Draft Syllabus: (As of 12/11/07)
PAPA 6664/STS 6664
Advanced Topics in Public Policy:
Homeland Security as a Complex System of Systems
Spring Semester 2008
CPAP
School of Public and International Affairs
VIRGINIA TECH, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Randall S. Murch, PhD rmurch@vt.edu
, (703) 518-2719 [office] or (703) 731-2712 [mobile]
Course Overview
Homeland security has been the natural outgrowth of national security as a result of the events of September 11, 2001 and the recognition of the need for greater investment and coordination for securing the homeland. Since the creation of the Office of Homeland Security and then the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the namesake has presented itself in a number of different agencies, policies and initiatives, some of which are indeed “security” in nature and some which are not. While DHS and its relatives at the state and local levels have been created and gone forward, other departments such as the Department of Defense and Health and Human Services have established parallel efforts which are now interfacing with those at all levels in the civilian sector. Various sectors, such as public health, agriculture, transportation, communications, finance, commerce, and humanitarian assistance and their attendant organizations all have large stakes and involvement in homeland security in various ways and through various means. No matter how one defines “homeland security”, it encompasses a wide and diverse array of endeavors, most of which are not singular in nature and which cross federal, state and local departments, jurisdictions, areas of interest and responsibility, policies, strategies, plans and programs. These in turn, involve a complex ecosystem of human, societal, political, technological, environmental, and geographic and geotemporal realities, problems, gaps, challenges and opportunities.
These various “systems” in the context of homeland security are being driven by interpolated and extrapolated less-than-perfect knowledge and assessments of adversaries and their intent and capabilities, “threats”, and our real and perceived exploitable weaknesses and vulnerabilities, all of which are dynamic, heterogeneous and involve some degree of uncertainty. The latter, then, should require an understanding of “risk”, an aspect that is relatively new and just beginning to take root in homeland security. Risk itself is viewed and addressed in various ways depending on the sector and level concerned.
This course will take a direct and practical approach to critically examining and exploring the complexities of homeland security. The principal theme throughout will be

a “systems approach”; understanding and assessing how adversaries see themselves and see us, how our policies and actions could be, have been and should be formulated and carried out in context and how performance is or should be measured. The course will be consist of a series of modules each of which focus on one or closely related representative “problem sets” which then link to the others. Appropriate background discussion and “What problem are we trying to solve?”, “How well are we doing?”,
“How do we know how well we are doing and how confident are we in that determination?”, “What are we missing and are we not addressing?” and “How might or should it be done better?” will be thematic for each module. Students can expect to be fully engaged with the instructor and each other in every session in this course.
This course offering will be conducted as a seminar course emphasizing interactive critical thinking, discussion and discourse and fueled by presentations and participation by the instructor and all students.
Instructional Philosophy and Approach
This course is designed and will be executed as a seminar course, with the focus on surveying key topics, focusing on critical and catalytic engagement in each session.
We will build each successive session on those previous to create an intellectual architecture and system of knowledge and thinking about the complexity of homeland security. We will bring forth, discuss, debate and argue (civilly) many topics, issues, ideas and positions along the way. Through this process, we should discover how “hard the problem” is, how well or not “the problem” (whatever it is) has or is being addressed or not, how “problem + approach” has resulted in success at some level or failure, could have been approached better or could result in a solution through some novel approach.
Remember that the course is being approached in the context of homeland security as a complex system of systems. It is not possible or reasonable to cover all that is directly or indirectly been spoken, written about or thought of or could be in topics, disciplines or endeavors related to homeland security. We would need a much longer period of time to do so. We will take a “healthy cut” at a range of topics, but can only do so much in the time we have available in a semester course which meets once a week for ca. 3 hours.
“Read Aheads” and “Think Aheads” are provided to prepare you (and me) for each session. I have selected representative readings, sampled or pointed you to other sources for you to search and explore. There are countless others; just go hunting on the
Internet or using sources I’ve provided. The amount of directly and indirectly related information “out there” is overwhelming. It may appear that the weekly readings are overly extensive or burdensome. It is up to you to decide what and how much you read and explore, as long as you feel that you have prepared yourself for each upcoming session. As you will note below, it is also your choice to select an area of interest to develop for your in-session presentation when it is your turn. I plan on using additional sources and citations to lecture from, which I intend to provide at the appropriate time.

I am approaching this course from the perspective that we will all learn and discover over the semester, work hard individually and together, hopefully bond as a class and enjoy the experience. I’m going to give the entire course my “best shot”; I expect the same from each of you.
Course Objectives
1. Using a succession of priority homeland security themes and topics, explore and gain an understanding of the diversity, complexity, interdependencies, uncertainties and risks within homeland security as a subset of national security in the manner of:
 the threats, vulnerabilities, challenges, uncertainties that exist, i.e. that which bounds the “problem to be solved” in context
 the nature, role, intent and capabilities of adversaries
 governance, societal and “environmental” complexities and dynamics
 the policies and programs and actions that have been and are being taken, and assessing faults, shortfalls and gaps that must or should be addressed
 the systematics (in this usage, name, assigned, assumed and perceived jurisdiction and function) of the departments, agencies, organizations and entities that are and would be involved or effected
 the tradeoffs in resource investments to address capabilities, gaps, needs and opportunities and “cost v. benefit”
 observed, expected and anticipated results and outcomes as a means of understanding how effectiveness should or could be measured and optimized
2. Critically assess current approaches and policies and formulate better approaches, policies, requirements, authorities and responsibilities, strategies, plans, programs, management and execution toward optimal performance in selected, key aspects of homeland security, while understanding the boundaries and limits of what can be achieved or expected in performance given realities and existing constraints
3. Explore and formulate better and more agile “critical paths” to increase and strengthen homeland security, robustness and resilience in a complex and uncertain world
Course Requirements
1. Class Participation: 13 sessions X 10 points each = 130 points total
2. Lead Two In-Class Discussions, Session-Related Topics: 2 X 50 = 100
3. Final In-Class Power Point Presentation, Homeland Security-Complex System of
Systems Theme, on Topic of Choice: 200 points

4. Annotated Bibliography (200 points total): Session Entries = 1 entry per week X 13 weeks X 10 points per entry, or 130 points; Final Presentation = 7 entries X 10 points per entry, or 70 points, Total 200 points
Total: 630 points
Required Background Resources (Instructor purchased the required books through amazon.com)
Jane A. Bullock et al. 2006. Introduction to Homeland Security, Second Edition
(Butterworth-Heinemann Homeland Security Series). Elsevier, 654 ppg
Bruce Hoffman. Inside Terrorism. 2006. Columbia University Press, 432 ppg
Mark Sauter and James Carafano. 2005. Homeland Security: A Complete Guide to
Understanding, Preventing and Surviving Terrorism. McGraw-Hill, 483 ppg
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. 2004. The 9/11
Commission Report. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 567 ppg
Useful Additional Resources/Links
U. S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov
, Reports and Testimonies (search by topic, e.g., Homeland Security)
Reports by the Congressional Research Service, at www.fas.org/sgp/crs/index , www.freepint.com/gary/crs or www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs
U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, Center for Homeland Defense and Security, Homeland
Security Digital Library. Go to www.chds.us
(Center for Homeland Defense and
Security) and locate the Homeland Security Digital Library on the right-hand side of the page. You must request an account and provide justification (i.e., graduate studies at
Virginia Tech, professor has an account and recommended their site), and if approved they will create account and provide user name and password.
Rand Corporation. www.rand.org
(briefings, testimonies and reports can be downloaded as pdf often for free).
Studies and reports of the National Research Council and National Academies (National
Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering), www.nas.edu
, e.g., click on Policy and Global Affairs Division and locate various reports and studies that are available regarding issues of science and security. Most of these can be downloaded for free.

Defense Science Board. Several relevant reports are available for download at www.acq.osd.mil/dsb .
Links to or citations for additional resources will be provided during the course as needed or appropriate. Various journals and other sources exist which contain homeland security and related articles and pieces.
Intended Session Structure, Expectation for Participation and Contribution
Part 1: Instructor lecture with discussion (40 minutes + 20 minutes = 60 minutes);
Student Session Theme Development Presentation (beginning Session 2 or 3, 1 per session at 30 minutes total); Discussion of Session Background Questions, Read Aheads and Student Bibliography Session Entries (60 minutes); with 15 minute midpoint break
Part 2: Instructor lecture and scenario, with discussion (60 minutes), Student Session
Theme Presentation (1 at 30 minutes total), Discussion of Session Background Questions,
Read Aheads and Student Bibliography Session Entries (60 minutes), with 15 minute midpoint break.
Part 1 and Part 2 In-Class Student Session Theme Development Presentation
Each student will make one presentation as part of the course sessions in Part 1 and Part 2 on a relevant aspect of the session theme. Sign up sheets will be available at the first session and will be filled out then for Part 1 and then again prior to Spring Break for Part 2. In part 2 of the course, paired (two students, same grading scheme, each student graded individually) will be permitted. All sessions in each part will be covered by one presentation.
These presentations will be 15 minutes in length up to 15-20 minutes (flexible) guided discussion and dialogue. The purpose of these presentations is to further develop a sub-topic of relevance and interest within the session theme, as well as stimulate intellectual inquiry and discussion. The presentation should elucidate and explore the complexity or interdependencies within one or between multiple dimensions of a topic or issue. The resource used for this presentation should help flesh out the critical assessment of the topic or point and your position (supports or conflicts with). Presenters will be graded on the selection of the topic (relevance and relationship to session theme), content development (critical thinking, assessment of the topic, question quality) and supporting references, presentation ability, and how effectively they stimulate and guide class discussion on their topic. Students are free to use selections for their annotated bibliographies as a basis for these presentations. 50 points possible for each of two presentations, 100 points total toward course grade.
Final Presentations: Homeland Security Complexity Theme

At the end of the course, each student will prepare and deliver to the class a 45 minute presentation (and leading up to 15 minutes of question, answer and discussion) on a homeland security “systems of systems”/complexity-interdependency topic of their choice which is representative of the range of topics covered or referenced during the course. Power Point is the format to be used. The selected topic should be an observation, problem, situation or solution and represent a multidimensional theme to the presentation, argument presented and conclusions. The student will be graded on the quality of topic selection, content development and presentation of the topic (including the idea, concept, hypothesis or argument being presented) as well as how he or she engages the instructor and fellow students in Q&A and discussion. The quality of organization, presentation and graphics of the Power Point will also be factored in as part of the grade. 200 points total toward the course grade.
Annotated Bibliography
Each student will develop an annotated bibliography during the course and submit it to the instructor by email by 5:00 p.m. on April 24 th
for grading. The bibliography will consist of two sections; section one will be captioned “Session Entries” with headers for each of the first 13 sessions with the entries below the header. Each of these entries will coincide with the session theme. Section two will relate to the final presentation and will consist of at least 7 entries which are directly related to and support the final presentation.
Each entry will have associated with it a one paragraph (maximum of 500 words) summary of the source cited. This paragraph should contain a brief summary of the source’s content and main points as well as an analysis or conclusions about the source by the student. Again, each entry should be selected so as to address aspects of a complexity/interdependency/”systems” theme with the session’s topic area or to support the final presentation.
Acceptable bibliography entries include: scholarly articles from peer-reviewed journals, books or book chapters, published reports from the U.S. Government Executive Branch and Legislative Branch, departments, agencies and centers and the like, published reports from reputable non-profit and academic study and analysis centers, and feature length news and analysis articles from reputable news journals (not newspapers; for news/news analysis sources, no more than two of thirteen for the sessions bibliography and one of seven for the final presentation). Total for this assignment is 200 points.
Grading Scale
A 93 - 100
A- 90 - 92
B+ 87 - 89
B 83 - 86
B- 80 - 82

C+ 77 - 79
C 73 - 76
C- 70 - 72
[Possible Points for Course: 630]
Course Outline, with Session Read Aheads and Questions to Contemplate
Overarching Questions for the Course:

What are the interrelationships and interdependencies of and within “homeland security”, national security and global security, robustness and resiliency?

Is U.S. homeland security organized (structurally and functionally; naturally or purposefully) as an effective “system of systems”, i.e., to reasonably and effectively prevent, disrupt, defeat, defend, mitigate and recover from terrorist and other catastrophic events? Does it or has it performed in this manner since its inception?

If it is not, why is this so and what should be done to build and sustain a fully robust and agile system? Is the system that should be implemented possible to achieve and afford?

Is it possible to “know everything, protect everything and secure everyone” at all times in a free society? What level of risk is reasonable, acceptable or realistic? Do or should rights and freedoms have to be modified to increase national and societal security and protection?

Great amounts of words, study, human endeavor, public and private funds, and political, media and public attention have been paid to “homeland security”; what is the resulting benefit-to-cost ratio thus far? Are we more or less secure?
Can we ever be “more secure” than we are at this point in time?
Part 1: Strategic Perspectives
Session 1, January 17: Course Introduction, Homeland Security in a Dangerous,
Uncertain and Dynamic World
Read Aheads:

The 911 Commission Report, Chapters 1, 3, 6 – 8

Sauter and Carafano, Chapters 1 – 2

Homeland Security, Bullock et al, Chapter 1 (Suggested)
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Did 9/11 occur as a result of one or more “point failure” (or series) or a
“system failure”? Were there any “lessons learned” from events prior to 9/11 that should have been addressed and implemented that would have prevented or mitigated it?

2.
From your perspective, what are the 3 – 5 most important strategic conditions, shortcomings or gaps which existed in the United States prior to 9/11 that most contributed to the success of the attacks? What was the most critical?
3.
What were the interdependencies and interrelationships of those strategic conditions, shortcomings or gaps that you identified?
4.
If any one, some combination or all of those conditions, shortcomings or gaps had not existed or had been less apparent or severe, would 9/11 have been prevented or its effects mitigated, and if so how?
5.
In your view, are we safer now with respect to being able to prevent, deter, disrupt, defeat, mitigate and recover from attacks on the homeland than we were before 9/11? Why or why not?
Session 2, January 24: Adversaries, Threats and Risks
Read Aheads:

The 911 Commission Report, Chapters 2, 4, 5

Hoffman, Chapters 3 – 5

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 7 and Appendix 1; Chapters 4 - 5 (Suggested)

Southern Poverty Law Center, Intelligence Project, www.splcenter.org/intel

Search www.rand.org
for relevant studies, reports and testimonies (several in recent years; select a couple of relevant studies and scan)
Optional

Riedel, Bruce. 2007. Al Qaeda Strikes Back. Foreign Affairs, May/June, pp 24-40
Search on Your Own-Search Terms Examples: Terrorism and Extremism, Jihad or Jihadi,
Religious Extremism; Terrorism and Cults; Global Terrorism; Regional Terrorism,
Terrorism and Propaganda; Terrorism and the Media; History of Islam and Terrorism,
Fatwa and Terrorism, Risk and Terrorism
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
In your view, what is the greatest risk to homeland security that the U.S. faces today? Why? What are the components of that risk and what are their relative weights that contribute to your overall assessment or conclusion?
2.
What is it about the calculus of adversaries, threats and vulnerabilities that can never be eliminated or have the risk reduced to manageable levels?
3.
How should risk assessments be designed, performed and used to effect policy decisions, programs and measures of effectiveness?
4.
Has the United States Government been successful in reducing risks associated with our most dangerous adversaries, the threats (tools, techniques and methods that could be used), strategic and tactical vulnerabilities and the potential impacts of those calculi? Why or why not (use example)? Are the claims of success or progress by the Government accurate or not (use example)? In your example, how could success be achieved in a better designed and executed systems approach?

5.
What will be the greatest threats and risks to U.S. homeland security 10 years from now?
Session 3, January 31: Organizations and Layers: Actors, Stakeholders and Overseers
Read Aheads:

The 9-11 Commission Report, Chapter 13

Bullock et al, Chapter 3, 5

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 11

Final Report on 9/11 Commission Recommendations, www.9-11pdp.org
Task:

Search On Your Own: Focus on a particular branch, agency, department or component of interest to you to understand its roles, authorities and responsibilities, accomplishments, failures and shortcomings, and strategies, priorities and plans related to homeland security (directly or indirectly)
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Is the Executive Branch “organized for success” to properly execute the
homeland security mission? Is it pursuing such properly and effectively?
2.
Is the Department of Homeland Security necessary? Is there a better model?
Major problems at DHS in a variety of areas are reported on a weekly basis and are often persistent; (select exemplars) how do these impact the effectiveness of
DHS as an agency charged with “securing the homeland”?
3.
Does Congress’ committee oversight structure for homeland security enable or impede success in homeland security or it is about right? Do Congressionally- directed appropriations (aka “pork”) further or impede the national goals and objectives in homeland security? Give examples to support your position.
4.
If you had the ability and authority to reorganize and restructure the Federal government so that it maximized effectiveness and success at all levels (Federal, state and local) for the homeland security mission, what would be your first 3 – 5 actions in order to make the most progress for the overall system you envision?
5.
How and by whom should the Department of Homeland Security be held accountable regarding setting and accomplishing its priorities, requirements, goals and objectives? Does a “system” exist to ensure overall success? What about other agencies with key missions that support homeland security? Who and how should the overseers be held accountable?
Session 4, February 7: Foreign and Domestic Intelligence
Note: This session will be held most likely on Saturday morning, February 9 th , from
9:00 – 11:45 (exact time a bit negotiable), to allow invited participation by instructor in conference that week in the UK.)
Read Aheads:

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 13

Bullock et al, Chapter 5, pp. 197 – 205


Overview of the Intelligence Community, www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/int023.html

Office of the Director of National Intelligence, www.dni.gov
(read through
“About ODNI”)
 ODNI’s 500-Day Plan: Integration and Collaboration,
www.dni.gov/500-dayplan.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation, www.fbi.gov
, review “What We Investigate” and
“National Security Priorities”
Optional

Richelson, Jeffrey T., The U.S. Intelligence Community, 4 th
Edition. Westview,
Boulder CO, 526 pp. (Scan as desired or interested)

McConnell, Mike. 2007. (On cover, as “Making Intelligence Smarter”)
Overhauling Intelligence. Foreign Affairs, July/August, pp 49 – 58
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
To what areas of homeland security does or should intelligence make the most significant contributions to planning, operations and preparedness? Do they now? What are the gaps and challenges? Can they be effectively addressed?
2.
Which intelligence agencies have or should have the most significant roles and responsibilities for homeland security?
3.
What is or should be the relationship between national intelligence and domestic intelligence for robust homeland security? Is intelligence shared by and with all the levels that need it to properly prepare and execute their homeland security, public safety and public security mission? What are the issues that prevent or impede information sharing between various levels and components? What mechanisms have been emplaced to facilitate information and intelligence sharing?
4.
Is it likely that the U.S. will be surprised by a major terrorist attack or campaign within the next 3 years that will be successful due to failures in intelligence, planning, preparedness or response? Support and defend your position. If you believe that we will be, how in your view is it likely that this attack or campaign will be manifested and what will be the adversaries’ objectives? Is it possible to adequately prepare for, thwart or defend against such?
5.
Is greater access to unprotected information by U.S. intelligence agencies necessary to protect against perceived or actual threats to homeland security?
What is the right balance between Government access and privacy? What system should be in place to ensure that balance is kept, protected and respected?
Session 5, February 14: Strategy, Policy and Law
Read Aheads:

The 9-11 Commission Report, Chapter 12

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 12; (optional) Chapter 18

Bullock, Chapter 2


National Strategy for Homeland Security, Homeland Security Council, October
2007, www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/homeland/nshs/2007

National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, www.whitehouse.gov/nsct/2006

Homeland Security Presidential Directives, 1 – 20 (scan, as available), National
Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directives (NSPD, HSPD), see www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/index ; or Loeb, Daniel E., Homeland Security
Presidential Directives, Lulu Press, 83 pp
Suggested

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (see Bullock et al, Appendix 3)

PATRIOT Act (See Bullock et al, Appendix 2)

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Does the 2007 President’s Homeland Security Strategy articulate an effective homeland security system which increases the likelihood of prevention, mitigation and recovery from catastrophic attacks and natural disasters? From a “systems perspective”, what are its strengths and weaknesses?
2.
Twenty-one Homeland Security Policy Directives (or HSPDs) that have been issued by the White House since 2001. Select three and perform a thumbnail assessment on them. Are they properly targeted and developed? What are their strengths and weaknesses relative to what is intended in the document? Have those three been acted on (or can they be) in a manner that does or will achieve the targets set out in the policy?
3.
Often during this Administration, Congress reacts to Executive Branch homeland security policies, proposals and programs by stating that “there is not enough money for homeland security”. Is this true? Does more money alone ensure homeland security? Do Congressionally-directed appropriations (earmarks) advance or impede homeland security from the national perspective?
4.
Several key laws have been enacted or revisited since 2001 to supposedly strengthen the Government’s ability to protect and secure the homeland, such as the USA PATRIOT Act and the FISA. Are laws and amendments such as these useful or necessary, do they actually make us “more secure”?
5.
In our style of a free society, what is the proper legal balance for advancing homeland security and public safety while preserving and protecting our way of life (e.g., civil liberties)?
Session 6, February 21: Homeland Defense: DOD and Homeland Security
Read Aheads:

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 11, pp 228-230

Bullock et al, Chapter 7, pp 342-345

Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, June 2005, www.defenselink.mil/news/June2005/d20050630homeland/pdf

Useful Links

USNORTHCOM, at www.northcom.mil
, go to “About USNORTHCOM”, and
“Links” and to “Joint Task Force for Civil Support” and “National Guard Bureau” for “WMD Civil Support Teams”

North American Aerospace Defense Command, at www.norad.mil

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense, see www.defenselink.mil/policy/hd

US Military Operations in the Global War on Terrorism, Congressional Research
Service, RL-32758, www.fas.org/sgp/crs

Global War on Terrorism, See Global Security at www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/terror-ops

Joint Special Operations Command (USJSOC), See www.globalsecurity.org/military/agencydod/jsoc
Search on Your Own-Search Terms Examples

WMD Civil Support Teams, Joint Task Force for Civil Support, Maritime
Domain Awareness, Air Domain Awareness, Homeland Defense, Global War on
Terror, DOD Medical Support to Homeland Security
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
How should the Department of Defense contribute and participate in homeland security? In which mission areas should or does DOD provide the most “value added”?
2.
Is there a formal system in place that governs DOD participation in homeland security? How is “jurisdiction” at en event determined between DOD and various levels of civilian agencies?
3.
What are the “critical components” of effective interaction between DOD and civilian agencies for homeland security coordination, operations and missions?
What are the key gaps that must be addressed?
4.
In which homeland security (and related) mission areas is there the “greatest risk” for DOD involvement? Be prepared to explain your answer.
5.
What homeland security mission areas cannot be effectively executed without
DOD assistance and participation?
Session 7, February 28: Public Awareness, Security, Safety, Response and Recovery
Read Aheads:

The 9-11 Commission Report, Chapter 9

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 13 and 15; (optional) Chapters 16 – 17

Bullock et al, Chapters 6 – 8

Draft of National Response Framework, Google and locate PDF file (scan)

CRS Report RS22393, “State and Urban Area Homeland Security Plans and
Exercises; Issues for the 110 th
Congress”, January 3, 2007 (updated)
Useful Links


Global Security, www.globalsecurity.org
or Google for “TOPOFF (1, 2, 3 and 4)”
Search on Your Own-Search Terms Examples

Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness, Homeland Security Preparedness
Grants, Homeland Security Exercises, Joint Terrorism Task Forces, Homeland
Security Response, Homeland Security Planning, Homeland Security and Public
Health, Homeland Security and Crisis and Risk Communications, State and Local
Homeland Security Planning and Preparedness, Public Safety and Homeland
Security, National Guard and Homeland Security, TOPOFF
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Who has or should have the primary responsibility and authority (Federal, state, local; and private sector) for ensuring the security, safety and resiliency of the public before, during and after a terrorist attack? A natural catastrophe? Do or should responsibility and authorities change over the course of an event? Is the
Federal Government a reliable resource? Why or why not?
2.
What are the most important “must have” components for acceptable public safety, security and resiliency at the state and local levels with respect to homeland security?
3.
When the Federal Government issues an elevated terror alert level, what should the response be at the local and state levels? What can and should be expected out of the Federal Government to address immediate needs of state and local jurisdictions?
4.
How should local jurisdictions plan and prepare for the “rare event”
(catastrophic terrorist attack, including with WMD)? What should they have in place or readily available? What are the Federal Government’s roles and responsibilities to ensure appropriate preparedness and preparation occurs?
5.
How does or should crisis and risk communication work into public preparedness for, response to and recovery from catastrophic events? What are the roles and responsibilities of the Federal, state and local authorities in this regard and what constitutes effective programs and actions in these areas? What should governments, and the public and private sectors be doing?
Spring Break, March 6, No Class (Spring Break)
Session 8, March 13: U.S. Homeland Security in the Context of Global Security
Read Aheads:

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 6

Hoffman, Chapter 8 - 9

National Military Strategy, 2004, www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2005/d20050318nms.pdf


CRS Issue Brief: “Terrorism and National Security: Issues and Trends”; for summaries of available versions go to www.opencrs.cdt.org/document/IB10119 or for current version [2006] go to www.usembassy.gov/en/download/pdf/natl_sec.pdf
or to CRS website

Global Challenges of WMD Terrorism, www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2007/c-rpt-terrorism-2006-04

United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism, www.un.org/terrorism (search site, including “Global Strategy to Counter Terrorism”)

UN Resolutions 1373 and 1540 ( www.un.org
or Google and locate)

Visit the Biological Weapons and Toxins Convention website at www.opbw.org
, click on “BTWC” at top for BWTC treaty, download and scan, scan site

Visit the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons website at www.opcw.org
and scan, scan site

The Diplomacy of Counterterrorism: Lessons Learned, Ignored and Disputed,
U.S. Institute of Peace, Special Report No. 80, 14 January 2002 (can locate via
Internet and download)

Search on Your Own-Search Terms Examples: Poverty and Terrorism, U.S.
Foreign Policy and Terrorism, International Agreements, Policies and Terrorism,
International Actions, Military Operations and Terrorism, Diplomacy and
Terrorism, Health and Terrorism, Hunger and Terrorism, Drugs and Terrorism,
Weapons Trafficking and Terrorism, Human Trafficking and Terrorism, Military
Assistance and Terrorism, WMD Proliferation and Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Terrorism, Counterproliferation and Terrorism, Trafficking and WMD,
Religion and International Terrorism, International Extremism and Terrorism
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
What are the three most important global problems or conditions which impact on the security of the U.S. homeland? If you were President, how would you go about solving it and its most important attendant issues?
2.
What are the key interdependencies between global security, U.S. national security and U.S. homeland security? In your view, what are the best approaches to addressing and strengthening those interdependencies for success in the long term? How should an American administration lead and represent U.S. and global interests in the areas you have chosen? Which countries are or should be our strongest partners?
3.
What elements and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission address homeland security in the context of global security? Do you agree with these as being effective and necessary measures? Why or why not? Have these been effectively pursued or addressed by the Bush Administration? Why or why not? What were the responsibilities and shortcomings of the Clinton and previous Administrations which contributed to the conditions and situations faced by the Bush
Administration?
4.
What are the major contributions to global insecurity and instability in the world today? How door should these affect or influence planning, preparedness and response with respect to U.S. homeland security?

5.
If cost and time were not issues, what are or would be the most effective international “systems” initiatives to reduce the threat, effects and impacts of terrorism both globally and on the U.S? (Think big, strategically and from a
“systems perspective”)?
Part 2: Topical Foci, with Scenarios (Provided during Class)
Session 9, March 20: CBRNE Terrorism
Read Aheads:

Sauter and Carafano, Chapter 9

Bullock et al, Chapter 6

Homeland Security Planning Scenarios, www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2004/hsc-planning-scenarios-jul04
(scan 1 - 8, 11-14)

Bioterrorism Agents/Diseases, www.bt.cdc.gov/Agent/agentlist.asp

IED/Booby Traps, www.golbalsecurity.org/military/intro/ied.htm

Improvised Explosive Device Defeat (Excerpts, chapters 1 – 5), www.fas.org/irp/doddir/fmi3-34-119-excerpt

Chemical Agents, http://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/agentlistchem.asp

NTI Website Resources on Radiological Terrorism, http://204.71.60.37/e_research/e3_special_radtrafficking.html

The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060715-3.html

Improvised Nuclear Devices and Nuclear Terrorism, The WMD Commission
Number 2, www.wmdcommission.org/files/no2/pdf

Search on Your Own-Useful Search Terms: WMD Terrorism; CBRNE Terrorism;
Biological Terrorism; Bioterrorism; Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response;
Chemical Terrorism et al; Radiological Terrorism et al; Dirty Bomb; Improvised
Nuclear Device; Nuclear Terrorism; Terrorists Seeking or Acquiring Biological,
Chemical, Radiological and Nuclear Weapons; Improvised Explosive Devices,;
Anarchist’s Cookbook; Poor Man’s James Bond (Four Volumes); Poisoner’s
Handbook
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Can terrorist attacks with weapons of mass destruction (weapons of mass effect) on U.S. soil be prevented?
2.
What is the greatest threat to the U.S. homeland with regard to WMD/WME, chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or conventional explosives? Why? Are the risks increasing or decreasing? a.
What would have greater societal impact, a bioterrorism attack or an attack using an improvised nuclear device? Improvised radiological device? Improvised chemical device?

3.
What measures would be most effective in reducing the risk of WMD terrorism against the U.S. homeland? (hint: think “systems”)
4.
Is it likely or unlikely that the U.S. homeland will experience suicide bombings in the next 5 years? If your answer is “yes”, what should be done to best prepare, plan and reduce the risks? (hint: think “systems”) If your answer is “no”, what do you base this on?
5.
How should the U.S. tackle the problem of intentions, development, acquisition and use of CBRNE by extremists?
Session 10, March 27: Homeland Security and Movement: Transportation, Immigration,
Air, Maritime and Border Security
Read Aheads:

Bullock et al., Chapter 5, pp. 205 – 228

HSPDs 2 (Combating Terrorism through Immigration Policies), 6 (Integration and
Use of Screening Information), 11 (Comprehensive Terrorist-Related Screening
Procedures), and 13 (Maritime Security Policy, also NSPD-41); NSPD 22
(Trafficking in Persons), www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/index

National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel, May 2, 2006, 45 ppg

National Strategy for Aviation Security, March 26, 2007, 29 ppg

Air Domain Awareness Surveillance and Intelligence Integration Plan, March 26,
2007. www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hspd_16domsurvintelplan.pdf

Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability. 2006. Michael Greenberg et al. Rand
Corporation, 199 ppg (scan, suggested; go to www.rand.org
or will be provided)

The Strategic Challenge of Border Security. Testimony by Michael Wermuth and
K. Jack Riley, Rand Corporation. In front of the U. S. House of Representatives
Homeland Security Committee, Subcommittee on Borders, Maritime and Global
Counterterrorism, March 8, 2007 (go to www.rand.org
or will be provided)

Border Security and the Terrorist Threat. Testimony by K. Jack Riley, Rand
Corporation. In front of the U. S. House of Representatives Committee on
Homeland Security, Subcommittees on Economic Security, Infrastructure
Protection and Cybersecurity and Emergency Preparedness, Science and
Technology, August 8, 2006 (go to www.rand.org
or will be provided)

Useful Links: www.dhs.gov
(e.g., click on links under Secure and Open Borders at bottom of main page; click on Prevention and Protection at top of main page and go to Container Security Initiative Ports; click on Commerce and Trade at top, go to Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism), www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/pubs

Search on Your Own-Search Terms Examples: Air Domain Awareness; Maritime
Domain Awareness; Immigration and Homeland Security; Commercial Aviation and Homeland Security; Borders and Homeland Security; FAA and Commercial
Aviation Security; Railroads and Homeland Security; Commercial Trucking and
Homeland Security; USA VISIT; Coast Guard and Homeland Security;
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,; Customs and Border Protection

Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Is it possible to fully secure the borders of the U.S. against all serious threats to homeland security which could be delivered through transportation, immigration and across our borders?
2.
If you had the authority and resources to design and implement three national or international programs to reduce the risks to homeland security here (and elsewhere) through these means, what would they be and what would have to be accomplished to reduce risks to acceptable levels? Could the U.S. (or international community) accept and afford your programs?
3.
Could an attack of the scale of 9/11 (or greater) be repeated today against the
U.S. homeland? Why or why not? If so, how could you envision it being carried out given the “systems” that are in place (or not) today?
4.
What is the appropriate national immigration policy that ensures public security, safety and stability at the national, state and local levels? Would the U.S.
Executive and Legislative Branches have the political will and commit the resources to carry out your policy?
5.
In your view, do serious threats to homeland security already exist within U.S. borders of types and capabilities that no transportation, immigration and border security policies, programs and practices can defend against?
Session 11, April 3: Closely Examining a Related Set of Infrastructures: Public Health and Agriculture (and touching on other selected infrastructures)
Read Aheads:

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. 2006. Globalization,
Biosecurity and the Future of the Life Sciences. National Academies Press,
Washington, DC. , 299 ppg

National Research Council. 2003. Countering Agricultural Bioterrorism. National
Academies Press, Washington, DC.169 ppg

National Research Council. 2004. Biotechnology Research in an Age of
Terrorism. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. 147 ppg

Useful Links o A collection of government agency documents is available at http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/resources/govt_docs/index.html
Federal legislation related to U.S. biosecurity is available at http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/resources/govt_legislation/index.html

Search on Your Own- Examples of Useful Search Terms: Biosecurity and Public
Health; Bioterrorism and Public Health Planning, Preparedness and Response;
Agricultural Bioterrorism and Impacts; Food Security; Protecting the Food
Supply; Agricultural Biosecurity; U.S. Public Health Infrastructure and
Bioterrorism Preparedness; Biowatch; Bioshield; Biosense; Pandemic Flu and

Homeland Security; Avian Flu and Homeland Security; Foot and Mouth Disease and Biosecurity
Optional (scan as desired):

Institute of Medicine. 2002. Biological Threats and Terrorism. National Academy
Press, Washington, DC. 367 ppg
Think Ahead: Thematic Discussion Questions
1.
Is it realistic to think that a bioterrorism attack will inflict mass casualties on the
U.S. population? Is it necessary to cause mass casualties in order to inflict terror through the use of a biological weapon?
2.
What would have the greater societal impacts and effects, a realistic and executable bioterrorism (or related) attack against human populations or an agricultural sector target? (Hint: think systems) Either way, how would you envision such an attack and its impacts unfolding?
3.
Should a pandemic be considered as a threat to national security?
4.
Does the U.S. “have it right” with regard to its priorities and programs in bioterrorism preparedness and response? If “yes” why; if “no” what should the priorities and program investments be?
5.
With respect to the advancement of the life sciences and current and new generations of biological weapons, how would the recommendations of the previously referenced Institute of Medicine study work into a “systems approach” in addressing bioterrorism and homeland security?
6.
How could a significant bioterrorism attack (any scale) affect other key U.S. infrastructure sectors? In your view, how could this be accomplished? Would an attack of this type impact homeland security? How quickly and well could it be determined that it was one or the other? How quickly and well could recovery and restoration be instituted?
Session 12, April 10: Science and Technology and Homeland Security
Read Aheads:

National Research Council. 2002. Making the Nation Safer: The Role of Science and Technology in Countering Terrorism. The National Academies Press,
Washington, DC 415 ppg (Executive Summary and scan through recommendations and synopses)

National Research Council. 2007. Science and Security in a Post-9/11 World: A
Report Based on Regional Discussions Between the Science and Security
Communities. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC 120 ppg

Cragin, Kim, Peter Chalk, Sara A. Daly and Brian Jackson. 2007. Sharing the
Dragon’s Teeth: Terrorist Groups and the Exchange of New Technologies. Rand
Corporation, Washington DC and Santa Monica CA, 136 ppg
Task:


Focusing on a homeland security area, infrastructure, policy, threat or vulnerability of interest to you, (e.g., using key words drawn from the recommendations in Making the Nation Safer or previous class sessions, use or create search terms, or other available sources) do a ‘thumbnail assessment’ on the state of science and technology or related programs; focus on problem, how science and technology has been used or delivered and success, shortfall or failure of approach, program or deliverable; be prepared to discuss
Optional:

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. 2005. An International
Perspective on Advancing Technologies and Strategies for Managing Dual-Use
Risks: Report of a Workshop. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
141 ppg

The National Research Council. 2007. Countering the Threat of Improvised
Explosive Devices: Basic Research Opportunities. The National Academies Press,
Washington, DC 36 ppg (free download available at www.nas.edu
)
Think Ahead: Thematic and Discussion Questions/Tasks
1.
From your perspective, what are or should be the 3 – 4 highest priority science and technology or science and technology policy-enabled initiatives or systems that should (must) be in place to contribute most significantly to U.S. homeland security? Which allow for the “biggest bang for the buck” against what you think is the greatest threat to homeland security?
2.
How can science and technology be misused in the name of homeland security?
(Use examples or scenarios). If the technology capabilities are necessary in your view to address homeland security priorities, what should or must be in place to ensure their appropriate use? Ex: Is extensive telecommunication and information system surveillance by the U.S. Intelligence Community (which includes agencies that have domestic law enforcement functions and authorities) a necessary and appropriate use or misuse of technology? Why or why not?
3.
Review the recommendations the NRC study “Making the Nation Safer”; do science and technology alone make a significant impact on homeland security?
Which and how have these recommendations been pursued (successfully, modified or unsuccessfully) Note: Based on the recommendations articulate (an existing) or fashion (a notional) system that has to be in place for the outcome to have significant impact (benefit/cost).
Session 13, April 17: Should Dealing with Natural Disasters Be Part of the U.S.
Homeland Security System?
Read Aheads:

The White House. 2006. Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons
Learned. www.whitehouse.gov/reports/katrina-lessons-learned

Homeland Security Planning Scenarios, 9 and 10, www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2004/hsc-planning-scenarios-jul04

Task:

Search On Your Own: Coverage, assessments, analyses and criticisms of Federal response by US Government homeland security (civilian) and homeland defense
(military) organizations to natural disasters in the past 5 years (major weather systems, large scale fires, earthquakes, major floods etc), focus on a particular event and the response and recovery and responsible organizations.
Think Ahead: Thematic and Discussion Questions/Tasks
1.
Do or could major natural disasters impact our homeland security in a significant way?
2.
Currently, is the U.S. Government properly organized and resourced to effectively address natural disasters and recovery? (Think “systems”.) If not, what major recommendations would you make to address what you see at gaps and shortcomings?
3.
What were and are the major “systems failures” in the Government’s preparedness, response and recovery to Hurricane Katrina?
4.
What is the responsibility of the Federal Government to state and local governments and non-government organizations with respect to major natural disasters (non man-made: weather, geophysical, health, environmental)?
5.
Is addressing natural disasters a proper mission area of the Department of
Homeland Security? If not, how should the Government be organized to best address natural emergencies as well as homeland security?
Session 14 April 24: Course Wrap-Up and Final Presentations (Annotated Bibliographies
Due)
Session 15, May 1: (Exam Day, Spill Over for Final Presentations)