Regarding homeland security, February was a bad month for the Bush administration. The House of Representatives issued a scathing critique of the response to hurricane Katrina. Then came the fireworks over the sale of management contracts for six major U.S. east coast ports to Dubai Port World, a United Arab Emirates-owned company.
Critics alleged that outsourcing port security to the UAE was an invitation for disaster, particularly since Dubai purportedly had pre-9/11 links with al Qaeda and had served as the port of departure for A. Q. Khan's illegal shipments of nuclear-related technology. In fact, port security was not the issue. Politics were. Many Americans could not intuitively understand the decision to allow the transfer of the contracts to a UAE-based firm.
Unfortunately, neither event has addressed the larger questions that pertain to homeland security. Is the United States safer now than it was before 11 September 2001, and has the performance of the administration and the Department of Homeland security been up to the task of protecting the nation against natural or man-made disasters?
My answer to the first question regarding the nation is a qualified no, particularly when one considers the worsening conditions in Iraq, Iran's intransigence toward limiting its nuclear programs, and the election of Hamas to lead the Palestinian Authority. My answer to the second is also no. One reason is that assignment of authority, responsibility, and accountability across the homeland security sector has not yet been agreed to or adjudicated. There is no single or magic solution to this very complex and tough set of issues. That does not mean we as a nation cannot be innovative in proposing fixes.
Both the congressional and the White House lessons-learned reports on Katrina showed the failure of various chains of command, the absence of good, timely, and accurate communications, and the lack of coordinated planning, training, and action among local, city, state, and federal agencies. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its former head, Michael Brown, came under particular fire. Recommendations ranging from abolishing or completely restructuring FEMA to making it independent again have been proposed.
Here is another idea for improving both disaster response and port security. It is controversial. And it concerns FEMA and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Within the Department of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard is one agency that does not suffer from the weaknesses noted previously. Indeed, its performance during Katrina was one of the few high points of that disaster. And it is the fifth military service, meaning that it is well-suited to cooperate closely with the Department of Defense's Northern Command, charged with defense of the homeland.
FEMA should be divided into two parts. One would be the administrative and logistical support agency that provides longer-term relief and resources to regions recovering from disasters. It would be able to deploy for extended periods to provide aid until recovery has been completed.
The other part of FEMA would be operational, dealing with planning, training, preparing, and exercising for disasters and then providing emergency assistance for the first 30 or 60 days following the event. This part of the agency would be incorporated into the Coast Guard. A deputy commandant could be created to oversee this function.
With its military culture and operational orientation, the Coast Guard would be able to provide the leadership and management across much of the homeland security domain, including expanding career opportunities for Coast Guard personnel to specialize in disaster relief. The Coast Guard would need resources assigned accordingly for these tasks, giving it larger budgetary discretion.
Such a merger would also enhance port security, as disaster preparation no doubt would strengthen coordination and cooperation at our maritime hubs. Indeed, for our major ports and coastal states, a Coast Guard admiral could be designated in advance as the coordinator or disaster-control officer, double-hatted perhaps in the state national guard to give a direct link to the governor in time of crisis.
Obviously, such a merger must be done with great care. Understanding the cultural and bureaucratic differences is essential. However, given that disaster preparation and response requires individuals whose competence must have a large operational and professional content, what better organization in DHS is there than the Coast Guard?
Harlan Ullman is a columnist for
Proceedings and the Washington Times. A television commentator, his newest book, due out in June, is America's Promise Restored: Preventing Culture, Crusade, and Partisanship from Wrecking Our Country (Carroll & Graf, 2006).