This is a three-part question.
Part I
Choose one “Critical Thinking” problem/question(s) from one of the assigned Introduction to Emergency Management chapters to thoroughly answer and discuss. Please first repeat the chosen question before answering.
Chapter 1, page 5: "Can you think if any positive or negative aspects of disaster-driven evolutionary changes in the United State's emergencymanagement system? What about for changes that occur in the absence of initiating disaster events(Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011)?"
Before one can look at disaster -driven evolutionary changes, one needs to understand the difference between a hazard and a disaster. A hazard is a source of danger that may lead to a disaster or emergency (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011). An example of a hazard may be a chemical plant in your local area. A disaster is a hazard that has evolved into an event that requires emergency action and services (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011). An example of a disaster in a leak at the local chemical plant that causes the evacuation of the town and requires emergency services to assist in the form of chemical cleanup, medical support, and security.
While hazards have driven relatively few positive changes, disasters on the other hand have created evolutionary changes from small changes in procedures to large changes such as federal regulations and creation of new federal agencies. The evolutionary change that a disaster drives is based upon the disaster level.
Disasters are classified into three different levels. Level I disasters are typically minor and may last only a day with little to no impact on the area. There is relative little damage or loss of life (Fennelly, 2004). Level II disasters typically last more than a day and can affect people, wildlife, and the environment (Fennelly, 2004). Level III disasters typically carry over more than a few days and normally can damage to property and the environment. It also tends to produce damage to people and wildlife to include death (Fennelly, 2004).
Most evolutionary changes that occur from disasters are from level III disasters. Examples of level III disasters include tornados, hurricanes, oil leaks, etc. These disaster set the stage for evolutionary change depending upon their severity.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was a organization that was formed after a major disaster. Prior to FEMA, most emergency organizations were independent and did not cooperate with each other. They handled hazards and disasters within their own agencies with little regard for a centralizedcooperation (Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). This problem of independent separation and operations was seen in the Three Mile Island nuclear incident (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011). It was after the review by congress after the incident was over that a plan was called for and President Carter pulled the agencies together into one agency under the FEMA title. (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011).
There have been other disasters that have driven evolutionary changes in not only emergency management but in legislation. In the oil spill that occurred in the Gulf Coast waters, we saw one of the positive changes of inter office cooperation. During the incident, many emergency management agencies worked together to resolve the problem of the leaking well. This included involving the oil company in the process to not only stop the leak but in prevention and recovery operations.
As I was in the local area when the oil spill was being worked, I saw agencies working together that had not in previous years. The United States Coast Guard was working with the oil company. The oil company was working with government engineers to come up with solutions to plug the well. This cooperation created new technologies for future oil spills and also demonstrated that cooperation among agencies is key to successful operations.
This incident also spurred new legislation that was driven by the recommendations of the onsite agencies. Tighter safety and security laws were passed to ensure the mitigation of the next event. These laws were enacted to help the next team be prepared for the next oil event. As of today, these agencies are still working together to monitor, repair, and developed new emergency plans for the oil industry.
Disasters, depending upon their levels, drive evolutionary changes that can be minor to major in nature; however, emergency management has the problem of being a single minded focus system due to politics and other issues. It is when a disaster never happens that problems tend to occur.
After the original trade center bombing, the after action security teams proposed several mitigating steps to help mitigate future events. Some of the proposals were accepted while other were ignored. One of the items discussed after the bombing was the potential for a air attack against the towers. While it was a possibility, America had never had a air terrorist attack that would help to solidify the proposed recommendations for an air attack. It was even suggested that the government was responsible for protecting the air space and preparing for an air assault on the towers was a waste of time because it would never happen.
Because there had been no air attack attempts, it was looked at as insignificant in the emergency planning phase of reprotecting the towers until September 11, 2001 occurred. Years later, the new towers are now being built with internal structures that can withstand a direct aircraft hit to the new towers. In this instance, change to the emergency management system never changed because of the absence of an air attack on the towers. That all changed on September 11, 2001.
Part II:
Choose and “fully” answer and “discuss” “one” of the end of chapter “Self-Check Questions” listed at the end of each Introduction to Emergency Management chapter. Your single selection can come from any assigned chapter. Please first identify the chapter the question originated from and repeat the question before answering.
Chapter 1, Self-Check Question 9, "What changes did the creation of the Department of Homeland Security bring about for the federal emergency management capacity (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011)?"
The formation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provided a foundation that was needed to centralize multifaceted agencies into a single point of operations (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2011). The job of the DHS was to become the focal point for emergency operations. This included natural disasters to full blown terrorist attacks. With the combining of many agencies into a single entity, the capacity of the DHS increased and along with the merger came resource increases and also interagency cooperation (Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008). The DHS also assumed a new role of emergency management that now needed to be governed and guided to handle any type of disaster through various agencies and resources.
I randomly asked ten people if there was a difference between homeland security and emergency management. The answer did not surprise me. Out of the ten people who were interviewed, sixty percent stated that homeland security and emergency management was the same thing. Out of the ten people interviewed, only 10 percent knew emergency management mission. Granted, this was a very small sampling of people, only ten verse thousands, but it creates a point that cannot be ignored. How can emergency management be effective is no one knows what the mission accomplishes.
Emergency managements primary role is “not to stop the terrorists, but to reduce the future loss of life, injuries, property damage, and economic disruption” (Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009) of major events. Emergency management has been established to deal with the resulting actions of terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and catastrophic events. It was not established to deal with terrorist themselves.(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009).
Essential emergency management requires the effective use of risk analysis and implementing policies, procedures, and safeguards that will secure targets. This includes physical hardening of targets, educating the public, and to respond effectively in the event of a major event(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). Risk management is the primary tool for emergency management. A good risk management program includes four basic steps. These steps are: “1.) Identify risks or specific vulnerabilities, 2) Analyze and study risks, including the likelihood and degree of danger of an event, 3) Optimize risk management alternatives (ex. Risk avoidance, risk reduction, risk spreading), and 4) Study security programs (every day monitoring of your security programs).(Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008). Risk management can help mitigate the potential for terrorist attacks by sampling applying these steps without taking shortcuts. By using risk analysis and implementing policies, procedures, and security devices, a facility’s potential for attack goes down by at least 80%(Garcia, 2008).
While emergency management cannot eliminate all risks because natural and terrorist events will occur, they provide one piece to the overall homeland security puzzle. There are several other major players that help complement the homeland security puzzle. Some of these agencies include the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the United States Coast Guard.
The FLETC serves as the primary federal law enforcement training provider(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). The FLETC provides multiple levels or training to over 80 federal agencies and assists several countries in training of personnel.(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). What is ironic is that even thought the FLETC exists, the security field as a whole cannot decide upon the level of training the public and private security personnel must receive. Federal and public law enforcement officers typically receive 180 hours or more of training while the private sector receives typically less than 32 hours of training(Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008). Because of the lack of set training standards, this creates a large variation of how security personnel are trained to accomplish their jobs and creates prime opportunities for terrorists and other adversaries. Even the government seems to agree that law enforcement training is not that important when they reduced the FLETC budget by one percent for FY 2009 (Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009).
Another major role player is the TSA. The TSA was created only two months after the September 11, 2001 attack to protect the nation’s transportation system. The TSA’s primary focus is on “identifying risks to the transportation sector, prioritizing them, and managing them to acceptable levels through a variety of means, while working to mitigate the impact of incidents that may occur”(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). Prime examples of tools that are being used to mitigate incident impacts include full body scanners, chemical detectors, additional security personnel, and the arming of pilots. The only real problem that currently exists is that most of TSA seems to be focused on air travel and not other forms of travel. An adversary will normally pick targets that they have an eighty percent chance of success to accomplish the mission(Garcia, 2008). Imagine what would have happened to the rail industry if the terrorist had used trains verse aircraft in the September 11, 2001 attacks.
I remember a recording a buddy of mine sent to me of a real commercial pilot pre-departure debrief and it hits the TSA goal right out of the park. The pre-departure briefing proceeded as normal until the very end. At the end, the pilot went on to explain that the door to the cockpit was steel reinforced and that he was carrying a15 round Smith and Wesson semi-automatic pistol and his co-pilot was carrying a six-round .357. He further explained that they were fully trained to use the weapons and that they were loaded with armor piercing rounds. His final words were “sit back and enjoy your flight and thank you for flying with us today”.
While not the final agency that is a major role player within homeland security, the United States Coast Guard plays a very important role. They are one of the few federal services that can operate within the United States borders. Remember that military services such as Army, Marines, Air Force, and Navy cannot operate on US soil in certain role because of the Constitution of the United States. The Coast Guard played a major role in securing the American ports as the Navy ships departed during the September 11, 2001 attack. Because of the resolve of the Coast Guard to prove itself as a well-equipped military force working within the jurisdiction of U.S. territory, their budget were increased greatly(Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, & Yeletaysi, 2009). The Coast Guard stepped in to secure the ports of America. While we have not had any major terrorist events at ports in recent years, we have had natural disasters that have provided a future prediction of what might occur during and after a terrorist attack.
Ports along the seaboard are essential for America’s survival. When hurricane Katrina hit and the barges were held out at sea, America saw the impact. Gas prices went from $2 a gallon to over $8 a gallon overnight. Even after business started to return to normal, the economy is still showing the scars from Hurricane Katrina. Watch what happens to gas prices when a tanker has a spill in the ocean. A recent event that occurred that could have had a major impact on the American economy and possibly port security was he recent arrest of over 100 individuals that were planning terrorist attacks against oil lines in Saudi Arabia. One has to wonder if their failed attempt was a test for something much bigger. As I stated earlier, the TSA and air security is all that we hear about in the news today. Do you realize that only about twenty percent of containers shipped to American ports are ever checked (Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008)?
Part III
Choose one end of chapter “Important Term” to define “and” explain. In addition, include an example or illustration with your definition and explanation.
Chapter 2, What is Terrorism?
Within today's electronic highway, information is routed to people all over the world in a instant. This could be via internet, satellite, or television. The problem is that many times, the information provided is inaccurate. One piece of information that is being broadcast on a daily basis is that "America is at war with terrorism". This is a misconception. America is in a skirmish with terrorism not at war.
To understand why America is involved in a skirmish with terrorism verse a war, we need to understand the three key terms. These terms are 1.) Skirmish, 2.) Act of War, and 3.) Terrorism. A "Skirmish" is defined as "1.) a fight between small bodies of troops, esp. advanced or outlying detachments of opposing armies or 2.) any brisk conflict or encounter" ( 2010).A "Act of War" is defined as "an act of aggression by a country against another with which it is normally at peace" ( 2010). "Terrorism" is defined as "1. ) the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political reasons, 2.) the state of fear and submission produced terrorism or terrorization, and 3.) a terroristic method of governing or resisting a government"( 2010).
With keeping these three key term in mind, the difference between a terrorist attack and a act of war can be seen even though the terms are used interchangeably. This interchangeably is incorrect. America is not at peace nor has it ever been as peace with terrorism. Terrorism is an act that is used against a population to instill fear and submission while an act of war is two or more nations that were at peace now engaging in fighting.
An act of war is defined by events that engage nations to declare war on their neighbors. A prime example was when Iraq crossed into the nation of Saudi Arabia. When this event occurred, the sovereignty of Saudi Arabia was threatened by the invasion of Saddam Hussein and his troops. These two nations were previously at a state of non-fight peace until territory was violated. Terrorism is predominantly based upon a belief system or perception of injustices due to perception or suppression (Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008). During acts of war, the people engaged in combat are normally legal combatants. They are trained soldiers and are willing participants that know the rules of engagement during a declared war.
Terrorism, on the other hand, is the use of fear and coercion to instill fear and suppression into a general population or government for political or belief system reasons. Many terrorist groups have some sort of manifesto that dictates their beliefs and reasoning for their actions (Fischer, Halibozek, & Green, 2008). This is currently what we see in today's ongoing skirmished with terrorism in many countries to included America. Many of the attacks that have occurred within the Middle Eastern theater may seem like acts of war, however, they are acts of terrorism. Their reasoning for attacks are based upon their religious doctrine, culture, and fear of the mighty American beast. Terrorist want to instill fear into populations so as to rule by using fear and coercion against, in this case, the world population.