X hits on this document

262 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

82 / 95

organizational hierarchy” any reorganization of DoD should perhaps be along functional

lines. The strategists include: “asymmetric warfare, joint information technology

development, joint procurement, homeland defense, and peace enforcement,” on their

list of functional lines.16

Another body of experts who determined that sizable reorganization is required to

adequately address the new security environment is the US Commission on National

Security. Among the Hart-Rudman commission’s most significant recommendations was

the call for a new federal agency at the cabinet level. This new agency, the National

Homeland Security Agency (NHSA), would have the “responsibility for planning,

coordinating, and integrating various US government activities involved in homeland

security.”17 This step would force the consolidation of “certain homeland security

activities to improve [their] effectiveness and coherence.” They reached this conclusion

partly because “within the federal government, almost every agency and department is

involved in some aspect of homeland security.” However, “none have been organized to

focus on the scale of the contemporary threat to the homeland.”18 Congress, it seems, has

also paid attention to the homeland security issue by taking up many of the commission’s

recommendations in newly introduced legislation on the matter.

Summary

It is abundantly clear that DoD’s strategic organizational structure has not kept

pace with the WMD threat. Today, many national security experts see WMD and other

asymmetric threats as not only valid, but increasingly dangerous over time. While DoD

spends a great deal of money on the issue, many experts are beginning to understand

71

Document info
Document views262
Page views264
Page last viewedFri Dec 09 02:27:27 UTC 2016
Pages95
Paragraphs2013
Words21971

Comments