NSWBCN Strategy All Hazards Interagency Challenges P5 IP HLS650 VC 1501B 01 Homeland Security and Government John J Cederstrom

Running head: NSWBCN STRATEGY, CHALLENGES 1

NSWBCN Strategy, All Hazards, Interagency Challenges

John J. Cederstrom

P5 IP: Interagency Processes and Challenges

HLS650-VC-1501B-01 Homeland Security and Government

Instructor: Dr. Billing

Due: 03/23/2015

Some work repurposed from P4 IP this class and Professor

NSWBCN STRATEGY, CHALLENGES 2

Abstract

National Southwest Border Counternarcotic, NSWBCN, Strategy is an integral part to the

security of the United States, U.S., homeland, peoples, and infrastructure, (CTUO, 2015). The

highlights of the NSWBCN will be looked at and an explanation of the core missions and

policies for homeland security interagency involvement and planning, over lapping missions and

areas, interagency communications and intelligence sharing, (CTUO, 2015). Key parts that affect

the U.S., its people and private sectors, outlining critical infrastructure protection, how the

NSWBCN sections help the border states and are conducive to affecting a favorable outcome for

them will be looked at as well as other areas and threats and hazards, (CTUO, 2015). This will

include looking at a scenario of border infiltration and weapons of mass destruction, WMD, by

known methods across the southwest borders by terrorist from the Middle East region, (CTUO,

2015). Highlights of the all-threat environment in the southwest border area; also primary and

secondary threats will be looked into, (CTUO, 2014). Outlining the scenario of the bringing of

WMD’s across the southwest border and the threat it consists of, and means of stopping,

diverting, or diffusing the attempts, (CTUO, 2015). To include explaining the facts of why this

region needs greater focus and concern as well as proposed plans to help the situation, (CTUO,

2015). A quad chart supporting planning variables and cross-domain strategies is to be included

as well as, cooperation, collaboration, and integration of methods and policies between U.S. and

Mexico, and finally showing a list of inter-agency cooperation and hierarchy, (CTUO, 2015). A

brief conclusion will follow.


NSWBCN Strategy and All Hazards Strategy

Strategic Purpose

The strategic importance of the NSWBCN highlights and explains the policies that are in

place to face the problems that are being had in southwest Mexico- U.S. border. The highlights

of this policy is to stop or curb the transport and sale of drugs, weapons, cash, and methods of

doing and transporting these as well as cutting the flow of people that are involved in these

illegal activities into the U.S. by the southwest border, (ONDCP, 2013). It also involves the

stopping the flow out of the U.S. of the same into Mexico where the majority of the marijuana

and methamphetamines come into the U.S. from; thus helping to reduce the funds that enable the

drug cartels to carry on their activities, (ONDCP, 2013). Another part of the NSWBCN policy is

to form stronger and safer border communities as well as work with the Mexican government to

thwart the efforts of the drug cartels efforts to bring illegal drugs, other contraband, and people

into the U.S., (ONDCP, 2013). All these steps are needed to help strengthen the southwest border

thus strengthening the security of U.S. border, its citizens, and its infrastructure.

The private sector has been subjected to unprecedented violence and intimidation from

the drug cartels the are trafficking in the drugs, weapons, people, and other contraband into the

U.S. by way of the southwest borders and the adjoining ports in the cities of the mid-western

states, (ONDCP, 2013). The government agencies are being influenced in similar ways with

attacks on federal, state, and local officials and agents, corruption by bribes and other methods to

cause government officials, port workers, and border agents to help facilitate the illegal activities

or just simply look the other way while the crimes are being committed; either way it needs to be

looked at and dealt with in the U.S. and primarily more so in Mexico, (ONDCP, 2013). The

federal agents, police, and judicial workers in Mexico are greatly under-paid compared to most


public servants in other countries and can triple their average 10k a year salary simply by turning

a blind eye and not noticing wrong doing; this has to change for there to be a nation-wide shift in

Mexico to stop, dissuade, or curb illegal border crossings or activities, (Lee, 2014).

Scenario

The presence of middle-eastern terrorist is documented several times by congressional

committees, border control authorities, and Arizona and Texas authorities and they are trying to

get more done on their borders, (Allen, 2012). Several plausible scenarios can be acted out and

researched on it, training implemented for it; but it will not happen without action being taken. In

2010 near Naco, Arizona and Mexico border two Bangladesh transnational terrorist were

arrested, when they tried to cross the border, (Allen, 2012). The count in late 2010 was that

almost 60,000, other than Mexican, nationalities were arrested trying to cross the U.S. and

Mexico border and some 800 were from terrorist watch countries like Afghanistan, Syria, and

Iran, (Allen, 2012). These illegal border crossings happened by many different ways from

swimming the Rio Grande River, being smuggled in by drug smugglers, or simply paying to be

brought in by air, sea, or land somehow, (Allen, 2012). A video by Abdullah al-Nafisi stated that

there was no need for planes as bombs but that a suitcase holding just 4 pounds of anthrax,

dispersed properly in a large city, could kill 300,000 or more U.S. citizens making 9/11 seem

tiny by comparison; that is if one Muslim fighter carried it in to the U.S. by the tunnels in

Mexico, (The Washington Times, 2009). The video by al-Nafisi also said that al Qaeda planned

to bomb U.S. nuclear plants and that they should ally themselves with groups that are against the

U.S. government like the Neo-Nazis or white supremacy groups, (The Washington Times, 2009).

The main threat here is the need to improve security of the south west border of the U.S.

Primary and Secondary Threats


The primary threat to U.S. is that the southwest border of the U.S. and Mexico, 1951

miles of it, is largely unfenced and unmanned and poses a real threat to the security of the U.S.,

its citizens, and critical infrastructure, (Schaefer & Gonzalez, 2010). The primary threat from

these areas is border crossings by radical Muslim terrorist with WMD’s that pose a real danger to

the U.S., (Schaefer & Gonzalez, 2010). The ease of crossing the border in the southwest and also

threats like the one from Abdullah al-Nafisi and his telling terrorist to cross the border in Mexico with

WND’s or that there are plans to bomb U.S. Nuclear facilities should cause alarm with the U.S.

government, the border states, such as Arizona, Texas, California, and New Mexico, (The Washington

Post, 2009). The secondary threat to the security of the southwest border and the danger of illegal

crossings is the fact that drug smugglers are forming relationships with Muslim terrorist to

further their own agendas and also tie into the amount of money and weapons the terrorist

possess and have access to, (Allen, 2012). The case to show this is in 2005 two Hamas terrorist,

Mahmoud Khalil and Ziad Saleh, were arrested in Los Angeles in an illegal operation after

giving a drug smuggler $10,000 each to be brought across the border; by all standards this should

be alarming to U.S. officials, law makers, and emergency and law enforcement workers, (Allen,

2012). Also in 2005, an Iraqi al-Qaeda terrorist was arrested near the Brownsville, Texas/

Mexico border and was training at a known terrorist-narcotics military training camp in Mexico;

this should be a wakeup call to the U.S. that something needs to be done to better secure the

southwest border, (Allen, 2012).

Multi-agency Effort, Cooperation, Sharing Needed

The main agencies involved in the south west border security are the U.S. Customs and

Border Protection, CBP, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, FBI, the U.S. Immigration and

Customs Enforcement’s, ICE, the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA, the Department of


Homeland Security, DHS and others, but these agencies along with the U.S. Coast Guard try to

enforce border, immigration, and criminal laws as well as secure the border and ports, (ONDCP,

2013). Figure 2 shows a more comprehensive chart on the organizational set up of the DHS.

The Department of Homeland Security Organizational Chart - 2010

(Chesbro, 2014) Figure Organizational chart DHS. Figure 2

This organizational set up of securing the border is headed by DHS and CBP to keep the borders

secure and other federal participants are agencies like the FBI, ICE, and DEA which are a big

part of the federal task force to secure the border, (ONDCP, 2013). These agencies are also

tasked to coordinate efforts with state, local, and tribal authorities, as well as with each other, to

monitor any illegal border actions and then move to prevent it, stop it, dissuade, or apprehend

those responsible, (ONCDP, 2013). Coordinating these different agencies and entities with their


different priorities, agendas, and levels of readiness and expertise can be an overwhelming task

even with proper legislation and funding from the government to make communications and

resource allocation better and a priority, (CTUO, 2015). Difficulty in coordinating intelligence of

a top secret nature, since not all stakeholders in this arena have differing levels of security

clearances, is one challenge; as well as some agencies understanding or misunderstanding as to

what their authority in the matter and operational boundaries are, can pose still other problems,

(Kettl, 2014). This kind of problem left unchecked or dealt with will handicap law enforcement,

federal agents, and will hinder securing the borders and allow delays in getting critical areas of

the border monitored and secured. Cost and funding are another frustrating aspect of securing the

border in that every area has its own needs, priorities, and agenda to see their specific needs met.

The DHS needs to take the lead in seeing that funds, technology, and all needed resources are

allocated according to critical areas so that a better, comprehensive strategy of a secured border

is the result; and working with private landowners and businesses along the southwest border to

shore up their own security measures, (CBP, 2012). The southwest border is almost 2000 miles

of rough terrain; only with an integrated, multi-agency, multi-state, combined with local, private,

and tribal agencies will an effective security task force, and secure border be had, (CTUO, 2015).

The need to utilize the local authorities, people, and tribal elements, that understand the local

needs and the terrain, back roads, and country that the federal agents, who could be from all

over, will not have to gain their acquired knowledge in a short time. This is why a better and

thorough look at existing policies, procedures, and resource allocation should take place and

redone to meet an ever changing and evolving border threat by drug cartels, Islamic or

transnational terrorist, and criminals, (CTUO, 2015).

Concerns to Address


The Tohono O'odham Nation, an American Indian Tribe with a reservation at the U.S. /

Mexico border in Arizona, has a wide, open section of unfenced border where federal, tribal, and

local authorities have had a hard time keeping the drug and people smugglers, weapons, money,

and other contraband from crossing the border since it is mainly unprotected except for a motor

vehicle barrier designed to keep vehicles out but not people or smugglers, (Pitts & Lieberman,

2013). Just another example of an under manned, resourced and unprotected border area which is

the size of Connecticut that has become a hot bed of border illegal border crossings and activities

of all kinds, (Pitts & Lieberman, 2013). The reservation in itself should be a cause for concern

enough to have authorities come together, pool resources, technologies, and become more

proactive at securing the southwest border from being overrun by these transnational terrorist,

smugglers, and people. The land owners, ranchers, and businesses which are on the border have

the same problems with the same issues on their land that they are often left to deal with,

(CTUO, 2015). It is time to have an actual plan, with a budget, and a completion date to be

researched, made, put into operation, and also completed so the southwest border can be secure.

The main inefficiencies are in resource allocation, man-power, and lack of a concrete barrier to

keep illegal crossings from happening, (CBP, 2012). Advances have been made, but the rate of

progress in securing the southern border is going at to slow a pace compared to the rate at which

those crossing it, illegally, are crossing over. Time for action is now in this area of security that

is lacking. The vast expanses of the southern border that are not being patrolled, monitored, or

secured according to the agencies that have the job of doing it, like CBP, is definitely lacking

and falling short, (CBP, 2012).

Governance and Challenges, Recommendations


CBP. (2011). Photo Fig. 1

Figure 1 above says it all; it is a vast and tough terrain to be navigated with few roads,

ways of getting around the length of the border. The Patriot Act is a one needed law, but needs to

ensure that it does not violate the 4th amendment which states ; U.S. citizens are not subject to

unreasonable searches and seizures and are to be secure in their persons, house, and papers,

(Pease, 2013). The Patriot Act has sections that allow for indiscriminate wiretaps on all phones;

the taking of emails, and holding people or citizens without cause for a certain time and that

violates U.S. citizen’s civil and constitutional rights, (Pease, 2013). The need for non-citizens to

be investigated and held or just deported is something that recent administrations have been not

wanted to do. This seems to be against the core mission and directives of the DHS to secure the


borders and keep U.S. citizens safe and secure, (CTUO, 2015). The policy of having a set

standard of searches, checks, and protocol by countries on both sides of the southern and

northern borders is a needed and lacking item in border security, (DHS, 2010). Communication,

intelligence sharing, and direction of efforts is the main need for a secure border, a cross between

technology, hands on searching, and observation by multiple agencies, federal, local, tribal, and

private, (Kettl, 2014). Participants in the border security are all aspects of DHS, Border Agents,

Immigration agents, FBI agents, and many others agencies with offices and support personnel on

either side of the border, (CBP, 2011). Challenges to securing the southwest border start with the

vastness of the area; it is almost 2000 miles of harsh terrain, (Schaefer & Gonzalez, 2010). About

900 miles of these 2000 miles is fenced, considered to be managed, or secure, (Barry, 2011). The

limited resources; lack of manpower by border control agents, not so for those trying to smuggle

drugs, people, money, terrorist, or weapons across the border, whether in or out of the U.S., these

smugglers and terrorist have the financial resources to get across the border, (Schaefer &

Gonzalez, 2010). These parts of the southwest border make it the prime spot for terrorist to

attempt to bring weapons of mass destruction into the U. S. and attack its citizens or

infrastructure, (CTUO, 2015).

A lack of a concrete fence, double fence with sensors and razor wire, monitored regularly,

makes it easy for illegal border crossings, (CTUO, 2015). Border agents are outnumbered every

time they confront illegal border crossers; these mostly in remote areas where back-up are miles

away, (Pavlich, 2013). Border agents have been injured, killed, and recently one officer was shot

in the head when he confronted 3 armed illegal border crossers; only one of his killers were ever

arrested, (Pavlich, 2013). Also one officer attempted to halt 150 illegal border crossers and even

when back up arrived the mob threw rocks and bottles at the agents, (Pavlich, 2013).


Communications and culture barriers can be a challenge when securing the southwest border

since the Mexican population, the drug dealers, and Mexican authorities speak Spanish and the

drug lords are often either feared or looked at as good people since they employ many in Mexico,

Mexican agents also, (CTUO, 2015). The problem needs to be dealt with on all levels and

progress on a secured border and keeping the border agents safe should be a priority. There are,

in some cases, offices of different agencies with similar functions located in the same city near

the border; cutting redundant practices and spreading these agencies services further apart along

the border would help to cut down on waste, replication of actions, and help secure the border in

more areas, (CTUO, 2015). Taking risk assessments, resource allocation charts, and tracking

usage and comparing it to actual needs based on frontline reports, would cut costs, waste, and

have better resource allocation, thus a more secure border, and be more compliant to laws

requiring accountability, (CTUO, 2015). The last recommendation for a secure border is to set in

motion the planning for, the financing for, and the building of a concrete, double fenced barrier

with a wide open road along the length of the border to make monitoring the border easier,

responding to problems faster, and to keep illegal border crossings to a minimum, (Schaefer &

Gonzalez, 2010).

National Border Protection, Preparedness, CIKR

There are 9 main points to look at in the strategy of NSWBCN and the main points of the

strategy are listed to help explain, discuss, and to show justification for getting federal grants or

appropriations for the states that border Mexico, (CTUO, 2015). There are 9 strategic objectives

which will help in getting funding for these states once the governors have applied for the

assistance and allocation amounts and sectors are diagnosed, (The Whitehouse, 2013). These

objectives are as follows: 1, increase criminal intelligence, information sharing capabilities,


processes, and procedures associated with the Southwest border, (The Whitehouse, 2013). 2.

Intercept, prevent drugs, drug proceeds, and associated instruments of violence at the ports,

points of entry, and check points set at random along the Southwest border, (The Whitehouse,

2013). 3. Intercept, prevent drugs, drug proceeds, and associated instruments of violence

between the ports, or entry points along the Southwest border, (The Whitehouse). 4. Intercept,

prevent drugs, drug proceeds, and associated illegal activities in the air, water, or land domains

along the Southwest border, (The Whitehouse, 2013). 5. intercept, take down, or inhibit terrorist,

drug trafficking, or criminal operations along the Southwest border by increasing investigations,

arrest, and prosecutions, (The Whitehouse, 2013). Steps 6 & 7. Prevent, disrupt, or dissuade the

flow of illegal proceeds, drugs, weapons, monies across the Southwest border into Mexico, (The

Whitehouse, 2013). 8. Develop strong, prosperous, safe, and resilient communities that are

resistant to criminal activity and promote healthy lifestyles, (The Whitehouse, 2013). Lastly, 9.

increase and develop U.S.–Mexico cooperation on joint counter-narcotic efforts, policies,

procedures, laws, and joint operations, (The Whitehouse, 2013). These objectives, efforts, and

strategies will enable the federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, agents, and authorities to gain

needed funds and resources from the government and other ventures to enhance border security

in each of these states once proper documentation from the states governors is received and

funding along established guidelines is approved. This means that their borders will be better

protected, secure, and with better resources and funding. The man-power and technology can be

better allocated, more people put in place, and a larger area of the border with Mexico under

better, active surveillance, and monitoring, (CTUO, 2015). It is a joint responsibility of federal,

state, local, and tribal agencies and elected officials to secure the U.S. borders and to make sure

proper funding and resource allocation is available, (Kettl, 2014). Funding is available through


the U.S. Patriot Act, since it includes proactive and reactive parts as well as immigration laws to

thwart illegal entrance into the U.S. and can help in apprehension, arrest, prosecution, and

deportation of illegal peoples, criminals, terrorist, and their sympathizers, by and out of, the U.S.,

(Bach, 2005). Other possible funding act are: the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012, the

Ultralight Aircraft Smuggling Prevention Act of 2012, Homeland Security Act of 2002,

Intelligence Reform And Terrorism Prevention Act Of 2004, the Jaime Zapata Border

Enforcement Security Task Force Act and other Acts as is needed to get the proper funding for

the states and border security, (DHS, 2014), (The Whitehouse, 2013). The suggestion and need

is for the Governors to be involved in requesting, getting, and distributing the needed funding for

their states to improve efforts to secure the Southwest border of the U.S.

Critical Infrastructure, Response, Resilience

The southwest border critical infrastructure response and recovery initiatives should be

integrated into future policy by having more men, resources, and advanced technology available

for the agencies for a secure southwest border, (CTUO, 2015). Response means to have the

means, equipment, people, plans, policies, and funding to respond to terrorist threat, border

incursion, smugglers, and natural or man-made disasters, meeting these threats head on to help

defeat, dissuade, discourage, or stop the threat and help any U.S. citizens, infrastructure, or way

of life continue and prosper despite the intended result of the threat or event, (DHS, 2013). To

assess the level of readiness and response and to what extent to prepare for being resilient, the

DHS uses risk assessments for planning, coordinating resources, equipment, people, and

responders, (DHS, 2013). These risk assessments are based on known or imagined threats,

events, or disasters so preparations for an all hazards-environment like, smugglers, weapons

traders, or tornadoes along the southwest border can have a plan to respond and for resilience for


a quick come back from a worst case scenario event, (DHS, 2013). Prevention can be to strike

first to keep something from happening, response is to react to a threat in progress to stop it,

thwart it, dissuade it, or absorb it, and resilience is to lessen the effect of a threat, disaster, or

event, man-made or naturally occurring, so as to lessen the time critical services and

infrastructures are down and unavailable, (CTUO, 2015). The need for an all hazards plan and

preparation, risk assessments and priorities made for most likely targets, establish partnerships

with federal, state, local, tribal, and private sector entities that can provide different and thus a

more complete blanket of response and resiliency to possible threats and disasters, (DHS, 2014).

Consistent prioritization, risk assessment is essential to focus planning, boost coordination, and

support effective resource allocation and threat or disaster management decisions supporting

critical infrastructure and key resource protection, (DHS, 2010). Planning, information and

intelligence sharing, resources, and skilled people to make it all happen is the best way to have a

proper response ready and resilience possible. The best recommendation for a good response is

to have prior planning, risk assessments, mock disasters or threats to respond to, and multi-

agency involvement as well as cross domain exercises included to better respond to all-hazards,

asymmetrical threat when it does occur, (CTUO, 2015). Recommendations to improve resilience

is to have critical infrastructure behind hardened barriers, keep supplies on hand like medicines,

gear, materials, and transportation for workers and victims to be able to get critical infrastructure

like electricity, water, and medical care, available quickly and without much delay, (CTUO,

2015). Preparations, planning, logistics, risk assessments, and resource allocation to critical

holding areas are key to being resilient, (DHS, 2013).

Quad Chart Planning Variables Cross-Domain


Air-Domain

Federal Aviation Administration

Department of Transportation

U.S. Marshalls Office

Aviation Security Directives

Coordinating Intelligence with Cyber and Land

Domains

Transnational Terrorist have changing agendas and avenues of attack

Threats, disasters, cyber-attacks, Limited

manpower and resources, coordination of interagency operations with other domains

Intercept weapons, drugs, contraband, money,

terrorist and weapons of mass destruction

all threats environment, all hazards, whole nation approach

Coordinate with Mexico on policies and

procedures

Maritime-Domain

Coast Guard

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Budget constraints, multiple ports of entry and

vast expanses of water ways and oceans.

Threats disasters, cyber-attacks, limited resources and manpower

Large amounts of imports of all kinds to

inspect

Coordination of intelligence and inter-agency objectives with other domains

Intercept drugs, smugglers, weapons, money,

illegal aliens, terrorist

all threats environment, all hazards, whole nation approach

Coordinate with Mexico on policies and

procedures

Land-Domain

Federal Bureau of Investigations

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

U.S. Immigration and Customs

Enforcement

Department of Justice

Secure borders, 2000 miles of rough terrain on southern border, limited coverage of the border

Intercept terrorist, transnationals, illegal aliens,

drugs, weapons, money, weapons of mass destruction, smugglers, all threats environment,

all hazards, whole nation approach

Monitor points of entry and search vehicles

Arrest and prosecute violators

Cyber-Domain

Federal Bureau of Investigations

Department of Justice

Department of Energy

Monitor activities on World Wide Web, intercept and translate transmissions, emails, and other information and intelligence of

suspected terrorist and criminals

Protect Energy critical infrastructure, nuclear facilities, intercept terrorist plots, stop attacks

and infiltrations

Prosecute violators, secure cyber-domains of critical infrastructure

Coordinate with other allied nations to increase

a global net


Coordinate with Mexico on policies and procedures

Figure 2. Cross-Domain Planning Agencies and Variables

Variables in planning and coordination with multiple agencies and entities is that each

agency is apt to protect its own turf and primary missions and goals, might hesitate to share all

intelligence with other agencies trying to secure the border, duplication of task, and lack of

centralized command and communications structure and also cultures of different agencies vary,

(Kettl, 2014). Critical infrastructure and resilience are tied to human, physical, and cyber-

domains and are also a vital part of homeland security and keeping the nation functioning at a

peak level, (CTUO, 2015). The Department of Homeland Security and the National Intelligence

Agency are the leading agencies that the other agencies and divisions, state, local, and tribal

agencies all report to keep a flow of command, intelligence, and vital information as well as

people, resources, and assets to keep the multi-agency, multi-threat, all nation, and all hazard

approach to national security and securing the vast expanses of the southwest border, water

ways, airways, and cyber domains secure, (CTUO, 2015). The human variable, the unpredictable

variations that come with the changing threats and natural disasters that can come is a variable of

planning and risk assessment that will keep the planning and policy making at an ever changing

field of all the agencies, working together, to be able to keep up with, (Kettl, 2014). Risk

assessment, giving values to critical infrastructure to prioritize, keep a firm regimen of training

and information going between agencies and stakeholder, in other words, an all nation, all

hazards, multi-agency cooperation and operations is the best way to avoid break downs in

responses, protection, and resilience, (CTUO, 2015).


International Factors and Mexico/U.S. Cooperation’s

The need for international involvement in securing not only the U.S. borders and other

countries borders is a matter of a multi-nation, multi-agency, all-threats and hazards approach to

help make the cooperation and commitment to border security viable, (CTUO, 2015). In the area

of the southwest border there needs to be several plans and implementations of them between the

U.S. and Mexico, (CTUO, 2015). The most effective plan to increase cooperation and border

security is to make a viable way to make the labor and trade markets between the U.S. and

Mexico better organized, better paying for all parties, and a better and more fluid way for legal

border crossing to have gainful employment within Mexico, the U.S., in traditional low wage,

labor intense industries, like picking fruits from trees in California, pecans in Texas, ranching,

construction, and farming, (Schaefer & Gonzalez, 2010). This would work since the average

minimum salary in Mexico is 6 or more times lower than lower wages in the U.S., (Schaefer &

Gonzalez, 2010). Training exercises, uniform codes and policies for the way officials on both

sides of the southwest border are doing inspections, passport procedures and validations,

immigration standards, and joint agency task-forces and training with the U.S. and Mexico

agents and personnel from multiple agencies and scenarios being involved; like a natural disaster

scenario or a terrorist threat scenario, (CTUO, 2015). Involving the agencies of both federal and

local assets within the communities to take both Mexico and the U.S. to an all-threat, all-hazards,

and risk assessed scenario based, all nations approach to the border security of the joined U.S.

and Mexico Border, (CTUO, 2015). Increase interaction with both nations on intelligence

sharing, cyber-security, data and information on drug cartels, smugglers, and illegal or terrorist

type activities, seize assets of known cartels, use military, law enforcement, and federal agents to

form a combine, multi-nation force to go in and forcibly remove the drug cartels, their


operations, and their products, (CTUO, 2015). These steps, with increase cooperation and

intelligence sharing, and joint task forces with a better labor and trade market between the U.S.

and Mexico would allow the poorer citizens of both countries the ability to be less dependent on

the drug cartels for employment. Cyber-security, monitoring, and tracking of illegal practices,

smuggling operations, human trafficking, and transnational terrorist movements and

communications by the U.S. and Mexico should be an important part of any joint national plan

between the two countries, (CTUO, 2015). The final step would be to seek out, stop, and

prosecute those caught being bribed, paid, or in any way acting in favor of illegal activities or

organization, corruption in government must be the first thing to be stopped for the other plans to

work.

Comprehensive Case Study Review

According to the mission statement of the DHS, it has 5 core missions that it must

adhere; here are five homeland security missions:

1. Prevent terrorism and enhancing security;

2. Secure and manage our borders;

3. Enforce and administer our immigration laws;

4. Safeguard and secure cyberspace;

5. Ensure resilience to disasters, (DHS, 2012).

In the study of the southwest border and the NSWBCN it is quite clear the security is not

enhanced enough, the southwest border is not secure or managed, and the immigration laws are

not being enforced, and sadly terrorist activity on the border is not being regulated or stopped,


(DHS, 2012). The study shows to many flaws in the system and it has not proper plan in the

works to fix border security along Mexico in the near future, mainly due to political, federal,

state, and local bickering over who is going to pay for it, who is going to do the work, and what

does each entity get for their cooperation. The study shows a clear strategy but a gross lack of

funding, manpower, resources, and equipment to make a serious dent in the massive issue of

southwest border security, interdiction, response, and resilience to an asymmetric, all threats and

hazards environment where criminals and transnational terrorist cross the border at will, (CBP,

2014). The main goal is border security and this is based on risk assessments and analysis of

known and possible threat or disasters which results in planning and readiness so that an

unknown threat, hazard, or disaster will be efficiently dealt with based on these analysis and

planning, (CTUO, 2015). Having threat analysis and being able to mock practice and plan for

possible scenarios will make a multi-agency, all-nation interdiction or response to an known or

unknown threat since the agencies involved will already have worked together, communicated,

and collaborated on possible scenarios, (CTUO, 2015). The major challenge to multi-agency

securing of the southwest border is funding, lack of a permanent hardened fence or wall made

from concrete, lack of manpower, resources, and a lack of intelligence sharing in a timely

manner, (CTUO, 2015). The President, Congress and all agencies involved in securing the

southwest border of the U.S. need to get together and get the job done to safe guard the citizens

of the U.S.

Capitol Hill and Funding for NSWBCN Strategy

Congress, the President, and all aspects of the agencies dealing with securing the

southwest border and ports are well aware of the need for action. In putting this comprehensive

report on the NSWBCN strategy and challenges to it before Congress to vote on a budget, plan


of action, and set a tentative completion date will require a major shift in public opinion on the

important issue for U.S. citizens, a major act of terrorism or violence by a criminal faction or

transnational terrorist group on U.S. soil that would kill thousands of innocent men, women, and

children indiscriminately, or, least, likely, for the government to listen to the analysis of this

report and seek to solve the border issues that are putting every U.S. citizen at risk, (Kettl, 2014).

This case study/analysis also would need to go before every governor and state legislature in the

southwest border region first, and other states shortly after, to get the state governors and

legislatures to put pressure on congress to step up and start securing the south west border,

(CTUO, 2015). The analysis sets the tone for a better understanding of further, more in-depth

studies on cost of a concrete barrier, border fence, border road, and a possible time frame for

completion; funds for additional manpower, equipment, and technology to be used to keep any

part of the hardened barrier secure, to monitor the ground for any signs of tunnel boring

activities, and applicable, laws, equipment, and aircraft to secure the border, prevent fly-overs of

the border, and to repel or shoot possible illegal border crossers, smugglers, or transnational, not

Mexican, nationals that could be terrorist, (CTUO, 2015).

Funding will need to come from Congress primarily with the states chipping in some as well as

any private industry or citizens that want to be a part of the endeavor by supplying funds, man-

power, resources, or aide to workers building the concrete barrier. The risk assessments and

analysis have been done; implementation will need to take place of the strategy, and cooperation

and collaboration between the U.S. and Mexican governments will need to happen to make a

unified, multinational front against the drug cartels and transnational terrorist trying to come into

the U.S. by way of the southwest border, (CTUO, 2015).


Conclusion

The government, in short, needs to improve the actual structure of a barrier in the area of

the southwest border to a hardened, concrete, dual walled fence with a clear and easily traversed,

regularly traversed road, with sensors on it as well as drone flyover regularly. The cooperation of

various agencies, non-duplication of functions and intelligence gathering along with information

sharing, is a must have case for a secured southwest border. Lastly there needs to be adequate

research, risk assessments, resource allocation, manpower allocation, funding, and a firm set of

goals and procedures by the U.S. and Mexico so the border is secured on both sides.


References

Allen, S. (2012, March 23). Hezbollah terror threat on U.S.-Mexico border is real. Arizona

Capitol Times. Retrieved from

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/03/23/hezbollah-terror-threat-on-u-s-mexico-

border-is-real/

Bach, R. (2005, June). Transforming border security: prevention first. Homeland Security Affairs 1,

Article 2. Retrieved from https://www.hsaj.org/articles/181

Barry, T. (2011, June 1). Policy on the Edge: Failures of Border Security and New Directions for

Border Control. Center for International Policy. Retrieved from

http://www.ciponline.org/research/html/failures-of-border-security-and-new-directions-

for-border-control

Chesbro, M. (2014). A Brief History of U.S. Intelligence. Annals of Inside Homeland Security.

Retrieved from http://www.abchs.com/ihs/SUMMER2014/ihs_articles_1.php

Colorado Technical University Online, CTUO. (2015). HLS650-VC-1501B-01 Phase 5 Activity:

Interagency Processes and Challenges [Multimedia Presentation]. Retrieved From

Colorado Technical University Online Virtual Campus, HLS650-VC-1501B-01

Homeland Security and Government

https://campus.ctuonline.edu/portal/6/pages/mainframe.aspx?contentframe=/Default.aspx

Kettl, D.F. (2014) System under stress the challenge to 21st century governance. (3rd edition).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications


Lee, B. (2014, March 5). Mexico's drug war. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved from

http://www.cfr.org/mexico/mexicos-drug-war/p13689

Office of National Drug Control Policy, ONDCP. (2013). National southwest border

Counternarcotic strategy. White House. Retrieved from

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ondcp/policy-and-

research/southwest_border_strategy_2013.pdf

Pease, H.W. (2013). Tea Partiers Oppose Renewal of Patriot Act on Constitutional Grounds.

Liberty under Fire. Retrieved from

http://www.libertyunderfire.org/2011/02/tea-partiers-oppose-renewal-of-patriot-act-on-

constitutional-grounds/

Pavlich, K. (2013, November 27). Mob of 150 Illegal Aliens Attack Border Patrol Agents.

Townhall.com. Retrieved from

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/11/27/mob-of-150-illegal-aliens-attack-

border-patrol-agents-n1754063

Pitts, B. & Lieberman, D. (2013, June 27). In efforts to secure US-Mexico border, Ariz. Native

Americans feel caught in the middle. ABC News Nightline. Retrieved from

http://abcnews.go.com/US/efforts-secure-us-mexico-border-ariz-native-

americans/story?id=19496394

Schaefer, R.J. & Gonzalez, C. (2010, January 3). Sealing the southwest border: reports from

Hidalgo and Cochise counties. University of New Mexico. Retrieved from

http://cbig.unm.edu/Sealing%20the%20Southwest%20Border.pdf


The Washington Post. (2009, June 3). Exclusive: Al Qaeda eyes bio attack from Mexico.

Retrieved from

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/3/al-qaeda-eyes-bio-attack-via-mexico-

border/?page=all

U.S. Congress. (2007). Congressional Record, V. 153, PT. 4, February 17, 2007 to March 12,

2007. Google. Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books?id=ExHp3NbxB4IC&pg=PA5649&lpg=PA5649&dq=c

ase+where+terrorist+tried+to+enter+U.S.+through+Mexico+tunnels&source=bl&ots=03

Sw_fZhI5&sig=_gGn_xoCk99Ha63OgByCHSm8Fog&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8fzxVOXPE8S

0oQT5q4CgBQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=case%20where%20terrorist%20tr

ied%20to%20enter%20U.S.%20through%20Mexico%20tunnels&f=false

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP. 2012- 2016 Border Patrol strategic plan the

Mission: protect America. Retrieved from

http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/bp_strategic_plan.pdf

United States Department of Homeland Security, DHS. (2010). Dams Sector-Specific Plan

An Annex to the National Infrastructure Protection Plan. Retrieved from

http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/nipp-ssp-dams-2010-508.pdf

United States Department of Homeland Security, DHS. (2014). Office of Infrastructure

Protection. Retrieved from


http://www.dhs.gov/office- infrastructure-protection

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, DHS. (2011). Homeland Security Advisory Council –

Southwest Border Task Force Tasking. Retrieved from

https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hsac-southwest-border-task-force.pdf

United States Department of Homeland Security, DHS. (2014). Key DHS Laws. Retrieved

From http://www.dhs.gov/key-dhs- laws

United States Department of Homeland Security, DHS. (2012). Our Mission. Retrieved

From: http://www.dhs.gov/our-mission

The Whitehouse, Office of National Drug Control Policy. (2013). National Southwest

Border Counternarcotic Strategy. Retrieved from

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ondcp/policy-and-

research/southwest_border_strategy_2013.pdf

Documents

NSWBCN Strategy All Hazards Interagency Challenges P5 IP HLS650 VC 1501B 01 Homeland Security and Government John J Cederstrom