THE PARADOX OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY PARADIGM – A CASE FOR A SYSTEMS INTEGRATION APPROACH TO ACHIEVE COST-EFFECTIVE SECURITY ENHANCEMENT INVESTMENTS
INTRODUCTION:
In life, CHANGE IS INEVITABLE – sometimes, for the good and sometimes perhaps with not so good consequences. So the theme of this conference, “Security Industry on the Threshold of Changes” is most appropriate as we address the formidable safety and security challenges facing all of us today as well as tomorrow and the rising budget cost implications.
Safety and security, in particular “homeland security,” should be of paramount concern at the national, state/provincial, and local levels, both in the public and private sectors. The geo-political environment today poses a monumental challenge for all countries concerning the safety and security of their citizens, visitors, workers, colleagues, and families.
Program requirements continue to grow exponentially over time as we confront the entire spectrum of security threats, both natural and man-caused. But resource constraints remain a reality for all managers and administrators balancing many urgent needs within budgetary limits. To date since the events of 9-11, multi-billions of dollars have been spent by most countries and the costs for security programs continue to grow. The U.S. alone “has spent more than $280B on the domestic side of the war on terrorism” between 2001 and 2006. U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have exceeded $400B. (1)
With claimants exceeding available resources, a paradigm is needed to better determine the budget priorities and more efficiently allocate constrained budgetary funds. My objective today is to briefly discuss the basis of my thesis that a system of systems concept with a systems integration methodology would be of value to ascertain the high priority needs to achieve cost-effective security program investments, and thus minimizing avoidable waste of our finite resources.
THE CHALLENGES:
Safety and security threats are almost infinite ranging from natural disasters to industrial accidents to terrorist-caused catastrophes. Security threats can be transnational (i.e., not necessarily initiated by the actions of a sovereign nation), overt/covert actions by another nation (i.e., an adversary), or from within a nation itself (i.e., the homegrown terrorists, sleepers or saboteurs).
The availability of emergency resources, (i.e., skilled personnel, critical equipment, essential supplies and a responsive infrastructure) will be dictated by the preparedness investments made prior to the disaster. Thus the response capability for catastrophic disasters will be program dependent and finite at all levels of government as well as in the private sector. Additional investments made at the onset of the catastrophe will not likely provide timely remedies. Organizations will be forced to respond with capabilities on-hand no matter how insufficient or ineffective, e.g., Hurricane Katrina in the United States. The situation becomes even more complicated and challenging when multiple organizations or states are involved in disaster scenarios because of proprietary concerns of private organizations as well as national or state sovereignty issues.
Thus, it should be expected that, in the event of any catastrophe, the demand for resources will far exceed that available unless sufficient and timely investments are effected to provide the desired level of emergency preparedness before the onset of any major disaster.
During times of non-emergencies, even funds required to achieve emergency response capabilities for catastrophes must compete for budget allocations with other high priority program needs. Expenditures to attain or improve safety and security capabilities can require considerable fiscal commitments from constrained budget funds at all levels of organizations. Thus, budget allocations for safety and security needs may be insufficient to fully satisfy all such requirements. Ascertaining the valid needs and priorities is a requisite to attaining any level of security preparedness.
Thus, a key requirement involves a concept and methodology to determine priorities of need and a better basis to allocate scarce budget funds to the most deserving programs. Also, fiscal prudence dictates that wasted resources must be minimized such as when funds are spent to only obtain suboptimal solutions.
COMPLEXITIES OF HOMELAND SECURITY:
The entire spectrum of security threats, your own evolving capabilities, and your vulnerabilities need to be understood within your respective organizations to fully address homeland security challenges of today and tomorrow.
- Normally, the security threats will be the variable factors.
- Your capabilities will be finite and thus fixed at any point in time.
Thus, your true capabilities must be understood in order to accurately measure your ability to respond to a given security threat. Your response options to catastrophes, accidents, and terrorist actions will be limited to whatever capabilities you have actually achieved and not merely a theoretical or planned capability. When the disaster response requirements exceed your available resources and response capabilities, acceptable substitutes must be pre-planned and alternative options understood and promulgated to all concerned.
SECURITY itself is a complex challenge and can be viewed as interactive multiple dimensions. For this study, we can consider five tracks of security categories:
- Track A can be viewed from the local, state/provincial, national and multinational levels.
- Track B can be viewed concerning physical, personnel, operational and organizational security needs.
- Track C can be viewed addressing functional categories (i.e., transportation, communications, finance, etc.), commodities (i.e., food, fuel, clothing, etc.), infrastructure (i.e., transportation network, energy distribution system, etc.), and emergency medical operations and support.
- Track D can be viewed as the interactive relationship between the public and private sectors. A related factor is the role and capabilities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) during response and mitigation of catastrophic events (i.e., International Red Cross, Salvation Army, et al.).
- Track E can be viewed from the spectrum of security threats:
- Natural disasters – earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, tornados, etc.
- Catastrophic industrial accidents – e.g., chemicals production and storage facility as with the American Cyanamid plant in Bhopal, India in 1984, and the accidental release of radioactive materials at the Chernobyl nuclear facility, Ukraine in 1986.
- Terrorist actions – weapons, doctrine and tactics employed and the applications of asymmetric warfare by terrorists. (2) “In the realm of strategy it (asymmetry) means organizing or acting differently than an opponent, either to gain an advantage or because there are no other options.” (3)
A nation/state/organization’s response to any catastrophic event becomes further complicated when the scenario involves multiple entities, e.g., cross border events or when external assistance must be integrated with your own internal response actions. International and inter-state assistance in response to catastrophic events may be indispensable when faced with insurmountable tasks. These mutual aid pacts and cooperative actions should be planned and agreements pre-established to facilitate rapid and coordinated response operations under likely chaotic and dire conditions.
SECURITY SYSTEMS VULNERABILITIES:
Paradoxes, anomalies, and dichotomies:
- Security control and access procedures inconsistently implemented.
- Security procedures and standards differ for air, ocean, rail and bus travel.
- Public sector and private sector variances for security priorities.
- Conflicting guidance from different agencies and organizations.
- Claimants likely to exceed available resources in emergencies.
- WMD misnomer vis-à-vis WMC and WMP.
Examples of suboptimal planning and systems integration lack:
- Incomplete CW threats mitigation actions – e.g., antidotes, detectors, masks, monitors, decontamination, evacuation and treatment of casualties.
- Emergency medical care for mass casualties - without ready access of patients to existing trauma centers.
- Electric power service capability must address all components – generation, distribution, transformers, storage, etc.
- Communications during catastrophic emergencies – incompatible communications among first responders and emergency operations personnel, public announcements with power outages e.g., after an earthquake, etc.
SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMS INTEGRATION:
The genesis of systems analysis began during the cold war period of the early 1960’s. The architect of systems analysis was the then U.S. Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. Systems analysis deals with macro-choices and can be an instrument for cost-effectiveness studies to determine efficient resource allocation decisions. Typically, it is used to make decisions on large and expensive plans and programs involving multiple elements. An underlying value is that it promotes thinking in orderly, systematic ways. (4)
The systems analysis process involves other analytical tools including operations research, computer modeling, measures of effectiveness (MOEs), capabilities based planning (CBP), capabilities based analysis (CBA), and program evaluation tools for resource allocation to identify the cost-effectiveness of alternative options. The purpose of program evaluation is to allocate resources as efficiently as possible. (4)
This intrinsic value of systems analysis, promoting thinking in orderly, systematic ways, plus the application of analytical tools such as program evaluation techniques, serve as the bases for my systems integration concept to solve the “Paradox of the Homeland Security Paradigm.” Systems integration should involve a disciplined assessment of every relevant system component and subsystems for a holistic determination of all high priority capabilities required to achieve and maintain homeland security objectives. It should afford an opportunity for a macro-view of the strategic situation as a whole of interactive components instead of a micro-view of independent and isolated parts. This prioritization review confirms the priority requirement and allocates available program budget funds.
HOMELAND SECURITY SYSTEMS FRAMEWORK:
Primary thrusts:
- Strategic planning.
- Global and multi-national perspective.
- National integration and seamless operations.
- Full coordination and interoperability.
- Address cross-jurisdictional issues and concerns.
- Priorities may be dynamic and subject to change.
- Recognize the complexity of the challenges.
System framework:
- Core issues and priorities established.
- Intelligence policies, procedures and priorities.
- National critical infrastructure elements modeled. Agriculture, aquaculture, communications, energy, health, financial, transportation, water supplies, maritime operations, selected industrial and storage facilities, and high priority government facilities and systems.
- WMD/WMC/WMP considerations. Mass evacuation, mass casualties processing and treatment, and mass panic concerns and control.
- Nation’s access control and security needs. Border control, ports and terminals security, and overlapping jurisdictions.
- Public–private sectors differences and considerations.
- ID essential data base elements. Key assets and facilities, identify the spectrum of weapons threats, lead and supporting roles of agencies, operational and procedural overlaps and seams, suitable substitutes and acceptable alternative procedures, and relevant NGO’s and volunteers.
THINKING “OUTSIDE THE BOX”:
- Develop exigent protocols in event of catastrophic events in lieu of existing “business as usual” government policies and procedures.
- Establish a triage system at all levels of government to allocate and distribute critical resources in short supply during catastrophic disasters when claimants overwhelm available resources. Emergency medical procedures involving mass trauma casualties apply this principle of selectively determining which casualties are most deserving of emergency medical care.
- Develop production surge capabilities as an alternative to the “sunk cost” investments in large stockpiles of essential goods and supplies.
- Develop a program to utilize retirees and volunteers to supplement staffs at government agencies at all levels to achieve continuity of government operations after the disaster.
- Develop a methodology to establish reliable baselines to obtain useful measures of effectiveness as well as to gauge progress of high cost programs.
- Develop and establish “all hazards” emergency shelters instead of single-purpose shelters such as for hurricanes, earthquakes, tornados, WMD events, industrial accidents, etc.
- Establish review boards or implement program evaluation reviews to ensure high-cost programs do not result in only suboptimal solutions.
- Incorporate “Assumption Based Planning” (5) considerations in all strategic planning efforts.
- Identify and preplan acceptable substitute items and alternative options in the event of insufficient preferred resources during a catastrophic disaster.
- Develop a Homeland Security Integrated Systems Framework to achieve a holistic approach to address all relevant systems and components necessary to attain your stated national security objectives.
Notes:
- Five Years after 9/11, U.S. Still One Step behind Terrorists, G. Gordon, M. Taylor and R. Hutcheson, McClatchy-Tribune News Service, September 10, 2006.
- Understanding Asymmetric Warfare: Threats and Responses, John Allen Williams, National Strategy Forum Review, Vol. 16, Issue 3, Summer 2007.
- Strategies for Asymmetric Threats to US National Security, Steven Metz, National Strategy Forum Review, Vol. 16, Issue 3, Summer 2007.
- Policy Analysis in National Security Affairs: New Methods for a New Era, Richard Kugler, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, June, 2006.
- Assumption Based Planning, The RAND Corporation.
- Col. (Retd.) Kay S. Kimura,
Consultant and Lecturer, Homeland Security, USA.
Go Top
SEE YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR: INTERESTING AND THOUGHT PROVOKING
One day all the employees reached the office and they saw a big advice on the door on which it was written:
"Yesterday the person who has been hindering your growth in this company passed away. We invite you to join the funeral in the room that has been prepared in the gym".
In the beginning, they all got sad for the death of one of their colleagues, but after a while they started getting curious to know who was that man who hindered the growth of his colleagues and the company itself.
The excitement in the gym was such that security agents were ordered to control the crowd within the room.
The more people reached the coffin, the more the excitement heated up.
Everyone thought: "Who is this guy who was hindering my progress? Well, at least he died!".
One by one the thrilled employees got closer to the coffin, and when they looked inside it they suddenly became speechless. They stood nearby the coffin, shocked and in silence, as if someone had touched the deepest part of their soul.
There was a mirror inside the coffin: everyone who looked inside it could see himself.
There was also a sign next to the mirror that said:
"There is only one person who is capable to set limits to your growth: it is YOU.
You are the only person who can revolutionize your life. You are the only person who can influence your happiness, your realization and your success. You are the only person who can help yourself.
Your life does not change when your boss changes, when your friends change, when your parents change, when your partner changes, when your company changes. Your life changes when YOU change, when you go beyond your limiting beliefs, when you realize that you are the only one responsible for your life.
"The most important relationship you can have, is the one you have with yourself"
Examine yourself, watch yourself. Don't be afraid of difficulties, impossibilities and losses: be a winner, build yourself and your reality.
The world is like a mirror: it gives back to anyone the reflection of the thoughts in which one has strongly believed.
The world and your reality are like mirrors laying in a coffin, which show to any individual the death of his divine capability to imagine and create his happiness and his success.
It's the way you face Life that makes the difference Have a nice day.
Email from Mr. R.K. Khandelwal
Go Top
|
