Homeland Defense and the Maritime Domain

I will be attending Homeland Security 2020: The Future of Defending the Homeland conference at the Heritage Foundation on August 23rd - or at least I will be attending the first day which is specifically regarding maritime security. The description is as follows:

With ninety percent of the world’s trade transported by sea, a major terrorist attack focused on one or more U.S. ports would significantly impact the U.S. economy and our ability to project military power. While Congress has passed legislation to protect America’s ports, it’s important to evaluate its effectiveness, as well as that of intelligence measures taken since 9/11. Join us as our panelists examines what policies and capabilities the U.S. needs to develop in order to prevent or recover from possible attacks and better protect the homeland.

10:00 a.m.
Panel 1
Defending Domestic Waters: U.S. Maritime Security Policies

Dr. Steven Bucci
Associate Partner and Cyber Security Lead, Global Leadership Initiative at IBM Global Services, and former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Homeland Defense & Defense Support of Civil Authorities, U.S. Department of Defense

Michael Barrett
President of Diligent Innovations and former Director of Strategy, Homeland Security Council, The White House

Adam Salerno
Senior Manager, U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Hosted by Claude Berube
Visiting Fellow for Maritime Studies, The Heritage Foundation


11:00 a.m.
Panel 2
Programs, Platforms, and People: Navy and Coast Guard Capabilities for 2020

VADM Terry Cross, USCG (Ret)

CAPT Tom Bortmes, USN (Ret)

Port security is foremost in the mind of national leaders in Washington in regards to the maritime component of Homeland Security, and it should be. I gave serious thought to focusing on this specific issue and throwing all of my collected research into the topic and write several posts to generate as much focus as possible on the issue. The thing is, everyone else will be focused on this issue - so I'll be approaching the maritime component of homeland security from a completely different perspective. These are the three issues I'll be writing about leading up to and after the conference.

1) How seriously is the United States addressing the enormous challenges facing the Coast Guard today when they are currently going through budget cuts and equipment attrition at an accelerated rate. There are 250 cutters 65ft or more, and their average age is 41 years old! In response to the BP oil spill, no less than 3 aircraft aborted their tasking in the initial hours due to maintenance problems. Is it time to expand the Coast Guard? Is it time to move the Coast Guard out of DHS?

How do we rationalize the two hat service between DHS and DoD and expect high returns on investment when the service is being pulled too many different directions with its broad - and expanding - roles in missions on issues like port security, homeland defense, international maritime security training, environmental protection, maritime navigation and safety, marine resource protection, ice operations, drug interdiction, and migrant interdiction... to name a few. In a post 9/11 world, how has the material condition of the Coast Guard been allowed to deterrent so far when there has been so much rhetoric and tax money spent in the name of homeland security?

2) The emerging threats to the maritime domain in US territorial waters are impressive. It is no longer simply a matter of mini-submarine smuggling, but we now have evidence drug cartels have been building conventionally powered submarines of military design for operations off our coast lines. Is our nation adapting our maritime security capabilities for homeland defense at the same pace as criminal advesaries are adapting their capabilities? A submarine is a conventional military weapon system - and doesn't even address the irregular maritime warfare capabilities that might be deployed in our nations coastal regions.

3) Alaska is a state, although some Americans tend to forget about it. When looking at a globe of the earth, we typically see the world from the equator rather than from the viewpoint of the North Pole. Rarely is it highlighted how much territory in the Arctic Sea is part of our nations economic exclusion zone that extends 200 miles from the Alaskan northern shores. That enormous region of sea contains numerous natural resources that nations like Russia will exploit if allowed, and the potential impact on marine life and environment is just as significant to our economic interests as the loss of any energy resources.

As of 2010, the Coast Guard (thus the United States as a nation) has only 1 operational Ice Breaker - ONE. How do we enforce the nations Arctic Policy with a single operational Ice Breaker? Furthermore, how is it even possible Congress can't build more (and state of the art) Ice Breakers when US Shipbuilding is in dire need for new orders, when Arctic Sea issues are commonly discussed in Congressional hearings on Capitol Hill, and when virtually every Think Tank in Washington - including the Heritage Foundation and the Center for American Progress (which covers both sides of the political isle) - have reports in recommendation of building more Ice Breakers?

I expect to dive into all three of these issues on the blog beginning on August 23rd. Hopefully there are answers to some of the questions list here - among others - at the conference.