Reorganizing for National Security and Homeland Security

Abstract

This article considers the post–September 11 challenges faced by the U.S. national security machinery and analyzes the relationship between the new threat environment, the United States’s role in the world, and decision–making structure. Homeland security is defined as a subset of national security. The threat of foreign terrorist organizations acting on U.S. soil should be seen in the political context of the pursuit of U.S. national interests in an often anarchic world. Two models for homeland security organizational structures are considered: a departmental model and an interagency model. The interagency model, embodied in the Homeland Security Council, is a better fit given the nature of the threat, the crucial need for coordination, and the realities of governmental decision making. The organizational challenges that may complicate the government’s preparations, decisions, and implementation of a major homeland defense mission stem from three rivalries: executive–legislative, cabinet–staff, and Homeland Security Council–National Security Council.

Development of the Croatian National Security Strategy in the Hybrid Threats Context

“…These events changed the United States' calculus of national interests and led to the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security (Newmann 2002). The changed post-Cold War security environment, with new threats and challenges, necessitated an additional focus on internal security, consequently involving the crisis management concept.…”

Mandates to Coordinate: The Case of the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act

“…For instance, institutional scholars have found that implementing agents often create layers of middle management or restructure or develop partnerships; however, such acts are often largely ceremonial and have little substantive effect on the organization (Blum, Fields, & Goodman, 1994;Edelman, 1977;Frumkin & Galaskiewicz, 2004;Meyer & Rowan, 1977;Meyer, Scott, & Strang, 1987;Meyer, Scott, Strang, & Creighton, 1988;Scott, 2007). Coordination, in particular, is often found to be the goal of vast organizational restructuring and the development of new intergovernmental bodies, such as councils or joint agency task forces (Agranoff, 1990;Agranoff & Lindsay, 1983;Jennings & Krane, 1994;Kettl, 2003;Newmann, 2002;Rabe, 1996;Radin, 1992;Thomas, 1997;Wise, 2002). Again, research has demonstrated that many of these efforts are hollow or symbolic (Andrews & Boyne, 2012;March & Olsen, 1983;Moseley & James, 2008;Pollitt, 2007;Rabe, 1996;Schram, 1992;Thomas, 1997;Wilson, 1989).…”

The Impact of 9/11 on Information Policy in the United States: A Current Perspective on Homeland Security and Emergency Management

“…Particularly in information policy, the 9/11 Commission Report stated that the primary problem was the asymmetry of information among relevant organizations with shared risks and responsibilities (Comfort, 2005). Therefore, planned coordination under an agency model does not arrange federal, state, and local organizations into a set hierarchy, because strategic goals of organizations and boundary settings of organizations are reshaped by environmental and administrative jurisdictions (Newmann, 2002).…”

“…The main goal that must be achieved is the effective integration of federal, state, and local governments surrounding the first response (Wise & Nader, 2002). The lack of a single authority in decision making, and control of the information under the Presidential office, merely intensifies the gaining of control over the policies (Newmann, 2002). For instance, the paramount flaw with the previous system (such as what appeared in the Anthrax outbreak crisis of 2001) is that there is no single authority to assist state and local officials during emergency situations (Wise & Nader, 2002).…”

“…The authority over homeland security issues would also enable the U.S. President to take control over the executive branch (Newmann, 2002). The top executive branch secures the control of homeland security plans and implements them via statutes and federal budget allowances.…”