Upload
trey-stockett
View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Responding to Terrorism:Is the New Department of
Homeland Security the Answer?
National Center for Digital Government
Lewis Branscomb, Harvard University
Situation calls for new approach to policy research & design New problems, poor fit to government
experience and structure. Even to ways of thinking about roles of government.
High stakes, high levels of uncertainty. Congress and administration are
accustomed to hot and cold war in which policy research was thought to play a relatively minor role
What is needed is applicable social science knowledge, coupled with technology options
New structure is needed to design the new structure!
Policy analysis vs Policy design Analysis is necessary but not sufficient;
assumes existence of institutions for decision
Policy design focuses on effective action and may not be analytically optimum
Absent a receptor for advice, able to act, focus must be on case for action
Who were the receptors, post 9-11? Jack Marburger? Gov. Ridge? Congress?
Critical Role of Information in Public Policy Formulation Can diffusion of information about
the new situation catch up with the need for decisions?
Can government organize to acquire, process and utilize a vast range of new kinds of information?
What will be the sources of this information?
OUTLINE [1] Nature of the threat [2] Sources of vulnerability [3] Technical responses to the
threats [4] Technical strategies [5] S&T priorities [6] Structural Issues in government
[1] Nature of the domestic, catastrophic terrorism threat
Three Policy areas for Protecting Our Society
Foreign Policies Policies to reduce poverty, injustice,
authoritarian rule, religious zealotry, are the only long term solutions
Military strategies to discourage aid to terrorists Domestic Policies
Trying to find all potential terrorists in the USA, risking denial of civil liberties at home.
Hardening Potential Targets Mix of technical economic and behavioral
isssues.
Asymmetric Warfare: How might science and technology help? Cold War: asymmetry of Soviet ground
forces balanced by NATO technology. Catastrophic terrorism is the ultimate in
asymmetric conflict; Now the asymmetry is reversed. Each terrorist threat is in some ways a new
conflict. Organized terrorism is the “privatization of
war.” To what extent can S&T compensate for
the reverse-asymmetry in terrorism threat?
The Terrorists’ Advantage Stealth and patience Operatives under deep cover inside
USA International base of operations
Possible type III terrorism – non-state terrorists with rogue state support
Unknown and idiosyncratic objectives Lack of clear political or military goals,
thus lack of any clear end game.
Offsetting Terrorists’ Advantage with Technology and Operations
Global intelligence and military presence.
Possibility of making targets less vulnerable, thus less attractive.
Possibility of damage limitation. Possibility of enhanced recovery. Possibility of forensic analysis.
Structural Problems Inhibiting Contribution of Technology State and municipal governments have
the main responsibility for responding to attack, mitigating harm, recovery. Severe deficits; have received little federal
money Have limited S&T resources
Private industry owns many if not most of the targets; Who will harden them?
Federal government is responsible for borders, intelligence and technology But almost all of the technical experience and
talent is outside the new Department of HS.
Terrorism threat does not fit the conventional categories
War Criminal justice
Foreign Domestic
Temporary Continuing
Federal State and local
High tech Low tech
Government Industry
LMB assessment of progress since 9-11-01 in preparedness Large cities and states are very active,
but have no money, little S&T resource. Private sector owns most targets, awaits
Federal guidance on who is responsible. Federal efforts stalled, awaiting new
Department No S&T for CT strategy ready for implementation FY 2003 Budget for CT R&D only $0.5B New Department has no budget yet S&T departments/agencies are initiating many small
uncoordinated efforts Fed. Gov’t is infatuated with Iraq and WMD
New department is not sufficient
Sources of Vulnerability
Sources of Vulnerability Terrorists did not create them; science
and economics did. They are a consequence of highly
efficient and interconnected systems we rely on for key services -- transportation, information, energy, food, finance, and health care.
Calls for a new, more resilient political economy:
Ecological Economics Slide 2
Critical Infrastructures 85 % of US Infrastructure systems are
owned and run by private firms; not government.
They are deeply technically interdependent: Domino effects Leads to threat of multiple, simultaneous attacks
What are government/industry responsibilities? How can government motivate industry investment in hardening?
How can the economy be both sustainable and resilient?
[3] Varied nature of threats and technical responses
Dual-Use Strategy: Imbedding S&T strategy in
civil economy
Search for technologies that reduce costs or provide ancillary benefits to civil society to ensure increase likelihood that industry will invest
in hardening critical infrastructure; more sustainable effort against terrorist
threats integration of HS R&D with rest of societal
research and engineering base
Possible Targets Human health and food systems Energy systems Communications and information services Transportation systems (air, sea & land) Cities and fixed infrastructure (buildings,
water supply, tunnels & bridges, people) People and their response to terrorism Institutions of government, real and
symbolic
Terrorists’ Weapons Nuclear and radiological attacks. Biological weapons against human and
agricultural health systems. Military chemical weapons; Industrial chemicals: toxic, & explosive Fuels Cyber attacks on telecoms, data or controls. Transportation systems used as weapons. Inducing western gov’ts to amplify terror
Response of People to Terrorist Threat
People to provide accurate and trustworthy information quickly and authoritatively.
Fear, confusion & loss of public confidence in those responsible for protection.
Is government needlessly amplifying the threat, thus doing terrorists psychological job for them? Need for meaningful warning systems. Need for local leadership and resources. Danger of virtual attack (biological or
radiological)
Technical strategies
The “system of systems” technical challenge
Attacks are likely to involve multiple complex systems Multiple critical industrial infrastructures Federal state and local authorities and
responders Complex networks of sensors Data fusion and data mining
Priority setting requires modeling and simulating attack and response, red teaming proposed solutions.
Analysis of technology strategies
Repair the weakest links in vulnerable systems and infrastructures.
Use defenses-in-depth (do not rely only on perimeter defenses or firewalls).
Use “circuit breakers” to isolate and stabilize failing system elements (soft failure modes).
Build security and flexibility into basic designs
Design systems for real people, behaving as they can be predicted to behave.
Civil Liberties vs Technology Sensors may reduce need for personal &
package inspections. Data mining could threaten civil liberties Biometrics
much more reliable than drivers license can also be used to intrude on personal privacy Don’t prove “who you are.”
Technical programs must evaluate balance between effectiveness and civil impact
Keeping Information from Terrorists
A very broad range of basic research information will be needed to counter terror threats.
“Sensitive but unclassified” has been suggested but is unworkable.
Science journals already being attacked for publishing science deemed useful to terrorists.
Military style classification based on clear criteria is the only workable answer
Setting Counter Terrorism Priorities
How to set S&T priorities? Vulnerability and value of the target Ability of S&T programs to harden
target Dual use value of the S&T outcomes Value of the target to terrorists
Satisfaction of terrorists’ goals Capability of terrorists to attack it Likelihood of success
Terrorists’ Priorities
Which would they choose if they had the capability:
Spread disease germs among the population?Destroy the Statute of Liberty?Flood New Orleans?Shut down the New York Stock Exchange?
US counter terrorism strategy requires predicting their priorities. This requires better intelligence and understanding of radical Islam.
Structural Issues in Government
Industry and States Incentive structure for critical
infrastructure industries and owners of key buildings and facilities.
State and city input to national S&T strategy.
Funding S&T development in response to state and municipal needs.
Giving states and cities resources for restructuring EOCs, training, deployment and exercising of new systems.
Department of Homeland Security
Law now provides for an Undersecretary Technology with broad technical authority.
Dep’t is assembled from the “border” control agencies; none have a strong S&T research, acquisition & deployment experience.
New department has 6 S&T institutions.
Relationship of DHS to S&T agencies of federal government
With almost all S&T capability outside the Department, a strong national technical strategy is required.
Implementation of such a strategy depends on a strong & effective OHS and OSTP in the White House.
Neither exists, nor seems likely soon.
Some Research Priorities – Understanding the Problem Understanding Terrorists’ target priorities Roots of terrorism and foreign policy options Understanding people’s response to terror Public Administration
New Department – making it work Fed – state – county – city – industry
collaboration. Balancing domestic intelligence with civil
rights
Some Information Science Research Priorities
Designing screening and data systems involving new technologies Implications of universal identifiers Designing and managing dining mining
systems that protect civil liberties Countering false-information attacks Arranging for credibility by officials
briefing the public about S&T threats
A New Economics? Policies for inducing private sector to
harden critical infrastructure Creating economic incentives to
generate a more resilient infrastructure
Anticipating impact on economy and means for minimize it
Encouraging innovation when there are not quantifiable market incentives
A New Urgency for Education Reform
New role for social science in understanding roots of terrorism and routes to reducing demand for it.
Training first responders in use of high tech systems
Introducing a more mature view of the world and America’s place in it into K – 16 education
Understanding how the media might be helped to be more balanced and constructive in reporting on terrorism
Dramatically expanding language skills
Problem of contributing good policy design to authorities Who wants the advice and will pay for it? Who can implement the advice? What institutional barriers prevent the
advice from being taken? How will the agenda for urgent matters
evolve, with war in Iraq etc? How can one get information on which to
base the analysis and design?