Homeland Security Outlook

By Lieutenant General (USA, Ret) Richard A. Hack, and Colonel (USA, Ret) Michael R. Gonzales

The tragic attacks of September 11, 2001, devastation caused by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, a string of violent murders by drug traffickers on the Southwest Border, and the scourge of pandemic flu demonstrate the severity and diversity of threats that the United States faces in the area of Homeland Security. While these contingencies pose different challenges than those faced in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, many military capabilities being leveraged overseas can be adapted to support Homeland Security.

By Michel Marizco, HSO Contributor

It was the first public test for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. On Christmas Day, a suicide bomber with suspected al-Qaeda ties boarded a Detroit-bound plane and tried to detonate the military-grade explosives he'd brought on board. Intelligence gathering had failed. Airport screening had failed. Inter-government cooperation had failed. In the end, it was up to the passengers to save themselves.

But rather than acknowledging the failings, Napolitano defended her department, announcing on national television "the system worked really smoothly." The fact that she repeated that message throughout the day, then waited a full day to retract the statement, suggests that the DHS has not yet learned the art of public relations.

By Rich Cooper

As history has shown us there is no date or holiday that is sacrosanct to terrorism. One day is as good as any other to strike and that was certainly true for the Christmas Day, Detroit-bound Northwest flight 253, but thanks to the actions of some fast acting passengers, the murderous actions of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab were stopped. Unlike the Ft. Hood actions of US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Obama Administration had no hesitation in calling these actions for what they were, "an act of terror."

By Patricia Titus, Chief Information Security Officer, Unisys Federal Systems

Public opinion, a powerful force for change in the United States, may prove instrumental in helping to transform our national approach to cyber security. A recent Unisys Security Index  points to both growing fear among U.S. citizens around the security of personal information as well as increased openness to new technologies that can afford greater protection.  Both trends can prove helpful to the Obama administration as it tackles our nation's growing cyber security threats.

By David Tuttle, Director, Public Safety, leads Cellular Specialties Inc.

A recent survey by the In-Building Wireless Alliance (IBWA) found that less than one-third of fire departments nationwide are able to communicate from within a building to the command and control post outside the building, or the ability to integrate with building automation systems. In-Building Wireless (IBW) solutions provide uninterrupted communications anywhere, anytime from inside a building -- whether it's on the stairwells, in an elevator, the basement or multi-level underground garage. With IBW, occupants can communicate with the outside world or within the building. First responders can talk with their command post to request additional help or clarify an emergency situation, while local and state Departments of Homeland Security can easily issue early-warning systems for all types of emergencies.

By Andy Lausch, Vice President of Federal Sales for CDW Government, Inc.

Late last month, a security breach in the House Ethics Committee -- in which a junior staff member inadvertently shared confidential information -- once again highlighted a critical issue for federal civilian and Department of Defense agencies alike: even the most robust security policies and technologies are often no match against employees who are unaware that their actions violate security policies or subvert protective technologies.

By John Bew, Deputy Director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence

The prevailing fashion in foreign policy making circles in the US and the UK is the idea of 'engagement'. At the diplomatic level, this has a clear logic -- attempting to improve relationships between states and to seek out areas of cooperation and mutual interest. However, in speaking of 'engagement' neither the US or UK governments have fully distinguished between state actors and non-state actors.