Homeland Security Troubles - Essay Example

One is left to wonder what is meant precisely by the reference to the term “Security.” One might very well infer a definition of security which emphasizes security against terrorism by outsiders, against terrorism by insiders, against natural disasters, against threats to global hegemony, against commercial and economic interests, and a great range of perceived national interests and concerns.

The mere designation, “Homeland Security”, without more, creates more questions than it answers. This survey, this reaction paper, will argue that these terms need to be defined very specifically and very deliberately; otherwise, it persists as a vague concept capable of being used as justification for nearly any action. More specifically, this paper will argue that homeland ought to be defined to include a variety of harmonious interests and that security ought to be defined as actions and policies designed to accomplish their objectives with the least amount of intrusion into the affairs of individual states and the lives of individuals or businesses.

As an initial matter, the homeland should include a variety of interests; more particularly, it should refer to the nation, the states, and individuals. There should be no ranking of these homeland types in terms of significance; that means that national interests should not be placed above state interests through this extra-constitutional concept and that individuals should not be granted a higher status than they are already accorded under traditional notions of constitutional jurisprudence. A framework for allocating powers and rights already exists in the constitution; the mere notion of a recently defined homeland being promulgated haphazardly and zealously guarded sounds forebodingly like an attempt to subvert constitutional principles through non-constitutional means. A great deal has been made about protecting critical homeland sites, such as those related to infrastructure, finance, and military readiness. The homeland also includes lesser constituent parts of the country, such as Louisiana, which was devastated by the hurricanes recently. There ought to be a uniform approach to defining the homeland, whether is the Pentagon, the Federal Reserve Bank, Louisiana, or Mr. and Mrs. Smith’s family farm.  My sense, my reaction, is that the homeland portion of the concept prioritizes national aspects while minimizing or ignoring state and individual aspects. This would be a dangerous deviation from the constitutional principles upon which this country was founded; as a result, that would make Homeland Security a direct threat to the system of governance established by the American constitution.

In addition, the security aspect of the concept is also vague and seemingly unlimited. Is security meant to be proactive or reactive? Is it meant to stifle otherwise protected types of speech and protests to prevent some potential negative outcome? The Central Intelligence Agency and the American military have traditionally been vested with duties dealing with international affairs. The CIA is no more allowed to spy on American soil than are American soldiers allowed to engage in domestic law enforcement activities. And, yet, as security implies both the gathering of intelligence and the mobilization of physical forces to deter any potential attack, who else would be involved in maintaining American security if not these organizations? This raises troubling issues. Does this notion of security mean that traditional means for protecting the privacy and liberty of American citizens are now obsolete? Are we now obligated to report on our neighbours, sacrifice our privacy, and place the security of the nation above our human rights?  This sounds more like communist China or Nazi Germany than the United States which we have studied in school.

In conclusion, homeland security is a troubling development in the history of the United States. It is most troubling because it implies a reorganization of our government’s relation to the states and its citizens. This reorganization has not been accomplished through constitutional means; to be sure, two-thirds of the states have not ratified such acts as the Patriot Act. There should be respect for the homeland and security is a natural desire. How these goals are obtained, however, is important. It is important because America is becoming a very different country. It might be time to more carefully define these terms and discuss their implications.