|
|
Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management Crisis and Emergency Management Newsletter Website |
|
| |
March
2006
Volume
10 - Number 2 |
|
Is terrorism a reality in this country that will become part of our lives, or is it something we can put a stop to through programmatic and political measures? To the leaders of the United States and its citizens, yes, it is very much both. Terrorism is not a new phenomenon. It did not start on September 11, 2001. It is not a product of Islam or any other religion. It is neither entirely foreign, nor entirely domestic. But it is real. It can strike at anytime at the hand of a person or a group. It can devastate infrastructure. It can take lives. It can instill fear and disrupt economy, but the one thing that an active citizenry must believe about terrorism, is that it can be stopped. It is no secret that the commissioning of the Department of Homeland Security had a primary mission above all others: prevent September 11 from recurring. However, at the foot of the fledgling DHS, lay two challenges. The first, and more amply funded, is to defend the United States and its interests from the threats of terrorism. The second task is to prepare, protect, and respond to natural disasters. In a government with limited resources, one succeeds at the expense of the other. After Katrina, the emphasis on the terrorism threat was called into question. Justifying the financial investment into antiterrorism is difficult and full of illogical rationalization. Quantifying the effectiveness will be shown through time and through confirmed attack prevention. The White House publishes a list of unclassified plots thwarted after September 11 (included below). As this list grows and as new attack plans achieve no success, DHS will find justification. At this point, it is too early to challenge the effectiveness of those efforts, but the concern is made evident by the lack of emergency capability demonstrated during hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The failures in these storms have been attributed to the lack of focus on natural disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery: a task that seemed formidable before the new fund allocation strategy. The effects of terrorism have not been stopped; they have been displaced. They’ve been pushed onto our populations susceptible to natural disasters. They’ve surfaced as we deny contractors based on their national origins. The effects of terrorism resonate far beyond direct destruction and death. Because of the foreign attacks on our homeland and allied states, the fear that traverses this country is nearly crippling. The racism and stereotyping that now surface because of that fear are a reemergence of civil inequity. The resources we apply to combat the freshly realized risk come not freely; they come at the reduction of conveniences and necessary protectorate functions of our government and of our economy. These effects heavily weigh on the choice with which we are now confronted. It is unfortunate that we have had this choice to make. We live in a real world with tough choices. But when comparing the terrorism risk to the risks of natural disasters, we must choose to pursue the elimination of that which can be stopped while it is infantile enough to eliminate. We cannot solely view the world as it is; we must see potential in what it can become. There is no growth plateau for organizations using terror as a weapon unless there is intervention. Recruitment is constancy for these ideological groups and we must apply pressure to curtail terrorist accomplishment. By smothering the fire in the present, we offer ourselves the opportunity of success in the future. For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-7.html |