Posted on 03/23/2005 7:32:49 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen
Interview Paul McHale, US Assistant Secretary Of Defense For Homeland Defense
By , JDW Staff Reporter, Washington, DC
The office of Paul McHale, who was appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense in February 2003, has just completed a strategy for domestic defence, which will be briefed to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the coming weeks. There is about $9.5 billion earmarked for homeland defence in the US Department of Defense (DoD) budget for next year.
At the core of the new strategy is the belief that, even in 'homeland' defence, it is essential to fight as far from US borders as possible, McHale says. "We don't believe the earlier language that has been used to describe homeland defence as the 'home game', or power projection as the 'away game', is really the right way to view the inseparable integration of homeland defence into a global effort targeting transnational terrorists.
"Immediately after 11 September, for reasons that were understandable at the time, we tended to focus our defences on close-in capabilities. We all spoke in terms of better port security. We envisioned a more comprehensive approach to domestic critical infrastructure protection," he says.
Now, by contrast, the DoD is focusing on a broader notion of national defence. "As we began to explore the strategy ... we realised that to defend the hilltop at the point of your concertina wire is a defence that is doomed to failure because of its last-minute capabilities," he notes. "We should see homeland defence not as a distinct and separate requirement but rather as an integrated element of a global strategy, carefully designed to defeat not only hostile nation states but ... transnational terrorist organisations prepared to attack the US in unconventional ways."
The US developed a sophisticated air-defence system under the North American Aerospace Defense Command during the Cold War. The Ballistic Missile Defense System, which was declared operational last year, provides defence against intercontinental missiles. However, the US still remains vulnerable to short-range missiles or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) launched from ships off the US coast, McHale says, noting that it requires air-defence capabilities analogous to those that US bases overseas have. In addition, the combat air patrols over US airspace that have been conducted since the attacks of 2001 will continue indefinitely, McHale says.
Although an enemy ground attack on the US is considered unlikely, the Quick Reaction Forces (QRF) and Rapid Reaction Forces (RRF) that were established after 11 September are adequate for the threat, McHale says. "I would anticipate that well into the foreseeable future there will be a requirement for a QRF capability quite similar to what we have today. The changes will be in better training, more flexible doctrine specifically oriented toward terrorist threat and non-lethal capabilities," he says.
US territory is at greatest threat from the sea, McHale notes. The most worrying scenario is that terrorists could smuggle a nuclear bomb or similar device into a US port using a commercial ship. In the short term, Washington wants to increase its monitoring of ships en route to the US, with US Navy or Coast Guard personnel or other US officials conducting occasional searches of ships using hand-held radiation detectors, McHale says.
"We have multilateral and bilateral agreements with many countries; we have domestic authorities with respect to counter-narcotics; there are traditional principles of self defence that are embedded in international law. It may be that we need to review those authorities, consolidate them and codify them in a more effective manner. [However] I personally believe that it is not an unreasonable requirement that before a ship enters any nation's port [it should] be subject to a properly regulated, professionally conducted inspection to determine the possible presence of a weapon of mass destruction."
In the future, the US wants to be able to detect radiation from greater distances, he says. "It is not at all inconceivable that within the next decade we could have [weapons of mass destruction] sensor packages that could be mounted on aircraft, including UAVs, in order to approach and, from a distance, detect aboard a ship a possible weapon of mass destruction," he says.
McHale also believes that the US needs to look more closely at the requirements for ships in the domestic security mission to determine the number and types that would be appropriate. "In the next 10 years we will take a hard look at what are the design characteristics of ships that are used primarily or frequently for homeland defence missions. Should we have certain sensor packages and capabilities within the assigned crew that will ensure the execution of missions that are closely associated with homeland defence?"
As to whether that would require a new type of ship, McHale says: "I'm not going to prejudge that. However, I do believe there are unique requirements that have not yet been fully incorporated into our existing force structure. It may be that an existing class of ship or a prospective class might be readily adapted to homeland defence missions simply by [installing] a carefully designed package of capabilities specifically intended to support maritime homeland defence," he says.
US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) officials are also looking at the structure of maritime assets needed for their mission and whether what they have is enough. However, Mc Hale says it is unlikely that NORTHCOM - a combatant command dedicated to the continental US, Canada and Mexico - will get dedicated ships and aircraft. "I would not expect ships to be assigned permanently to NORTHCOM. The real key is to assure that NORTHCOM can acquire and exercise command and control over appropriate maritime assets both for purposes of deterrence and for engagement, to include maritime intercept operations."
Interesting. Good to know there are some creative minds working on solutions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.