--- Begin Message ---
Military Favors a Homeland Command
Forces May Shift To Patrolling U.S.
By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 21, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61145-2001Nov20.html
The nation's top military authorities favor appointing a four-star
commander to coordinate federal troops used in homeland defense, part of a
broad reorganization that Pentagon officials say could change some forces'
primary mission from waging war overseas to patrolling at home.
Although the Pentagon has regional commanders in chief, known as CINCs, who
are responsible for Europe, the Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East
and South Asia, none exists for managing the deployment of U.S. forces in
the United States. Creating one now, military officials say, would clarify
the chain of command for those troops.
Any extensive use of federal troops on U.S. soil would come despite a
traditional aversion to -- and legal limits on -- the use of military
forces for domestic law enforcement. But the Sept. 11 attacks and the Bush
administration's declared war on terrorism have blurred the distinction
between foreign wars and domestic crimes and prompted a rethinking of the
Pentagon's command structure and force assignments.
Although Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has yet to make a final
decision, senior military officials working the issue say agreement has
been reached on establishing a homeland CINC (pronounced "sink").
"There's a consensus of opinion now that a need exists to quickly pin the
rose on some four-star commander," a senior official said.
Rather than set up an entirely new command, with all the fresh bureaucracy
and expense that would entail, officials have focused on which of several
commands already headquartered in the United States could be rejiggered to
take on the homeland defense mission. Their deliberations appear to have
narrowed into a competition between two candidates, the North American
Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) in Colorado and the Joint Forces Command
in Virginia.
Responsibility for coordinating all federal activities in homeland defense
rests with Tom Ridge and the new White House Office of Homeland Security.
The purpose of the Pentagon's new four-star assignment would be to
consolidate the chain of command running from the president through the
secretary of defense to those federal troops enlisted in the defensive
effort.
Historically, the Pentagon has seen little reason to earmark forces for
homeland defense, let alone designate a major command for the job. In the
event of a terrorist attack, the Pentagon's response plan has relied
heavily on such local and regional organizations as police, firefighters,
medics and hazardous material teams to deal with the consequences. Only as
a matter of last resort were federal troops to be summoned to help.
But after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, military
forces have been thrust into new domestic security roles. Air Force jets
now regularly patrol the skies over U.S. cities. Thousands of National
Guard troops are protecting airports and bridges and assisting at border
checkpoints. They also were deployed last week to secure the Capitol
grounds after the anthrax scare.
Such new responsibilities have strained Pentagon resources and raised
questions about some lines of command. The air patrols have been run by
NORAD. The Joint Forces Command has charge of the maritime approaches to
the United States. And many of the National Guard troops have been pressed
into action by state governors.
"The chain of command is not as clear in the United States as overseas,"
the senior official said. "We think it's time to clarify things."
Among the most urgent questions confronting the new homeland CINC will be
which military units should remain allocated for overseas duty and which
need to be tagged for more permanent homeland defense assignments. This
question is likely to fall heaviest on the National Guard, which has been
struggling since the end of the Cold War to find new roles apart from its
traditional one of being ready to augment regular troops in a major war
overseas.
About one-third of the Guard's 358,000 soldiers still constitute eight
heavy armored divisions. At the same time, Guard members have started
assuming a larger share of overseas peacekeeping assignments, relieving
some of the burden on regular troops. Elements of the Virginia Guard's 29th
Division, for example, are serving in Bosnia.
"One school of thought says we can still do both" foreign and domestic
operations, said Army Secretary Tom White. "But the other side says we
can't."
Addressing a conference last week on the military's role in homeland
defense, Ridge said that the administration would look at whether to shift
some Guard units and assets. He also said that regular military troops
would be deployed to handle domestic terrorist attacks only as "the last
resort," noting that the government had plenty of other options short of
that.
The idea for a homeland CINC last received high-level Pentagon
consideration three years ago, but then-Defense Secretary William S. Cohen
quickly dropped it after protests from civil libertarians and right-wing
militia groups alike. Critics expressed alarm at the prospect of military
forces encroaching on areas traditionally considered the responsibility of
civilian emergency response, law enforcement and health agencies.
Instead, Cohen sought and received approval from President Bill Clinton to
establish a permanent task force headed by a two-star general officer and
charged with coordinating the military's response to a chemical or
biological attack on the United States. That task force, assigned to the
Joint Forces Command, was portrayed as a modest effort to prepare for
logistical, medical and enforcement demands likely to be placed on the
Pentagon in the event of an attack on the United States.
Senior Pentagon officials say times have changed, and at least some of
those who were critical of a homeland CINC agree -- up to a point.
"We have no objection in principle to the creation of a homeland commander
in chief," said Tim Edgar, legislative counsel for the American Civil
Liberties Union. "But we're still concerned about the powers he will have,
and we'll have strong objections if he's authorized to act in areas better
handled by civilian law enforcement."
Edgar warned against the danger of "mission creep" and the risk that
military forces could end up threatening individual rights. Recent decades
offer cautionary tales about the use of the military in domestic law
enforcement -- notably in 1957, when the governor of Arkansas employed
Guard troops to block black students from entering a Little Rock high
school, and in 1970, when Guardsmen opened fire on students at Kent State
University protesting the Vietnam War.
Legal barriers to sending the armed forces into U.S. streets were imposed
by the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878, which was prompted by President Ulysses
Grant's use of federal troops to monitor elections in the former
Confederate states. The act prohibits military personnel from searching,
seizing or arresting people in the United States.
Some exceptions already exist, allowing military forces to suppress
insurrections or domestic unrest or to assist in crimes involving nuclear,
biological or chemical weapons. The bar to military involvement was lowered
further in 1986, when President Ronald Reagan directed the Pentagon to
assist in the war on drugs.
Since Sept. 11, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), the ranking minority member on
the Armed Services Committee, has led a push to revise the act.
"It's a doctrine that's served us very well," he said at a hearing Oct. 25.
"But there comes a time when we've got to reexamine the old laws of the
1800s in light of this extraordinary series of challenges that we're faced
with today."
But congressional opinion on the matter is divided, and several senior
Pentagon officials expressed little interest in any fundamental overhaul of
the act.
The move to establish a homeland CINC, officials said, is likely to be
followed by geographical and other adjustments in some of the combatant
commands under what the Pentagon calls the Unified Command Plan. Rumsfeld
has urged the top commanders to think more creatively about how to organize
to fight terrorism around the world.
A final recommendation on where to assign the homeland role is due to
Rumsfeld next month. Officials cited these considerations:
The Joint Forces Command already has responsibility for the maritime
approaches to North America, plus land defense of the continental United
States. It is located near Washington and has a well-developed relationship
with National Guard and reserve components, as well as with federal and
state agencies. But if this command were to take on homeland defense, its
four-star leader probably would have to shed something -- most likely, his
role as head of NATO's North Atlantic region.
NORAD already has charge of protecting U.S. skies and is running the combat
air patrols over the United States. It has an extensive communications,
command and control network, as well as a strategic location in the center
of the country. But it lacks much experience with the land and sea
components that would be essential to the homeland defense job.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
Refill any ink cartridge for less!
Includes black and color ink.
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/ltH6zA/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/zgSolB/TM";><B>Click
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
ctrl is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds
are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and
'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-directions and outright frauds—is
used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout
the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, ctrl gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always
suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. ctrl gives no credence to Holocaust
denial and nazi's need not apply.
There are two list running, ctrl@yahoogroups and [EMAIL PROTECTED],
ctrl@yahoogroups has unlimited posting and is more for discussion.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is more for informational exchange and has limited posting
abilities.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
Om
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--- End Message ---
