Strategy to Fight Transnational Organized Crime
The strategy to fight transnational organized crime comprises to all national power’s elements that are geared towards protecting citizens and the national security interests of the United States from the convergence of the transnational criminal threats of the 21st century. The strategy is premised around a common unifying principle that is to build, integrate and balance the American power’s tools for combating transnational organized crime and national security related threats as well urging the nation’s foreign partners to observe the same principle. The long term goal of this strategy is for the reduction of transnational organized crime from a threat to national security to a public safety problem that is manageable in both the United States and other strategic regions around the globe ( Berdal & Serrano, 2002).
In order to accomplish these goals, this strategy pursues some objectives. It seeks to protect its citizens and partners from violence, exploitation and harm by transnational criminal networks. It also helps partner countries to strengthen transparency and governance, server alliances of state crime and break transnational criminal networks’ corruptive power. It pursues to break the transnational criminal networks’ economic power as well as protecting strategic networks and the financial system of the U.S. from abuse and TOC penetration. Moreover, it seeks to rout out the transnational criminal networks that present greatest risk to national security by denying them of their means of empowerment, thwarting the criminal involvement in terrorist activities and targeting their infrastructure. The strategy also seeks to build global consensus, public-private partnerships and multilateral cooperation to overthrow transnational organized crimes (The White House, 2011).
The strategy introduces innovative and new tools and capabilities as well. This will be accomplished by highlighting within the available resources to the agencies and departments that are affected. Some of these tools include anew executive order, a proposed legislative package, a new presidential proclamation, a new rewards program and an interagency threat mitigation working group. Each of these tools is designed and equipped to serve diverse roles and functions for the strategy.
National Strategy to Fight Counterterrorism
The National Strategy to Fight Counterterrorism officiated the approach that was being used and adapted by President Obama and his Administration in prevention of terrorist attack and delivering shattering blows against al-Qaeda. This includes the successful mission of the termination of Osama bin Laden. The counterterrorism strategy is part of the larger National Security Strategy that seeks to advance and endure the security interests of the nation. This includes respect for universal values, prosperity, global cooperation in meeting international challenges and security. Since the September 11th attack, there have been a buildup of homeland and counterterrorism capacities of the nation and this Strategy adds to this. It neither overhauls nor retains the previous strategies and policies wholesomely (National Counterterrorism Center, 2012).
This Strategy recognizes that the nation is under constant threats from terrorists. Indeed there are numerous groups and nations that support terrorism against the U.S. interests. Some of them include Hezbollah, Iran, Syria and HAMAS. The Strategy encourages the U.S to use everything within its policy range to protect itself against the threats. Nonetheless, this counterterrorism strategy’s principle focus is on the network that poses the most significant and direct threat to the United States. This is mainly al-Qaeda and its adherents and affiliates. This is informed by the fact that the terrorist outfit of al-Qaeda has butchered thousands of American citizens including the September 11th attack in New York. Al-Qaeda affiliates like the al-Qaida based in Yemen and the AQAP based in the Arabian Peninsula have also been threats as well. They attempted to bomb an airline destined to Detroit in December 25 2009 but failed. Meanwhile al-Qaeda adherents are those individuals, some of who are citizens of the United States who are inspired by and cooperate with al-Qaeda. They have therefore involved themselves in terrorism activities like the murder of service members in 2009 at Fort Hood.
The ultimate objective of the Strategy is very clear and precise. This is to dismantle, disrupt and eventually defeat al-Qaeda and the core of its leadership in Afghanistan-Pakistan region together with its adherents and affiliates to ensure citizens’ security and interests. The posture of the strategy is that America is at war. The nation is waging a sustained, broad, relentless, and integrated campaign that harness all American power elements to rout out al-Qaeda. However, in order to defeat al-Qaeda, the Strategy must pursue some specific counterterrorism goals. This include homeland protection through reduction of vulnerabilities and updating and adapting defenses of the nation, degrading, dismantling, disrupting and defeating al-Qaeda wherever they are as well as preventing terrorists from developing or acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Other goals include elimination of safe havens that are used by al-Qaeda for training, plotting and launching attacks, degrading links between, the terrorist outfit, its adherents and affiliates. The Strategy also counters al-Qaeda’s ideology of justification of violence in addition to depriving the group’s online communication, illicit financing and logistic support. The Strategy must however uphold the nation’s principles as it pursues its goals. These principles include upholding core American values, harnessing every tool, building partnerships, applying tools appropriately and building a culture of resilience and preparedness at home.
Homeland Security Presidential Decisions
Homeland security presidential decisions are several directives that have been issued by the presidents of the United States of America. For instance Homeland Security Presidential Directive No. 7 was issued by former U.S President George W. Bush in 2003 December with an intention of updating policies that were aimed at protecting the country from attacks by terrorists. It superseded an earlier directive that had been issued by former President Clinton on the same, the Presidential Decision Directive No. 63 in 1998 ( O'Leary, 2006).
The PDD-63 was originally intended to require federal agencies to guarantee practicability and continuousness of systems that are computer based or physical that were essential for minimizing the function of the government of the United States together with the economy should there be a terrorists attack. The HSPD-7 however has a little bit different mandates. The agencies and the federal departments in the HSPD-7 are required to develop technologies and methods of protecting all crucial infrastructures and key resources of the economic sector and the government as well. The main goal of the HSPD-7 is to ensure that destruction, exploitation, incapacitation of resources and infrastructures are prevented. HSPD-7 also aims at fostering the development of technologies and methods for minimizing adverse impacts that have the potential of occurrence. Agencies and other federal departments have instructions to work with local and state governments as well as the private sector in accomplishing the objectives that have been laid out in the HSPD-7 ( Loeb, 2007).
Presidential Decision Directives
Presidential Decision Directives are also referred to as Presidential Directives. They are an executive order form that the President of the United States issues with the consent and advice of the National Security Council. The directives bear the ‘full force and effect of law’ and articulate the national security policy of the executive as well. Majority of the Presidential Directives are concerned with the national security and as such most of them remain classified. The National Security Council acts as the key forum for consideration by the President for national security matters and policy issues. In pursuant to directives on policy review, the National Security Council gathers views and facts of the appropriate agencies of the government, determines alternatives, and conducts analyses before presenting policy choices for decisions to the President. The decision directives announce the decisions of the President ( Relyea, 2011).
Between the year 1993 and 2001, President Clinton and his administration issued 75 Presidential Decision Directives. These directives communicated the decisions of the President regarding U.S. foreign policy and the national security. All declassified Presidential directions are available for review by member of the public or any other interested entity. The Freedom of Information Act (FOLA) also allows anyone to fill a Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) to request for such information. Presidential Directives are also reviewed by the President. During his reign on power, the Clinton administration conducted 56 Presidential Review Directives. Presidential Review Directives are different from Presidential Directives in the sense that only requested items are reviewed and analyzed. These are undertaken by U.S. foreign policy and national security departments ( Relyea, 2011).
References
Berdal, M. R., & Serrano, M. (2002). Transnational organized crime and international security : business as usual? Boulder, Co. : Lynne Rienner Pub.
Loeb, D. E. (2007). Chicago Fifteenth Edition. [Morrisville, NC]: ulu Press.
National Counterterrorism Center. (2012). National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel. New York: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
O'Leary, . R. (2006). The dictionary of homeland security and defense. New York: iUniverse.
Relyea, H. C. (2011). Presidential Directives: Background and Overview. Washington DC: DIANE Publishing.
The White House. (2011). Strategy to combat transnational organized crime [electronic resource] : addressing converging threats to national security. Washington : The White House.
