|
June 2003 The Role of Private Security in Combating Terrorism Presentation Given by Charles P. Connolly The World Trade Center attack on 9/11 not only changed the way we think but from an organizational perspective how we are to function in the future. It may also be time to redefine ownership of our national security. Law Enforcement, in my judgment, will at some point transform itself to meet the terrorist threat in ways that are not yet on our respective police screens, regarding training, surveillance, investigative techniques, disaster prevention and response. And most importantly developing collaborative relationships. Today's presentation is not an end product but a challenge to examine and change, if necessary, a mindset to allow the Public and Private Protection sector to accomplish its mission through recognition of the merits of shared assistance and cooperation. Quite frankly all disasters are essentially local. There is no such thing as a Homeland Department or FBI disaster; there are only a New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago or even a De Moines disaster. Yes its impact matters and relates to the larger community. But if we are to be successful in developing a more productive anti-terrorist environment both sectors need to change their client culture from one of mere security awareness or knowledge to that of security ownership and responsibility. Today, security is everyone's responsibility! Essentially, in today's climate the stakes are too high economically
and in personal safety to ignore the potential contribution of
the private sector to the security of the nation. Historically
there were a number of - Didn't have to pay for. And if you still have concerns, REMEMBER, the police chief is always in control as he or she is the only governmental constitutionally empowered authority in town. In combating terrorism why is the role of the private security sector so important? Given that today's battlefront is on America's homeland the police are the front line troops in this war. However, they are not alone in this effort as Security assumes a greater role in safety, prevention and preventing the misuse of proprietary assets. In fact, security is often at the scene when the police arrive. Yet, neither is prepared nor trained or equipped to combat an invisible enemy whose stated objective is disruption, destruction and mass death. Although the State Department lists over fifty identifiable terrorist groups who are capable of providing cooperation to each other, Al Qaeda is different! Terror was often a tool to win a place at the bargaining table. Al Qaeda appears to just want to blow up the table. To paraphrase it's our way of life " STUPID". It would appear to today's fanatic that everything is black or white, curse or blessing, friend or foe. He or she increasingly perceive tolerance for weakness and are apt to remind us that they are much more enthusiastic on dying than we are on living. What may be happening now may prove more important and dangerous than Bin Laden or Al Qaeda. The real issue, in my judgment, is a growing ideology rather than organizational intent. We are witnessing an awakening in which Al Qaeda inspires a movement encouraging other fanatics to recruit among the larger Muslim community. Fundamentalism in the Islamic world is something we know little about. But it is a world in which 1/2 of its population is probably under twenty-five years of age. And for some it appears that you can't talk them out of their obsession. There are those among us who honestly believe our grandchildren might witness the fruits of any victory. 9/11 has shown us that we can't ignore this threat of radical Islam as they - Do not practice self-restraint. The Department of Justice reports that there are in the USA some 314,000 ABSCONDERS, People ordered to be deported and can't be found. You may recall at last year's conference, then Assistant Dir. of FBI, Dale Watson reported that the prior 30-month period 93 million visas were issued. It is entirely logical that our anti-terrorist response must adjust and adapt to these ideologies but also possible that the twenty first-century challenge is to find appropriate counter-measures that will allow us to live with such constant threats. The old US tactic was " wait and respond". The new wisdom appears to be that we take the battle to them. Self-Defense, however, is no less important regardless of our international strategy 9/11 will affect the conduct of Corporate America more than any prior threat. Why? 9/11 is the gold standard for terrorist success. It also encourages "copycats". The technology formerly controlled by the few is now available to the many. Also that technology is reaching the stage where one can program a project to be operated by the less skilled. Myself and others would like to see the NEI play a greater role as the threats domestically will be concentrated in jurisdictions under the responsibility of the Major Cities Chiefs and active NEI members. My experience indicates the call for Partnership is not a new gospel! Yes, the call for Partnership has been followed up by genuine interest on the part of some police officials while other attitudes ranged from lukewarm to lip service. In some departments there were simply no interest. I suggest that attitudes will change or some careers will! Allow me to offer an explanation for such a belief. A protection transformation is on the horizon, as society's safety is, in fact, no longer viewed simply as the exclusive role of government. One can make the argument as to whether government is the primary provider of protection given the research that a host of non-governmental groups have assumed responsibility for their own protection. The restructuring or shifting of public protection can be witnessed by the fact: 1) Private policing outnumbers public policing. In this country
the ratio is listed as three to one. If you cannot accept this future of protection, let me offer another level of concern to the Police Chief of the future in fulfilling his protective responsibility to society as well as the economic well being of this country. With 85 % of the Nation's infrastructure owned and operated by the private sector the United States increasingly relies on American companies to safeguard the nation's economy, security and well being. A sustainable partnership between the Public and Private sector
is imperative if we are to protect the essential elements of our
economy and way of life, in agriculture and food production and
distribution, water, communication, energy, health & drug
services, telecommunications, Transportation, Banking and financial
services, chemical and hazardous materials, commercial and sports
centers. America's private sector - businesses, universities and labor have long been a partner to government supplying the tools and technologies to support national security. Unfortunately, this first war of the twenty-first century puts America's businesses and employees on the front lines of the battlefield - targets and pathways for attack and destruction. There will be no personal safety or economic vitality without a secure environment. That is the challenge for Private Security as well as the Law Enforcement community. Equally important is the transformation of Law Enforcement to lead in rethinking a systematic collaborative security response that will adapt to the world's new realities Domestically we must further explore what partnership potential exists. What role does or can police leadership play in recognizing, recruiting and developing Police/Private security initiatives. If this notion has value then the NEI is in the perfect position to identify that value, and ask why is it not being initiated on a much larger scale? And if today's presenters are on message what are the obstacles to successful implementation and where are the opportunities to resolve them. The Role of Private Security and why is it so important? Obviously, the fact that private security protects 85 per cent of the nation's infrastructure is a compelling fact in rethinking the nation's security response. Aside from the domestic war on terrorism, it's important that we recognize what is occurring on the international side. Despite the most recent world tension and Wall Street scandals, National Governance, the role of nation states is falling behind on the world scene. Global Corporations are increasingly taken the place of influence. World and domestic events should give us pause to reflect that we may not be able to address today's needs much less tomorrow's with yesterday's answers. While some economic and terrorism concerns have tempered the triumph of Globalism there has been an interesting transformation in world influence and power. Several years ago it was reported that General Motors had a bigger budget than Denmark, Toyota had surpassed Norway and Wal-Mart's budget exceeded that of Poland. In the same context Ford exceeded South Africa while Mitsubishi and Unilever together outsized Indonesia (believed to be the 4th largest country) and Vietnam. Actually the hundred biggest economies in the world are equally divided between Corporations and Government. Surely, it can be said that Big Business "has a dog in this fight" against terrorism. While this transformation has met a few bumps in the road, a major challenge according to the International Monetary Fund is a world that is moving from a Public Sector Dominance towards one of Private Enterprise. Ironically, Bill Gates of Microsoft gave away more money last year to underdeveloped countries than the World Health Fund. If government and business need to adapt to the world's new realities, surely the Public and Private Protection Sectors should not be too far behind! Our best statistics suggest some 700,000-law enforcement officers
are manning our nation's battlefront. Nationally they are supported
by approximately 12,000 FBI personnel and a number of other federal
agencies, e.g. the Secret Service, DEA, etc., probably half the
FBI's size. If Absolute Guarantees can't be the core of our national defense shouldn't we strive to ensure that our Intelligence capacity be equal or better than our First Response capability. Surely we would agree that it is better to prevent a catastrophe than effectively respond to its aftermath. Therefore, if prevention through Intelligence is a goal why not explore the intelligence contributions of America's most successful corporations. To repeat myself, there are a number of legitimate, possible legal and long-term historical concerns involving cooperation with the government. Yet there is a compelling rationale for exploring to the utmost private security's participation in the war against terrorism. The Private Sector has the technology, the resources and I suspect the analytical intelligence to be a major contributor to the security of the nation. The issue, in my opinion, is how do we harness it. I believe you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would deny that Transnational Crime and Terrorism undermines the very foundations of international democratic order. Transnational crime corrupts political leaders while successful terrorism undermines the cause of human rights. With this in mind we need to be aware that sophisticated illegal operations and enterprises have increased greatly since the Berlin Wall came down. Many countries, similar to the Internet are without secure controlled borders. As such the nature, scope and function of Public Protection, International, Federal and Domestic suggest a transformation given its traditional perspective is one of reaction and rarely proactive. The call for action is often predicated on the existence of "Critical Mass" prior to unmasking organized criminal activity. This is not meant as a criticism just merely reflects a function of governmental monitoring. Terrorists and Organized Criminals are not adversely affected by jurisdictional boundaries. Law Enforcement, unfortunately, is so affected. Accompanying political change has been the rapid advance in technology, communication and transportation creating a universal "global village" and "Information Highway". Someone needs to explore who will police this Village and this
elusive highway. It is an important question given the projected
decline of national governance and that the Internet provides
us the possibility of having the equivalent of a printing press
in our home. Its use can be for good or bad. Obviously we are
not about to solve today's, nor tomorrow's problems with yesterday's
solutions. *Are there changes occurring now in countries that many law enforcement communities are ill equipped to handle? *If so, What extensions, new roles, or partnerships will be required among security, law enforcement and prosecution. * Who will be able to analyze, interpret, prevent, investigate
and secure successful prosecutions internationally and domestic.
What kind of borderless paper trails will exist given the reliance
on electronic * Given fiscal trends, can the world criminal justice system afford to train personnel to function in the new world of globalism, instantaneous crime and terror. * Where are the "expert witnesses" going to come from if we are to successfully investigate and assist in the prosecution of transnational crimes involving sophisticated telecommunications or computerized networks. * In the future will we or can we consider the use of Corporate experts during the investigative and prosecution phrases. It has been my observation that law enforcement personnel upon achieving a certain technical proficiency tend towards the private sector given the financial benefits. Our best technical skills group may not be government employees. * What legislation, domestic and international, treaties included,
might be necessary in combating both global crime and terrorism. Again, it is important to stress that it can only be Law Enforcement
Leadership that can replace our culture of independence with that
of interdependence. However, it is important that we define the
term "partnership" more clearly. It's not simply a Law
Enforcement commitment to communicate in a more timely and relevant
mode. That is merely a promise to create a better communications
network. It has to be more than a one way street even though we
fully recognize that the police function and authority is the
essential controlling player.
|