'Homeland defense' won't be easy By Brad Knickerbocker

"Civil defense" conjures images of blackout curtains, backyard bomb shelters, and kids huddled under school desks for "duck and cover" drills. In today's world of massive terrorist attacks, defending the homeland is likely to mean much more.

Evidence abounds that the United States is on the kind of war footing most Americans have never experienced: Jet fighters roar off to patrol overhead skies; tearful goodbyes are said as sailors board warships headed for foreign waters; military reservists and National Guard members - citizen soldiers - are rearranging their lives in the face of imminent call-up to active duty; the US Coast Guard and immigration officials are stepping up efforts to protect borders and coastal waters; airport-security teams are wearing flak jackets and carrying assault rifles; and security is increasing at municipal water supplies and hydropower dams.

While these steps may be necessary reactions to the Sept. 11 attacks in New York and Washington, there is general agreement that much more is needed to prevent future attacks. The National League of Cities, for example, reports that nearly half of all communities have no plans to defend against, or respond to, terrorist attacks. And the Nuclear Regulatory Commission now acknowledges that the country's 103 nuclear reactors were not built to withstand the impact of the kind of aircraft that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon without releasing radioactivity - a reversal of the NRC's earlier position.

Homeland defense has been much on the mind of government officials and private analysts in recent months, including the Bush administration, which established a special task force under Vice President Dick Cheney in May. A string of reports warns that the country needs to do much more to detect, avert, and respond to terrorist attacks.

"We're not immune from attack," President Bush said in a speech before Congress last week. "We will take defensive measures against terrorism to protect Americans."

Mr. Bush's first action was to name Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge (R) to head a new cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security. Governor Ridge's job will be to coordinate the activities of more than 40 federal offices and agencies. Finding ways to get those offices and agencies to share intelligence information will be an important first step.

Some say this doesn't go far enough. A bipartisan panel headed by former Sens. Gary Hart (D) and Warren Rudman (R), recommended an independent agency rather than a terrorism "czar" trying to deal with turf battles and entrenched interests.

"We are not prepared for the next attack," says Senator Hart. "That's all I can say, and I'll keep on saying it."

Beyond rearranging bureaucracies and spending more to fight terrorism, some experts say, defending American soil also may require a reordering of defense priorities to focus on issues closer to home.

"Despite the more than $300 billion we spend on defense," says Lee Hamilton, a former member of Congress who chaired the House Intelligence Committee, "we remain, ... extremely vulnerable to hostile attacks on our own soil."

Page: 1 | 2