When Immigration-Customs Enforcement officers arrested a Bronx
man with about 1,000 flawlessly counterfeited law-enforcement
badges on him, some of which represented federal agencies such as
the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Agency, they headed off what could
have been a security disaster.
But they also highlighted a difficult choice that confronts Michael
Chertoff, the new secretary of the Department
of Homeland Security.
In his first public speech at George Washington University,
Chertoff promised a comprehensive review, by the end of May, that
would "examine what we need to do and what we are doing without
regard to component structures."
"Old turf," he said, "will not define our objectives or the measure
of our achievements. Because bureaucratic structures and categories
exist to serve our mission, not to drive it."
Chertoff at least has his priorities
right. The department, created by the Homeland Security Act of
2002, was the product of political compromise and best guesses.
Watching it in action has shown that many of the compromises were
bad and the guesses wrong.
Among Chertoff's most daunting challenges will be figuring out what
to do with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and
Customs-Border Protection (CBP), agencies formed from pieces of the
pre-9/11 Customs, Border Patrol and Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS). The INS was abolished. Immigration border inspectors
and Border Patrol agents merged with most of Customs to create CBP.
Customs and Immigration investigators and detention and removal
officers were combined into ICE, responsible for "internal
enforcement." The two agencies were assigned to a Border and
Transportation Security (BTS) directorate under an
undersecretary.
This reorganization has proven to be a disaster, exchanging one
seam in U.S. security for another. Before the creation of Homeland
Security, "people" and "things" entering the country were handled
under separate systems. Today, travelers and goods pass through an
integrated system, but border operations and interior enforcement
are divided into two organizations that, as yet, haven't learned to
work well together.
The seizure of the badges in New York was an exceptional but
unfortunately rare example of effective teamwork. CBP, in fact, has
little incentive to cooperate with ICE on investigations, and its
agents are as likely to call the FBI or Drug Enforcement Agency as
their former co-workers. ICE, in fact, is so broke that agents
often can't afford to leave their offices, lacking travel funds or
even small change for automotive repairs.
It was a dumb decision. Separating responsibilities makes no sense.
Every ICE investigation begins with a person or persons crossing or
attempting to cross U.S. borders. Thus every ICE operation requires
working with CBP. In fact, in researching the creation of the
department, we couldn't find one compelling argument for creating
separate agencies. Indeed, the only serious argument not to merge
them now is that the disruption of further reorganization would
make things worse.
The case for leaving well enough alone might make sense if
terrorism wasn't a long-term threat. But it is, and America's
homeland-security agencies will have to be effective for decades.
Now is certainly the time for a short-term disruption that makes
for better long-term security.
And cohesion is but one argument in favor of the merger. It also
would permit Chertoff to eliminate the BTS undersecretary,
"middle-management" that had to be created only to oversee the two
agencies. This, in turn, would enable the secretary to establish an
undersecretary to develop policies for the department.
However the secretary elects to deal with the issue, any effective
reorganization and realignment of missions must do the following --
(1) establish common priorities, policies and doctrine between
border security, internal enforcement and overseas operations (both
ICE and CBP have agents abroad), (2) seamlessly integrate
information and intelligence sharing, (3) ensure effective
operational coordination and (4) gain economies of scale,
particularly important for the cash-strapped ICE. If Chertoff can
create an organization that can do those four things, then he
really will have accomplished something.
Still, changing the status quo would be a difficult decision for
Chertoff. It won't be easy to implement, and it will meet
resistance. It is perhaps the first great test he faces in his new
administration.
If he fails this challenge, ICE and CBP may limp through his tenure
without another 9/11. But he will have saddled his successors with
agencies that always will lack the mission, authorities and
resources to do the job right.
James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., is a senior research fellow for defense and homeland
security at The Heritage Foundation (heritage.org) and co-author of
"
Winning the Long War: Lessons from the Cold War for Defeating
Terrorism and Preserving Liberty." Alane Kochems is a
researcher in Heritage's homeland security project.
Distributed nationally on the Knight-Ridder Tribune wire