State of Recovery

The Quest to Restore American Security After 9/11

Barry Scott Zellen

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN:
  9781628923254
• Edition: 1
• eBook ISBN:
  9781441103246
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: National Security
• Index: Politics & International Relations

In the decade that followed 9/11, technologies and technology policies became central to homeland security. For example, the U.S. erected new border defenses with remote sensors and biometric scanners, and deployed new autonomous air warfare capabilities, such as the drone program. Looking at efforts to restore security after 9/11, the work examines issues such as the rise in technology spending, the various scenarios of mass terror, and America's effort to ensure that future engagements will take place far from the homeland. Operation Iraqi Freedom, Iran's emergence as nuclear threat, and North Korea's acceleration of its missile program are analyzed along with the "axis of evil" and America's effort to create a ballistic missile shield to thwart this emerging threat to its security. By focusing on the technologies of homeland security rather than on cyber warfare itself, the work offers a unique and needed survey that will appeal to anyone involved with the study and development of homeland and strategic security.

Part I

Technology to the Rescue

1

Moore’s Law and the Evolution of Security Technology

The contrast couldn’t be more extreme. First, there were the go-go days of the late 1990s technology boom—when America fell in love with digital technology, and investors fell in love with digital technology companies—and the entire nation appeared excited about the seemingly limitless potential that digital innovation promised to bring. Then, in a fiery instant, came the wakeup call of 9/11—when a pan-Islamist movement aiming to restore a mediaeval theocracy upon Southwest Asia struck at America’s heartland, downing the Twin Towers, a symbol of America’s economic leadership, while delivering a solid, but not a knockout blow, against the sprawling Pentagon complex, headquarters of the US Department of Defense (DoD).

The ensuing David and Goliath struggle pitted the most advanced, technological society on earth, and also one of the most open—America—against one of the least technologically developed nations on earth, governed by a theocratic tyranny—Afghanistan, which was hosting Al Qaeda. So it’s no surprise that America, in its GWOT, turned to its newest technological know-how to bolster its border security—and help to prevent the next 9/11 from happening. As a result, one byproduct of the 9/11 attacks was an unprecedented surge in government investment in new technologies for homeland security, and a massive intra-governmental reorganization giving birth to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on January 24, 2003—described by DHS as “the largest federal reorganization in more than 50 years.”¹

Technology and security after 9/11

As reported by Charles J. Murray in the EE Times in January 2005, “as the United States struggled to adjust to its dark new reality following the terror attacks of September 2001, one of the first phenomena to rise from the rubble was a booming security-technology market that today remains in runaway expansion mode.”² Indeed, he wrote that “development activity in a raft of security technologies—from biometric sensors and scanning software to electromagnetic systems for detecting virtually any kind of concealed weapon—took off so quickly in the wake of the attacks that even the most determined industry watchers underestimated the sector’s growth.”³ With the 2003 creation of the DHS came a new and unprecedented concentration of funding for securing America in a single administrative entity, creating the expectation among IT vendors—eager to kick-start their ailing stock prices and revitalize investor sentiment in the wake of the great “Tech Wreck” when the internet bubble collapsed—of an unprecedented federally funded feeding frenzy.

But not everyone was happy with the early days, when DHS’ bark was stronger than its bite. As reported in the first edition of Homeland Security Tech Watch on October 1, 2003: “President Bush signed the first regular Appropriations Act for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) granting budget authority in 2004 for $29.4 billion—a 1.8% increase ($535.8 million) over the fiscal year 2003 budget.”⁴ And only “days later, frustrated IT executives—anxious to finally size the addressable homeland security market for their particular products and services—heard the same recitation of high-level budget numbers from top DHS officials.”⁵ Homeland Security Tech Watch noted that “across town on Capitol Hill, a poorly attended congressional hearing on the DHS Enterprise Architecture (the IT Roadmap) gave clues as to why: the Appropriations Act contains very little detail on technology spending because DHS’ Enterprise Architecture to guide investment decisions had not yet been drawn up when the bills were written.”⁶

Hence early frustrations were the result of the newness of the endeavor and the complexity of the challenge. As Homeland Security Tech Watch explained, while “it seems like an eternity for waiting vendors, it was only a few short months ago that the most complex government reorganization in US history began—merging 22 agencies into one. Merger integration doesn’t happen overnight.”⁷ In so short a time, it adds, “pay scales still haven’t been set nor procurement policies issued, much less business processes re-engineered or decisions made about needed technologies.”⁸ But at the same time, “there were signs of progress in the testimony on the DHS Enterprise Architecture,” and “a plan now exists, though still somewhat conceptual, to begin the transition from the current state to the target,” and while tech vendors were cautioned not to “expect the floodgate on spending to open wide,” they were encouraged to “look for the trickle to gradually become a steady stream.”⁹

And while “early estimates indicate that Congress appropriated roughly $3 billion for technology—10% of the total DHS budget,” this was “down from the President’s original request of $3.8 billion.”¹⁰ Homeland Security Tech Watch noted that “appropriations for technology did not increase over last year’s budget which was approximately $3 billion, as well,” and that Congress actually “decreased funding from the President’s request for many of the major technology projects that have the most immediate impact on fighting terrorism—such as the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US VISIT) and security screening equipment,” and “most technology project funding was down roughly 25% to 30% from the President’s request”—as Congress began “exercising increased oversight and greater scrutiny on major technology projects,” driven by its perception of a slow start for several major projects that “appeared to get off to a slow start because they were held up by the DHS reorganization and initial efforts at building an Enterprise Architecture.”¹¹

But it did not take long for DHS spending on technology to ramp up. DHS announced, on February 3, 2003, that its FY2004 budget would fund efforts to prevent “terrorist attacks within the United States” while “reducing America’s vulnerability to terrorism,” and “minimizing the damage and recovering from attacks that do occur.”¹² As such, DHS was empowered to “move forward with a sustained and cohesive strategy in key areas such as improving security at the nation’s borders”; “decreasing the vulnerabilities of the nation’s critical infrastructure”; and “advancing research in science and technology aimed at countering terrorist attacks.”¹³ And, as reported by Government Security magazine in July 2003, DHS “moved to implement an act” that was drafted by Congress in 2002, “granting many companies protection from lawsuits if they invest in developing and deploying qualified anti-terrorism techniques.”

The “Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002,” better known as the SAFETY Act, was designed to “motivate further investment in anti-terrorism technologies” by empowering DHS to “determine if a company’s anti-terrorism technology is considered qualified.”¹⁴ Under the new law, the undersecretary for Science and Technology was made “responsible for review and approval of applications for Designation and Certification of Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies (QATTs) under the SAFETY Act,” as part of Washington’s effort to “encourage the development and deployment of anti-terrorism technologies that will substantially enhance the protection of the nation,” and to “ensure that the threat of liability does not deter potential sellers from developing and commercializing technologies that could significantly reduce the risk of, or mitigate the effect of, acts of terrorism.”¹⁵

For its second full year of operations, the FY2004 budget request for DHS totaled $36.2 billion—reflecting a 7.4% increase in funding over FY2003, and a 64% increase over FY2002.” In the FY2004 budget, $803 was requested “for the Department to use American ingenuity and develop new partnerships with the private sector to research, develop and deploy homeland security technologies that will make America safer—an eight-fold increase over 2002.”¹⁶ Additionally, the Science and Technology Directorate’s Advanced Research Project Agency was tasked to “direct $350 million in new funding to address gaps in high-priority operational areas like protecting critical infrastructure and our borders.”¹⁷ And, $18.1 billion was requested “for the Border and Transportation Security Directorate to meet the strategic goals of improving border security and transportation security—while at the same time facilitating the unimpeded and reliable flow of commerce and people across our borders and through our airports, seaports, highways and railways.”¹⁸ An additional $100 million was requested for the comprehensive Entry-Exit system, designed to “enable the Department to track the entry and exit of visitors to the United States,”¹⁹ bringing the total to $480 million.

A year later, the FY2005 budget requested “total new resources for FY2005 of $40.2 billion” for “an increase of 10% above the comparable FY2004 resource level,” which “substantially increases funding for DHS from 2003—the year that the Department was created—and continues the dramatic growth for agencies that are now a part of DHS.”²⁰ The FY2005 budget request included “$411 million in new funding to maintain and enhance border security activities,” and “$340 million in 2005—an increase of $12 million over the FY2004 funding—to continue expansion of the US VISIT system.”²¹ As well, the FY2005 budget request included $50 million “for the next generation of screening devices for our nation’s ports of entry,” plus “$64.2 million to enhance land-based detection and monitoring of movement between the ports,” $28 million to “increase the flight hours of P-3 aircraft and $12.5 million for long range radar operations.”²²

Technology spending on the rise

By 2005, DHS spending on technology had finally achieved the scale frothily anticipated by IT executives during those frustrating, early post-9/11 days when DHS was just ramping up. In the June 2004 edition of the National Defense Magazine, Harold Kennedy wrote that an “array of emerging technologies is the key to defending the United States from its enemies,” and “developing those technologies is the mission of the S&T division,” short for Science and Technology, of DHS.²³ According to Kennedy, Charles E. McQueary, the undersecretary of homeland security for science and technology, led the S&T division of DHS since its inception in 2003, and as its budget grew “by $126.5 million—nearly 14 percent—to a requested $1.03 billion in 2005,” it allowed S&T to accomplish “a great deal in a short amount of time,” though McQueary noted “much more remains to be done.”²⁴

Indeed, as reported by Dibya Sarkar on Federal Computer Week’s website, FCW.com, President Bush’s proposed FY2006 budget for DHS “underlines a heavy reliance on information technology for better border and port security uses” and “improved screening and credentialing of individuals.”²⁵ The FY2006 budget proposed for DHS totaled $41.1 billion, up 6.6% from FY2005, and its “IT portion would rise nearly 25%—to $5.96 billion from $4.78 billion in fiscal 2005.”²⁶ Sarkar cited DHS acting Secretary Admiral James Loy, who said that “technology holds enormous potential to meet many of our most pressing security needs and we must bring these resources to bear in our fight against terrorism.”²⁷ That’s why the FY budget called for the Office of the Chief Information Officer to “get a $28.43 million increase, from the current $275.27 million to $303.7 million—which includes ongoing maintenance and operations and department-wide technology projects.”²⁸ In the coming year, DHS planned to “consolidate various screening and identification activities to form the Office of Screening Coordination and Operations (SCO) within the Border and Transportation Security Directorate,” using over $840 million “to consolidate and integrate these.”²⁹ As well, the S&T Dir...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Introduction
• Part I Technology to the Rescue
• Part II Securing Our Borders
• Part III Protecting the Populace
• Part IV Ensuring Our Survival: Thinking about the Unthinkable after 9/11
• Bibliography
• Index