Skip to comments.Hart/Rudman -- 21st Century Commission Recommends New Anti-Terror Cabinet Agency
Posted on 06/06/2002 7:15:17 PM PDT by Pete
08:00CST - 02 Feb 2001
Hart/Rudman -- 21st Century Commission Recommends New Anti-Terror Cabinet Agency
A bipartisan panel led by former US senators Warren B. Rudman and Gary Hart on Wednesday called for the creation of a Cabinet-level agency to assume responsibility for defending the United States against the increasing likelihood of terrorist attacks in the country. The commission making the recommendation included high-ranking military and former Cabinet secretaries. Their report warned bluntly that terrorists probably will attack the US with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons at some point within the next 25 years.
The commission proposed a complete redesign of the National Guard to provide the proposed new "Homeland Security Agency" with U.S.-based troops to combat those who threaten a nation that for more than two centuries was isolated from attack by two oceans. The panel outlined a far-reaching reorganization of the Pentagon, State Department, National Security Council and other agencies, saying that they have become bloated and unfocused. The report even urged Congress to streamline its own committee structure to keep interference in national security matters at a minimum.
The commission acknowledged that implementing the recommendations would be difficult. Congress would have to pass legislation authorizing the changes. If all of the recommendations were to become law, it would mark the most sweeping renovation of US defense and foreign policy operations since approval of the landmark National Security Act of 1947. Like that measure, which refocused World War II-era agencies on the challenges of the Cold War, the commission's plan is intended to ready the nation for starkly different threats in a new century.
The panel, in what many are calling a radical departure from "conventional wisdom," recommended folding the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Customs Service, Border Patrol and Coast Guard into the new "Homeland Security Agency." It said that the National Guard should be "reorganized, properly trained and adequately equipped" to cope with natural disasters and attacks on U.S. targets by weapons of mass destruction. The commission said that the National Guard should be relieved of the responsibility of participating in overseas deployments and concentrate on security at home.
The report said: "The combination of unconventional weapons proliferation with the persistence of international terrorism will end the relative invulnerability of the US homeland to catastrophic attack. A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century. The risk is not only death and destruction but also a demoralization that could undermine US global leadership. In the face of this threat, our nation has no coherent or integrated governmental structures."
US armed forces now are organized and trained to have the capability to fight two major overseas wars at the same time, a contingency the commission called "very remote." The report recommended abandoning the two-war strategy to permit the Pentagon to prepare for situations like the recent wars in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, which it characterized as far more likely. The panel said that both the State Department and the Pentagon "need substantial bureaucratic remodeling."
Read the entire report:
"Roadmap For National Security; Imperative For Change"
The Phase III Report of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century
Here is a link to the Commission's homepage. http://www.nssg.gov. I believe the Cabinet level position is recommended in the third report.
Here is a link to the National Homeland Security Agency Act that was introduced in the House on March 21, 2001.
Also, some of you might find my recent post on the Commission of interest. It is here. Post #52 (second one down).
Personally, I think it is worthwhile to find out where the idea for a Homeland Security Cabinet position came from and to consider the reasons why. Especially given the fact that such a Cabinet level position was the intent long before 9/11.
But, hey, that's just me.
Just knowing that Hart and Rudman are at the center of it tells me a lot of what I already want to know.
The earliest use of the term "homeland security" that I was able to find is from the 2nd report from the US Commission on National Security/21 Century, which was published on April 15, 2000. While this is the first use of "homeland security" I could find, it should be noted that the first phase report, issued in September 1999, frequently refers to "homeland defense" in a consistent context. Now, while the term "homeland defense" has been used for quite some time, historically when referring to the Soviet nuclear threat, the first time I have been able to find it used in our current context is from a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Roundtable titled "Terrorism and Homeland Defense" from April 12, 1999. Here is a link
For those of you who are wondering what the CFR has to do with this, I point you to a previous post of mine, here (#52 - second one down). Also, I have found poking around the CFR webpage to be helpful when considering how we got to where we are today in terms of "homeland security".
Here is the link: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/security/has308020.000/has308020_0f.htm
This is a good if not somewhat disturbing read. Especially the discussion of the second amendment and the suggestion that the National Guard can be used to assist govenor's with "internal problems" - whatever those are.
The testimony by Killebrew also lays the ground work for combining all the security functions into a single Cabinet level position.
BTT from 20 years ago...
Actually, the term was used in the January 31, 2001 report issued by the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century. This was the the last of a series of three reports issued by this group over a period of two years. In this final report they recommend the creation of a “National Homeland Security Agency”. In fact, after September 11, it was this group’s work that was used as a model for the mechanisms that were set up. A copy of the report can be found here: http://www.cfr.org/Public/media/attack_links.html
Now, some of you reading this may have noticed that the URL above is from the Council on Foreign Relations. Interestly enough, the commission that issued the report was first suggested by Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, both CFR members, and implemented by Bill Cohen, also a CFR member. The two chairs, Rudman and Hart, are (yes, you guessed it) CFR members. As if that is not enough, there were ten commissioners and, here it comes, each and everyone is a CFR member. So, what you have is a situation where are new National Security policy (including the Patriot Act) is basically a product of the Council on Foreign Relations. You may be saying at this point, “So what? That is tinfoil hat stuff.” Maybe, maybe not. Might be worth checking out, though, given their influence.
One more thing: Rice, Powell and Cheney are also CFR members. In fact, every Secretary of State since WWII has been a member of CFR.
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.