HLS811: Fundamentals of Homeland Security and Emergency Management

Lesson 4: Executive Branch Polices and Strategies

Lesson Objectives

At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

• Explain the nature of national securty strategy.
• Explain the pillars upon which the U.S. National Security Strategy is founded and how it integrates homeland security.
• Explain the principal goals of the National Strategy for Homeland Security, which provide guidance, organization, and unity of effort for the U.S. national homeland security enterprise.
• Define homeland security as outlined in the National Strategy for Homeland Security and subsequent official documents.

Please complete the assignments and readings outlined on the course schedule for this week.

Executive Branch Policies and Strategies

Introduction

The National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Defense Reorganization Act of 1986

So, just what exactly is the National Security Strategy (NSS) and what dictates its preparation?

In 1986, the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act attempted to legislate a solution to what many believed was a significant shortcoming in U.S. national security policy which was the frequent failure of sitting presidents to adequately formulate a consistent and integrated policy that incorporated all elements of U.S. national power: diplomatic, information, military, and economic. Specifically, the act required the following stipulations:

Following the completion of a global strategic appraisal and its subsequent identification of opportunities, threats, and challenges that may or will impact U.S. national interests, the president articulates broad courses of action or statements of guidance and objectives that will be adopted by the national government in an effort to promote and protect U.S. national interests as required by the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act. Once all of the hierarchical steps of strategy development have been accomplished, to include the promulgation of both formal and informal national policy objectives and guidance, the National Security Council and particularly the National Security Advisor (Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs) produces the official NSS.

The NSS provides all federal departments with national policy objectives and clear, concise, and achievable guidance from which, for our purposes, homeland security objectives can be developed and formally promulgated by the Secretary for Homeland Security in the National Strategyfor Homeland Security.

It is important to understand that the NSS articulates the president’s strategic vision as he attempts to adapt the American government to the ever changing realities and responsibilities of the global environment. The NSS provides guidance and direction to the federal government in an attempt to outline priorities, and perhaps most importantly of all, to engender a level of policy coherence that maximizes the impact of all of the elements of national power while simultaneously minimizing risk. The NSS also gives notice to the rest of the world as to just exactly what U.S. national interests are and how the United States will use its elements of national power to secure those interests.

Strategy

This article and the information that follows are provided to help you understand how national security strategy is formulated via a hierarchical process beginning with a review of national values and ending with an assessment of risk.

Reading: Cancian, M.F. et al. Formulating National Security Strategy: Past Experience and Future Choices (2017)  

Strategy should be a careful and thoughtful process intended to pursue long-term national interests by striking a balance between national objectives and the policy alternatives or methods to achieve those national objectives coupled with the resources or means available to accomplish those policy alternatives. Lykke (2001) states that strategy can be simply expressed by the following equation:

Strategy = Ends (objectives) +Ways (methods) + Means (resources)

If nations possessed unconstrained resources there would be no need of strategy. Limitless resources such as personnel and money ("blood and treasure"), time, and information, etc. would enable nations to pursue any and all policy options and alternatives even simultaneously if necessary or desired. Since no nation has such an abundance of resources they must attempt to balance the strategy equation by employing all elements of national power to include diplomatic, information, military, and economic in such a manner that long-term national interests are pursued coherently and deliberately. Whenever one component of the equation is out of balance national leaders should attempt to reevaluate their proposed strategy, i.e. adjust their ends, ways, or means, or accept a level of risk. Therefore, the derivative of the Lyyke model, which includes risk, can be expressed as follows:

(Strategy ≠ Ends (objectives) +Ways (methods) + Means (resources)) = Risk

Using the war in Iraq as an example: the Bush administration accepted a degree of risk when it chose to depose Saddam Hussein (end) by invading Iraq (way) in that the United States did not have sufficient ground forces (means) to react to another significant global event elsewhere, such as the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Certain types of risk can be mitigated through the use of other resources.

The Hierarchical Nature of Strategy

National security strategy should be the resultant of a careful and thoughtful process intended to pursue long-term national interests as opposed to a haphazard, short-term, reactionary course of action. Therefore, we can view national security strategy as a methodical exercise to determine the correct balance between national objectives (ends), the policy alternatives (ways) to achieve those ends, and the means (resources) necessary to employ the policy alternatives that will bring about national objectives. To determine the proper mix of ends, ways, and means, we must have an understanding of who we are as a nation, our national values, and what we perceive to be important steps, interests, that need to be pursued to protect and defend those values. The following hierarchical methodology is employed by the United States Army War College as a technique to provide a logical progression from the determination of national values through the development of national military strategy and national homeland security strategy and the subsequent determination of an acceptable level of risk.

In theory and as outlined in the diagram, the hierarchical development of national strategy begins with the understanding of core national values from which one can derive national interests. U.S. national values represent the legal, philosophical, and moral basis for preservation of our American way of life. These values define who we are as a people, what we find important as a sovereign nation, and they provide our sense of national purpose. The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution enumerate the fundamental framework of American values, which can be summarized as an overarching respect for individual human rights, and the respect for the rule of law.

From these core national values we are able to identify key national interests that protect and promote our national values. For example, key national interests include: our democratic way of life, territorial integrity, global trade and international rule of law, regional peace, and so on. These national interests become the focus of U.S. national action and they furnish the impetus for the identification and selection of national objectives (ends) from which the formulation of national security policy and strategy are ultimately derived.

As a technique, interests can be subdivided into several levels of intensity in an effort to answer the following question: What happens if the interest is not achieved? By answering this question, national leaders are able to prioritize national interests and to subsequently devote limited national resources (means) to those interests that if not protected or promoted could have either an immediate or future detrimental impact on our core national values.

One of the techniques that national leaders are able to employ to identify key national interests is a process known as the “Strategic Appraisal.” Essentially, the strategic appraisal examines the domestic and international environments to identify the full spectrum of real and potential threats, challenges, trends, technologies, movements, and ideologies that do or may have an adverse impact on national interests. The strategic appraisal also examines all potential opportunities that may prove to be beneficial in the support and preservation of national interests. It must be understood that these various threats, challenges, and opportunities may be arise from both state and non-state actors or from international trends such as globalization or the proliferation of weapons and information technology.

Following the completion of the strategic appraisal and its subsequent identification of opportunities, threats, and challenges that may or will impact U.S. national interests, national leaders, particularly the president in the case of the U.S., must articulate broad courses of action or statements of guidance and objectives that will be adopted by the national government in an effort to promote and protect national interests. For example, on August 5th, 1990, when speaking to reporters on the south lawn of the White House, President George H. W. Bush stated in response to the then recent Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, “This will not stand. This will not stand, this aggression against Kuwait.” In making this statement, President Bush articulated a refined U.S. national security policy that was consistent with U.S. national values and interests and was based on the contemporary international security environment thereby giving a clear indication to the world and to the U.S. national security apparatus just exactly what the U.S. position was concerning the invasion and by inference what the U.S. was going to do to expel Iraq from Kuwait.

The National Security Strategy (NSS)

The 2017 National Security Strategy of the United States of America (NSS) rests on four distinct pillars which may also be interpreted as vital American interests. Note homeland security is defined as the first pillar of national security: 

1. Protect the American People, the Homeland, and the American Way of Life;
2. Promote American Prosperity;
3. Preserve Peace through Strength;
4. Advance American Influence.

The 2017 Strategy concludes with a chapter on understanding the strategy in a regional context with specific sections on regions worldwide.

The Strategy addresses key challenges and trends that affect the U.S. and its interests in the world. Most notably, the Strategy identifies strategic competitors China and Russia and the challenges they present to the United States: “Revisionist powers, such as China and Russia, that use technology, propaganda, and coercion to shape a world antithetical to our interests and values.” (NSS, 2017, Fact Sheet)

The Strategy also identifies other threats to U.S. values and interests as well as global security:

• Regional dictators that spread terror, threaten their neighbors, and pursue weapons of mass destruction;
• Jihadist terrorists that foment hatred to incite violence against innocents in the name of a wicked ideology, and transnational criminal organizations that spill drugs and violence into our communities. (NSS, 2017, Fact Sheet)

Perhaps one of the most foundational elements of the Strategy is a recognition that current nation state competitions require the United States to rethink the underlying premise of foreign and security policies of the past two decades. America’s “policies based on the assumption that engagement with rivals and their inclusion in international institutions and global commerce would turn them into benign actors and trustworthy partners. For the most part, this premise turned out to be false.” (NSS, 2017, p. 3) While not expressly stated this statement refers primarily to China and secondarily to Russia.

According to the National Security Strategy of 2017, the greatest transnational threats to the homeland are:

• Jihadist terrorists, using barbaric cruelty to commit murder, repression, and slavery, and virtual networks to exploit vulnerable populations and inspire and direct plots.
• Transnational criminal organizations, tearing apart our communities with drugs and violence and weakening our allies and partners by corrupting democratic institutions.

(NSS, 2017, Fact Sheet)

The new Strategy articulates and advances the Trump Administration’s concept of principled realism. It is a realist strategy because it acknowledges the central role of power in international politics, affirms that strong and sovereign states are the best hope for a peaceful world, and clearly defines US national interests. The Strategy is grounded in advancing American principles which spread peace and prosperity around the globe. (NSS, 2017, Fact Sheet)

The Strategy promoted in this document advocates for defense in depth to eliminate threats through offensive and defensive measures. The layered defense construct ranges from community based organizations through international partnerships. This construct identifies a wide range of threats to US security.

Click here to download the document.

The National Strategy for Homeland Security (NSHS) and Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) 

In addition to the National Security Strategy (NSS), the president, through the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council, publishes the National Strategy for Homeland Security (NSHS). The first NSHS was published in July 2002, ten months after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The most recent version of the NSHS was published in October 2007. The purpose of the NSHS is to mobilize and organize our nation to secure the Unites States homeland from terrorist attacks. The 2002 NSHS states that this is an exceedingly complex mission that requires coordinated and focused effort from our entire society – the federal government, state and local governments, the private sector, and the American people.

The NSS aims to guarantee the sovereignty and independence of the United States, with our fundamental values and institutions intact. It provides a framework for creating and seizing opportunities that strengthens U.S. national security and prosperity. The NSHS complements the NSS by addressing a very specific and uniquely challenging threat – terrorism in the United States – and by providing a comprehensive framework for organizing the efforts of federal, state, tribal, and local governments, as well as private organizations whose primary functions are often unrelated to national security (NSHS, 2002).

The 2002 NSHS states that the link between national security and homeland security is subtle, but very important. For more than 60 years, the United States has sought to protect its own sovereignty and independence through a strategy of global presence and engagement. In so doing, America has helped many other countries and peoples advance along the path of democracy, open markets, individual liberty, and peace with their neighbors. Yet, there are those who oppose America’s role in the world, and who are willing to use violence against the United States and its allies. The overwhelming power of the United States leaves these enemies with few conventional options for inflicting harm on the United States or our interests. One such option is to take advantage of our freedom and openness by secretly inserting terrorists into our country to attack our homeland. Homeland security seeks to deny this avenue of attack and thus to provide a secure foundation for America’s ongoing global engagement. Therefore, we can see that the NSHS is a subordinate strategy document to that of the NSS, but together they are mutually supporting and provide guidance to the executive branch departments and agencies (NSHS, 2002).

The 2007 NSHS has a slightly different focus than that of the 2002 NSHS in that it states that the “lives and livelihoods of the American people also remain at risk from natural catastrophes, including naturally occurring infectious diseases and hazards such as hurricanes and earthquakes, and man-made accidents." The NSHS recognizes that while we must continue to focus on the persistent and evolving terrorist threat, we also must address the full range of potential catastrophic events, including man-made and natural disasters, due to their implications for homeland security.

The purpose of the NSHS is to guide, organize, and unify our nation’s homeland security efforts. It provides a common framework by which our entire nation should focus its efforts on the following four goals:

• Prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks;
• Protect the American people, our critical infrastructure, and key resources;
• Respond to and recover from incidents that do occur; and
• Continue to strengthen the foundation to ensure our long-term success.

While the first three goals help to organize our national efforts, the last goal entails creating and transforming our homeland security principles, systems, structures, and institutions. This includes applying a comprehensive approach to risk management, building a culture of preparedness, developing a comprehensive Homeland Security Management System, improving incident management, better utilizing science and technology, and leveraging all instruments of national power and influence.

Homeland security requires a truly national effort, with shared goals and responsibilities for protecting and defending the homeland. The NSHS leverages the unique strengths and capabilities of all levels of government, the private and non-profit sectors, communities, and individual citizens (NSHS, 2007, p. 1).

The Department of Homeland Security defines homeland security as: The concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur. As such, the Department of Homeland Security is the lead federal agency for homeland security activities (NSHS, 2007, p. 3).

The 2007 NSHS was updated in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and it takes into account the realization that an all hazards approach to homeland security does not detract from the goal of preventing terrorism, but instead enhances national first response, mitigation, preparedness, protection, and prevention capabilities. The new strategy was crafted with the understanding that all disasters occur initially at the local level. However, the new focus emphasizes that homeland security must be a shared responsibility built on partnerships between federal, state, tribal, and local government agencies, as well as with private and non-profit organizations and individual citizens. The 2007 NSHS highlights these points by indicating that: “Our understanding of homeland security continued to evolve after September 11, 2001 adapting to new realities and threats. As we waged the War on Terror both at home and abroad, our Nation endured Hurricane Katrina, the most destructive natural disaster in U.S. history. The human suffering and staggering physical destruction caused by Katrina were a reminder that threats come not only from terrorism, but also from nature. Indeed, certain non-terrorist events that reach catastrophic levels can have significant implications for homeland security (NSHS, 2007, p. 3).

After reading the NSHS, consider if the document is too narrowly focused on the terrorist threat to the United States or if it gives adequate consideration to all potential hazards as implied in the first paragraph of the document which states: “The lives and livelihoods of the American people also remain at risk from natural catastrophes, including naturally occurring infectious diseases and hazards such as hurricanes and earthquakes, and man-made accidents (p. 1).

Homeland security is evolving and that the first Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (2010) and previous work established the Homeland Security Enterprise (HSE) as an, “Enterprise with a shared responsibility of federal, state, local, tribal, territorial, nongovernmental, and private-sector partners—as well as individuals, families, and communities. Diverse and widely distributed, spanning the country and including international partners, the homeland security enterprise jointly builds capabilities and carries out homeland security functions”.

These functions are built around the following current homeland security core missions, now articulated in the 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR):

• Prevent terrorism and enhance security;
• Secure and manage our borders;
• Enforce and administer our immigration laws;
• Safeguard and secure cyberspace; and
• Strengthen national preparedness and resilience.

These functions were first delineated in the 2010 QHSR, have been modified only slightly in the current iteration of the QHSR, but focus clearly on increasing resilience and preparedness, following Presidential Decision Directive (PPD) 8 – National Preparedness (2011), and PPD 21 – Critical Infrastructure and Resilience (2013).

Ask yourself how the documents mentioned on this page define homeland security. What are the strategic concepts that the strategy outlines to prevent and disrupt terrorist activities? How does the strategy suggest that we protect the American people, critical infrastructure, and key resources? How does the strategy suggest that we develop a “culture of preparedness”?

Lesson 4 Summary

To effectively forge and execute a viable and sustainable national security strategy, there must be effective cooperation, coordination, and communication between and among all levels of government, as well as the private sector. National security and homeland security are not the sole purview of the federal government. Many of the current and emerging threats, whether they be natural or human caused, demand a whole-of-government approach.

The threat of terrorism, in particular, even requires a multinational effort and cooperation. This is why we see increasing strategic and operational integration of national security and homeland security, although we must understand the remaining differences between the two. Those include that homeland security is a law-enforcement enterprise that uses defense support of civil authorities but is not a defense function. 

From: Siedschlag, A. “Homeland and civil security research studies for an evolving mission space: Introduction and overview of articles,” in Siedschlag, A. (ed.). Cross-disciplinary Perspectives on Homeland and Civil Security. A Research-Based Introduction. New York: Peter Lang, 2015, pp. 2-4.