystems have not adequately supported the homelandsecurity mission. Databases used for federal lawenforcement, immigration, intelligence, public healthsurveillance, and emergency management have notbeen connected in ways that allow us to comprehendwhere information gaps or redundancies exist. Inaddition, there are deficiencies in the communicationssystems used by states and municipalities throughoutthe country; most state and local first responders donot use compatible communications equipment. Tosecure the homeland better, we must link the vastamounts of knowledge residing within eachgovernment agency while ensuring adequate privacy.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security identifiesfive major initiatives in this area:

• Integrate information sharing across the federalgovernment;

• Integrate information sharing across state and localgovernments, private industry, and citizens;

• Adopt common “meta-data” standards for electronicinformation relevant to homeland security;

• Improve public safety emergency communications;and

• Ensure reliable public health information.

International Cooperation. In a world where theterrorist threat pays no respect to traditional bound-

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y xi

aries, our strategy for homeland security cannot stop atour borders. America must pursue a sustained,steadfast, and systematic international agenda tocounter the global terrorist threat and improve ourhomeland security. Our international anti-terrorismcampaign has made significant progress sinceSeptember 11. The full scope of these activities will befurther described in the forthcoming National SecurityStrategy of the United States and the National Strategyfor Combating Terrorism. The National Strategy forHomeland Security identifies nine major initiatives inthis area:


• Combat fraudulent travel documents;

• Increase the security of international shippingcontainers;

• Intensify international law enforcement cooperation;

• Help foreign nations fight terrorism;

• Expand protection of transnational critical infrastructure;

• Amplify international cooperation on homelandsecurity science and technology;

• Improve cooperation in response to attacks; and

• Review obligations to international treaties and law.

Costs of Homeland Security

The national effort to enhance homeland security willyield tremendous benefits and entail substantialfinancial and other costs. Benefits include reductions inthe risk of attack and their potential consequences.Costs include not only the resources we commit tohomeland security but also the delays to commerce andtravel. The United States spends roughly $100 billionper year on homeland security. This figure includesfederal, state, and local law enforcement andemergency services, but excludes most funding for thearmed forces.

The responsibility of providing homeland security isshared between federal, state and local governments,and the private sector. In many cases, sufficient incen-tives exist in the private market to supply protection.Government should fund only those homeland securityactivities that are not supplied, or are inadequatelysupplied, in the market. Cost sharing between differentlevels of government should reflect the principles offederalism. Many homeland security activities, such asintelligence gathering and border security, are properlyaccomplished at the federal level. In other circum-

stances, such as with first responder capabilities, it ismore appropriate for state and local governments tohandle these responsibilities.

Conclusion: Priorities for the Future

The National Strategy for Homeland Security sets abroad and complex agenda for the United States. TheStrategy has defined many different goals that need tobe met, programs that need to be implemented, andresponsibilities that need to be fulfilled. But creating astrategy is, in many respects, about setting priorities—about recognizing that some actions are more criticalor more urgent than others.

The President’s Fiscal Year 2003 Budget proposal,released in February 2002, identified four priority areasfor additional resources and attention in the upcomingyear:

• Support first responders;

• Defend against bioterrorism;

• Secure America’s borders; and

• Use 21st-century technology to secure thehomeland.

Work has already begun on the President’s Fiscal Year2004 Budget. Assuming the Congress passes legislationto implement the President’s proposal to create theDepartment of Homeland Security, the Fiscal Year2004 Budget will fully reflect the reformed organi-zation of the executive branch for homeland security.That budget will have an integrated and simplifiedstructure based on the six critical mission areas definedby the Strategy. Furthermore, at the time the NationalStrategy for Homeland Security was published, it wasexpected that the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget wouldattach priority to the following specific items forsubstantial support:

• Enhance the analytic capabilities of the FBI;

• Build new capabilities through the InformationAnalysis and Infrastructure Protection Division ofthe proposed Department of Homeland Security;


• Improve the security of international shippingcontainers;

• Recapitalize the U.S. Coast Guard;

• Prevent terrorist use of nuclear weapons throughbetter sensors and procedures;

xii T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

• Develop broad spectrum vaccines, antimicrobials,and antidotes; and

• Integrate information sharing across the federalgovernment.

In the intervening months, the executive branch willprepare detailed implementation plans for these andmany other initiatives contained within the NationalStrategy for Homeland Security. These plans will ensurethat the taxpayers’ money is spent only in a mannerthat achieves specific objectives with clearperformance-based measures of effectiveness.

—————

1The National Strategy for Homeland Security defines“State” to mean “any state of the United States, theDistrict of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands,Guam, American Samoa, the Canal Zone, theCommonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, orthe trust territory of the Pacific Islands.” The Strategydefines “local government” as “any county, city, village,town, district, or other political subdivision of anystate, any Native American tribe or authorized tribalorganization, or Alaska native village or organization,and includes any rural community or unincorporatedtown or village or any other public entity for which anapplication for assistance is made by a state or politicalsubdivision thereof.”

2The distribution of the National Strategy for HomelandSecurity coincides with Congress’ consideration of thePresident’s proposal to establish a Department ofHomeland Security. The Strategy refers to a“Department of Homeland Security” only to providethe strategic vision for the proposed Department andnot to assume any one part of the President’s proposalwill or will not be signed into law.

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y xiii

Our Nation learned a terrible lesson on September 11.American soil is not immune to evil or cold-bloodedenemies capable of mass murder and terror. The worstof these enemies—and target number one in our waron terrorism—is the terrorist network Al-Qaeda. Yetthe threat to America is not limited to Al-Qaeda or tosuicide hijackings of commercial aircraft. The threat ismuch broader, as we learned on October 4, 2001, whenwe discovered that a life-threatening biological agent—anthrax—was being distributed through the U.S. mail.

Unless we act to prevent it, a new wave of terrorism,potentially involving the world’s most destructiveweapons, looms in America’s future. It is a challenge asformidable as any ever faced by our Nation. But we arenot daunted. We possess the determination and theresources to defeat our enemies and secure ourhomeland against the threats they pose.

Today’s terrorists can strike at any place, at any time,and with virtually any weapon. Securing the American

homeland is a challenge of monumental scale andcomplexity. But the U.S. government has no moreimportant mission.

National Strategy for Homeland Security

This document is the first ever National Strategy forHomeland Security. The purpose of the Strategy is tomobilize and organize our Nation to secure the U.S.homeland from terrorist attacks. This is an exceedinglycomplex mission that requires coordinated and focusedeffort from our entire society—the federal government,state and local governments, the private sector, and theAmerican people.

People and organizations all across the United Stateshave taken many steps to improve our security sincethe September 11 attacks, but a great deal of workremains. The National Strategy for Homeland Securitywill help prepare our Nation for the work ahead inseveral ways. It provides direction to the federal

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y 1

Introduction

government departments and agencies that have a rolein homeland security. It suggests steps that state andlocal governments, private companies and organiza-tions, and individual Americans can take to improveour security, and offers incentives for them to do so. Itrecommends certain actions to the Congress. In thisway, the Strategy provides a framework for the contri-butions that we all can make to secure our homeland.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is thebeginning of what will be a long struggle to protect ourNation from terrorism. It provides a foundation uponwhich to organize our efforts and provides initialguidance to prioritize the work ahead. The Strategywill be adjusted and amended over time. We must beprepared to adapt as our enemies in the war onterrorism adjust their means of attack.

Homeland Security Defined

In the aftermath of September 11, “homeland security”has come to mean many things to many people. It is anew mission and a new term. The federal governmentdefines homeland security as follows:

Each phrase in the definition has meaning.

Concerted national effort. The federal government has acritical role to play in homeland security. Yet the natureof American society and the structure of Americangovernance make it impossible to achieve the goal of asecure homeland through federal executive branchaction alone. The Administration’s approach tohomeland security is based on the principles of sharedresponsibility and partnership with the Congress, stateand local governments, the private sector, and theAmerican people. The National Strategy for HomelandSecurity belongs and applies to the Nation as a whole,not just to the President’s proposed Department ofHomeland Security or the federal government.

Prevent. The first priority of homeland security is toprevent terrorist attacks. The United States aims todeter all potential terrorists from attacking Americathrough our uncompromising commitment todefeating terrorism wherever it appears. We also striveto detect terrorists before they strike, to prevent themand their instruments of terror from entering ourcountry, and to take decisive action to eliminate thethreat they pose. These efforts—which will be

described in both the National Strategy for HomelandSecurity and the National Strategy for CombatingTerrorism—take place both at home and abroad. Thenature of modern terrorism requires a global approach toprevention.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security attachesspecial emphasis to preventing, protecting against, andpreparing for catastrophic threats. The greatest risk ofmass casualties, massive property loss, and immensesocial disruption comes from weapons of massdestruction, strategic information warfare, attacks oncritical infrastructure, and attacks on the highestleadership of government.

Terrorist attacks. Homeland security is focused onterrorism in the United States. The National Strategyfor Homeland Security characterizes terrorism as anypremeditated, unlawful act dangerous to human life orpublic welfare that is intended to intimidate or coercecivilian populations or governments. This descriptioncaptures the core concepts shared by the various defini-tions of terrorism contained in the U.S. Code, eachcrafted to achieve a legal standard of specificity andclarity. This description covers kidnappings; hijackings;shootings; conventional bombings; attacks involvingchemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons;cyber attacks; and any number of other forms ofmalicious violence. Terrorists can be U.S. citizens orforeigners, acting in concert with others, on their own,or on behalf of a hostile state.

Reduce America’s vulnerability. Homeland securityinvolves a systematic, comprehensive, and strategiceffort to reduce America’s vulnerability to terroristattack. We must recognize that as a vibrant andprosperous free society, we present an ever-evolving,ever-changing target. As we shore up our defenses inone area, the terrorists may exploit vulnerabilities inothers. The National Strategy for Homeland Security,therefore, outlines a way for the government to workwith the private sector to identify and protect ourcritical infrastructure and key assets, detect terroristthreats, and augment our defenses.

Because we must not permit the threat of terrorism toalter the American way of life, we have to accept somelevel of terrorist risk as a permanent condition. Wemust constantly balance the benefits of mitigating thisrisk against both the economic costs and infringementson individual liberty that this mitigation entails. Nomathematical formula can reveal the appropriatebalance; it must be determined by politicallyaccountable leaders exercising sound, consideredjudgment informed by top-notch scientists, medicalexperts, and engineers.

DefinitionHomeland security is a concerted nationaleffort to prevent terrorist attacks within theUnited States, reduce America’s vulnerabilityto terrorism, and minimize the damage andrecover from attacks that do occur.

2 T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

Minimize the damage. The United States will prepareto manage the consequences of any future terroristattacks that may occur despite our best efforts atprevention. Therefore, homeland security seeks toimprove the systems and prepare the individuals thatwill respond to acts of terror. The National Strategy forHomeland Security recognizes that after an attackoccurs, our greatest chance to minimize loss of life andproperty lies with our local first responders—policeofficers, firefighters, emergency medical providers,public works personnel, and emergency managementofficials. Many of our efforts to minimize the damagefocus on these brave and dedicated public servants.

Recover. As an essential component of homelandsecurity, the United States will build and maintainvarious financial, legal, and social systems to recoverfrom all forms of terrorism. We must, therefore, beprepared to protect and restore institutions needed tosustain economic growth and confidence, rebuilddestroyed property, assist victims and their families,heal psychological wounds, and demonstratecompassion, recognizing that we cannot automaticallyreturn to the pre-attack norm.

Principles of the National Strategy forHomeland Security

Our efforts in the war on terrorism are rooted in thesame core American strengths and characteristics thatled us to victory in World War II and the Cold War:innovation, determination, and commitment to thedemocratic tenets of freedom and equality. With thesestrengths and characteristics as our guide, eightprinciples have shaped the design of the NationalStrategy for Homeland Security.

Require responsibility and accountability. The NationalStrategy for Homeland Security is focused on producingresults. When possible, it designates lead executivebranch departments or agencies for federal homelandsecurity initiatives. As the President announced onJune 6, 2002, the Strategy calls for creating theDepartment of Homeland Security to clarify lines ofresponsibility for homeland security in the executivebranch. The new Department would take responsibilityfor many of the initiatives outlined here. The Strategyalso makes recommendations to Congress, state andlocal governments, the private sector, and theAmerican people.

Mobilize our entire society. The National Strategy forHomeland Security recognizes the crucial role of stateand local governments, private institutions, and theAmerican people in securing our homeland. Our tradi-tions of federalism and limited government requirethat organizations outside the federal government takethe lead in many of these efforts. The Strategy providesguidance on best practices and organizing principles. Italso seeks to empower all key players by streamliningand clarifying federal support processes.

Manage risk and allocate resources judiciously. TheNational Strategy for Homeland Security identifiespriority programs for our finite homeland securityresources. Because the number of potential terroristacts is nearly infinite, we must make difficult choicesabout how to allocate resources against those risks thatpose the greatest danger to our homeland. Theconcluding chapter of the Strategy identifies a set ofpriorities for the Fiscal Year 2004 Federal Budget.

Seek opportunity out of adversity. The National Strategyfor Homeland Security gives special attention toprograms that improve security while at the same timeadvancing other important public purposes orprinciples. We will build, for example, a nationalincident management system that is better able tomanage not just terrorism but other hazards such asnatural disasters and industrial accidents. We will builda medical system that is not simply better able to copewith bioterrorism but with all diseases and all mannerof mass-casualty incidents. We will build a border

Objectives of the National Strategy for Homeland Security

Homeland security is an exceedingly complexmission. It involves efforts both at home andabroad. It demands a range of government andprivate sector capabilities. And it calls for coordi-nated and focused effort from many actors who arenot otherwise required to work together and forwhom security is not always a primary mission.

This Strategy establishes three objectives basedon the definition of homeland security:

• Prevent terrorist attacks within the UnitedStates;

• Reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism;and

• Minimize the damage and recover fromattacks that do occur.

The order of these objectives deliberately sets priorities for America’s efforts to secure thehomeland.


management system that will not only stop terroristpenetration but will also facilitate the efficient flow oflegitimate commerce and people.

Foster flexibility. The National Strategy for HomelandSecurity emphasizes the need for a flexible response toterrorism. The terrorist threat is ever-changing becauseour terrorist enemies can strategically adapt theiroffensive tactics to exploit what they perceive to beweaknesses in our defenses. Therefore, the Strategy buildsmanagerial, budgetary, and structural flexibility into thefederal government’s homeland security structure andsuggests similar measures for the rest of the Nation. Itallows for the reassessment of priorities and therealignment of resources as the terrorist threat evolves.

Measure preparedness. The National Strategy forHomeland Security demands accountability from everygovernment body responsible for homeland securityinitiatives. Every department or agency will createbenchmarks and other performance measures by whichwe can evaluate our progress and allocate futureresources.

Sustain efforts over the long term. Protecting thehomeland from terrorist attack is a permanent mission.Therefore, the National Strategy for Homeland Securityprovides an initial set of initiatives for moving closer toour homeland security objectives. Lead departmentsand agencies should plan to sustain homeland securityinitiatives for years and decades, not weeks and months.

Constrain government spending. The National Strategyfor Homeland Security does not equate more moneyspent to more security earned. So in addition to new orexpanded federal programs, the Strategy also calls forgovernment reorganization, legal reform, essentialregulation, incentives, cost-sharing arrangements withstate and local governments, cooperative arrangementswith the private sector, and the organized involvementof citizens. The Strategy recognizes that the capabilitiesand laws we rely upon to defend America againstterrorism are closely linked to those which we rely uponto deal with non-terrorist phenomena such as crime,natural disease, natural disasters, and national securityincidents. The Strategy aims to build upon and improvethe coordination of these existing systems. It also seeksto harness the extraordinary strength and creativity ofthe private sector by allowing the market to solvehomeland security shortfalls whenever possible.

Implementing the National Strategy forHomeland Security

The National Strategy for Homeland Security establishes,for the first time in our Nation’s history, a statement ofobjectives around which our entire society can mobilize

to secure the U.S. homeland from the dangerous andevolving threat of terrorism.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security aligns andfocuses homeland security functions into six criticalmission areas: intelligence and warning, border andtransportation security, domestic counterterrorism,protecting critical infrastructure and key assets, defendingagainst catastrophic terrorism, and emergencypreparedness and response. The first three mission areasfocus primarily on preventing terrorist attacks; the nexttwo on reducing our Nation’s vulnerabilities; and the finalone on minimizing the damage and recovering fromattacks that do occur. The Strategy includes thePresident’s proposal to establish, for the first time, clearresponsibility and accountability for each of these criticalmission areas—most importantly, a Secretary ofHomeland Security who is appointed by the Presidentand confirmed by the Senate.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security provides,for the first time, a framework to align the resources ofthe federal budget directly to the task of securing thehomeland. Every homeland security dollar in thePresident’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2004 will correspondwith the strategy’s critical mission areas. The Strategyalso describes four foundations—unique Americanstrengths that cut across all of the mission areas, acrossall levels of government, and across all sectors of oursociety. These foundations—law, science andtechnology, information sharing and systems, andinternational cooperation—provide a useful frameworkfor evaluating our homeland security investmentsacross the federal government.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is, however,only a first step in a long-term effort to secure thehomeland. The federal executive branch will use avariety of tools to implement the Strategy. TheAdministration will work with Congress to craft futurefederal homeland security budgets based on theStrategy, providing every department and agencyinvolved in homeland security the required resources toexecute its responsibilities. Each lead department andagency will plan and program to execute the initiativesassigned by the National Strategy for Homeland Security.

Each department and agency will also be accountablefor its performance on homeland security efforts. Thefederal government will employ performancemeasures—and encourage the same for state and localgovernments—to evaluate the effectiveness of eachhomeland security program. These performancemeasures will allow agencies to measure their progress,make resource allocation decisions, and adjust prioritiesaccordingly.


Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will play a central role in imple-menting the National Strategy for Homeland Security. Inaddition to executing its assigned initiatives, theDepartment would also serve as the primary federalpoint of contact for state and local governments, theprivate sector, and the American people. Working withthe White House, the Department therefore would

coordinate and support implementation of non-federaltasks recommended in the Strategy.

Issuance of the Strategy overlaps with Congress’consideration of the President’s proposal to establishthe Department. Recognizing that Congress alone cancreate a new Department, references to a “Departmentof Homeland Security” are intended only to providethe strategic vision for the proposed Department.


Homeland Security and National SecurityThe Preamble to the Constitution defines our federal government’s basic purposes as “… to form amore perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”The requirement to provide for the common defense remains as fundamental today as it was whenthese words were written, more than two hundred years ago.

The National Security Strategy of the United States aims to guarantee the sovereignty andindependence of the United States, with our fundamental values and institutions intact. It providesa framework for creating and seizing opportunities that strengthen our security and prosperity.The National Strategy for Homeland Security complements the National Security Strategy of theUnited States by addressing a very specific and uniquely challenging threat – terrorism in theUnited States – and by providing a comprehensive framework for organizing the efforts of federal,state, local and private organizations whose primary functions are often unrelated to nationalsecurity.

The link between national security and homeland security is a subtle but important one. For morethan six decades, America has sought to protect its own sovereignty and independence through astrategy of global presence and engagement. In so doing, America has helped many othercountries and peoples advance along the path of democracy, open markets, individual liberty, andpeace with their neighbors. Yet there are those who oppose America’s role in the world, and whoare willing to use violence against us and our friends. Our great power leaves these enemies withfew conventional options for doing us harm. One such option is to take advantage of our freedomand openness by secretly inserting terrorists into our country to attack our homeland. Homelandsecurity seeks to deny this avenue of attack to our enemies and thus to provide a secure foundationfor America’s ongoing global engagement. Thus the National Security Strategy of the United Statesand National Strategy for Homeland Security work as mutually supporting documents, providingguidance to the executive branch departments and agencies.

There are also a number of other, more specific strategies maintained by the United States that aresubsumed within the twin concepts of national security and homeland security. The NationalStrategy for Combating Terrorism will define the U.S. war plan against international terrorism. TheNational Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction coordinates America’s many efforts to denyterrorists and states the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of massdestruction. The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace will describe our initiatives to secure ourinformation systems against deliberate, malicious disruption. The National Money LaunderingStrategy aims to undercut the illegal flows of money that support terrorism and internationalcriminal activity. The National Defense Strategy sets priorities for our most powerful nationalsecurity instrument. The National Drug Control Strategy lays out a comprehensive U.S. effort tocombat drug smuggling and consumption. All of these documents fit into the framework estab-lished by the National Security Strategy of the United States and National Strategy for HomelandSecurity, which together take precedence over all other national strategies, programs, and plans.

The U.S. government has no higher purpose than toensure the security of our people and preserve ourdemocratic way of life. Terrorism directly threatens thefoundations of our Nation—our people, our democraticway of life, and our economic prosperity. In the war onterrorism, as in all wars, the more we know about ourenemy, the better able we are to defeat that enemy. Themore we know about our vulnerability, the better ablewe are to protect ourselves.

One fact dominates all homeland security threatassessments: terrorists are strategic actors. They choosetheir targets deliberately based on the weaknesses theyobserve in our defenses and our preparations. They canbalance the difficulty in successfully executing aparticular attack against the magnitude of loss it mightcause. They can monitor our media and listen to ourpolicymakers as our Nation discusses how to protectitself—and adjust their plans accordingly. Where we

insulate ourselves from one form of attack, they canshift and focus on another exposed vulnerability.

We remain a Nation at war. Even as we experiencesuccess in the war on terrorism, the antipathy of ourenemies may well be increasing, and new enemies mayemerge. The United States will confront the threat ofterrorism for the foreseeable future.

Our Free Society Is Inherently Vulnerable

The American people and way of life are the primarytargets of our enemy, and our highest protectivepriority. Our population and way of life are the sourceof our Nation’s great strength, but also a source ofinherent vulnerability.

Our population is large, diverse, and highly mobile,allowing terrorists to hide within our midst. Americanscongregate at schools, sporting arenas, malls, concerthalls, office buildings, high-rise residences, and places


Threat and Vulnerability

of worship, presenting targets with the potential formany casualties. Much of America lives in denselypopulated urban areas, making our major citiesconspicuous targets. Americans subsist on the produceof farms in rural areas nationwide, making ourheartland a potential target for agroterrorism.

The responsibility of our government extends beyondthe physical well-being of the American people. Wemust also safeguard our way of life, which involves fivekey elements: democracy, liberties, security, economics,and culture.

Democracy. Our way of life is both defined andprotected by our democratic political system. It is asystem anchored by the Constitution, which estab-lished a republic characterized by significant limits ongovernmental power through a system of checks andbalances, a distribution of state and federal rights, andan affirmation of the rights and freedoms ofindividuals. Our democratic political system is trans-parent and accessible to the populace. It requires thatall actions adhere to the rule of law. And it relies onthe stability and continuity of our government, whichis ensured by constitutionally prescribed proceduresand powers.

Liberties. Liberty and freedom are fundamental to ourway of life. Freedom of expression, freedom of religion,freedom of movement, property rights, freedom fromunlawful discrimination—these are all rights we areguaranteed as Americans, and rights we will fight toprotect. Many have fought and died in order toestablish and protect these rights; we will not relinquish them.

Security. Our federal system was born, in part, out of aneed to “provide for the common defense.” Americanshave enjoyed great security from external threats, withno hostile powers adjacent to our borders and insulatedfrom attack by two vast oceans. Our approach tosecurity has had both external and internal dimensions.Externally, the United States has over the course of thepast six decades sought to shape the internationalenvironment through strong global political, economic,military, and cultural engagement. Internally, we haverelied primarily on law enforcement and the justicesystem to provide for domestic peace and order.

Economy. Our country’s economy is based on a freemarket system predicated on private ownership ofproperty and freedom of contract, with limitedgovernment intervention. We ask our able populationto work for their individual prosperity, as ourgovernment ensures that all have equal access to themarketplace. Our formula for prosperity is one that hassucceeded: we are the most prosperous Nation in theworld.

Culture. The United States of America is an open,welcoming, pluralistic, diverse society that engages indialogue rather than the dogmatic enforcement of anyone set of values or ideas. Our culture is also charac-terized by compassion and strong civic engagement.

The American Population

• An estimated 284.8 million people lived inthe United States on July 1, 2001

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce

• 54.2% of the Nation’s population lives inten states – three in the Northeast, three inthe Midwest, three in the South, and onein the West

• The average population density within theUnited States is 79.2 people per squaremile of land

• The average population density in metro-politan areas is 320.2 people per squaremile of land

• Over 225 million Americans live in metro-politan areas

• Nearly 85 million Americans live in metro-politan areas of 5 million people or more

• Each year, the United States admits 500million people, including 330 million non-citizens, through our borders

Source: 2000 Census

• Over 4 million people were processedthrough security at the last Olympics, over85,000 at the last Super Bowl, and approx-imately 20,000 each at the Republican andDemocratic National Conventions.

Source: U.S. Secret Service


The Means of Attack

Terrorism is not so much a system of belief, likefascism or communism, as it is a strategy and a tactic—a means of attack. In this war on terrorism, we mustdefend ourselves against a wide range of means andmethods of attack. Our enemies are working to obtainchemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weaponsfor the stated purpose of killing vast numbers ofAmericans. Terrorists continue to employ conventionalmeans of attack, such as bombs and guns. At the sametime, they are gaining expertise in less traditionalmeans, such as cyber attacks. Lastly, as we saw onSeptember 11, our terrorist enemies are constantlyseeking new tactics or unexpected ways to carry outtheir attacks and magnify their effects.

Weapons of mass destruction. The knowledge,technology, and materials needed to build weapons ofmass destruction are spreading. These capabilities havenever been more accessible and the trends are not inour favor. If our terrorist enemies acquire theseweapons and the means to deliver them, they are likelyto try to use them, with potential consequences far moredevastating than those we suffered on September 11.Terrorists may conceivably steal or obtain weapons ofmass destruction, weapons-usable fissile material, orrelated technology from states with such capabilities.Several state sponsors of terrorism already possess orare working to develop weapons of mass destruction,and could provide material or technical support toterrorist groups.

Chemical weapons are extremely lethal and capable ofproducing tens of thousands of casualties. They are alsorelatively easy to manufacture, using basic equipment,trained personnel, and precursor materials that oftenhave legitimate dual uses. As the 1995 Tokyo subwayattack revealed, even sophisticated nerve agents arewithin the reach of terrorist groups.

Biological weapons, which release large quantities ofliving, disease-causing microorganisms, have extraor-dinary lethal potential. Like chemical weapons,biological weapons are relatively easy to manufacture,requiring straightforward technical skills, basicequipment, and a seed stock of pathogenic microor-ganisms. Biological weapons are especially dangerousbecause we may not know immediately that we havebeen attacked, allowing an infectious agent time tospread. Moreover, biological agents can serve as ameans of attack against humans as well as livestockand crops, inflicting casualties as well as economicdamage.

Radiological weapons, or “dirty bombs,” combineradioactive material with conventional explosives. They

can cause widespread disruption and fear, particularlyin heavily populated areas.

Nuclear weapons have enormous destructive potential.Terrorists who seek to develop a nuclear weapon mustovercome two formidable challenges. First, acquiringor refining a sufficient quantity of fissile material isvery difficult—though not impossible. Second,manufacturing a workable weapon requires a very highdegree of technical capability—though terrorists couldfeasibly assemble the simplest type of nuclear device.To get around these significant though not insur-mountable challenges, terrorists could seek to steal orpurchase a nuclear weapon.

Conventional means. While we must prepare forattacks that employ the most destructive weapons, wemust also defend against the tactics that terroristsemploy most frequently. Terrorists, both domestic andinternational, continue to use traditional methods ofviolence and destruction to inflict harm and spreadfear. They have used knives, guns, and bombs to killthe innocent. They have taken hostages and spreadpropaganda. Given the low expense, ready availabilityof materials, and relatively high chance for successfulexecution, terrorists will continue to make use ofconventional attacks.

Cyber attacks. Terrorists may seek to cause widespreaddisruption and damage, including casualties, byattacking our electronic and computer networks, whichare linked to other critical infrastructures such as ourenergy, financial, and securities networks. Terroristgroups are already exploiting new informationtechnology and the Internet to plan attacks, raisefunds, spread propaganda, collect information, andcommunicate securely. As terrorists further developtheir technical capabilities and become more familiarwith potential targets, cyber attacks will become anincreasingly significant threat.

New or unexpected tactics. Our terrorist enemies areconstantly seeking new tactics or unexpected ways tocarry out attacks. They are continuously trying to findnew areas of vulnerability and apply lessons learnedfrom past operations in order to achieve surprise andmaximize the destructive effect of their next attack.Our society presents an almost infinite array ofpotential targets, allowing for an enormously widerange of potential attack methods.

The Terrorists

Our enemies seek to remain invisible, lurking in theshadows. We are taking aggressive action to uncoverindividuals and groups engaged in terrorist activity, butoften we will not know who our enemy is by nameuntil after they have attempted to attack us. Therefore,


we must uncover more than just the identities of ourenemy. We need to analyze the characteristics sharedby terrorists to help us understand where our enemiesare weak and where they are strong.

Terrorists and their tactical advantages. Terrorists enjoycertain tactical advantages. They are able to choose thetime, place, and method of their attacks. As we reduceour vulnerabilities in one area, they can alter their plansand pursue more exposed targets. They are able topatiently plan their attacks for months and years. Plansare undoubtedly underway today by terrorist cells thatwe have not yet eliminated.

Terrorists also exploit the advantage of relativeanonymity. They hide throughout the world, using thecover of innocent civilians as a shield. Weak states willremain susceptible to terrorist groups seeking safehaven, and may even cooperate with or actively supportterrorists.

Known terrorist groups. Al-Qaeda remains America’smost immediate and serious threat despite our successin disrupting its network in Afghanistan andelsewhere. While we have captured or killed hundredsof Al-Qaeda operatives, many remain at large,including leaders working to reconstitute the organi-zation and resume its operations. Al-Qaeda operativesand cells will continue to plan attacks against high-profile landmarks and critical infrastructure at homeand against targets in Europe, the Middle East, Africa,and Southeast Asia. Those attacks may use bothconventional and unconventional means in an effort tocreate as much destruction and kill as many people aspossible.

Al-Qaeda is part of a dangerous trend toward sophisti-cated terrorist networks spread across many countries,linked together by information technology, enabled byfar-flung networks of financial and ideologicalsupporters, and operating in a highly decentralizedmanner. Unlike traditional adversaries, these terroristnetworks have no single “center of gravity” whosedestruction would entail the defeat of the entire organ-ization. While we have denied Afghanistan as a safe

haven for Al-Qaeda, unrest in politically unstableregions will continue to create an environmentconducive to terrorism and capable of providingsanctuary to terrorist groups. Moreover, an unknownnumber of terrorist cells operate from within Westerndemocracies, where the safeguarding of civil libertiesprotects them as well as their potential victims.

Al-Qaeda is only part of a broader threat that includesother international terrorist organizations with the willand capability to attack the United States. The mostdangerous of these groups are associated with religiousextremist movements in the Middle East and SouthAsia. Until September 11, Hizballah was responsiblefor more American deaths than all other terroristgroups combined, including those killed in the 1983bombing of the U.S. Marine Corps barracks inLebanon. Hizballah has never carried out an attackwithin the United States, but could do so if thesituation in the Middle East worsens or the group feelsthreatened by U.S. actions. Other terrorist groups, fromHamas to the Real Irish Republican Army, havesupporters in the United States. To date, most of thesegroups have largely limited their activities in theUnited States to fundraising, recruiting, and low-levelintelligence, but many are capable of carrying outterrorist acts within the United States.

Terrorist groups also include domestic organizations.The 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building inOklahoma City highlights the threat of domesticterrorist acts designed to achieve mass casualties. TheU.S. government averted seven planned terrorist acts in1999—two were potentially large-scale, high-casualtyattacks being organized by domestic extremist groups.Both domestic terrorist groups (such as the NationalAlliance, the Aryan Nation, and the extremist PuertoRican separatist group Los Macheteros) and specialinterest extremist groups continue to pose a threat tothe peace and stability of our country.

1 0 T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

The tactics of modern terrorists are unbounded by thetraditional rules of warfare. Terrorists transform objectsof daily life into weapons, visiting death anddestruction on unsuspecting civilians. Defeating thisenemy requires a focused and organized response.The President took a critical step by proposing thecreation of the Department of Homeland Security.The creation of the Department, the most significantreorganization of the federal government in more than a half-century, will give the United States afoundation for our efforts to secure the homeland.The Department would serve as the unifying core ofthe vast national network of organizations and institu-tions involved in homeland security.

American Federalism and Homeland Security

American democracy is rooted in the precepts of feder-alism—a system of government in which our stategovernments share power with federal institutions.The Tenth Amendment reserves to the states and tothe people all power not specifically delegated to thefederal government. Our structure of overlappingfederal, state, and local governance—the United Stateshas more than 87,000 different jurisdictions—providesunique opportunities and challenges. The opportunitycomes from the expertise and commitment of localagencies and organizations involved in homelandsecurity. The challenge is to develop complementarysystems that avoid duplication and ensure essential


Organizing for a SecureHomeland

requirements are met. To meet the terrorist threat, wemust increase collaboration and coordination—in lawenforcement and prevention, emergency response andrecovery, policy development and implementation—sothat public and private resources are better aligned tosecure the homeland.

American People

All of us have a key role to play in America’s war onterrorism. Terrorists may live and travel among us andattack our homes and our places of business, gover-nance, and recreation. In order to defeat an enemy whouses our very way of life as a weapon—who takesadvantage of our freedoms and liberties—everyAmerican must be willing to do his or her part toprotect our homeland.

Since September 11, thousands of individuals havestepped forward to ask, “What can I do to help?” ThePresident launched Citizen Corps in January 2002 tohelp channel this volunteerism, and individuals in all50 states and U.S. territories have signed up since. Insupport of this effort, Citizen Corps released aguidebook—produced by the National CrimePrevention Council with support from the Departmentof Justice—to provide the American people with infor-mation about the latest disaster preparednesstechniques. As part of Citizen Corps, the FederalEmergency Management Agency’s CommunityEmergency Response Team program trains volunteersto support our first responders by providing immediatehelp to victims and by organizing volunteers at disastersites. Citizen Corps is expanding the NeighborhoodWatch Program to incorporate terrorism preventionand education into its existing crime preventionmission. Volunteers in Police Service will encouragethe use of civilian volunteers to support resource-constrained police departments. The Medical ReserveCorps will provide communities with medical volun-teers—both active and retired—who can assist healthcare professionals during a large-scale local emergency.Finally, Operation TIPS (Terrorism Information andPrevention System) will be a nationwide program tohelp thousands of American truck drivers, lettercarriers, train conductors, ship captains, and utilityworkers report potential terrorist activity. OperationTIPS will begin a pilot program in ten cities in August2002.

Private Sector

Given our traditions of limited government, theAmerican private sector provides most of our goodsand services. Private companies are a key source of newideas and innovative technologies that will enable us to

triumph over the terrorist threat. There are, forexample, pharmaceutical companies producing newvaccines against dangerous biological agents and infor-mation technology firms investing in newcommunications technology for first responders. ThePresident has sought to tap into this creative genius byestablishing a national Homeland Security AdvisoryCouncil and calling on private citizens to serve onsimilar boards at the state and local level.

The private sector also owns the vast majority ofAmerica’s critical infrastructure. It includes crucialsystems such as the agricultural and food distributionprocesses that put food on our tables, utility companiesthat provide water and power to our homes andbusinesses, and transportation systems that fly us fromcity to city and bus our children to and from school.The private sector also includes many of our academicinstitutions and a host of scientific, medical,engineering, and technological research facilities.

A close partnership between the government andprivate sector is essential to ensuring that existingvulnerabilities to terrorism in our critical infrastructureare identified and eliminated as quickly as possible.The private sector should conduct risk assessments ontheir holdings and invest in systems to protect keyassets. The internalization of these costs is not only amatter of sound corporate governance and goodcorporate citizenship but also an essential safeguard ofeconomic assets for shareholders, employees, and theNation. (See Costs of Homeland Security chapter foradditional discussion.)

State and Local Governments

State, county, municipal, and local governments fundand operate the emergency services that would respondin the event of a terrorist attack. Ultimately, allmanmade and natural disasters are local events—withlocal units being the first to respond and the last toleave. Since September 11, every state and many citiesand counties are addressing homeland security issueseither through an existing office or through a newlycreated office. Many have established anti-terrorismtask forces. Many have also published or are preparinghomeland security strategies, some based on existingplans for dealing with natural disasters. Each level ofgovernment must coordinate with other levels tominimize redundancies in homeland security actionsand ensure integration of efforts. The federalgovernment must seek to utilize state and localknowledge about their communities and then sharerelevant information with the state and local entitiespositioned to act on it. (A summary of homeland


security actions taken to date by states, counties, andcities is contained in a companion volume.)

Federal Executive Branch

The President’s most important job is to protect theAmerican people. To do so, he relies on the depart-ments and agencies of the executive branch, which areresponsible for executing and enforcing the federallaws, as well as the White House and other offices ofthe Executive Office of the President, which developand implement his policies and programs.

Department of Homeland Security. The President’sproposal to create the Department of HomelandSecurity is the outcome of a comprehensive study ofthe federal government’s current structure, theexperience gained since September 11, and the newinformation we have learned about our enemies whilefighting a war. The new Department would bringtogether 22 entities with critical homeland securitymissions and would provide us for the first time with asingle federal department whose primary mission is toprotect our homeland against terrorist threats. TheDepartment would play a central role in implementingthe National Strategy for Homeland Security. It would beresponsible for many specific initiatives and would alsostreamline relations with the federal government forour state and local governments, private sector, and theAmerican people. This Department, although focusedprimarily on homeland security, would continue toexecute the non-homeland security missions of itsconstituent parts.

White House Office of Homeland Security. Even after theDepartment of Homeland Security begins to function,the White House Office of Homeland Security willcontinue to play a key role advising the President andcoordinating the interagency process. It will continueto work with the Office of Management and Budget todevelop and defend the President’s homeland securitybudget proposals. It will certify that the budgets ofother executive branch departments will enable themto carry out their homeland security responsibilities.

Department of Defense. The Department of Defensecontributes to homeland security through its militarymissions overseas, homeland defense, and support tocivil authorities. Ongoing military operations abroadhave reduced the terrorist threat against the UnitedStates. There are three circumstances under which theDepartment would be involved in improving securityat home. In extraordinary circumstances, theDepartment would conduct military missions such ascombat air patrols or maritime defense operations.The Department would take the lead in defending thepeople and the territory of our country, supported byother agencies. Plans for such contingencies will

continue to be coordinated, as appropriate, with theNational Security Council, Homeland SecurityCouncil, and other federal departments and agencies.Second, the Department of Defense would be involvedduring emergencies such as responding to an attack orto forest fires, floods, tornadoes, or other catastrophes.In these circumstances, the Department may be askedto act quickly to provide capabilities that otheragencies do not have. Finally, the Department ofDefense would also take part in “limited scope”missions where other agencies have the lead—forexample, security at a special event like the recentOlympics.

Other federal departments and agencies. Many othergovernment departments and agencies supporthomeland security as part of their overall mission. TheAttorney General, as America’s chief law enforcementofficer, will lead our Nation’s law enforcement effort todetect, prevent, and investigate terrorist activity withinthe United States. The Department of Agriculture’sFood Safety Inspection and Agricultural ResearchServices have important homeland security responsibil-ities for preventing agroterrorism. The Centers forDisease Control and Prevention and the NationalInstitutes of Health, both part of the Department ofHealth and Human Services, provide critical expertiseand resources related to bioterrorism. Several otherfederal entities have significant counterterrorism intelligence responsibilities, including the CIA’sCounterterrorist Center and the FBI’sCounterterrorism Division and Criminal IntelligenceSection. The CIA is specifically responsible forgathering and analyzing all information regardingpotential terrorist threats abroad. The proposedInformation Analysis and Infrastructure ProtectionDivision within the Department of Homeland Securitywould be able not only to access and analyze homelandsecurity information, but also to translate it intowarning and protective action.Intergovernmental coordination. There is a vital need forcooperation between the federal government and stateand local governments on a scale never before seen inthe United States. Cooperation must occur bothhorizontally (within each level of government) andvertically (among various levels of government). Underthe President’s proposal, the creation of theDepartment of Homeland Security will simplify theprocess by which governors, mayors, and county leadersinteract with the federal government. We cannot andwill not create separate and specialized coordinatingbodies for every functional area of government. To doso would merely replicate the stovepiped system thatexists today and would defeat a main purpose ofcreating the new Department.


Because of our federalist traditions and our largenumber of local governments, the federal governmentmust look to state governments to facilitate closecoordination and cooperation among all levels ofgovernment—federal, state, and local. Therefore, thePresident calls on each governor to establish a singleHomeland Security Task Force (HSTF) for the state,to serve as his or her primary coordinating body withthe federal government. This would realign the existingAnti-Terrorism Task Forces, established afterSeptember 11 in 93 federal judicial districts

nationwide, to serve as the law enforcementcomponent of the broader HSTFs. The HSTFs wouldprovide a collaborative, cost-effective structure foreffectively communicating to all organizations andcitizens. They would help streamline and coordinate allfederal, regional, and local programs.They would alsofit neatly into the regional emergency responsenetwork that the Department of Homeland Securitywould inherit from FEMA.


Terrorism depends on surprise. With it, a terroristattack has the potential to do massive damage to anunwitting and unprepared target. Without it, theterrorists stand a good chance of being thwarted byauthorities, and even if they are not, the damage fromtheir attacks is likely to be less severe.

It follows that the United States must take everyappropriate action to avoid being surprised by anotherterrorist attack. To secure the homeland, we must havean intelligence and warning system that is capable ofdetecting terrorist activity before it manifests itself inan attack so that proper preemptive, preventive, andprotective action can be taken.

This is not the first time in American history that wehave had to focus on our early warning capabilities.The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7,1941, demonstrated the catastrophic consequences ofallowing an enemy to achieve even tactical surprise.With the dawn of the nuclear age, early warning

became essential to national survival. The UnitedStates spent billions of dollars during the Cold War onground- and space-based sensors that had oneprincipal, overriding purpose: to detect indications of anuclear attack by the Soviet Union. These earlywarning systems were the foundation for strategicnuclear deterrence because they provided the Presidentsufficient lead-time to make retaliatory decisions.

Early warning of an impending terrorist attack is a farmore difficult and complex mission than was earlywarning of a strategic nuclear first strike. Whereas wealmost always know the identity, location, and generalcapabilities of hostile nations, we frequently do notknow the identity or location of non-state terroristorganizations. The indications of terrorist intent areoften ambiguous. Terrorists are able to infiltrate andmove freely within democratic countries makingthemselves effectively invisible against the backdrop ofan enormously diverse and mobile society. Efforts togather intelligence on potential terrorist threats can


Intelligence and Warning

affect the basic rights and liberties of Americancitizens.

Moreover, the question of how to achieve earlywarning of terrorist threats is inseparable from thequestion of what to do with some warning informationonce it is in hand. What preventive action should betaken? What protective action should be taken? Towhom should the information be provided on a confi-dential basis? Should the public be informed and, if so,how and by whom? These very concrete decisions canhave life-or-death implications. Unfortunately, theambiguous nature of most intelligence on terroristthreats means that these decisions must often be madein conditions of great uncertainty.

America’s intelligence community has made significantcontributions to our national security and is nowmaking adjustments to help meet the increased needsfor homeland security. At present, we have insufficienthuman source intelligence developed overseas aboutpotential terrorist activities in the United States.Agencies at all levels of government have not alwaysfully shared homeland security information due to realand perceived legal and cultural barriers, as well as thelimitations of their information systems. The UnitedStates needs to do a better job of utilizing informationcontained in foreign-language documents that we haveobtained. In addition, our intelligence communitymust identify, collect, and analyze the new observablesthat will enable us to better understand emergingunconventional threats.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security reflects theconcept that intelligence and information analysis isnot a separate, stand-alone activity but rather an

integral component of our Nation’s overall effort toprotect against and reduce our vulnerability toterrorism. The basic roles and responsibilities in thisStrategy are depicted in Figure 1.

This framework recognizes four interrelated butdistinct categories of intelligence and informationanalysis, as well as three broad categories of actionsthat can follow from this analysis. The analyticcategories are as follows.

Tactical threat analysis. Actionable intelligence isessential for preventing acts of terrorism. The timelyand thorough analysis and dissemination of infor-mation about terrorists and their current and potentialactivities allow the government to take immediate- andnear-term action to disrupt and prevent terrorist actsand to provide useful warning to specific targets,security and public safety professionals, or the generalpopulation.

Strategic analysis of the enemy. Our intelligence agenciesmust have a deep understanding of the organizationsthat may conduct terrorist attacks against the UnitedStates. Knowing the identities, financial and politicalsources of support, motivation, goals, current andfuture capabilities, and vulnerabilities of these organi-zations will assist us in preventing and preemptingfuture attacks, and in taking long-term actions that canweaken support for organizations that seek to damageU.S. interests. Intelligence agencies can support thelong-term U.S. strategies to defeat terrorism by under-standing the roots of terrorism overseas, and theintentions and capabilities of foreign governments todisrupt terrorist groups in their territories and to assistthe United States.


Strategic Analysis

of the Enemy

Lead: DCI, FBI, DHS

Threat-Vulnerability

Integration (“Mapping”)

Lead: DHS

Vulnerability Assessment

Lead: DHSTactical Threat Analysis

Lead: DCI, FBI, DHS

Warning & Protective ActionLead: DHS

Preventive Action (Tactical)Lead: National JTTF

Strategic Response (Policy)Long-term Capability Building

Lead: OHS

Roles & Responsibilities of Homeland Security Intelligence and Information Analysis

Vulnerability assessments. Vulnerability assessmentsmust be an integral part of the intelligence cycle forhomeland security issues. They allow planners toproject the consequences of possible terrorist attacksagainst specific facilities or different sectors of theeconomy or government. These projections allowauthorities to strengthen defenses against differentthreats. Such assessments are informed by the use oftools such as computer modeling and analysis.

Threat-Vulnerability integration. Mapping terroristthreats and capabilities—both current and future—against specific facility and sectoral vulnerabilities willallow authorities to determine which organizationspose the greatest threats and which facilities andsectors are most at risk. It will also allow planners todevelop thresholds for preemptive or protective action.

Figure 1 also depicts three broad categories of actionthat can result from this analysis.

Tactical preventive action. Analysis can, and must, beturned into action that prevents terrorists fromcarrying out their plots. The United States has at itsdisposal numerous tools that allow for the disruptionof terrorist acts in the United States and the detentionof the terrorists themselves. These tools can bedeployed as soon as the analysis uncovers evidence ofterrorist planning. This analysis and assessment willhelp support and enable the actions taken by the U.S.government to prevent terrorism.

Warning and protective action. Inclusive and compre-hensive analysis allows the government to takeprotective action, and to warn appropriate sectors andthe public. Defensive action will reduce the potentialeffectiveness of an attack by prompting relevant sectorsto implement security and incident management plans.In addition, defensive action works as a deterrent toterrorists weighing the potential effectiveness of theirplans. Warnings allow entities and citizens to takeappropriate actions to meet the threat, includingupgrading security levels in any affected sectors,activating emergency plans, dispatching state and locallaw enforcement patrols, and increasing citizenawareness of certain activities.

Strategic response (policy). The enemy of today is fardifferent from those we have faced in the past. Thestrategies and operating procedures used to fight thetraditional strategic threats of the 20th century are oflittle use in the war on terrorism. We need to developand create new capabilities specifically designed todefeat the enemy of today and the enemy of the future.This immediate- and long-term strategic capabilitybuilding will be shaped through budgetary allocations,and will be informed by the careful analysis andassessment of homeland security information.

Understanding terrorist organizations will allow policy-makers to fashion policies that build internationalcoalitions against terrorism, and eliminate sources ofsupport or sanctuary for terrorists.

Major Initiatives

Enhance the analytic capabilities of the FBI. TheAttorney General and the Director of the FBI haveestablished the FBI’s top priority as preventing terroristattacks. They are creating an analytical capabilitywithin the FBI that can combine lawfully obtaineddomestic information with information lawfullyderived from investigations, thus facilitating promptinvestigation of possible terrorist activity within theUnited States.

The FBI is instituting several changes as it redefines itsmission to focus on preventing terrorist attacks. To

National VisionThe collection and analysis of homelandsecurity intelligence and information hasbecome a priority of the highest measure. Theintelligence community must enhance itscapacity to obtain intelligence relevant tohomeland security requirements. The intelli-gence profession must attract America’sbrightest and most energetic and allow them toacquire and apply the expertise needed to assurehomeland security. In addition, the intelligencecommunity must expand human source intelli-gence, and develop and utilize technology toenhance analytic, collection, and operationalefforts throughout the counterterrorismcommunity. Homeland security intelligence andinformation must be fed instantaneously intothe Nation’s domestic anti-terrorism efforts.Those efforts must be structured to provide allpertinent homeland security intelligence andlaw enforcement information—from all relevantsectors including state and local lawenforcement as well as federal agencies—tothose able to take preventive or protectiveaction. Under the President’s proposal, the newDepartment will provide real-time actionableinformation—in the form of protective actionsthat should be taken in light of terrorist threats,trends, and capabilities, and U.S. vulnerabil-ities—to policymakers, federal, state, and locallaw enforcement agencies and the private sector,based on the review and analysis of homelandsecurity information.


enhance the FBI’s analytic capabilities, the Director isseeking to increase the number of staff working toanalyze intelligence more than fourfold compared topre-September 11 figures. The Bureau will hireanalysts with specialized expertise, including foreignlanguage capacity, computer skills, and science andengineering backgrounds. The CIA will send approxi-mately 25 of its analysts to the FBI, enhancing notonly the FBI’s analytical capabilities but also therelationship between these two entities.

Build new capabilities through the Information Analysisand Infrastructure Protection Division of the proposedDepartment of Homeland Security. The President’sproposal to create the Department of HomelandSecurity would build new and necessary capabilitiesinto the Information Analysis and InfrastructureProtection Division of the Department. Currently, theU.S. government does not perform comprehensivevulnerability assessments of all our Nation’s criticalinfrastructure and key assets. Such vulnerability assess-ments are important from a planning perspective inthat they enable authorities to evaluate the potentialeffects of an attack on a given facility or sector, andthen to invest accordingly in protecting such facilitiesand sectors. The Department of Homeland Securitywould have the responsibility and capability ofperforming these comprehensive vulnerability assess-ments. (See Protecting Critical Infrastructure and KeyAssets chapter for additional discussion.)

The vulnerability assessments, important in their ownright, are also building blocks for a key homelandsecurity function that currently is not being performed:threat-vulnerability integration. Today, no governmententity is responsible for analyzing terrorist threats tothe homeland, mapping those threats against ourvulnerabilities, and taking protective action. Our intelligence and federal law enforcement agencies focuson the detection and disruption of each individualthreat. The Department of Homeland Security,informed by intelligence and information analysis andvulnerability assessments, would focus on longer-termprotective measures, such as the setting of priorities forcritical infrastructure protection and “target-hardening.” (See Protecting Critical Infrastructure andKey Assets chapter for additional discussion.)

To perform this function, the Secretary of the newDepartment of Homeland Security would have broadstatutory authority to access intelligence information,as well as other types of information, relevant to theterrorist threat to our Nation. Indeed, the President’sproposal not only permits, but requires, each executiveagency to promptly provide the Secretary all reports,assessments, and analytical information relating to themissions of the new Department. The Department

would also work with state and local law enforcementand the private sector to leverage the critical homelandsecurity information in the possession of these entities.

In addition to transforming homeland security infor-mation into long-term protective action, theDepartment of Homeland Security would also turn theinformation into useful warnings. The Departmentwould serve as the primary provider of threat infor-mation to state and local public safety agencies and toprivate sector owners of key targets, therebyminimizing confusion, gaps and duplication.

The combination of these new capabilities within theDepartment of Homeland Security and the existingand enhanced capabilities of our Nation’s intelligenceand law enforcement communities would enable thefederal government to combat terrorism withmaximum effect.

Implement the Homeland Security Advisory System. TheHomeland Security Advisory System disseminatesinformation regarding the risk of terrorist acts tofederal, state, and local authorities, the private sectorand the American people. The Advisory System createsa common vocabulary, context, and structure for theongoing national discussion about the nature of thethreats that confront the homeland and the appropriatemeasures that should be taken in response. It seeks toinform and facilitate decisions appropriate to differentlevels of government and to private citizens at homeand at work. The Department of Homeland Securitywould be responsible for managing the AdvisorySystem.

The Advisory System provides a national frameworkfor public announcements of threat advisories andalerts to notify law enforcement and state and localgovernment officials of threats. They serve to informthe public about government preparations, and toprovide the public with the information necessary torespond to the threat. The Advisory System charac-terizes appropriate levels of vigilance, preparedness, andreadiness in a series of graduated threat conditions.Each threat condition has corresponding suggestedmeasures to be taken in response. Such responsesinclude increasing surveillance of critical locations,preparing to execute contingency procedures, andclosing public and government facilities.

Utilize dual-use analysis to prevent attacks. Terroristsuse equipment and materials to carry out their criminalacts. Such equipment and material can include itemssuch as fermenters, aerosol generators, protective gear,antibiotics, and disease-causing agents. Many of theseitems are “dual-use” items—they have not just terroristapplications, but also legitimate commercial applica-tions, and can often be bought on the open market. If


suspect dual-use acquisitions are identified, cross-referenced with intelligence and law enforcementdatabases, and mapped against threat analyses, the U.S.government’s ability to detect terrorist activities at thepreparation stage will be enhanced. Therefore, thefederal government, led by the Department ofHomeland Security, will evaluate and study mecha-nisms through which suspect purchases of dual-useequipment and materials can be reported and analyzed.(See Defending against Catastrophic Threats chapter fora discussion of the Select Agent Program.)

Employ “red team” techniques. The Department ofHomeland Security, working with the intelligencecommunity, would utilize “red team” techniques toimprove and focus of the Nation’s defenses againstterrorism. Applying homeland security intelligence and

information, the new Department would have certainemployees responsible for viewing the United Statesfrom the perspective of the terrorists, seeking todiscern and predict the methods, means and targets ofthe terrorists. Today’s enemies do not think and act inthe same manner as yesterday’s. The new Departmentwould use its capabilities and analysis to learn howthey think in order to set priorities for long-termprotective action and “target hardening.” Employing“red team” tactics, the new Department would seek touncover weaknesses in the security measures at ourNation’s critical infrastructure sectors duringgovernment-sponsored exercises. (See ProtectingCritical Infrastructure and Key Assets chapter foradditional discussion.)


The United States shares a 5,525 mile border withCanada and a 1,989 mile border with Mexico. Ourmaritime border includes 95,000 miles of shoreline andnavigable waterways as well as a 3.4 million squaremile exclusive economic zone. All people and goodslegally entering into the United States must beprocessed through an air, land, or sea port of entry.Many international airports are dispersed throughoutthe United States. Each year, more than 500 millionpeople legally enter our country. Some 330 million arenon-citizens; more than 85 percent enter via landborders, often as daily commuters. An enormousvolume of trade also crosses our borders every day—some $1.35 trillion in imports and $1 trillion inexports were processed in 2001.

America historically has relied heavily on two vastoceans and two friendly neighbors for border security,and on the private sector for most forms of domestictransportation security. The increasing mobility anddestructive potential of modern terrorism has requiredthe United States to rethink and rearrange fundamen-tally its systems for border and transportation security.Indeed, we must now begin to conceive of bordersecurity and transportation security as fully integratedrequirements because our domestic transportationsystems are intertwined inextricably with the globaltransport infrastructure. Virtually every community inAmerica is connected to the global transportationnetwork by the seaports, airports, highways, pipelines,railroads, and waterways that move people and goodsinto, within, and out of the Nation. We therefore mustpromote the efficient and reliable flow of people,


Border and TransportationSecurity

goods, and services across borders, while preventingterrorists from using transportation conveyances orsystems to deliver implements of destruction.

Major Initiatives

Ensure accountability in border and transportationsecurity. The President has proposed to Congress thatthe principal border and transportation securityagencies—the Immigration and Naturalization Service,U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Coast Guard, Animal andPlant Health Inspection Service, and TransportationSecurity Agency—be transferred to the newDepartment of Homeland Security. The newDepartment also would control the issuance of visas toforeigners through the Department of State and wouldcoordinate the border-control activities of all federalagencies that are not incorporated within the newDepartment.

Create “smart borders.” Our future border managementsystem will be radically different from today’s whichfocuses on linear borders. It will create a “border of thefuture” that will be a continuum framed by land, sea,and air dimensions, where a layered managementsystem enables greater visibility of vehicles, people, andgoods coming to and departing from our country. Thisborder of the future will provide greater securitythrough better intelligence, coordinated nationalefforts, and unprecedented international cooperationagainst the threats posed by terrorists, the implements

of terrorism, international organized crime, illegaldrugs, illegal migrants, cyber crime, and the destructionor theft of natural resources. At the same time, theborder of the future will be increasingly transparent tothe efficient flow of people, goods, and conveyancesengaged in legitimate economic and social activities.The federal government will allocate resources in abalanced way to manage risk in our border and trans-portation security systems while ensuring the expedientflow of goods, services, and people.

Internationally, the United States will seek to screenand verify the security of goods and identities of peoplebefore they can harm to the international trans-portation system and well before they reach our shoresor land borders. The Department of HomelandSecurity would improve information provided toconsular officers so that individual applicants can bechecked in comprehensive databases and would requirevisa-issuance procedures to reflect threat assessments.The United States will require visitors to present traveldocumentation that includes biometric identifiers. TheUnited States will also work with international organi-zations and the private sector to improve the securityof people, goods, conveyances traveling internationally,and the ports that they use. The United States willwork with other countries and international organiza-tions to improve the quality of travel documents andtheir issuance to minimize their misuse by smugglersand terrorist organizations. We will also assist othercountries, as appropriate, to improve their bordercontrols and their coordination with us. Finally, we willwork closely with Canada and Mexico to increase thesecurity of our shared borders while facilitatingcommerce within the North American Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA) area.

At our borders, the Department of Homeland Securitywould verify and process the entry of people in orderto prevent the entrance of contraband, unauthorizedaliens, and potential terrorists. The Department wouldincrease the information available on inbound goodsand passengers so that border management agenciescan apply risk-based management tools. TheDepartment would develop and deploy the statutorilyrequired entry-exit system to record the arrival anddeparture of foreign visitors and guests. It woulddevelop and deploy non-intrusive inspectiontechnologies to ensure rapid and more thoroughscreening of goods and conveyances. And it wouldmonitor all our borders in order to detect illegal intru-sions and intercept and apprehend smuggled goods andpeople attempting to enter illegally.

The Department of Homeland Security proposed bythe President will also build an immigration services

National VisionA single entity in the Department of HomelandSecurity will manage who and what enters ourhomeland in order to prevent the entry ofterrorists and the instruments of terror whilefacilitating the legal flow of people, goods, andservices on which our economy depends. TheDepartment and its partners will conduct border-security functions abroad to the extent allowed bytechnology and international agreements. Federallaw enforcement agencies will take swift actionagainst those who introduce contraband or violateterms of entry and pose threats to the Americanpeople. The U.S. government will work with theinternational community and the private sector tosecure the transportation systems which linkAmerican communities to the world, movingpeople and goods across our borders andthroughout the country within hours.


organization that administers immigration laws in anefficient, expeditious, fair, and humane manner. TheDepartment would ensure that foreign visitors complywith entry conditions. The Department, in cooperationwith colleges and universities, would track and monitorinternational students and exchange visitors. TheDepartment would enter into national law enforcementdatabases the names of high-risk aliens who remain inthe United States longer than authorized and, whenwarranted, deport illegal aliens.

Increase the security of international shipping containers.Containers are an indispensable but vulnerable link inthe chain of global trade; approximately 90 percent ofthe world’s cargo moves by container. Each year, nearly50 percent of the value of all U.S. imports arrives via16 million containers. The core elements of thisinitiative are to establish security criteria to identifyhigh-risk containers; pre-screen containers before theyarrive at U.S. ports; use technology to inspect high-riskcontainers; and develop and use smart and securecontainers. The United States will place inspectors atforeign seaports to screen U.S.-bound sea containersbefore they are shipped to America, initially focusingon the top 20 “mega” ports (including Rotterdam,Antwerp, and Le Havre), because roughly 68 percentof the 5.7 million sea containers entering the UnitedStates annually arrive from these seaports.

Implement the Aviation and Transportation Security Actof 2001. On November 19, 2001, the President signedinto law the Aviation and Transportation Security Actof 2001. The act established a series of challenging butimportant milestones toward achieving a secure airtravel system. More broadly, however, the act funda-mentally changed the way transportation security willbe performed and managed in the United States. Thecontinued growth of the world economy—and, inparticular, commercial transportation and tourism—depends upon effective transportation securitymeasures being efficiently applied. The act recognizedthe importance of security for all forms of trans-portation and related infrastructure elements. Thiscannot be accomplished by the federal government inisolation and requires strengthened partnerships amongfederal, state, and local government officials and theprivate sector to reduce vulnerabilities and adopt thebest practices available today. Protection of criticaltransportation assets such as ports, pipelines, rail, andhighway bridges, and more than 10,000 FAA facilitiesis another key requirement established by the act.Additionally, the Transportation SecurityAdministration will coordinate federal efforts to secure

the national airspace—an essential medium for travel,commerce, and recreation.

The federal government will work with the privatesector to upgrade security in all modes of trans-portation. Areas of emphasis will include: commercialaviation and other mass transportation systems; inter-modal transportation; hazardous and explosivematerials; national airspace; shipping containersecurity; traffic-management systems; critical infra-structure; surety of transportation operators andworkers; linkages with international transportationsystems; and information sharing. We will utilizeexisting modal relationships and systems to implementunified, national standards for transportation security.

Recapitalize the U.S. Coast Guard. The Budget forFiscal Year 2003 requested the largest increase in thehistory of the U.S. Coast Guard. The Budget for FiscalYear 2004 will continue to support the recapitalizationof the U.S. Coast Guard’s aging fleet, as well astargeted improvements in the areas of maritimedomain awareness, command and control systems, andshore-side facilities. The United States asks much of itsU.S. Coast Guard and we will ensure the service hasthe resources needed to accomplish its multiplemissions. We saw the dedication and the versatility ofthe U.S. Coast Guard in the aftermath of September11, a performance that vividly demonstrated the U.S.Coast Guard’s vital contribution to homeland security.Nevertheless, the U.S. Coast Guard is also responsiblefor national defense, maritime safety, maritimemobility, and protection of natural resources, andwould continue to fulfill these functions in theDepartment of Homeland Security.

Reform immigration services. The Administration willcomplete reform of the Immigration andNaturalization Service (INS), separating the agency’senforcement and service functions within, as thePresident has proposed, the new Department ofHomeland Security. This reform aims to ensure fullenforcement of the laws that regulate the admission ofaliens to the United States and to improve greatly theadministration of immigration benefits to more than 7million annual applicants. Americans have longcherished our identity as a nation of immigrants. Thisreform will ensure that every applicant’s case isreviewed in a timely and courteous way. Finally, theDepartment of Homeland Security would implementthe Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry ReformAct, including the requirement that foreign visitorspossess travel documents with biometric information.


The attacks of September 11 and the catastrophic lossof life and property that resulted have redefined themission of federal, state, and local law enforcementauthorities. While law enforcement agencies willcontinue to investigate and prosecute criminal activity,they should now assign priority to preventing andinterdicting terrorist activity within the United States.

Effectively reorienting law enforcement organizationsto focus on counterterrorism objectives requiresdecisive action in a number of areas. Many of thenecessary steps have already been taken, althoughadditional work remains to be done before lawenforcement agencies collectively can pursue thecounterterrorism mission with maximum effect. Thefederal government has already instituted initiativesthat have increased information sharing and thecoordination of operations throughout the lawenforcement community. Not only are the federal lawenforcement and U.S. intelligence agencies communi-cating better with each other, the entire law

enforcement community—international, federal, state,and local—is now sharing more information. Inaddition, law enforcement agencies at all levels ofgovernment have worked to enhance coordination oftheir counterterrorism operational activities so that ourcollective efforts complement each other.

While the intelligence and law enforcement commu-nities have made progress in the areas of informationsharing and coordination, major shortcomings continueto exist in other important areas. Our government’sability to identify key sources of funding for terroristactivity and the methods used to finance terroristoperations remains inadequate. The U.S. governmenthas not yet developed a satisfactory system to analyzeinformation in order to predict and assess the threat ofa terrorist attack within the United States. The federalgovernment needs to do a better job of utilizing thedistinct capabilities of state and local law enforcementto prevent terrorism by giving them access, whereappropriate, to the information in our federal


Domestic Counterterrorism

databases, and by utilizing state and local informationat the federal level. The FBI-led Joint Terrorism TaskForces, by including participants from state and locallaw enforcement as well as federal agencies, draw onstate and local capabilities, and enhance intergovern-mental coordination.

Major Initiatives

Several chapters, such as Intelligence and Warning,Border and Transportation Security, and ProtectingCritical Infrastructure and Key Assets, are closely interre-lated with Domestic Counterterrorism. (See, for example,“Tactical Preventive Action” in the Intelligence andWarning chapter.) This chapter only discussescounterterrorism initiatives and actions that do not fallunder other critical mission areas.

Improve intergovernmental law enforcement coordi-nation. An effective domestic counterterrorism effortrequires the participation of law enforcement personnelat all levels of government, as well as the coordinationof all relevant agencies and officials. Toward this end,the FBI is expanding the Joint Terrorism Task Forces( JTTFs), now operating in 47 field offices, to all 56

FBI field offices by August 2002. The Task Forceshave primary operational responsibility for terrorisminvestigations that are not related to ongoing prosecu-tions. The JTTFs, whose participants representnumerous federal agencies and state and local lawenforcement, combine the national and internationalinvestigative capacity of the federal government withthe state and local “on-the-beat” knowledge andcapabilities.

Facilitate apprehension of potential terrorists. In order toapprehend suspected terrorists before they have theopportunity to execute their plans, we must ensure thatlaw enforcement officers are able to access informationon suspected terrorists. Several initiatives are underwayto create fully accessible sources of information relatingto suspected terrorists. First, the Department of Justicehas expanded and will continue to expand the dataincluded in the FBI’s National Crime InformationCenter (NCIC) database, which is accessible toapproximately 650,000 state and local law enforcementofficers. The names and identifying information ofsubjects of domestic and foreign terrorism investiga-tions have already been entered into the database. TheDepartment of Justice is adding to the NCIC databasethe names of over 300,000 fugitive aliens in violationof final orders of deportation. In addition, the AttorneyGeneral has directed the FBI to establish procedureswith the Department of State to enable inclusion ofdata from the TIPOFF System—which provides infor-mation on known or suspected terrorists toimmigration and consular officers—into the NCICdatabase. The ultimate objective of this effort is toensure that the “cop on the beat” has access topertinent information regarding potential terrorists.

The FBI is also establishing a consolidated terrorismwatch list that will serve as a central access point forinformation about individuals of investigative interest.The watch list will be fully accessible to the lawenforcement and intelligence communities, and willinclude information derived from FBI and JointTerrorism Task Force investigations, the intelligencecommunity, the Department of Defense, and foreigngovernments.

The Attorney General has directed the FBI, throughits Legal Attaches, to establish procedures to obtainfingerprints, other identifying information, andavailable biographical data of all known or suspectedterrorists who have been identified and processed byforeign law enforcement agencies, and to enter suchdata into the FBI’s Integrated Automated FingerprintIdentification System and other appropriate databases.

The Attorney General has also modified certain guide-lines to give the FBI greater latitude to conduct

National Vision

We will redefine our law enforcement mission tofocus on the prevention of all terrorist acts withinthe United States, whether international ordomestic in origin. We will use all legal means—both traditional and non-traditional—to identify,halt, and, where appropriate, prosecute terroristsin the United States. We will prosecute or bringimmigration or other civil charges against suchindividuals where appropriate and will utilize thefull range of our legal authorities. We will pursuenot only the individuals directly engaged interrorist activity, but also their sources of support:the people and organizations that knowinglyfund the terrorists and those that provide themwith logistical assistance. To achieve these aims,we will strengthen our federal law enforcementcommunity. In addition, we will augment thescope and quality of information available to alllaw enforcement. In that regard, we will buildand continually update a fully integrated, fullyaccessible terrorist watch list. When we haveidentified any suspected terrorist activities, wewill then use all the tools in our Nation’s legalarsenal, including investigative, criminal, civil,immigration, and regulatory powers to stop thosewho wish to do us harm.


essential counterterrorism investigative activities in theUnited States, and to utilize commercially availablecomputer databases in support of counterterrorisminvestigations, consistent with Constitutionalstandards. Such databases serve a key function in theeffort to apprehend suspected terrorists before theycarry out any terrorist act as the data contained thereincan reveal patterns of criminal behavior. TheDepartment of Justice currently is engaged in “data-mining” projects that utilize computer technology toanalyze information to reveal patterns of behaviorconsistent with terrorist activities. For example,utilizing law enforcement and intelligence informationas well as public source data, the Foreign TerroristTracking Task Force employs risk modelingalgorithms, link analysis, historic review of pastpatterns of behavior, and other factors to distinguishpersons who may pose a risk of terrorism from thosewho do not.

Continue ongoing investigations and prosecutions. TheNation’s law enforcement community currently isinvestigating both confirmed and suspected terroristactivity. The largest and most extensive investigation is“Penttbom”—the FBI’s inquiry into the attacks ofSeptember 11. “Penttbom” is the largest criminal inves-tigation in history, currently involving the cooperationof numerous federal agencies, state and local lawenforcement, and the intelligence and law enforcementagencies of foreign countries. Several prosecutions arenow underway as a result of the “Penttbom” investi-gation, including the prosecution of ZacariasMoussaoui on charges of conspiring with Osama bin Laden and others to carry out the attacks ofSeptember 11.

Our counterterrorism efforts also include the investi-gation and prosecution of foreign and domesticterrorists unrelated to the September 11 attacks, as wellas the pursuit of individuals who provide logisticalsupport to terrorists. In addition, law enforcementagencies are pursuing a more aggressive preventivestrategy by investigating and dismantling criminalrings throughout the country that sell false driver’slicenses, certifications for the transportation ofhazardous materials, passports, and visas.

As the chief federal law enforcement officer, theAttorney General—relying heavily on the FBI—willlead federal law enforcement efforts in investigationsand prosecutions, while coordinating with theDepartment of Homeland Security and other federallaw enforcement agencies, as well as state and localauthorities. State and local law enforcement personnel,operating within each community, are indispensable toour domestic counterterrorism efforts, playing several

critical roles, including uncovering and reportingunusual behavior and security anomalies.

Complete FBI restructuring to emphasize prevention ofterrorist attacks. Our Nation’s highest law enforcementobjective must be the prevention of terrorist acts—asignificant shift from pre-September 11 objectives. Inorder to focus the mission of the federal lawenforcement community on prevention, the federalgovernment, working with Congress, needs torestructure the FBI and other federal law enforcementagencies, reallocating certain resources and energies tothe new prevention efforts.

The FBI already has made several structural changes toreflect the primacy of the counterterrorism mission.For example, in the fall of 2001, the Director of theFBI established new positions responsible for strength-ening information sharing and coordination with stateand local law enforcement agencies.

The FBI Director recently announced the secondphase of the reorganization, under which significantresources will be committed to preventing terroristattacks, pending congressional approval. The planincreases the FBI’s counterterrorism investigativecapabilities and flexibility by shifting hundreds of fieldagents from criminal investigations to counterterrorisminvestigations and activities. At the same time, thisshift allows each field office to meet national program-matic objectives for the FBI’s highest priority—preventing terrorist attacks within the United States.

The plan also seeks to build within the FBI a concen-trated, national, centralized, and deployable expertiseon terrorism issues. This requires both ensuring thatinformation and knowledge in the field offices getsrelayed to headquarters and creating expertise that canbe easily accessed by and deployed to field offices. Inorder to respond to the need for a more flexible andmobile deployment of highly knowledgeable countert-errorism agents, the FBI plans to devote a portion ofthe increased personnel to “Flying Squads.” Thesesquads, consisting of agents with specific counterter-rorism expertise, will travel to field offices when theirexpertise is needed, and will bring valuable informationback to FBI headquarters for analysis. Reflecting theglobal nature of the terrorist reality, the “FlyingSquads” will also be deployed overseas when necessary.In addition, the FBI will augment its overseas presenceand partnerships by increasing the number of LegalAttaches around the world, who will fall under theauthority of our Ambassadors.

The plan also includes the establishment of a new,expansive multi-agency National Joint Terrorism TaskForce at FBI Headquarters that will complement theJoint Terrorism Task Forces established in local FBI


field offices and improve collaboration and informationsharing with other agencies. (See Intelligence andWarning chapter for additional discussion on FBIrestructuring.)

Target and attack terrorist financing. A cornerstone ofour counterterrorism effort is a concerted interagencyeffort to target and interdict financing of terroristoperations. The FBI’s Financial Review Group andOperation Green Quest at the U.S. Customs Service,proposed to be a component of the Department ofHomeland Security, have spearheaded the enforcementcomponent of the terrorist finance interdiction effort.The Review Group is a multi-agency effort led by theFBI to investigate suspicious financial transactions inorder to uncover and prosecute terrorist financing anddevelop predictive models to help identify future illegalfinancing. Operation Green Quest, launched by theDepartment of Treasury at the Customs Service, worksto freeze the accounts of, and seize the assets of,individuals and organizations that finance terroristgroups. Going forward, the FBI should lead the federalgovernment law enforcement campaign against

terrorist financing, with support from the Departmentof Homeland Security.

Track foreign terrorists and bring them to justice. Thefederal government has two key missions in regard totracking foreign terrorists: barring terrorists orterrorist-supporting aliens from the United States andtracking down and deporting any who have illegallyentered our country. The Foreign Terrorist TrackingTask Force at the Department of Justice currentlyperforms this function. The Task Force is also chargedwith facilitating coordination and communicationamong the agencies with immigration and enforcementresponsibilities.


Terrorists are opportunistic. They exploit vulnerabilitieswe leave exposed, choosing the time, place, andmethod of attack according to the weaknesses theyobserve or perceive. Increasing the security of aparticular type of target, such as aircraft or buildings,makes it more likely that terrorists will seek a differenttarget. Increasing the countermeasures to a particularterrorist tactic, such as hijacking, makes it more likelythat terrorists will favor a different tactic.

Protecting America’s critical infrastructure and keyassets is thus a formidable challenge. Our open andtechnologically complex society presents an almostinfinite array of potential targets, and our critical infra-structure changes as rapidly as the marketplace. It isimpossible to protect completely all targets, all thetime. On the other hand, we can help deter or deflectattacks, or mitigate their effects, by making strategicimprovements in protection and security. Thus, while

we cannot assume we will prevent all terrorist attacks,we can substantially reduce America’s vulnerability,particularly to the most damaging attacks.

All elements of our society have a crucial stake inreducing our vulnerability to terrorism; and all havehighly valuable roles to play. Protecting America’scritical infrastructure and key assets requires anunprecedented level of cooperation throughout alllevels of government-with private industry and institu-tions, and with the American people. The federalgovernment has the crucial task of fostering a collabo-rative environment, and enabling all of these entities towork together to provide America the security itrequires.

What must we protect? The USA PATRIOT Actdefines critical infrastructure as those “systems andassets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the


Protecting CriticalInfrastructures and Key Assets

United States that the incapacity or destruction of suchsystems and assets would have a debilitating impact onsecurity, national economic security, national publichealth or safety, or any combination of those matters.”Our critical infrastructures are particularly importantbecause of the functions or services they provide to ourcountry. Our critical infrastructures are also particularlyimportant because they are complex systems: theeffects of a terrorist attack can spread far beyond thedirect target, and reverberate long after the immediatedamage.

America’s critical infrastructure encompasses a largenumber of sectors. Our agriculture, food, and watersectors, along with the public health and emergencyservices sectors, provide the essential goods andservices Americans need to survive. Our institutions ofgovernment guarantee our national security andfreedom, and administer key public functions. Ourdefense industrial base provides essential capabilities tohelp safeguard our population from external threats.Our information and telecommunications sectorenables economic productivity and growth, and isparticularly important because it connects and helpscontrol many other infrastructure sectors. Our energy,transportation, banking and finance, chemical industry,and postal and shipping sectors help sustain oureconomy and touch the lives of Americans everyday.

The assests, functions, and systems within each criticalinfrastructure sector are not equally important. Thetransportation sector is vital, but not every bridge iscritical to the Nation as a whole. Accordingly, thefederal government will apply a consistent method-ology to focus its effort on the highest priorities, andthe federal budget will differentiate resources requiredfor critical infrastructure protection from resourcesrequired for other important protection activities. Thefederal government will work closely with state andlocal governments to develop and apply compatibleapproaches to ensure protection for critical assests,systems, and functions at all levels of society. Forexample, local schools, courthouses, and bridges arecritical to the communities they serve.

Protecting America’s critical infrastructure and keyassests requires more than just resources. The federalgovernment can use a broad range of measures to helpenable state, local, and private sector entities to betterprotect the assests and infrastructures they control. Forexample, the government can create venues to shareinformation on infrastructure vulnerabilities and best-practice solutions, or create a more effective means ofproviding specific and useful threat information tonon-federal entities in a timely fashion.

In addition to our critical infrastructure, our countrymust also protect a number of key assets—individualtargets whose destruction would not endanger vitalsystems, but could create local disaster or profoundlydamage our Nation’s morale or confidence. Key assetsinclude symbols or historical attractions, such asprominent national, state, or local monuments andicons. In some cases, these include quasi-public symbolthat are identified strongly with the United States as aNation, and fall completely under the jurisdiction ofstate and local officials or even private foundations.Key assets also include individual or localized facilitiesthat deserve special protection because of theirdestructive potential or their value to the localcommunity.

Finally, certain high-profile events are strongly coupledto our national symbols or national morale and deservespecial protective efforts by the federal government.

Critical Infrastructure Sectors

AgricultureFoodWaterPublic HealthEmergency ServicesGovernmentDefense Industrial BaseInformation and TelecommunicationsEnergyTransportationBanking and FinanceChemical IndustryPostal and Shipping


Major Initiatives

Unify America’s infrastructure protection effort in theDepartment of Homeland Security. Our countryrequires a single accountable official to ensure weaddress vulnerabilities that involve more than oneinfrastructure sector or require action by more than oneagency. Our country also requires a single accountableofficial to assess threats and vulnerabilities comprehen-sively across all infrastructure sectors to ensure wereduce the overall risk to our country, instead ofinadvertently shifting risk from one potential set oftargets to another. Under the President’s proposal, theDepartment of Homeland Security will assume respon-

sibility for integrating and coordinating federal infra-structure protection responsibilities.

The Department of Homeland Security would consol-idate and focus the activities performed by the CriticalInfrastructure Assurance Office (currently part of theDepartment of Commerce) and the NationalInfrastructure Protection Center (FBI), less thoseportions that investigate computer crime. TheDepartment would augment those capabilities with theFederal Computer Incident Response Center (GeneralServices Administration), the Computer SecurityDivision of the National Institute of Standards andTechnology (Commerce), and the NationalCommunications System (Defense).

The Department of Homeland Security would alsounify the responsibility for coordinating cyber andphysical infrastructure protection efforts. Currently, thefederal government divides responsibility for cyber andphysical infrastructure, and key cyber security activitiesare scattered in multiple departments. While securingcyberspace poses unique challenges and issues,requiring unique tools and solutions, our physical andcyber infrastructures are interconnected. The devicesthat control our physical systems, including ourelectrical distribution system, transportation systems,dams, and other important infrastructure, are increas-ingly connected to the Internet. Thus, theconsequences of an attack on our cyber infrastructurecan cascade across many sectors. Moreover, the number,virulence, and maliciousness of cyber attacks haveincreased dramatically in recent years. Accordingly,under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will place an especially highpriority on protecting our cyber infrastructure.

Reducing America’s vulnerability to terrorism must alsoharness the coordinated effort of many federal depart-ments and agencies that have highly specializedexpertise and long-standing relationships with industry.For example, the Treasury Department chairs theFinancial and Banking Information InfrastructureCommittee, which brings together several federalagencies and the private sector to focus on issuesrelated to the financial services industry. Each of thecritical infrastructure sectors has unique characteristics,hence posing unique security challenges. TheDepartment of Homeland Security would coordinatethe activities of the federal departments and agencies toaddress the unique security challenges of each infra-structure sector. The following chart depicts the federalgovernment’s organization for protecting America’sinfrastructure and key assests, and indicates the depart-ments and agencies that have primary responsibility forinteracting with particular critical infrastructure sectors.

National VisionThe United States will forge an unprecedentedlevel of cooperation throughout all levels ofgovernment, with private industry and institu-tions, and with the American people to protectour critical infrastructure and key assets fromterrorist attack. Our country will continue totake immediate and decisive action to protectassets and systems that could be attacked withcatastrophic consequences. We will establish asingle office within the Department ofHomeland Security to work with the federaldepartments and agencies, state and localgovernments, and the private sector toimplement a comprehensive national plan toprotect critical infrastructure and key assets. Thenational infrastructure protection plan willorganize the complementary efforts ofgovernment and private institutions to raisesecurity over the long term to levels appropriateto each target’s vulnerability and criticality. Thefederal government will work to create anenvironment in which state, local, and privateentities can best protect the infrastructure theycontrol. The Department of Homeland Securitywill develop the best modeling and simulationtools to understand how our increasinglycomplex and connected infrastructures behave,and to shape effective protection and responseoptions. The Department of Homeland Securitywill develop and coordinate implementation oftiered protective measures that can be tailored tothe target and rapidly adjusted to the threat.The Department of Homeland Security,working through the Department of State, willfoster international cooperation to protectshared and interconnected infrastructure.



Federal Government Organization to Protect Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets

President

Secretary of Homeland SecurityFederal, state, local, and private sector coordination and integration

Comprehensive national infrastructure protection planMapping threats to vulnerabilities and issuing warnings

Sector Lead Agency

Agriculture Department of Agriculture

Food:Meat and poultry Department of Agriculture

All other food products Department of Health & Human Services

Water Environmental Protection Agency

Public Health Department of Health & Human Services

Emergency Services Department of Homeland Security

Government:Continuity of government Department of Homeland Security

Continuity of operations All departments and agencies

Defense Industrial Base Department of Defense

Information and Telecommunications Department of Homeland Security

Energy Department of Energy

Transportation Department of Homeland Security*

Banking and Finance Department of the Treasury

Chemical Industry and Hazardous Materials Environmental Protection Agency

Postal and Shipping Department of Homeland Security

National Monuments and Icons Department of the Interior

* Under the President’s proposal, the Transportation Security Administration, responsible for securing our Nation’s trans-portation systems, will become part of the Department of Homeland Security. The new Department will coordinate closelywith the Department of Transportation, which will remain responsible for transportation safety.

Build and maintain a complete and accurate assessment ofAmerica’s critical infrastructure and key assets. TheDepartment of Homeland Security must be able totranslate threat information into appropriate action inthe shortest possible time, a critical factor in preventingor mitigating attacks, particularly those involvingweapons of mass destruction. Accordingly, theDepartment would build and maintain a complete,current, and accurate assessment of vulnerabilities andpreparedness of critical targets across critical infra-structure sectors. The Department would thus have acrucial capability that does not exist in our governmenttoday: the ability to continuously evaluate threat infor-mation against our current vulnerabilities, inform thePresident, issue warnings, and effect action accordingly.As noted in the Intelligence and Warning chapter, theDepartment would augment this unique capability with“red team” techniques to view our vulnerabilities fromthe perspective of terrorists, and to provide objectivedata on which to base infrastructure protectionstandards and performance measures.

A complete and thorough assessment of America’svulnerabilities will not only enable decisive near-termaction, but guide the rational long-term investment ofeffort and resources. For example, a comprehensiveassessment of vulnerabilities and threats can helpdetermine whether to invest in permanent, physical“hardening” of a target, or in maintaining a reserve ofpersonnel and equipment that can meet a temporary“surge” requirement for increased security.

Enable effective partnership with state and local govern-ments and the private sector. Government at the federal,state, and local level must actively collaborate andpartner with the private sector, which controls 85percent of America’s infrastructure. Private firms bearprimary and substantial responsibility for addressingthe public safety risks posed by their industries-protecting a firm’s assets and systems is a matter ofsound corporate governance. In many cases privatefirms, not the government, possess the technicalexpertise and means to protect the infrastructure theycontrol. Government at all levels must enable, notinhibit, the private sector’s ability to carry out itsprotection responsibilities. The Nation’s infrastructureprotection effort must harness the capabilities of theprivate sector to achieve a prudent level of securitywithout hindering productivity, trade, or economicgrowth.

The Department of Homeland Security would givestate and local agencies and the private sector oneprimary contact instead of many for coordinatingprotection activities with the federal government,including vulnerability assessments, strategic planningefforts, and exercises. The Department would include

an office which reports directly to the Secretarydedicated to this function, and would build on currentoutreach efforts of existing federal agencies with infra-structure protection responsibilities.

When the Department of Homeland Security learns ofa potential threat to our critical infrastructure, it mustnot only disseminate warnings quickly, but must rapidlymap those threats against an accurate assessment of ourcountry’s vulnerabilities and effect appropriate action.To ensure this, the government must facilitate andencourage private firms to share important informationabout the infrastructure they control. Private firmsshould have reasonable assurance that good faithdisclosures about vulnerabilities and preparedness donot expose the firm to liability, drops in share value,loss of competitive advantage, or antitrust action. Asdiscussed in the Law chapter, the Attorney Generalwill convene a panel to propose any legal changesnecessary to enable sharing of essential homelandsecurity related information between the governmentand the private sector.

Develop a national infrastructure protection plan. TheDepartment of Homeland Security would develop andcoordinate implementation of a comprehensive nationalplan to protect America’s infrastructure from terroristattack. The plan will build on the baseline physical andcyber infrastructure protection plans which the Officeof Homeland Security and the President’s CriticalInfrastructure Protection Board will release by the endof Fiscal Year 2002. The national plan will provide amethodology for identifying and prioritizing criticalassets, systems, and functions, and for sharingprotection responsibility with state and localgovernment and the private sector. The plan willestablish standards and benchmarks for infrastructureprotection, and provide a means to measureperformance. The plan will inform the Department ofHomeland Security’s annual process for planning,programming, and budgeting of critical infrastructureprotection activities, including research and devel-opment.

As discussed in the Costs of Homeland Security chapter,the national infrastructure protection plan will alsoprovide an approach for rationally balancing the costsand benefits of increased security according to thethreat—to help answer, in effect, “how much protectionis enough?” The plan will describe how to use allavailable policy instruments to raise the security ofAmerica’s critical infrastructure and key assets to aprudent level, relying to the maximum possible extenton the market to provide appropriate levels of security.The Department would manage federal grant programsfor homeland security, which may be used to assist stateand local infrastructure protection efforts. In some


cases, the Department may seek legislation to createincentives for the private sector to adopt securitymeasures or invest in improved safety technologies. Inother cases, the federal government will need to rely onregulation—for example, to require commercial airlinesto electronically transmit passenger manifests on inter-national flights, or to require permits for intrastatepurchase of explosives.

Securing cyberspace. The cost to our economy fromattacks on our information systems has grown by 400percent in four years according to one estimate, but isstill limited. In one day, however, that could change.Every day somewhere in America an individualcompany or a home computer user suffers what forthem are significantly damaging or catastrophic lossesfrom cyber attacks. The ingredients are present for thatkind of damage to occur on a national level, to ournational networks and the systems they run upon, onwhich the nation depends. Our potential enemies havethe intent; the tools of destruction are broadlyavailable; the vulnerabilities of our systems are myriadand well-known. In cyberspace, a single act can inflictdamage in multiple locations simultaneously withoutthe attacker ever having physically entered the UnitedStates.

Accordingly, the President acted quickly following theterrorist attacks in September to secure our infor-mation and telecommunications infrastructure. ThePresident created the Critical Infrastructure ProtectionBoard and launched a public-private partnership tocreate a National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace. TheNational Strategy to Secure Cyberspace will provide aroadmap to empower all Americans to secure the partof cyberspace they control, including a variety of newproposals aimed at five levels: the home user and smallbusiness; large enterprises; sectors of the economy;national issues; and global issues.

Thousands of citizens all across the country havecontributed to the effort by contributing their views inTown Hall meetings, on interactive web sites, or byparticipating in one of the dozens of participatinggroups and associations. State and local governmentsand state and local law enforcement have also united toprepare their own cyber security strategies.

Harness the best analytic and modeling tools to developeffective protective solutions. As discussed in theIntelligence and Warning chapter, responding to threatinformation requires life-or-death decisions that mustoften be made in conditions of great uncertainty. High-end modeling and simulation tools can greatly enhanceour ability to quickly make those decisions based onthe best possible understanding of their consequences.

State-of-the-art modeling and simulation providesanother important tool for determining what assets,systems, and functions are “critical,” a process thatinvolves many factors that interact with one another incomplex ways. For example, an attack on a key Internetnode might cause few casualties directly, but couldtrigger cascading effects across many infrastructuresectors, causing widespread disruption to the economyand imperiling public safety. An attack on a major portcould inflict damage that affects transportation, energy,and economic infrastructure nationwide. A chemicalattack would have little effect on an empty stadium; acatastrophic effect on a stadium filled with tens ofthousands of spectators. Protecting America’s criticalinfrastructure thus requires that we determine thehighest risks based on the best possible understandingof these factors, and prioritize our effort accordingly.The Department of Homeland Security would developand harness the best modeling, simulation, and analytictools to evaluate the full range of relevant factors andthe complex manner in which they interact. TheDepartment would take as its foundation the NationalInfrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center(currently part of the Department of Energy).

Guard America’s critical infrastructure and key assetsagainst “inside” threats. The “insider threat” andpersonnel reliability are increasingly serious concernsfor protecting critical infrastructure. In the foodprocessing and distribution industry, disgruntled orformer employees have caused nearly all previousincidents of food tampering, providing a glimpse ofwhat terrorists with insider access might accomplish.Personnel with privileged access to critical infra-structure, particularly control systems, may serve asterrorist surrogates by providing information on vulner-abilities, operating characteristics, and protectivemeasures. These “insiders” can also provide access tosensitive areas, such as loading docks, control centers,and airport tarmacs. The U.S. government, workingthrough the Department of Homeland Security willundertake a comprehensive review of critical infra-structure personnel surety programs and proposenational standards for screening and backgroundchecks. To this end, the Secretary of HomelandSecurity and the Attorney General will convene a panelwith appropriate representatives from federal, state, andlocal government, in consultation with the privatesector, to examine whether employer liability statutesand privacy concerns hinder necessary backgroundchecks of personnel with access to critical infrastructurefacilities or systems. The Department of HomelandSecurity would also undertake a comprehensive reviewof other protection measures necessary to deny terroristaccess to critical infrastructure—for example, estab-lishing “security zones” and controlling access around


vulnerable port facilities much as we control access atairports.

Partner with the international community to protect ourtransnational infrastructure. We share much of ourcritical infrastructure with our neighbors in Canada andMexico, and increasingly with countries around theworld. Our electricity transmission, natural gas andpetroleum pipelines are part of a vast, interconnectedsystem that serves not only the United States, butCanada and Mexico as well. America’s seaports oftencontain dense concentrations of population and critical

infrastructure assets and systems while sustaining anever-increasing volume of trade with ports around theglobe. Thus, terrorists need not gain access to ourterritory to attack our infrastructure. The Administrationis establishing joint steering committees with bothCanada and Mexico to improve the security of criticalphysical and cyber infrastructure, and is actively pursuingnecessary international cooperation to increase thesecurity of global transportation systems and commerce.


The expertise, technology, and material needed to buildthe most deadly weapons known to mankind—including chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclearweapons—are proliferating. If our enemies acquirethese weapons, they are likely to try to use them. Theconsequences of such an attack could be far moredevastating than those we suffered on September 11—a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear terroristattack in the United States could cause large numbersof casualties, mass psychological disruption, andcontamination, and could overwhelm local medicalcapabilities.

Currently, chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear detection capabilities are modest and responsecapabilities are dispersed throughout the country atevery level of government. Responsibility for chemical,

biological, radiological, and nuclear surveillance as wellas for initial response efforts often rests with state andlocal hospitals and public health agencies. Today, if anatural disaster or terrorist attack causes medicalconsequences that exceed local and state capabilities,the Department of Health and Human Services wouldcoordinate the deployment of medical personnel,equipment, and pharmaceuticals among theDepartments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Justice,Transportation, Veterans Affairs, the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency, General ServicesAdministration, National Communications System,U.S. Postal Service, and the American Red Cross.

While the government’s collaborative arrangementshave proven adequate for a variety of natural disasters,


Defending against CatastrophicThreats

the threat of terrorist attacks using chemical,biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons with poten-tially catastrophic consequences demands newapproaches, a focused strategy, and a new organization.Our country has already expanded capabilities andimproved coordination among federal agencies, butmore can be done to prepare and respond.

Major Initiatives

Prevent terrorist use of nuclear weapons through bettersensors and procedures. Our top scientific priority mustbe preventing terrorist use of nuclear weapons. Underthe President’s proposal, the Department of HomelandSecurity will implement a new system of proceduresand technologies to detect and prevent the transport of

nuclear explosives toward our borders and into theUnited States. The Department of Homeland Securitywould develop and deploy new inspection proceduresand detection systems against the entry of suchmaterials at all ports of entry in the United States andat major overseas cargo loading facilities. TheDepartment—in cooperation with the Department ofTransportation, state and local governments, and theprivate sector—would develop additional inspectionprocedures and detection systems throughout ournational transportation structure to detect themovement of nuclear materials within the UnitedStates. It will also initiate and sustain research anddevelopment efforts aimed at new and better passiveand active detection systems.

The Departments of State, Energy, and Defense arealready working with foreign states possessing nuclearprograms to ensure continued strict security for theglobal inventory of nuclear weapons and materials,consistent with domestic and international legalobligations (including the Treaty on Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons). These Departments will alsowork with foreign governments to improve theircapabilities to detect the movement of nuclearmaterials or weapons and to respond appropriately.They will work with foreign governments, for example,to assess their need for enhanced radiation detectioncapabilities at borders, seaports, and airports and,where appropriate, will coordinate the provision ofdetection equipment to countries where the threatfrom the movement of nuclear weapons and materialsis significant.

Detect chemical and biological materials and attacks. Thefederal government, with due attention to constraintssuch as the need for low operating costs, will developsensitive and highly selective systems that detect therelease of biological or chemical agents. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency, for example, isevaluating the upgrading of air monitoring stations toallow for the detection of certain chemical, biological,or radiological substances. The federal government willalso explore systems that can detect whether anindividual has been immunized against a threatpathogen or has recently handled threat materials.

The ability to quickly recognize and report biologicaland chemical attacks will minimize casualties andenable first responders to treat the injured effectively.Local emergency personnel and health providers mustfirst be able to diagnose symptoms. In addition toexisting state laws mandating the reporting of threatdiseases by physicians, veterinarians, and public healthlaboratories, rapid diagnosis of diseases of concern andcommunication form the cornerstone of a robustresponse. The Department of Homeland Security,

National VisionAmerica will have a coordinated national effortto prepare for, prevent, and respond to chemical,biological, radiological, and nuclear terroristthreats to the homeland. We will seek to detectchemical, biological, radiological, or nuclearweapons and prevent their entry into the UnitedStates. If terrorists use chemical, biological,radiological, or nuclear weapons, our commu-nities and emergency personnel will beorganized, trained, and equipped to detect andidentify dangerous agents, respond rapidly, treatthose who are harmed, contain the damage, anddecontaminate the area. Our Nation willconsolidate and synchronize the disparateefforts of multiple federal entities currentlyscattered across several departments. Under thePresident’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will unify much of thefederal government’s efforts to develop andimplement scientific and technological counter-measures against human, animal, and plantdiseases that could be used as terrorist weapons.The Department would sponsor and establishnational priorities for research, development,and testing to develop new vaccines, antidotes,diagnostics, therapies and other technologiesagainst chemical, biological, radiological, ornuclear terrorism; to recognize, identify, andconfirm the occurrence of an attack; and tominimize the morbidity and mortality caused bysuch an attack. In addition, the federalgovernment will set standards and guidelines forstate and local chemical, biological, radiological,and nuclear preparedness and response efforts.


under the President’s proposal, will improve infectiousdisease and chemical terrorism surveillance by workingwith the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) and the Department of Veterans Affairs inconcert with local and state public health jurisdictions.These entities will work to develop a national systemto detect biological and chemical attacks. This systemwill include a public health surveillance system tomonitor public and private databases for indicators ofbiological or chemical attack. National research effortswill pay particular attention to recognizing harmfuldual-use industrial chemicals.

The CDC will continue its vital role in detecting,diagnosing, and addressing bioterrorist threats. ItsEpidemic Intelligence Service will be expanded andmodernized to better train local and state officials inrecognizing biological attacks. Under the President’sproposal, the Department of Homeland Security willalso provide resources to state and local jurisdictionswith a population of 500,000 or more to hire skilledepidemiologists. The recently established EpidemicInformation Exchange System will allow the sharing ofdisease information in a secure information system.Public health databases will be linked nationwidethrough the National Electronic Disease SurveillanceSystem to recognize patterns of disease occurrence andto identify potential regional or national outbreaks.The Laboratory Response Network will improvelaboratory technology and infrastructure to increase thespeed and precision of diagnoses and confirmation ofbiological attacks. The Department would build thecapacity to gather data from all these systems andsensors, quickly assess the extent of any attack, andrecommend response options to policymakers.

The Department of Homeland Security, working withthe Department of Agriculture, would also strengthenour parallel system for monitoring agriculturaloutbreaks. Since animals can serve as importantsentinels signaling a biological attack against humansor be targets themselves, the Department of HomelandSecurity would collaborate closely with theDepartment of Agriculture and the Food and DrugAdministration’s Food and Animal Health program.

Improve chemical sensors and decontaminationtechniques. Private industry and the military routinelyuse sensors that can detect and identify toxicchemicals. Sensors with medical applications have alsoreached the market. Affordable, accurate, compact, anddependable sensors, however, are not available. TheDepartment of Homeland Security would thereforefund and coordinate a national research program todevelop, test, and field detection devices and networksthat provide immediate and accurate warnings. TheDepartment would also support research into deconta-

mination technologies and procedures. As discussed inthe Emergency Preparedness and Response chapter, theDepartment of Homeland Security and theEnvironmental Protection Agency would requireassessment technologies to determine when to permitindividuals to re-enter buildings and areas.

Develop broad spectrum vaccines, antimicrobials andantidotes. In many cases, our medical countermeasurescannot address all possible biological agents or may notbe suitable for use by the general population. TheDepartments of Health and Human Services andHomeland Security, and other government and privateresearch entities, will pursue new defenses that willincrease efficacy while reducing side effects. Forexample, they will explore the utility of attenuatedsmallpox vaccines and of existing antivirals modified torender those vaccines more effective and safe.Furthermore, the federal government, in collaborationwith the private sector, will research and work towarddevelopment of broad spectrum antivirals to meet thethreat of engineered pathogens aimed at both humansand livestock.

Short-and long-term efforts will expand the inventoryof diagnostics, vaccines, and other therapies such asantimicrobials and antidotes that can mitigate theconsequences of a chemical, biological, radiological, ornuclear attack. Development of safer smallpox vaccinesand antiviral drugs will lower the risk of adversereactions experienced with the traditional vaccine. Thegoal of protecting a diverse population of all ages andhealth conditions requires a coordinated national effortwith a comprehensive research and developmentstrategy and investment plans.

Harness the scientific knowledge and tools to counterterrorism. We will harness America’s resources to fightagainst the most pressing chemical, biological, radio-logical, or nuclear challenges. In consultation with theDepartment of Health and Human Services, theDepartment of Homeland Security would leverage theexpertise of America’s cutting-edge medical andbiotechnological infrastructure to advance the state ofknowledge in infectious disease prevention andtreatment, forensic epidemiology, and microbialforensics. Substantial research into relevant medicalsciences is necessary to better detect, diagnose, andtreat the consequences of chemical, biological, radio-logical, or nuclear attacks. The President has proposeda National Biological Weapons Analysis Center in theDepartment of Homeland Security to address some ofthese issues and conduct risk assessments. This Center,with input from the public health sector, will identifythe highest priority threat agents to determine whichcountermeasures require priority research and devel-opment. The federal government will also consider and


address the potential impact of genetic engineering onthe biological threat.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ensuresthe availability of medical products (drugs, vaccines,and devices) in the event of the intentional use ofchemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents.Recently, the FDA adjusted its new drug andbiological product regulations so that certain humandrugs designed for emergency responses can be quicklyintroduced based on animal rather than human tests.

Implement the Select Agent Program. Research labora-tories can also counter bioterrorism throughprevention, and by tracking and securing dangerousbiological agents. Under the President’s proposal, the

Department of Homeland Security will oversee theSelect Agent Program to regulate the shipment ofcertain hazardous biological organisms and toxins.Through the registration of more than 300 labora-tories, the Select Agent Program has significantlyincreased oversight and security of pathogens thatcould be used for bioterrorism. The CDC is alsotraining public health officials in every state to assist inaccurately interpreting biosafety containment provi-sions and select agent procedures.


We must prepare to minimize the damage and recoverfrom any future terrorist attacks that may occur despiteour best efforts at prevention. Past experience hasshown that preparedness efforts are key to providing aneffective response to major terrorist incidents andnatural disasters. Therefore, we need a comprehensivenational system to bring together and command allnecessary response assets quickly and effectively. Wemust equip, train, and exercise many different responseunits to mobilize for any emergency without warning.Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security, building on the strong foundationalready laid by the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency (FEMA), will lead our national efforts to createand employ a system that will improve our response toall disasters, both manmade and natural.

Many pieces of this national emergency responsesystem are already in place. America’s first line ofdefense in the aftermath of any terrorist attack is itsfirst responder community—police officers, firefighters,emergency medical providers, public works personnel,and emergency management officials. Nearly threemillion state and local first responders regularly puttheir lives on the line to save the lives of others andmake our country safer. These individuals includespecially trained hazardous materials teams, collapsesearch and rescue units, bomb squads, and tactical units.

In a serious emergency, the federal governmentaugments state and local response efforts. FEMA,which under the President’s proposal will be a keycomponent of the Department of Homeland Security,provides funding and command and control support. A


Emergency Preparedness and Response

number of important specialized federal emergencyresponse assets that are housed in various departmentswould also fall under the Secretary of HomelandSecurity’s authority for responding to a major terroristattack. Because response efforts to all major incidentsentail the same basic elements, it is essential thatfederal response capabilities for both terrorist attacksand natural disasters remain in the same organization.This would ensure the most efficient provision offederal support to local responders by preventing theproliferation of duplicative “boutique” response entities.

Americans respond with great skill and courage toemergencies. There are, however, too many seams inour current response plans and capabilities. Today, atleast five different plans—the Federal Response Plan,the National Contingency Plan, the InteragencyDomestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan, theFederal Radiological Emergency Response Plan, and anascent bioterrorism response plan—govern the federalgovernment’s response. These plans and thegovernment’s overarching policy for counterterrorismare based on a distinction between “crisis management”and “consequence management.” In addition, differentorganizations at different levels of the governmenthave put in place different incident managementsystems and communications equipment. All too often,these systems and equipment do not function togetherwell enough.

We will enhance our capabilities for responding to aterrorist attack all across the country. Today, manygeographic areas have little or no capability to respondto a terrorist attack using weapons of mass destruction.Even the best prepared states and localities do notpossess adequate resources to respond to the full rangeof terrorist threats we face. Many do not yet have inplace mutual aid agreements to facilitate cooperationwith their neighbors in time of emergency. Untilrecently, federal support for domestic preparednessefforts has been relatively small and disorganized, witheight different departments and agencies providingmoney in a tangled web of grant programs.

Major Initiatives

Integrate separate federal response plans into a single all-discipline incident management plan. Under thePresident’s proposal, the Department of HomelandSecurity will consolidate existing federal governmentemergency response plans into one genuinely all-disci-pline, all-hazard plan—the Federal IncidentManagement Plan—and thereby eliminate the “crisismanagement” and “consequence management”distinction. This plan would cover all incidents ofnational significance, including acts of bioterrorism andagroterrorism, and clarify roles and expected contribu-tions of various emergency response bodies at differentlevels of government in the wake of a terrorist attack.

The Department of Homeland Security would providea direct line of authority from the President throughthe Secretary of Homeland Security to a single on-sitefederal coordinator. The single federal coordinatorwould be responsible to the President for coordinatingthe entire federal response. Lead agencies wouldmaintain operational control over their functions (forexample, the FBI will remain the lead agency forfederal law enforcement) in coordination with thesingle on-site federal official. The Department woulddirect the Domestic Emergency Support Team, nuclearincident response teams, National PharmaceuticalStockpile, and National Disaster Medical System, aswell as other assets.

Create a national incident management system. Underthe President’s proposal, the Department of HomelandSecurity, working with federal, state, local, and non-governmental public safety organizations, will build acomprehensive national incident management systemto respond to terrorist incidents and natural disasters.The Department would ensure that this nationalsystem defines common terminology for all parties,provides a unified command structure, and is scalableto meet incidents of all sizes.

The federal government will encourage state and localfirst responder organizations to adopt the already

National Vision

We will strive to create a fully integratednational emergency response system that isadaptable enough to deal with any terroristattack, no matter how unlikely or catastrophic,as well as all manner of natural disasters. Underthe President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will consolidate federalresponse plans and build a national system forincident management. The Department wouldaim to ensure that leaders at all levels of


government have complete incident awarenessand can communicate with and command allappropriate response personnel. Our federal, state,and local governments would ensure that allresponse personnel and organizations—includingthe law enforcement, military, emergencyresponse, health care, public works, and environ-mental communities—are properly equipped,trained, and exercised to respond to all terroristthreats and attacks in the United States.

widespread Incident Management System by making ita requirement for federal grants. All state and localgovernments should create and regularly update theirown homeland security plans, based on their existingemergency operations plans, to provide guidance for theintegration of their response assets in the event of anattack. The Department of Homeland Security will,under the President’s proposal, provide support(including model plans) for these efforts and will adjustthe Federal Incident Management Plan as necessary totake full advantage of state and local capabilities. Stateand local governments should also sign mutual aidagreements to facilitate cooperation with theirneighbors in time of emergency. Starting in Fiscal Year2004, the Department would provide grants in supportof such efforts.

Improve tactical counterterrorist capabilities. Withadvance warning, we have various federal, state, andlocal response assets that can intercede and preventterrorists from carrying out attacks. These include lawenforcement, emergency response, and military teams.In the most dangerous of incidents, particularly whenterrorists have chemical, biological, radiological, ornuclear weapons in their possession, it is crucial that theindividuals who preempt the terrorists do so flawlessly,no matter if they are part of the local SWAT team orthe FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team. It is also crucial thatthese individuals be prepared and able to work effec-tively with each other and with other specializedresponse personnel. Finally, these teams and otheremergency response assets must plan and train for theconsequences of failed tactical operations.

The Department of Homeland Security, as the leadfederal agency for incident management in the UnitedStates, will, under the President’s plan, establish aprogram for certifying the preparedness of all civilianteams and individuals to execute and deal with theconsequences of such counterterrorist actions. As part ofthis program, the Department would provide partialgrants in support of joint exercises between its responseassets and other government teams. (This programwould be voluntary for assets outside of the Departmentof Homeland Security.)

Enable seamless communication among all responders. Inthe aftermath of any major terrorist attack, emergencyresponse efforts would likely involve hundreds of officesfrom across the government and the country. It iscrucial for response personnel to have and useequipment, systems, and procedures that allow them tocommunicate with one another. Under the President’sproposal, the Department of Homeland Security willwork with state and local governments to achieve thisgoal.

In particular, the Department would develop a nationalemergency communication plan to establish protocols(i.e., who needs to talk to whom), processes, andnational standards for technology acquisition. TheDepartment would, starting with Fiscal Year 2003funds, tie all federal grant programs that support stateand local purchase of terrorism-related communicationsequipment to this communication plan and require allapplicants to demonstrate progress in achieving interop-erability with other emergency response bodies.

Prepare health care providers for catastrophic terrorism.Our entire emergency response community must beprepared to deal with all potential hazards, especiallythose associated with weapons of mass destruction.Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security, working with the Departments ofHealth and Human Services and Veterans Affairs, willsupport training and equipping of state and local healthcare personnel to deal with the growing threat ofchemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorism.It would continue to fund federal grants to states andcities for bioterrorism preparedness. It would use thehospital preparedness grant program to help preparehospitals and poison control centers to deal specificallywith biological and chemical attacks and to expand theirsurge capacity to care for large numbers of patients in amass-casualty incident. These efforts would enhancetraining between public health agencies and localhospitals and seek improved cooperation between publichealth and emergency agencies at all levels ofgovernment.

A major act of biological terrorism would almostcertainly overwhelm existing state, local, and privatelyowned health care capabilities. For this reason, thefederal government maintains a number of specializedresponse capabilities for a bioterrorist attack. TheNational Disaster Medical System, a federal/privatepartnership that includes the Departments of Healthand Human Services, Defense, Veterans Affairs, andFEMA, provides rapid response and critical surgecapacities to support localities in disaster medicaltreatment. Under the President’s proposal, theDepartment of Homeland Security will assumeauthority over the System as part of the federal responseto incidents of national significance. The System ismade up of federal assets and thousands of volunteerhealth professionals that are organized around thecountry into a number of specialty teams such asDisaster Medical Assistance Teams, National MedicalResponse Teams, and teams trained in caring forpsychological trauma. In addition, the Department ofVeterans Affairs operates a vast health care, training,and pharmaceutical procurement system with facilitiesin many communities nationwide. The Department ofDefense provides specialized skills and transportation


capabilities to move these teams and evacuatecasualties.

The Department of Homeland Security, working withthe Department of Health and Human Services, wouldlead efforts to test whether illnesses or complaints maybe attributable to chemical, biological, radiological, ornuclear exposure; establish disease/exposure registries;and develop, maintain, and provide information on thehealth effects of hazardous substances. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency will continue toprovide a laboratory diagnostic surge capacity forenvironmental samples during crises.

Augment America’s pharmaceutical and vaccine stockpiles.The National Pharmaceutical Stockpile ensuresAmerica’s ability to respond rapidly to a bioterroristattack or a mass casualty incident. This program, whichthe Department of Homeland Security will operate inconsultation with the Department of Health andHuman Services under the President’s proposal,maintains twelve strategically located “Push Packs”containing 600 tons of antibiotics, antidotes, vaccines,bandages, and other medical supplies. The federalgovernment can transport these packs to an incidentsite in less than 12 hours for rapid distribution by stateand local authorities. This system performed extremelywell in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks,delivering a “Push Pack” to New York City in sevenhours. Additional deployments followed the anthraxattacks of October 2001.

The National Pharmaceutical Stockpile alreadycontains a sufficient antibiotic supply to begintreatment for 20 million persons exposed to anthraxand should contain enough smallpox vaccine for everyAmerican by the end of 2002. The Department ofHomeland Security, working with the Department ofHealth and Human Services, would provide grants tostate and local governments to plan for the receipt anddistribution of medicines from the Stockpile. Inaddition, the Departments of Homeland Security andHealth and Human Services would pursue acceleratedFDA approval of safe and effective products to add tothe Stockpile and the development of procedures toaccelerate the availability of investigational drugsduring a public health emergency.

Prepare for chemical, biological, radiological, and nucleardecontamination. The Department of HomelandSecurity would ensure the readiness of our firstresponders to work safely in an area where chemical,biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons have beenused. The Department would begin requiring annualcertification of first responder preparedness to handleand decontaminate any hazard. This certificationprocess would also verify the ability of state and local

first responders to work effectively with related federalsupport assets.

Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will help state and local agenciesmeet these certification standards by providing grantmoney (based on performance) for planning andequipping, training, and exercising first responders forchemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks. Itwould launch a national research and developmenteffort to create new technologies for detection andclean-up of such attacks. After a major incident, theEnvironmental Protection Agency will be responsiblefor decontamination of affected buildings and neigh-borhoods and providing advice and assistance to publichealth authorities in determining when it is safe toreturn to these areas.

Plan for military support to civil authorities. The armedforces were an integral part of our national response tothe terrorist attacks of September 11. The Departmentof Defense currently uses a “Total Force” approach tofulfill its missions overseas and at home, drawing on thestrengths and capabilities of active-duty, reserve, andNational Guard forces. In addition to response fromthe active-duty forces, Air National Guard fighters tookto the air on September 11 to establish combat airpatrols. New Jersey and New York guardsmen and Navyand Marine Corps reservists provided medicalpersonnel to care for the injured, military police toassist local law enforcement officials, key assetprotection, transportation, communications, logistics,and a myriad of other functions to support recoveryefforts in New York City. Maryland Army NationalGuard military police units were brought on duty anddispatched to provide security at the Pentagon.President Bush asked governors to call up over seventhousand National Guard personnel to supplementsecurity at the Nation’s 429 commercial airports.Guardsmen also reinforced border security activities ofthe Immigration and Nationalization Service and theU.S. Customs Service.

The importance of military support to civil authoritiesas the latter respond to threats or acts of terrorism isrecognized in Presidential decision directives and legis-lation. Military support to civil authorities pursuant to aterrorist threat or attack may take the form of providingtechnical support and assistance to law enforcement;assisting in the restoration of law and order; loaningspecialized equipment; and assisting in consequencemanagement.

In April 2002, President Bush approved a revision ofthe Unified Command Plan that included establishinga new unified combatant command, U.S. NorthernCommand. This Command will be responsible forhomeland defense and for assisting civil authorities in


accordance with U.S. law. As in the case with all othercombatant commanders, the commander of NorthernCommand will take all operational orders from and isresponsible to the President through the Secretary ofDefense. The commander of Northern Command willupdate plans to provide military support to domesticcivil authorities in response to natural and man-madedisasters and during national emergencies. TheDepartment of Homeland Security and theDepartment of Defense would participate as appro-priate in homeland security training that involvesmilitary and civilian emergency response personnel.

Build the Citizen Corps. Under the President’s proposal,the Department of Homeland Security will maintainand expand Citizens Corps, a national program toprepare volunteers for terrorism-related responsesupport. If we can help individual citizens helpthemselves and their neighbors in the case of a localattack, we will improve our chances to save lives. (SeeOrganizing for a Secure Homeland chapter for additionaldiscussion.)

Implement the First Responder Initiative of the Fiscal Year2003 Budget. Before September 11, the federalgovernment had allocated less than $1 billion since 1995to help prepare first responders for terrorist attacks. Arange of federal departments provided funding fortraining and equipment, technical assistance, and othersupport to assist state and local first responders. Thesedisparate programs were a step in the right direction butfell short in terms of scale and cohesion.

In January 2002, President Bush proposed the FirstResponder Initiative as part of his Fiscal Year 2003Budget proposal. The purpose of this initiative is toimprove dramatically first responder preparedness forterrorist incidents and disasters. This program willincrease federal funding levels more than tenfold (from$272 million in the pre-supplemental Fiscal Year 2002Budget to $3.5 billion in Fiscal Year 2003). Under thePresident’s Department of Homeland Securityproposal, the new Department will consolidate all grantprograms that distribute federal funds to state and localfirst responders.

Build a national training and evaluation system. Thegrowing threat of terrorist attacks on American soil,including the potential use of weapons of massdestruction, is placing great strains on our Nation’ssystem for training its emergency response personnel.The Department of Homeland Security will under thePresident’s proposal launch a consolidated andexpanded training and evaluation system to meet theincreasing demand. This system would be predicatedon a four phased approach: requirements, plans,training (and exercises), and assessments (comprising ofevaluations and corrective action plans). The

Department would serve as the central coordinatingbody responsible for overseeing curriculum standardsand, through regional centers of excellence such as theEmergency Management Institute in Maryland, theCenter for Domestic Preparedness in Alabama, and theNational Domestic Preparedness Consortium, fortraining the instructors who will train our firstresponders. These instructors would teach courses atthousands of facilities such as public safety academies,community colleges, and state and private universities.

Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will establish national standards foremergency response training and preparedness. Thesestandards would provide guidelines for the vaccinationof civilian response personnel against certain biologicalagents. These standards would also require certaincoursework for individuals to receive and maintaincertification as first responders and for state and localgovernments to receive federal grants. The Departmentwould establish a national exercise program designed toeducate and evaluate civilian response personnel at alllevels of government. It would require individuals andgovernment bodies to complete successfully at least oneexercise every year. The Department would use theseexercises to measure performance and allocate futureresources.

Enhance the victim support system. The United Statesmust be prepared to assist the victims of terroristattacks and their families, as well as other individualsaffected indirectly by attacks. Under the President’sproposal, the Department of Homeland Security willlead federal agencies and provide guidance to state,local, and volunteer organizations in offering victimsand their families various forms of assistance including:crisis counseling, cash grants, low-interest loans,unemployment benefits, free legal counseling, and taxrefunds. In the case of a terrorist attack, theDepartment would coordinate the various federalprograms for victim compensation and assistance,including the Department of Justice’s Office forVictims of Crime and FEMA’s Individual Assistanceprograms. (See Costs of Homeland Security chapter foradditional discussion.)


Throughout this Nation’s history we have used ourlaws to promote and safeguard our security and ourliberty. The law will both provide mechanisms for thegovernment to act and define the appropriate limits ofthat action. The President, recognizing this, directedthe Office of Homeland Security to review state andfederal legal authorities pertinent to homeland security.

We have already taken important steps to protect ourhomeland. The USA PATRIOT Act, signed into lawby the President on October 26, 2001, has improvedgovernment coordination in law enforcement, intelli-gence gathering, and information-sharing. TheAviation and Transportation Security Act, which established the Transportation Security Administration,has strengthened civil aviation security. The EnhancedBorder Security and Visa Entry Reform Act willreinforce border security systems. Finally, the PublicHealth Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness andResponse Act will better the Nation’s ability toprevent, prepare for, and respond to bioterrorism.

But more needs to be done. On June 18, 2002, thePresident provided Congress with proposed legislationto establish a Department of Homeland Security. Thisnew Cabinet agency would have a single, urgentmission: securing the homeland of America andprotecting the American people from terrorism. Yetcreation of this department does not in and of itselfconstitute a sufficient response to the terrorist threat.We must pass complementary legislation to addressinnate deficiencies in our overall ability to counterterrorism.

Where new legislation at the federal level is necessaryto accomplish our counterterrorism goals, we shouldwork carefully to ensure that newly crafted federal lawsdo not preempt state law unnecessarily or overly feder-alize counterterrorism efforts. The Tenth Amendmentmakes clear that each state retains substantialindependent power with respect to the general welfareof its populace. States should avail themselves to the


Law

resources and expertise offered by their sister states andfederal counterparts.

Informed by these concepts, the National Strategy forHomeland Security outlines several legislative actions.This section does not purport to constitute a completesurvey of needed legislative changes. Rather, theactions outlined below are initial steps in an ongoingeffort to identify legislative reforms and redundancieswith respect to homeland security.

Major Initiatives (Federal)

Enable critical infrastructure information sharing.Homeland security officials need quick, completeaccess to information relevant to the protection ofphysical and cyber critical infrastructure. We mustmeet this need by narrowly limiting public disclosureof such information in order to facilitate its voluntarysubmission without compromising the principles ofopenness that ensure government accountability. Tothis end, the Attorney General will convene a panelwith representatives of state attorneys general, stategovernors, state legislators, state law enforcement, theFBI, the Environmental Protection Agency, the

Department of Health and Human Services, and otherfederal agencies as necessary upon consultation withthe Office of Management and Budget, to proposeneeded legislative reform or guidance regardingstatutes governing public disclosure.

Streamline information sharing among intelligence andlaw enforcement agencies. Homeland security requiresimproved information sharing between the intelligencecommunity, law enforcement agencies, and governmentdecision-makers. Our current shortcoming in this areastems, in part, from the number of laws, regulations,and guidelines controlling intelligence operations.Congress, with the enactment of the USA PATRIOTAct, took important steps toward identifying andremoving some barriers to the exchange of intelligence.The Administration will expand on this initiative byleading a review of all authorities governing theanalysis, integrity, and disclosure of intelligence withthe aim of improving information sharing throughlegislative reform while guarding against incursions onliberties.

Expand existing extradition authorities. The war onterrorism is and must be a global effort. Our countrymust continue to work cooperatively with nationsaround the world. To that end, the Departments ofState and Justice should work with Congress to amendcurrent extradition laws in two respects. First, newlegislation should be adopted that would authorizeextradition for additional crimes where the UnitedStates already has an extradition treaty, but where thetreaty applies only to a limited set of crimes. Second,Congress should grant authority to extraditeindividuals from the United States for serious crimes inthe absence of an extradition treaty, on a case-by-casebasis with the approval of the Attorney General andthe Secretary of State.

Review authority for military assistance in domesticsecurity. Federal law prohibits military personnel fromenforcing the law within the United States except asexpressly authorized by the Constitution or an Act ofCongress. The threat of catastrophic terrorism requiresa thorough review of the laws permitting the militaryto act within the United States in order to determinewhether domestic preparedness and response effortswould benefit from greater involvement of militarypersonnel and, if so, how.

Revive the President’s reorganization authority. OnlyCongress can create a new department of government;the President, however, is tasked with running thedepartments. Recognizing the need for flexiblePresidential management authority, Congress in 1932,provided the President with the ability to reorganizethe executive branch for the purpose of reducing

National VisionWe are a Nation built on the rule of law, and wewill utilize our laws to win the war on terrorismwhile always protecting our civil liberties. Weshould use our federal immigration laws andcustoms regulations to protect our borders andensure uninterrupted commerce; we shouldstrengthen state codes to protect our publicwelfare; we should employ local, state, andfederal criminal justice systems to prosecuteterrorists; and we should engage our partnersaround the world in countering the global threatof terrorism through treaties and mutuallysupporting laws. Where we find our existinglaws to be inadequate in light of the terroristthreat, we should craft new laws carefully, neverlosing sight of our strategic purpose for wagingthis war—to provide security and liberty to ourpeople. We should guard scrupulously againstincursions on our freedoms, recognizing thatliberty cannot exist in the absence of govern-mental restraint. As we move forward in thefight, we should refrain from instituting unnec-essary laws, as we remain true to our principlesof federalism and individual freedom.


expenditures and increasing efficiency. This authority,which has taken various forms over the years, lapsed in1984. While this Administration’s priority is workingwith Congress to restructure the federal government tocreate the Department of Homeland Security, revivingthe reorganization authority would greatly assistPresidents in years to come to eliminate redundancieswithin executive agencies and address homelandsecurity more efficiently and economically. Congressshould amend Chapter 9 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code toreinvigorate the President’s authority to reorganize theexecutive branch.

Provide substantial management flexibility for theDepartment of Homeland Security. Terrorists are oppor-tunistic, agile, and driven. In order to respond to themeffectively, the Secretary of the new Department ofHomeland Security must have the advantage ofmodern management techniques. Therefore, theAdministration’s proposed legislation for theDepartment includes 21st-century approaches topersonnel and procurement policies. It also requestsbroad reorganization authority to enhance operationaleffectiveness as needed. With these and other flexiblepractices, the Secretary would have the managerialfreedom necessary to accomplish not only theDepartment’s primary mission of homeland securitybut also the important agency functions it will absorbwhich are not directly related to homeland security.

Major Initiatives (State)

Given the states’ major role in homeland security, andconsistent with the principles of federalism inherent toAmerican government, the following initiativesconstitute suggestions, not mandates, for state initia-tives.

Coordinate suggested minimum standards for statedriver’s licenses. The licensing of drivers by the 50states, the District of Columbia, and the United Statesterritories varies widely. There are no national oragreed upon state standards for content, format, orlicense acquisition procedures. Terrorist organizations,including Al-Qaeda operatives involved in theSeptember 11 attacks, have exploited these differences.While the issuance of driver’s licenses falls squarelywithin the powers of the states, the federal governmentcan assist the states in crafting solutions to curtail thefuture abuse of driver’s licenses by terrorist organiza-tions. Therefore, the federal government, inconsultation with state government agencies and non-governmental organizations, should support state-ledefforts to develop suggested minimum standards fordriver’s licenses, recognizing that many states shouldand will exceed these standards.

Enhance market capacity for terrorism insurance. Theneed for insurance coverage for terrorist events hasincreased dramatically. Federal support is clearly criticalto a properly functioning market for terrorisminsurance; nonetheless, state regulation will play anintegral role in ensuring the adequate provision ofterrorism insurance. To establish a regulatory approachwhich enables American businesses to spread and poolrisk efficiently, states should work together and withthe federal government to find a mutually acceptableapproach to enhance market capacity to cover terroristrisk.

Train for prevention of cyber attacks. State and localofficials have requested federal training regarding theidentification, investigation, and enforcement of cyber-related crimes and terrorism. The FBI, in coordinationwith other relevant federal organizations, should assiststate and local law enforcement in obtaining trainingin this area.

Suppress money laundering. Terrorists use unregulatedfinancial services, among other means, to fund theiroperations. The Money Laundering Suppression Act(P.L. 103-325) urges states to enact uniform laws tolicense and regulate certain financial services. The USAPATRIOT Act also relies on state law to establish theregulatory structure necessary to combat moneylaundering. States should assess the current status oftheir regulations regarding non-depository providers offinancial services and work to adopt uniform laws asnecessary to ensure more efficient and effectiveregulation. By doing so, states would protect consumersby providing increased stability and transparency to anindustry prone to abuse while at the same timeproviding state and local law enforcement with thetools necessary to dismantle informal and unlicensedmoney transmission networks.

Ensure continuity of the judiciary. In the aftermath of aterrorist attack, our judicial system must continue tooperate effectively. Planning is critical to this conti-nuity. As such, states, relevant non-governmentalorganizations, and representatives of the Departmentof Justice and the federal judiciary should convene acommittee of representatives to consider the expedientappointment of judges; interaction and coordinationamong federal and state judiciaries; and other mattersnecessary to the continued functioning of the judiciaryin times of crisis.

Review quarantine authority. State quarantine laws —most of which are over 100 years old—fail to addressthe dangers presented by modern biological warfareand terrorism. States, therefore, should updatequarantine laws to improve intrastate response whileworking with their sister states and federal regulators


to assure compliance with minimum public healthstandards. To facilitate this process, the Departmentsof Homeland Security, Health and Human Services,Justice, and Defense should participate in a review ofquarantine statutes and regulations in conjunction withstate and local authorities to establish minimumstandards. In addition, legislators should provide strongfederal, state, and local evacuation authority throughappropriate legislation or regulation.


The Nation’s advantage in science and technology is akey to securing the homeland. New technologies foranalysis, information sharing, detection of attacks, andcountering chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear weapons will help prevent and minimize thedamage from future terrorist attacks. Just as scienceand technology have helped us defeat past enemiesoverseas, so too will they help us defeat the efforts ofterrorists to attack our homeland and disrupt our wayof life.

The Nation needs a systematic national effort toharness science and technology in support of homelandsecurity. Our national research enterprise is vast andcomplex, with companies, universities, research insti-tutes, and government laboratories of all sizesconducting research and development on a very broadrange of issues. Guiding this enterprise to fieldimportant new capabilities and focus new efforts in

support of homeland security is a major undertaking.The Department of Homeland Security, which underthe President’s proposal will serve as the federalgovernment’s lead for this effort, will work with privateand public entities to ensure that our homelandsecurity research and development are of sufficient sizeand sophistication to counter the threat posed bymodern terrorism.

The private sector has the expertise to develop andproduce many of the technologies, devices, and systemsneeded for homeland security. The federal governmentneeds to find better ways to harness the energy,ingenuity, and investments of private entities for thesepurposes. Many businesses that could play a role inhomeland security research and development areunaccustomed to working with the federal governmentand some avoid it entirely due to onerous contractingand oversight requirements. In addition, the


Science and Technology

government currently has very few programs thatsolicit research and development proposals focusedspecifically on developing new homeland securitycapabilities. The Department of Homeland Securitywould take the lead in overcoming these obstacles.

The President has proposed to consolidate most of thefederal government’s homeland security research anddevelopment efforts under the coordination of theDepartment of Homeland Security to ensure strategicdirection and avoid duplication. To date, research anddevelopment activities in support of homeland securityhave been underfunded, evolutionary, short-term innature, fragmented across too many departments, andheavily reliant on spin-offs from the national securityand medical sectors. Many of the involved agencieshave little frontline knowledge of homeland securityand little or no experience in technology acquisitionand supporting research. The new Department wouldbe responsible for overcoming these shortfalls byensuring the pursuit of research and developmentactivities where none existed previously.

The President’s Fiscal Year 2003 Budget requestproposed a significant increase in homeland securityresearch and development funding: from nearly $1billion in Fiscal Year 2002 to about $3 billion, with thebulk focused on developing new countermeasures tobioterrorism. This is a crucial first federal step fordealing with one of our most pressing scientificchallenges. The Department must build on this downpayment to create and implement a long-term researchand development plan that includes investment inpotentially revolutionary capabilities.

Major Initiatives

Develop chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclearcountermeasures. The Nation’s research and devel-opment agenda will prioritize efforts to deal withcatastrophic threats. Key initiatives will includeresearch and development to prevent terrorist use ofnuclear weapons, detect chemical and biologicalmaterials and attacks, develop high-efficacy vaccinesand antivirals against biological agents, and tracklaboratory use of biological agents. (See Defendingagainst Catastrophic Threats chapter for additionaldiscussion.)

Develop systems for detecting hostile intent. Terrorismultimately requires individual human beings to carryout murderous actions. These individuals, whether theyintend to commandeer an aircraft, detonate a suicidebomb, or sneak illicit material through customs, maybehave in a manner that reveals their criminal intent.The Department of Homeland Security would workwith private and public entities to develop a variety ofsystems that highlight such behavior and can triggerfurther investigation and analysis of suspectedindividuals. This would allow security officials at pointsof interest such as airports and borders to examinemore closely individuals who exhibit such character-istics and also have other indications of potentiallyhostile intent in their background. The Departmentwould also explore whether appropriate sensors candetermine whether individuals have been immunizedor otherwise exposed to biological agents, chemicalagents, or nuclear materials.

Apply biometric technology to identification devices. Asour military, intelligence, and law enforcement effortsin Afghanistan and other countries have demonstrated,bringing justice to terrorists and their supporters iscomplicated by the fact that they hide among innocentcivilians and in remote places. Finding terrorists andpreventing terrorist attacks here in the United States isdifficult for the same reason—for example, a terroriston the FBI’s Watch List may sneak past securitypersonnel at an airport thanks to false documents and asimple disguise. These challenges require new

security actors. We will explore both evolu-tionary improvements to current capabilitiesand development of revolutionary new capabil-ities. The Department of Homeland Securitywill ensure appropriate testing and piloting ofnew technologies. Finally, the Department,working with other agencies, will set standardsto assist the acquisition decisions of state andlocal governments and private-sector entities.


National Vision

In the war on terrorism, America’s vast scienceand technology base provides a key advantage.With the Department of Homeland Security asa focal point, the United States will press thisadvantage through a national research anddevelopment enterprise for homeland securitysimilar in emphasis and focus to that which hassupported the national security community formore than fifty years. The Department willestablish a disciplined system to guide itshomeland security research and developmentefforts and those of other departments andagencies. As a Nation, we will emphasizescience and technology applications that addresscatastrophic threats. We will build on existingscience and technology whenever possible. Wewill embrace science and technology initiativesthat can support the whole range of homeland

technologies and systems to identify and findindividual terrorists. The Department of HomelandSecurity would support research and developmentefforts in biometric technology, which shows greatpromise. The Department would focus on improvingaccuracy, consistency, and efficiency in biometricsystems. Furthermore, the Department would explorebiomolecular and other new techniques, as well asenhancements to current techniques such as noisesuppression methods for voice authentication.

Improve the technical capabilities of first responders. If wedo not protect our first responders from the dangerouseffects of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclearattacks, we may lose the very people we depend on tominimize the damage of any such attacks. TheDepartment of Homeland Security would launch asteady and long-term effort to provide first responderswith technical capabilities for dealing with the effectsof catastrophic threats—capabilities that would aidboth first responders and victims of the attack. Thesecapabilities would include protective gear and masks,prophylactic treatments, and decontaminationequipment. The Department would undertakesustained efforts to develop treatments and decontami-nation methodologies for radiological and nuclearevents. The Department would also focus on devel-oping new methods to merge disparate databases andprovide first responders with accurate and usablepictures of building layouts and other key informationabout the site of a terrorist incident. In all these efforts,the Department would pay great attention to ensuringthat these technologies are easy to use under theextreme conditions in which first responders operate.

Coordinate research and development of the homelandsecurity apparatus. The Department of HomelandSecurity, working with the White House and otherfederal departments, would set the overall direction forour Nation’s homeland security research and devel-opment. The Department would establish amanagement structure to oversee its research anddevelopment activities and to guide its interagencycoordination activities. It would base these efforts on aconstant examination of the Nation’s vulnerabilities,continual testing of our security systems, and updatedevaluations of the threat and its weaknesses. It wouldmake sure that new technologies can scale appropri-ately—in terms of complexity, operation, andsustainability—to meet any terrorist attack, no matterhow large.

The technologies developed through this research anddevelopment should not only make us safer, but alsomake our daily lives better; while protecting against therare event, they should also enhance the commonplace.Thus, the technologies developed for homeland

security should fit well within our physical andeconomic infrastructure and our national habits.System performance must balance the risks associatedwith the terrorist threat against the impact of falsealarms and impediments to our way of life.

Establish a national laboratory for homeland security.Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will establish a laboratory—actuallya network of laboratories—modeled on the NationalNuclear Security Administration laboratories thatprovided expertise in nuclear weapon design throughoutthe Cold War. These laboratories would provide amultidisciplinary environment for developing anddemonstrating new technologies for homeland securityand would maintain a critical mass of scientific andengineering talent with a deep understanding of thevarious operational and technical issues associated withhomeland security systems. The Department wouldestablish a central management and research facilitywith satellite centers of excellence located at variousnational laboratories.

The national laboratory for homeland security woulddevelop, demonstrate, and then transition to the fieldnew technologies and system concepts to counter thespecific threats of chemical, biological, radiological, andnuclear terrorism. It would transfer successfultechnologies to commercial industry for manufactureand long-term support. It would reach out to variousregional, state, and local homeland security efforts,gaining familiarity with their issues, and providingthem core research, development, test, and evaluationexpertise. The laboratory would help the Departmentof Homeland Security’s efforts to conduct and supportthreat and vulnerability analyses.

Solicit independent and private analysis for science andtechnology research. Under the President’s proposal, theDepartment of Homeland Security will fundindependent analytic support for our homelandsecurity science and technology endeavors. Theseefforts will support planning activities, including netassessment, preparing agency guidance, and reviewingagency programs and budgets; systems analyses;requirements analyses; assessments of competingtechnical and operational approaches; and theDepartment’s use of “red team” techniques. (SeeIntelligence and Warning chapter for additional detailson “red team” techniques.) The organizations thatprovide this support to the Department will undertakelong-range projects and should have access to sensitivegovernment and proprietary data, including intelli-gence assessments. They should also possessunquestionable objectivity, staying free from conflictsof interest with other government institutions and theprivate sector.


Establish a mechanism for rapidly producing prototypes.Technologies developed for a variety of purposes areoften directly applicable, or quickly adaptable, forhomeland security needs. Under the President’sproposal, the Department of Homeland Security willwork with other federal agencies to provide a means forrapid prototyping of innovative homeland securityconcepts based on existing technologies. It wouldcollect unsolicited ideas, evaluate them, and maintain acapability for funding the most promising ideas eitherdirectly or in partnership with a relevant agency. TheDepartment would ensure that successful prototypesare sustainable by partnering with the commercialsector for manufacture and long-term support.

Conduct demonstrations and pilot deployments. TheDepartment of Homeland Security would systemati-cally engage in pilot deployments and demonstrationsto provide a conduit between the state and local usersof technology and the federal developers of thattechnology. These pilot deployments and demonstra-tions would serve as a focal point for the developmentof regional solutions, testing how well new homelandsecurity technologies work under local conditionsacross America. We must also test how well thosetechnologies work in the case of a large-scale attack.

Set standards for homeland security technology. In order toencourage investment in homeland security science and

technology efforts, the Department of HomelandSecurity, along with other federal agencies, would workwith state and local governments and the private sectorto build a mechanism for analyzing, validating, andsetting standards for homeland security equipment. TheDepartment would develop comprehensive protocols forcertification of compliance with these standards. Thisactivity will allow state and local officials to makeinformed procurement decisions.

Establish a system for high-risk, high-payoff homelandsecurity research. Bringing the full force of science to bearon our efforts to secure the homeland will requiresystematic investment in innovative and revolutionaryresearch and development projects. We expect many ofthese projects to fail due to the technical risks involved,but the payoff for success will be great. The Departmentof Homeland Security would establish a program with ahigh level of programmatic and budgetary flexibility tosolicit private industry for innovative concepts.

Through these and other focused science and technologyprograms, we will develop new tools and techniques tosecure our homeland. Our enemies are adaptive,constantly searching for new ways to strike us. We mustdo the same. Just as we did in World War II and in theCold War, we must use our great strength in science andtechnology to triumph in the war on terrorism.


Information contributes to every aspect of homelandsecurity and is a vital foundation for the homelandsecurity effort. Every government official performingevery homeland security mission depends upon infor-mation and information technology.

Although American information technology is themost advanced in the world, our country’s informationsystems have not adequately supported the homelandsecurity mission. Today, there is no single agency orcomputer network that integrates all homeland securityinformation nationwide, nor is it likely that there everwill be. Instead, much of the information exists indisparate databases scattered among federal, state, andlocal entities. In many cases, these computer systemscannot share information—either “horizontally” (acrossthe same level of government) or “vertically” (between

federal, state, and local governments). Databases usedfor law enforcement, immigration, intelligence, andpublic health surveillance have not been connected inways that allow us to recognize information gaps orredundancies. As a result, government agencies storingterrorism information, such as terrorist “watch lists,”have not been able to systematically share that infor-mation with other agencies. These differences cansometimes result in errors if, for example, visa applica-tions and border controls are not checked againstconsistent “watch lists.” It is crucial to link the vastamounts of knowledge resident within each agency atall levels of government.

Despite spending some $50 billion on informationtechnology per year, two fundamental problems haveprevented the federal government from building an


Information Sharing andSystems

efficient government-wide information system. First,government acquisition of information systems has notbeen routinely coordinated. Over time, hundreds ofnew systems were acquired to address specific agencyrequirements. Agencies have not pursued compatibilityacross the federal government or with state and localentities. Organizations have evolved into islands oftechnology—distinct networks that obstruct efficientcollaboration. Second, legal and cultural barriers oftenprevent agencies from exchanging and integratinginformation.

Information-sharing capabilities are similarly deficientat the state and local levels. Many states maintainterrorism, gang, and drug databases that other statescannot access. In addition, there are deficiencies in thecommunications systems used by municipalitiesthroughout the country. If an attack were to occurtoday, most state and local first responders would notbe using compatible communications equipment.Wireless technology used by most communities isoutdated, and one-third of public safety agencies havereported trouble communicating with counterpartsduring incidents (according to the Public SafetyWireless Network, a joint program of the Departmentsof Justice and Treasury). Although many states haveinstituted new infrastructures for sharing informationwithin their jurisdiction, sharing with other states andwith federal agencies remains fragmented. This lack ofinteroperability was evident many times over the pastdecade—during the 1993 World Trade Centerbombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the 1999Columbine school shootings, and the September 11attacks. At Columbine, the responders included 23local and county law enforcement agencies, two stateand three federal law enforcement agencies, six localfire departments, and seven local emergency medicalservices—most with incompatible communicationsprocedures and equipment.

Major Initiatives

Five principles will guide our country’s approach todeveloping information systems for homeland security.First, we will balance our homeland security require-ments with citizens’ privacy. Second, the homelandsecurity community will view the federal, state, andlocal governments as one entity—not from the point ofview of any agency or level of government. Third,information will be captured once at the source andused many times to support multiple requirements.Fourth, we will create databases of record, which willbe trusted sources of information. Finally, thehomeland security information architecture will be adynamic tool, recognizing that the use of informationtechnology to combat terrorism will continually evolveto stay ahead of the ability of terrorists to exploit oursystems.

It is important to protect the public’s right to accessinformation, but to do so in balance with securityconcerns. In general, laws such as the Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA) provide for access togovernment information to the extent that records arenot exempt from disclosure. At the same time,Congress has crafted numerous exemptions identifyingcategories of information that should not be publiclydisclosed as the public interest weighs against it. Inmaking decisions about this category of information—such as whether to make it available on agency websites—agencies must weigh the benefits of certaininformation to their customers against the risks thatfreely-available sensitive homeland security infor-mation may pose to the interests of the Nation.

Integrate information sharing across the federalgovernment. Under the President’s proposal, theDepartment of Homeland Security will coordinate thesharing of essential homeland security information

of the personnel and resources available toaddress these threats. Officials will receive theinformation they need so they can anticipatethreats and respond rapidly and effectively.The incorporation of data from all sourcesacross the spectrum of homeland security willassist in border management, critical infra-structure protection, law enforcement, incidentmanagement, medical care, and intelligence. Inevery instance, sensitive and classified infor-mation will be scrupulously protected. We willleverage America’s leading-edge informationtechnology to develop an information archi-tecture that will effectively secure the homeland.


National Vision

We will build a national environment thatenables the sharing of essential homelandsecurity information. We must build a “systemof systems” that can provide the right infor-mation to the right people at all times.Information will be shared “horizontally” acrosseach level of government and “vertically” amongfederal, state, and local governments, privateindustry, and citizens. With the proper use ofpeople, processes, and technology, homelandsecurity officials throughout the United Statescan have complete and common awareness ofthreats and vulnerabilities as well as knowledge

nationwide through the Critical InfrastructureAssurance Office. This would include the design andimplementation of an interagency information archi-tecture to support efforts to find, track, and respond toterrorist threats in a way that improves both the timeof response and the quality of decisions. The CriticalInfrastructure Assurance Office will also define pilotprojects to address immediate homeland securityrequirements while laying the foundation forcontinuous improvement. New coordination groupswill recommend better information-sharing methods,focusing on, among other things, border security;transportation security; emergency response; chemical,biological, radiological, and nuclear countermeasures;and infrastructure protection.

As described in the Domestic Counterterrorism chapter,the FBI will create a consolidated Terrorism WatchList that includes information from a variety of sourcesand will be fully accessible to all law enforcementofficers and the intelligence community. TheDepartment of Homeland Security, as proposed by thePresident, will oversee a joint project of the U.S.Customs Service, Immigration and NaturalizationService, Transportation Security Administration, andInternational Trade Data System Board of Directorsfor large-scale modernization at border crossings.

Integrate information sharing across state and localgovernments, private industry, and citizens. Severalefforts are underway to enhance the timely dissemi-nation of information from the federal government tostate and local homeland security officials by buildingand sharing law enforcement databases, securecomputer networks, secure video teleconferencingcapabilities, and more accessible websites.

First, the FBI and other federal agencies areaugmenting the information available in their crimeand terrorism databases such as the National CrimeInformation Center and the National LawEnforcement Telecommunications Systems. Thesedatabases are accessible to state and local authorities.

Second, state and local governments should use asecure intranet to increase the flow of classified federalinformation to state and local entities. This wouldprovide a more effective way to disseminate infor-mation about changes to the Homeland SecurityAdvisory System and share information aboutterrorists. The federal government will also make aneffort to remove classified information from somedocuments to facilitate distribution to more state andlocal authorities. The effort will help state and locallaw enforcement officials learn when individualssuspected of criminal activity are also under federalinvestigation and will enable federal officials to linktheir efforts to investigations being undertaken in the

states. The Department of Homeland Security wouldcreate a Collaborative Classified Enterpriseenvironment to share sensitive information securelyamong all relevant government entities. This effort,which is to include dozens of agencies, will put in placea secure communications network to allow agencies to“plug in” their existing databases to share information.

Third, a secure video conferencing capabilityconnecting officials in Washington, D.C. with allgovernment entities in every state will be implementedby the end of the calendar year. This capability willallow federal officials to relay crucial informationimmediately to state homeland security directors andenhance consultation and coordination.

Fourth, expansion of the ‘.gov’ domain on the Internetfor use by state governments has already beencompleted. In the past, only federal governmentwebsites were permitted to use the ‘.gov’ domain. Thischange will ensure the legitimacy of governmentwebsites and enhance searches of all federal and statewebsites, thereby allowing information to be accessedmore quickly. These ‘.gov’ sites will also allowhomeland security officials to exchange sensitive infor-mation on the secure portions of those websites.

Adopt common “meta-data” standards for electronic information relevant to homeland security. TheAdministration has begun several initiatives tointegrate terrorist-related information from databasesof all government agencies responsible for homelandsecurity. As this information is assembled, it is crucialto compile simultaneously information about the infor-mation so that homeland security officials understandwhat is available and where it can be found. Thiscomplements the effort to analyze the informationwith advanced “data-mining” techniques to revealpatterns of criminal behavior and detain suspectedterrorists before they act. The Department ofHomeland Security, Department of Justice, FBI, andnumerous state and local law enforcement agencieswould use data-mining tools for the full range ofhomeland security activities.

The National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) is aworking example of compiling meta-data to facilitateintegration of data and support decision making. TheNSDI is a network of federal, state, and localgeospatial information databases that provide meta-data for all information holdings to make informationeasier to find and use. The assembled data will includegeospatial products, including geographic informationsystems that will be used with incident managementtools and allow immediate display of maps and satelliteimages. The President’s geospatial informationintegration e-government initiative will increase theamount of meta-data available on the NSDI and


develop data standards that permit additionalintegration of information. The geospatial e-govinitiative efforts will be coordinated with incidentreporting data to create real time maps and images foruse across government in domestic counterterrorismand incident management.

Improve public safety emergency communications. In anemergency, rescue personnel cannot afford to behampered by incompatible communications assets.Under the President’s proposal, the Department ofHomeland Security will work to develop compre-hensive emergency communications systems. TheNational Communications System would be incorpo-rated into the Department of Homeland Security tofacilitate the effort. These systems will disseminateinformation about vulnerabilities and protectivemeasures, as well as allow first responders to bettermanage incidents and minimize damage. The newDepartment would pursue technologies such as “reverse911” which would call households to alert those at risk.Project SAFECOM, one of the President’s e-government initiatives, is being designed to address theNation’s critical public safety wireless shortcomingsand will create a tactical wireless infrastructure for firstresponders and federal, state, and local lawenforcement and public safety entities.

Ensure reliable public health information. TheDepartment of Homeland Security, in cooperationwith the Department of Health and Human Services,would also work to ensure reliable public healthcommunications. Prompt detection, accurate diagnosis,and timely reporting and investigation of diseaseepidemics all require reliable communication betweenmedical, veterinary, and public health organizations.Once an attack is confirmed it is crucial to have real-time communication with other hospitals, publichealth officials, other health professionals, lawenforcement, emergency management officials, and themedia. The Centers for Disease Control andPrevention has created the Health Alert Network toincrease the interconnectivity of federal, state, and localpublic health and emergency response agencies fortimely communications about health advisories,laboratory findings, information about diseaseoutbreaks, and distance learning. Under this plan, 90percent of every state will be covered by this high-speed network and the capacity to receive emergencybroadcast health alert messages. Providing the publictimely and accurate risk communication during apublic health emergency will inform as well as reassureconcerned Americans.


In a world where the terrorist pays no respect to tradi-tional boundaries, a successful strategy for homelandsecurity requires international cooperation. Americamust pursue a sustained, steadfast, and systematicinternational agenda to counter the global terroristthreat and improve our homeland security. This agendalies at the nexus of the National Strategy for HomelandSecurity and the National Security Strategy of the UnitedStates.

Following September 11, the United States began acampaign to engage our partners around the globe inthe fight against terrorism. We have made significantprogress. We have built international support for actionagainst global terrorism. We have entered into cooper-ative efforts to improve security against terrorist attackson the United States. We have, for example, madearrangements with Canada and Mexico to improve thesecurity of our shared land borders. Similarly, we areworking with partners around the world to improvethe security of international commerce and trans-

portation networks to prevent their exploitation byterrorists. And we have embarked upon joint scientifictechnological research and development aimed atcountering the many dimensions of the terrorist threat.

Our global engagement to secure the homeland inter-sects with our government’s efforts in other areas aswell. Consequently, some initiatives will be closelycoordinated, and even shared, between the NationalStrategy for Homeland Security and our other nationalstrategies, especially the National Security Strategy of theUnited States, the National Strategy for CombatingTerrorism, and the National Strategy to Combat Weaponsof Mass Destruction. Oversight of such initiatives—which include international law enforcement andintelligence cooperation and the protection of criticalinfrastructure networks—will be shared between ourgovernment’s homeland security and national securitystructures to reduce seams in our defenses that may beexploited by our enemies.


International Cooperation

Major Initiatives

Create “smart borders.” The United States is workingclosely with its neighbors to improve efforts to stopterrorists and their instruments of terror from enteringthe United States. The United States has entered into“Smart Border” agreements with Mexico and Canadato meet this objective. (See Border and TransportationSecurity chapter for additional discussion.)

Combat fraudulent travel documents. More than 500million people cross our borders every year. Verifyingthat each has a legitimate reason to enter the UnitedStates requires international support. The UnitedStates is working with the G-8 group of nations, theInternational Civil Aviation Organization, and other

entities to set improved security standards for traveldocuments such as passports and visas. TheDepartment of State, working with the Department ofHomeland Security, will negotiate new internationalstandards for travel documents by the earliest possibledate. The United States will launch a pilot programwith select countries to share information aboutspecific incidents of travel document fraud and illegalentry and deportation.

Increase the security of international shipping containers.Sixteen million containers enter our Nation every year.The United States will work with our trade partnersand international organizations to identify and screenhigh-risk containers and develop and use smart andsecure containers. (See Border and TransportationSecurity chapter for additional discussion.)

Intensify international law enforcement cooperation.Since September 11, the U.S. government has workedwith individual countries and through multilateralinternational organizations to improve cooperation onlaw enforcement action against terrorists. These effortshave focused on freezing the assets of terrorists andaffiliated persons and organizations. We have alsoworked together to prevent terrorist recruitment,transit, and safe haven, and have cooperated with othercountries to bring terrorists to justice.

The Department of Justice, in cooperation with theDepartment of State, will continue to work with itsforeign counterparts on law enforcement issues. TheFBI headquarters will build closer working relation-ships with foreign counterparts on counterterrorismmatters through its new Flying Squads. (See DomesticCounterterrorism chapter for additional discussion.) TheUnited States will continue to press its G-8 counter-parts for implementation of the 25-pointCounterterrorism Action Plan approved at theNovember 2001 joint meeting of the G-8 Lyon Group(International Crime Experts Group) and RomaGroup (Counterterrorism Experts Group).

Help foreign nations fight terrorism. The U.S.government provides other countries with specializedtraining and assistance to help build their capacities tocombat terrorism. Some of these programs are militaryin nature, but many focus on improving the efforts ofcivilian authorities. They range from seminars indrafting legislation to the provision of equipment forenhancing border security and customs capabilities.

Expand protection of transnational critical infrastructure.The United States will continue to work with bothCanada and Mexico to improve physical and cybersecurity of critical infrastructure that overlaps withboth countries. (See Protecting Critical Infrastructureand Key Assets chapter for additional discussion.)

National VisionThe United States will work with traditionalallies and new friends to win the war onterrorism. We will sustain a high level of inter-national commitment to fighting terrorismthrough global and regional organizations (suchas the United Nations and the Organization ofAmerican States), major international fora(such as the G-8), specialized organizations(such as the World Health Organization, theInternational Civil Aviation Organization, andthe International Maritime Organization),multilateral and bilateral initiatives, and, whereneeded, new coordination mechanisms. We willwork with our neighbors and key tradingpartners to create systems that allow us to verifythe legitimacy of people and goods entering ourcountry. We will increase information sharingbetween law enforcement, intelligence, andmilitary organizations to improve our collectiveability to counter terrorists everywhere,including in America. We will increase inter-national cooperation on scientific andtechnological research designed to help prevent,protect against, and respond to terrorist threatsand attacks. We will work with our partners toprepare to support one another in the wake ofany attack. As we implement this Strategy wewill be sensitive to treaty and other obligations;however, where we find existing internationalarrangements to be inadequate or counterpro-ductive to our efforts to secure our homeland, wewill work to refashion them. Throughout theseefforts, we will harmonize our homelandsecurity policies with our other national securitygoals.


Amplify international cooperation on homeland securityscience and technology. In addition to our nationalprogram to develop and deploy new technologies andnew uses of technology against terrorism, the U.S.government will encourage and support comple-mentary international scientific initiatives. Forexample, the United States will seek to establishcooperative endeavors with Canada and Mexico forcross-border efforts to detect biological weaponsattacks; eventually, these programs may be expanded toinclude other friendly nations. In conjunction with theDepartment of State and the intelligence community,the Department of Homeland Security would alsowork with certain close allies to improve techniquesand develop new technologies for detecting hostileintent.

Improve cooperation in response to attacks. The UnitedStates will continue to work with other nations toensure smooth provision of international aid in theaftermath of terrorist attacks. The Department ofState, working closely with the Department ofHomeland Security and others, will lead these efforts.The United States will expand its exercise and trainingactivities with Canada in 2003 as part of the SmartBorder Initiative. It will establish similar activities withMexico. It will also initiate bilateral and multilateralprograms to plan for efficient burden sharing betweenfriendly nations in the case of attack. For example, theUnited States will work with its NATO allies tooutline the organization’s role in preventing andresponding to terrorist attacks on member states.

Review obligations to international treaties and law. TheUnited States is party to all 12 counterterrorism instru-ments adopted by the United Nations in recent years.These treaties form an important part of our multi-lateral counterterrorism strategy. We are activelyencouraging all United Nations members to join andfully implement all 12 conventions.

On a bilateral basis, the United States will negotiateand renegotiate, if appropriate, mutual legal assistancetreaties (MLATs) based on U.S. law enforcementpriorities that will help advance homeland security.MLATs allow the exchange of evidence in a formusable at trial. MLATs also enable law enforcement toobtain information abroad in connection with theinvestigation, prosecution, and prevention of offensesin a manner that is more speedy, efficient, and reliablethan the traditional judicial letters rogatory process.


The national effort to enhance homeland security willyield tremendous benefits and entail substantialfinancial and other costs. The benefit will be areduction in both the risk of future terrorist events andtheir consequences should an attack occur. Thefinancial costs are the amount of money, manpower,equipment, and innovative potential that must bedevoted to homeland security—resources which thencannot be used for goods, services, and otherproductive investments. Americans also incursubstantial costs in longer delays at airport securitycheckpoints and restrictions on some individualfreedoms. While these costs are often difficult tomeasure quantitatively, they are no less real andburdensome to Americans. We must measure andbalance both benefits and costs to determine thecorrect level of homeland security efforts. This chapterdescribes the broad principles that should guide theallocation of financial resources for homeland security,

help determine who should bear the financial burdens,and help measure the costs.

The United States spends roughly $100 billion per year on homeland security. This includes the services of federal, state, and local law enforcement andemergency services but excludes most spending for thearmed forces. The cost is great, and we will strive tominimize the sacrifices asked of Americans, but as aNation we will spend whatever is necessary to securethe homeland.

Principles to Guide Allocation ofHomeland Security Costs

Balancing benefits and costs. Decisions on homelandsecurity activities and spending must achieve twooverarching goals: to devote the right amount of scarceresources to homeland security and to spend theseresources on the right activities. To achieve the first


Costs of Homeland Security

goal, we must carefully weigh the benefit of eachhomeland security endeavor and only allocate resourceswhere the benefit of reducing risk is worth the amount ofadditional cost. One implication of this standard is that itis not practical or possible to eliminate all risks. Therewill always be some level of risk that cannot be mitigatedwithout the use of unacceptably large expenditures.

The second goal for homeland security spending is toprioritize those activities that most require additionalresources. Given the resources available, we shouldstrive to maximize security by distributing additionalfunding in such a way that the value added is approxi-mately equal in each sector. Because some activitiesmight achieve substantial benefits at low cost, whileothers result in minimal gain at a high price, resourcesshould be shifted to their most “productive” use. Theseshifts should continue until the additional value of riskmitigation per dollar is equalized.

The role for government. The government should onlyaddress those activities that the market does notadequately provide—for example, national defense orborder security. Our government provides these serviceson behalf of American citizens for our collective benefit.Many homeland security activities—such as a nationalincident management system—require governmentaction.

For other aspects of homeland security, sufficientincentives exist in the private market to supplyprotection. In these cases, we should rely on the privatesector. For example, owners of large buildings andhosts of large events may have a sufficient incentive toprovide security for those venues.

Federalism and cost sharing of expenditures. Thehomeland security mission requires a national effort—federal, state, and local governments partneringtogether and with the private sector. It is critical thatwe identify tasks that are most efficiently accomplishedat the federal versus local or regional level. A centralcriterion is the degree to which the activity is nationalor sub-national in scope. Many homeland securityactivities, such as intelligence gathering, bordersecurity, and policy coordination, are best accomplishedat the federal level. In other circumstances, such aswith first responder capabilities, state and local govern-ments are better positioned to handle theseresponsibilities.

At a time when budgets are tight across the country,the federal government will play a key role in securingthe homeland. It is critical, however, that all levels ofgovernment work cooperatively to shoulder the costs ofhomeland security. The federal government will leadthe effort, but state and local governments can andshould play important roles. As a result, Americans will

gain from these homeland security efforts every daywith improvements in public services such as lawenforcement and public health systems.

Regulations. Traditionally, governments have usedregulations in addition to direct expenditures to meettheir objectives. Rigid regulation, however, has provento be an inefficient means of meeting objectives. To theextent that homeland security objectives are to be metby regulations for state and local governments orprivate-sector firms, the federal government willprovide an incentive to minimize costs and rewardinnovation by permitting maximum flexibility inmeeting those objectives. The federal government willfocus on specifying outcomes rather than the means bywhich they will be achieved.

The Costs of Homeland Security

Homeland security requirements take real resources(such as labor, capital, technology, and managerialexpertise) away from valued economic activities (suchas household consumption or business investment). Insome cases, homeland security spending also reducesresources that could be used to purchase other types ofpublic safety, such as cleaner water or safer highways.In other cases, the investment in homeland securitywill result in public safety benefits; water testing todetect chemical or biological agents, for example, willimprove overall water quality. The sum of theseeconomic resources shifted toward homeland security isthe fundamental economic cost of the endeavor.

Direct federal expenditure. In recent years, the federalgovernment has allocated considerable resources tohomeland security. Including supplemental funding,the federal budget allocated $17 billion to homelandsecurity in Fiscal Year 2001. This amount increased to$29 billion in Fiscal Year 2002. In Fiscal Year 2003,the President budgeted $38 billion for homelandsecurity activities. These budget allocations must beviewed as down payments to cover the most immediatesecurity vulnerabilities.

The President has noted that terrorism is the greatestnational security threat since World War II. Minimizingthe overall economic impact of fighting the war onterrorism will require that increased budgetary spendingon homeland security occur within the context of overallfiscal spending restraint. It is important to reprioritizespending to meet our homeland security needs, and notsimply to permit unchecked overall growth in federaloutlays. Over the long term, government spending isbalanced by either higher taxes or inflation, both ofwhich hinder the rapid economic growth that serves asthe ultimate source of resources for families’ standards ofliving and national needs.


If we do not reprioritize spending, then the costs ofhomeland security will be even greater because theseexpenditures do not represent the full cost of homelandsecurity to the economy. As noted earlier, the $38billion in taxes needed to finance the Fiscal Year 2003homeland security budget request will not be availablefor other uses such as personal consumption andprivate sector investments. The Council of EconomicAdvisers estimates that of the $38 billion, $24 billionwould come from reduced consumption, while $14billion would take the form of reduced private sectorinvestment. The cost is even higher, however, becauseof the economic distortions introduced by the taxsystem. Under any tax system, every dollar collected intaxes results in distortions that reduce the efficiency ofthe economy and lower national income. Thiseconomic distortion (referred to as deadweight loss) isroughly $0.27 per dollar of tax revenue.

State and local governments. It is difficult to measurethe financial contributions to homeland security madeby state and local governments. It is evident, however,that state and local governments are spending moneyor planning to spend money which was never expectedto be spent on defending and protecting theirrespective communities. These costs include protectingcritical infrastructure, improving technologies for infor-mation sharing and communications, and buildingemergency response capacity. At this time, theNational Governors’ Association estimates thatadditional homeland security-related costs, incurredsince September 11 and through the end of 2002, willreach approximately $6 billion. Similarly, the U.S.Conference of Mayors has estimated the costs incurredby cities during this time period to be $2.6 billion.

Private expenditures. Private businesses and individualshave incentives to take on expenditures to protectproperty and reduce liability that contribute tohomeland security. Owners of buildings have a signif-icant stake in ensuring that their buildings arestructurally sound, properly maintained, and safe foroccupants. To accomplish this, they often takeprotective measures that include employee educationand training, securing services, infrastructureassessment, technology, and communication enhance-ments. Properly functioning insurance markets shouldprovide the private sector with economic incentives tomitigate risks.

Costs of homeland security in the private sector areborne by both the owners of businesses in the form oflower income and their customers in the form ofhigher prices. The Council of Economic Advisersestimates that private business spent approximately $55 billion per year on private security before theSeptember 11 attacks. As a result of the attacks, their

annual costs of fighting terrorism may increase by 50to 100 percent. Increases in the cost of insurancepremiums have been more dramatic.

Economic Recovery

Additional homeland security costs would be incurredin the event of a terrorist attack. The economicresponse and recovery efforts would involve fourcentral activities.

Local economic recovery. The federal government isdeveloping a comprehensive and coordinated economicrecovery plan. The plan will improve federal support tostate and local governments for incidents thatoverwhelm state, local, and private-sector resources.This approach will help develop a better planned andmore flexible federal response, support stronger localplanning for economic recovery, lessen federal demandson state and local officials at the time of an incident,and provide federal assistance to state and local bodies,when appropriate, in a more user-friendly and effectiveway.

Restoration of financial markets. In the aftermath of anattack, the Department of Homeland Security, theDepartment of the Treasury, and the White Housewould oversee efforts to: effectively monitor financialmarket status; identify and assess impacts on themarkets from direct or indirect attacks; develop appro-priate responses to such impacts; inform senior federalofficials of the nature of the incident and the appro-priate response options; and implement responsedecisions through appropriate federal, state, local, andprivate sector entities.

National economic recovery. A major terrorist incidentcan have economic impacts beyond the immediatearea. Therefore, the Departments of HomelandSecurity, Treasury, and State and the White Housewould identify the policies, procedures and participantsnecessary to assess economic consequences in a coordi-nated and effective manner. This group will developrecommendations to senior federal officials on theappropriate federal response. The group will ensurethat government actions after an attack restore criticalinfrastructure, services, and our way of life as quickly aspossible and minimize economic disruptions. Thisgroup will also develop effective policies and proce-dures for the implementation of those responsesthrough appropriate federal, state, local, and privatesector bodies.

Economic impact data. Sound information about thenature and extent of the economic impact of anincident is important in developing an effectiveresponse. The Department of Commerce’s Economics


and Statistics Administration and other federalagencies are developing an economic monitoring,assessment, and reporting protocol to provide credibleinformation concerning the economic status of the areabefore an incident, assess the direct economic impactsof the incident, and estimate the total economic conse-quences in a more timely and accurate manner. Thisprotocol will help develop more accurate national,regional, and local economic impact data. This infor-mation will be provided to appropriate governmentofficials to help assess the appropriate response to theeconomic consequences of an incident.


This National Strategy for Homeland Security has set abroad and complex agenda for the United States. TheStrategy has defined many different goals that need tobe met, programs that need to be implemented, andresponsibilities that need to be fulfilled. The principalpurpose of a strategy, however, is to set priorities. It isparticularly important for government institutions toset priorities explicitly, since these institutions generallylack a clear measure of how successfully they providevalue to the citizenry.

Setting priorities is important to homeland security intwo distinct respects. First, there is the question of thepriority of homeland security compared to everythingelse the government does or might do. There is astrong consensus that protecting the people fromterrorist attacks of potentially catastrophic proportions

is among the highest, if not the highest, priority anygovernment can have. There will, of course, be vigorousdebate over how to achieve specific homeland securitygoals, who should pay, how much security is enough,and what the responsibilities of different entitiesshould be, but there is little disagreement that securingthe homeland is more important than just about everyother government activity.

Second, there is the more complex question of prior-ities within the homeland security agenda. This pointis absolutely essential in determining how to allocatethe taxpayers’ money in a government budget. ThePresident’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2003, which wasfinalized in the weeks immediately followingSeptember 11 and submitted to Congress in February2002, recognized the need for priorities. It identified


Conclusion:Priorities for the Future

four key areas for extra attention and carefully targetedincreases in federal expenditures:

Support first responders. The President’s 2003 budgetrequest included $3.5 billion to enhance firstresponders’ response capabilities in communities acrossthe Nation. These funds will support states andcommunities as they conduct exercises, purchaseequipment, and train personnel.

Defend against biological terrorism. The 2003 budgetrequest proposed increasing, by $4.5 billion to $5.9billion total, spending on programs that counter thethreat of biological terrorism. Areas of emphasisinclude: improving disease surveillance and responsesystems; increasing the capacity of public-healthsystems to handle outbreaks of contagious diseases;expanding research on vaccines, medicines, anddiagnostic tests; and building up the NationalPharmaceutical Stockpile.

Secure America’s borders. The Administration proposedincreasing spending on border security by $2.2 billionto $11 billion in 2003. These funds will expand thenumber of inspectors at ports of entry; purchaseequipment to increase inspections of containers andcargo; design and test a statutorily required system thatrecords the entry of individuals into the United Statesand their subsequent exit; and improve the CoastGuard’s ability to track maritime activity.

Use information to secure the homeland. The 2003budget proposed an increase in spending of $722million on programs that will use informationtechnology to more effectively share information andintelligence horizontally (between federal agencies) andvertically (between federal, state, and local govern-ments).

These initiatives are the President’s budgetary prioritiesfor Fiscal Year 2003, and will remain important issuesfor the foreseeable future.

There is, however, an additional statutory and institu-tional priority at the present time—namely, theestablishment of the new Department of HomelandSecurity as proposed by the President on June 6, 2002.Congress is considering legislation to implement thePresident’s proposal even as this National Strategy isbeing published. Building a strong, flexible, andefficient Department of Homeland Security is anenormous challenge and a top federal priority.

Assuming Congress passes legislation to implementthe President’s proposal to create the Department ofHomeland Security, the budget will fully reflect thereformed organization of the executive branch forhomeland security. The Fiscal Year 2004 Budget willalso have an integrated and vastly simplified account

structure based on the six critical mission areas definedby the National Strategy.

Indeed, work has already begun on the Fiscal Year2004 budget. At the time this National Strategy waspublished, it is expected that in Fiscal Year 2004 theAdministration will attach priority to the followingitems.

Enhance the analytic capabilities of the FBI (p. 17). Thefirst objective of this strategy is to prevent terroristattacks. The FBI is among the most important federalinstitutions for achieving this objective. The FBI isseeking to enhance its analytic capabilities to supportcounterterrorism investigations and operations, as wellas to enhance the counterterrorism capabilities of othercomponents of the federal government.

Build new capabilities through the Information Analysisand Infrastructure Protection Division of the proposedDepartment of Homeland Security (p. 18). Under thePresident’s proposal, the Department of HomelandSecurity will build on capabilities to comprehensivelyassess the vulnerabilities of our critical infrastructureand key assests, map threats against those vulnerabil-ities, issue timely warnings, and work with federal,state, and local governments and the private sector totake appropriate protective action.

Create “smart borders” (p. 22). We must preventterrorists and the implements of terror from enteringthe United States. At the same time, our economicsecurity depends on the efficient flow of people, goods,and services. We will build a “smart border” thatachieves both of these critical goals. It will featurestrong, advanced risk-management systems, increaseduse of biometric identification information, andpartnerships with the private sector to allow pre-cleared goods and persons to cross borders withoutdelay.

Increase the security of international shipping containers(p. 23). Ensuring the security of the global tradingsystem is essential to our security and world commerce.Some 16 million shipping containers enter the UnitedStates each year; roughly two-thirds come from 20“mega” seaports. The United States will work with itstrade partners to increase security in these ports,establish greater controls over containers, pre-screencontainers before they arrive in America, and developtechnologies to track in-transit containers.

Recapitalize the U.S. Coast Guard (p. 23). The Presidentis committed to building a strong and effective CoastGuard. The Administration’s Fiscal Year 2004 Budgetproposal will provide resources to acquire the sensors,command-and-control systems, shore-side facilities,boats and cutters, aircraft, and people the Coast Guard


requires to perform all of its missions, includingassuring the safety of Americans at sea, maritimedomain awareness, and fisheries enforcement.

Prevent terrorist use of nuclear weapons through bettersensors and procedures (p. 38). The federal governmentwill support research efforts for improved technologiesto detect nuclear materials and weapons. In particular,the Department of Homeland Security would developand deploy new detection systems and inspectionprocedures against the entry of such materials at allmajor ports of entry and throughout our nationaltransportation infrastructure.

Develop broad spectrum vaccines, antimicrobials, andantidotes (p. 39). The Department of HomelandSecurity and the Department of Health and HumanServices would support research efforts to expand theinventory of diagnostics, vaccines, antidotes, and othertherapies that can mitigate the consequences of achemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attack.Protecting a diverse population of all ages and healthconditions requires a coordinated national effort with acomprehensive research and development strategy andinvestment plans. Such efforts will also benefit otherinfectious disease and medical research.

Integrate information sharing across the federalgovernment (p. 56). The federal government willdevelop systems to coordinate the sharing of essentialhomeland security information. The federalgovernment will design and implement an interagency

information architecture that will support efforts tofind, track, and respond to terrorist threats in a waythat improves both the time of response and thequality of decisions.

These items will be the budgetary priorities of thefederal government for the next budget cycle. In theintervening months, the executive branch will preparedetailed implementation plans for these and most otherinitiatives contained within this Strategy. These planswill ensure that the taxpayers’ money is spent only in amanner that achieves specific objectives with clearperformance-based measures of effectiveness.

State and local governments, private industry, andconcerned citizens groups should go through a similarprocess of priority-setting and long-term planning.

* * *

Americans will never forget the murderous events ofSeptember 11, 2001. Our Nation suffered great harmon that terrible morning. The American people haveresponded magnificently with courage and compassion,strength and resolve. There should be no doubt that wewill succeed in weaving an effective and permanentlevel of security into the fabric of a better, safer,stronger America.


APHIS: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

ATSA: Aviation and Transportation Security Act

ATTF: Anti-Terrorism Task Force

CBRN: Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear

CDC: Center for Disease Control

CIA: Central Intelligence Agency

CIAO: Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office

CTC: Counter-Terrorism Center

DCI: Director of Central Intelligence

DHS: Department of Homeland Security(proposed)

DoD: Department of Defense

DoE: Department of Energy

EIS: Epidemic Intelligence Service

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency

FAA: Federal Aviation Administration

FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation

FDA: Food and Drug Administration

FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency

FTTTF: Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force

HAN: Health Alert Network

HHS: Health and Human Services

HSTF: Homeland Security Task Force (proposed)

IIPO: Information Integration Program Office

IMS: Incident Management System

INS: Immigration and Naturalization Service

ITDS: International Trade Data System

JTTF: Joint Terrorism Task Force

MRC: Medical Reserve Corps

MLAT: Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty

NCIC: National Crime Information Center

NCS: National Communication System

NDMS: National Disaster Medical System

NEDSS: National Electronic Disease Surveillance System

NIH: National Institutes of Health

NLETS: National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System

NRC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSA: National Security Agency

NSC: National Security Council

NSDI: National Spatial Data Infrastructure

NWP: Neighborhood Watch Program

OHS: Office of Homeland Security

OMB: Office of Management and Budget

TIPS: Terrorism Information and Preventive Systems

TSA: Transportation Security Administration

TSWG: Technical Support Working Group

VIPS: Volunteers in Police Service

WMD: Weapons of Mass Destruction

WTC: World Trade Center

H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y S T R AT E G Y 71

Acronyms

The American people responded to the attacks ofSeptember 11 with compassion and resolve. Virtuallyevery American participated in one way or another inhelping our Nation recover and grow stronger. Somerushed into burning buildings to save the lives ofcolleagues, friends, and strangers. Others demonstratedtheir solidarity by wearing an American flag on theirlapel. Members of our military flew combat air patrolsover our cities; some fought overseas. Many peopleministered to the injured and comforted the grieving,while others worked in their official capacities—aslegislators, policymakers, investigators, prosecutors, firstresponders, health officials, environmental experts,counselors, and economists—to help America recoverfrom the attacks and confront the terrorist threat.

People in every state, every city, and every governmentagency have contributed to the effort to make Americasafer. Our efforts so far have created the solid foundationon which we continue to build our defenses. While thework to protect Americans and our way of life willcontinue indefinitely, we as a country can be comfortedby our knowledge that the work is well underway.

Highlighted below are a few of the many actions takenby our Nation since September 11.

The Immediate Response to the Attacks

Rescue, recovery, and victim support. The response to theSeptember 11 terrorist attacks began onboard thehijacked planes as passengers did all they could tothwart the terrorists, and continued in the streets ofNew York City, in the rubble of the Pentagon, and inthe burning Pennsylvania countryside. Colleaguesassisted each other in escaping from the collapsingbuildings. Firefighters, police officers, emergencymedical professionals, and public works employeesresponded immediately to the crime scenes, whilehospitals treated the many victims. The recovery andclean-up efforts involved significant contributions fromall sectors of our society—federal, state, and localagencies and entities, the private sector, volunteerorganizations, as well as individual citizens.

The work to help the recovery effort and to assist thevictims of September 11 did not stop at Ground Zero.It continued as Congress and the President worked to

appropriate $40 billion in emergency funds tocompensate victims, aid the reconstruction efforts inNew York and Virginia, and strengthen our fightagainst terrorism. In addition, the American responsepersisted in the board rooms of private companies andcharitable organizations as various sectors worked toraise money and donate supplies to aid the victims.

The investigation. In response to September 11, theU.S. government initiated the largest criminal investi-gation in our Nation’s history, committing more than4,000 FBI agents and 3,000 support staff to the effort.The investigation has been supported by numerousfederal agencies, as well as state and local lawenforcement.

While the investigation has been led by lawenforcement, significant contributions have come frommany sectors. For example, Congress and the President,by passing and signing into law the USA PATRIOTAct, provided law enforcement with the tools necessaryto bring the guilty to justice. In addition, the interna-tional community joined us in the global war onterrorism, enabling law enforcement to investigategroups and terrorist cells throughout the world. TheAmerican population helped as well, by providing lawenforcement with important investigatory leads, callingthe Justice Department’s hotline to report suspectedterrorist activity, and logging onto the web site createdso that people could share information.

After September 11, the federal government committednot only to rooting out terrorists wherever they are, butalso to cutting off their sources of financial support. Tosupport this effort, and to identify and eliminatefunding sources of suspected terrorists, the TreasuryDepartment launched Operation Green Quest at theU.S. Customs Service and the FBI established theFinancial Review Group. Within weeks of September11, the President issued an Executive Order to starveterrorists of their support funds. To date, the UnitedStates has blocked $34.3 million in assets of suspectedterrorist organizations and terrorist supporters/finan-ciers. The global effort of more than 160 countries hasresulted in the freezing of over $112 million in assets.

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y A-1

Appendix: September 11 and America’s Response

The Response to the Terrorist Threat

Federal, state, and local governments and the privatesector must coordinate on issues affecting homelandsecurity in order to succeed in the fight againstterrorism.

Officials across all levels of government have beenworking together on homeland security related taskforces to meet this goal. In addition, each state nowhas a designated individual, charged by the respectiveGovernor, to perform homeland security responsibil-ities.

The private sector has also worked closely with thegovernment and with one another to better secure thehomeland. For example, the Business Roundtable, anorganization of Fortune 100 companies, establishedCEO COM Link, the Critical Emergency OperationsCommunication Link, to quickly alert and mobilizeAmerica’s business leaders in times of national crisis ora natural disaster. Working closely with governmentofficials, the Grocery Manufacturers of Americalaunched Project Vigilance—a program that encom-passes a task force on food security, “twenty-four,seven” databases, and other food industry actions tohelp assure the security of food and consumerproducts.

Supporting first responders. The members of theNation’s emergency services community are our firstresponders to terrorist attacks. Americans have done agreat deal since September 11 to support ourfirefighters, police officers, emergency personnel, andother responders. In the wake of the attacks, manycities reviewed and made changes to their emergencyplans. Congress appropriated $650 million for federalgrant assistance to states and localities for improvingfirst responder terrorism preparedness. With this vitalfederal assistance, first responders have received andwill continue to receive extensive training (including inweapons of mass destruction response) and necessaryequipment.

Americans in their private capacities have joined insupporting our emergency personnel as well. ThePresident created USA Freedom Corps to strengthenand expand opportunities to protect our homeland, aswell as to support our communities and to extendAmerican compassion around the world. As part ofthis initiative, Citizen Corps offers a wide range ofvolunteer opportunities to support first respondersthrough its five national level programs. To name justone example, the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency’s Community Emergency Response Teamprogram—part of Citizen Corps—trains volunteers tohelp support first responders during an incident. (See

Organizing for a Secure Homeland chapter for additionaldiscussion and description of Citizen Corps programs.)

Critical infrastructure and key asset protection. OurNation’s efforts to protect against the terrorist threathave included increased security of our country’scritical infrastructure and key assets. This increasedsecurity has taken many forms—heightened patrols,threat assessments, access restrictions—and has beenundertaken by many agencies at all levels ofgovernment. For example, the Department of Defensehas flown more than 22,000 combat air patrol missionswithin the United States since September 11 to protectour critical infrastructure from air attacks. The NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC) placed nuclear powerplants across the Nation on the highest level of securityafter the attacks, while the U.S. Customs Serviceplaced the Nation’s air, land, and sea ports of entry onAlert 1 Level, ensuring more thorough examinations ofpeople and cargo. In addition, the NRC initiated atop-to-bottom security review of nuclear power plants,including an assessment of plant vulnerability toaircraft.

Yet the federal government has not acted alone inprotecting our physical infrastructure. States and citieshave also increased security at critical sites. InJonesboro, Arkansas, the police department hasconcentrated security into areas that traditionally didnot receive much attention, directing patrols forcommunication towers, water storage and treatmentfacilities. Local law enforcement coordinated with theCoast Guard to create a safety zone around IndianPoint Energy Center, located 50 miles from New YorkCity. Utah, with federal assistance, instituted flight andsatellite surveillance over reservoirs. In Fresno,California, the police department staffed an anti-terrorism unit that conducted a survey of city buildingsand security readiness. In Tampa, Florida, marine, air,and uniform patrols have been instituted at animportant port, while in Wellington, Florida, newsecurity measures have been installed in a watertreatment plant.

The private sector, which owns the majority of ourinfrastructure, has also increased its security of its facil-ities. For example, the National Food ProcessorsAssociation formed the Alliance for Food Securityalmost immediately after September 11 to betterprotect the food supply from intentional contami-nation. The American Chemistry Council’s emergencycommunication center joined with the FBI’sHazardous Materials Response Team shortly afterSeptember 11, augmenting and improving their infor-mation-sharing and coordination activities.

In addition to our physical infrastructure, all levels ofgovernment, as well as private entities, have taken

A-2 T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

measures to increase the security of our criticalcomputer and information infrastructure. ThePresident’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board hasspurred research into potential methods to protect vitalcommunications networks. The U.S. governmentestablished stronger encryption standards to safeguardsensitive, non-classified electronic information. Thestate legislatures of Louisiana, Michigan, and theCommonwealth of Virginia have passed cyber-terrorism laws.

The attacks on the World Trade Center and on thePentagon starkly illustrated the need to protect ourtransportation systems, among other critical infrastruc-tures, from acts of terrorism. Accordingly, more than7,000 members of the National Guard, and laterthousands of state and local law enforcementpersonnel, were deployed to help secure the Nation’sairports. Congress passed the Aviation andTransportation Security Act, which established a seriesof challenging milestones to achieve a secure air travelsystem. The Federal Air Marshals program wassubstantially expanded and new security procedureshave been implemented at the Nation’s 429 commercialairports.

Cities and states have also committed energy andresources to protecting our means of transportation,and across the country, local law enforcement and stategovernments have dedicated more hours, money, andpersonnel to securing modes of transportation. Forexample, in West Virginia state employees patrolledthe state’s highways, bridges, and waterways, while theCity of Chicago increased security at its bridges andairports. States, including New Jersey, North Carolina,and Virginia, have also taken measures to increasesecurity relating to driver’s licenses by changing therequirements and identifying information necessary toobtain a license.

Protecting large events. The September 11 attackscreated public concern regarding the safety of largespectator events, to which law enforcement at everylevel has responded with careful planning and coordi-nation of security arrangements. The February 2002Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah, werea major test of America’s ability to protect a largepublic event. Security at Salt Lake City was morethorough, more visible, better planned, and bettercoordinated than at any Olympics in history. Thedesignation of the Olympics as a National SpecialSecurity Event brought federal support to the Gamesin the areas of venue security, air space security,training, communications, and credentialing.Throughout the Games, federal, state, and localagencies shared intelligence to ensure a high level ofreadiness, and dozens of state and local law

enforcement agencies took part in security planning,contributing valuable resources and invaluableexpertise.

National biodefense. On the heels of the tragedies ofSeptember 11, we found ourselves under attack onceagain – this time from the dissemination of anthraxthrough the mail. These attacks illustrated the need tomake prevention of and protection against bioterroristattacks a top priority. Our country has already takenseveral important steps, including the procurement of200 million doses of smallpox vaccine, and theexpansion of the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile.(See Emergency Preparedness and Response chapter foradditional discussion.)

While the federal government plays a critical role inincreasing our defenses against bioterrorist attacks,state and local governments are integral to preventionas well, and they have taken action. Michigan spent$2.6 million for epidemiologists, microbiologists, andlab personnel to increase the state’s ability to respondto bioterrorist attacks. The City of Baltimore created aweb-based surveillance system to track the appearanceof common symptoms in uncommon amounts thatmight indicate a biological attack.

Private industry has engaged as well. For example, fourmajor pharmaceutical companies, using informationfrom the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention,have begun to distribute reference guides to doctorsand caregivers on how to detect and treat anthrax inpatients.

Protecting our borders. Since September 11, we havetaken important measures to protect our borders moreeffectively. The U.S. Coast Guard deployed additionalpersonnel to protect our ports of entry immediatelyafter the attacks, while the Immigration andNaturalization Service and the National Guardaugmented their presence on our northern andsouthern borders. In addition, the Foreign TerroristTracking Task Force has been working to bar terroristsor terrorist-supporting aliens from the United Statesand to track down and deport any who have illegallyentered the United States.

We need the help of our closest neighbors—Mexicoand Canada—to fully protect our borders. InDecember 2001, the United States and Canadaconcluded a “Smart Border Declaration,” whichcommitted our governments to working together tobuild a secure border that operates efficiently andeffectively under all circumstances. The U.S. andCanadian governments have already made great stridesin realizing that vision, aggressively implementing adetailed 30-point action plan of specific measures to

T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y A-3

A-4 T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

securely facilitate the free flow of people andcommerce.

In a similar fashion, the United States and Mexicosigned the “U.S. – Mexico Border Partnership” decla-ration in March 2002. Currently, border managementagencies from both the United States and Mexico areworking together to implement a 22-point action planof specific measures to ensure the secure flow of legalgoods and people, and to build adequate border-management systems and infrastructure.

Protecting our borders involves not only knowing whoenters our country, but also what comes across ourborders. To protect the security of cargo entering theUnited States, the U.S. Customs Service launchedCustoms-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. Thisjoint initiative of the government and the private sectorrequires importers to take steps that will ensure tightersecurity of cargo, and, in return, the government agreesto give the more secure, low risk cargo the “fast lane”through our ports of entry.

Communicating with and engaging the public. Theattacks of September 11 filled America with appre-hension. Government representatives have worked toalleviate the anxiety in the months that have followedthrough responsible communication with the public.The government faces a balancing act on this front: thepublic’s need and right to know about terrorist threatsversus the risk of raising alarm unnecessarily or fruit-

lessly by relaying all information including ambiguousor non-specific threat information. In response to thispressing need for clear communication, and recog-nizing that an informed public is a key asset, thePresident created the Homeland Security AdvisorySystem to provide the public with the necessary infor-mation and awareness regarding terrorist threats andprotective action.

Our citizens also responded to September 11 with adedication to overcome the terrorist threat at home.The President created the Citizen Corps initiative tooffer Americans the opportunity to volunteer toprotect their communities through emergency responseand preparation. Public response has been impressive.More than 100 communities, ranging from majormetropolitan areas to small suburban and ruralcommunities, have formed Citizen Corps Councils tocoordinate local volunteer activities to support firstresponders. More than 38,000 individuals from all 50states have signed up online to participate in one ormore of the federally supported Citizen Corpsprograms, including Volunteers in Police Service,Neighborhood Watch and Operation TIPS, sponsoredby the Department of Justice; the Medical ReserveCorps, sponsored by the Department of Health andHuman Services; and the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency’s Community EmergencyResponse Team training.

xiv T H E N AT I O N A L S T R AT E G Y F O R H O M E L A N D S E C U R I T Y

homeland security - MIT OpenCourseWare · Since September 11, 2001, our Nation has taken great...

Documents

Transcript of homeland security - MIT OpenCourseWare · Since September 11, 2001, our Nation has taken great...