CONNECTIONS the Quarterly Journal

CONNECTIONS The Quarterly Journal Volume IV, Number 3 Fall 2005 Introduction: The Role of Armed Forces in Homeland Security: European and American Experiences and Practices............................. 1 Dr. John L. Clarke Homeland Security and Homeland Defense: America’s New Paradigm............................................................................................... 3 Colonel Thomas L. LaCrosse A New NATO Member’s Perspective: Hungary’s Army and Homeland Security ............................................................................. 17 Lt. Col. Imre Takács The Weight of History: Germany’s Military and Domestic Security. 37 Col. Gerhard J. Klose The Role of Italy’s Military in Supporting the Civil Authorities ....... 59 Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Carlo Cabigiosu The Soviet Legacy: Transforming Bulgaria’s Armed Forces for Homeland Security Missions.............................................................. 83 Col. Nikolay K. Dotzev A Neutral’s Perspective: The Role of the Austrian Armed Forces in Homeland Security ......................................................................... 97 Dr. Johann Frank The Role of the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom in Securing the State Against Terrorism.............................................................. 121 Jonathan Stevenson i INTRODUCTION The Role of Armed Forces in Homeland Security: European and American Experiences and Practices Dr. John L. Clarke ∗ Homeland security is a topic that has generated a great deal of attention in the past five years, on both sides of the Atlantic. With the increased focus on the homeland, or domestic, security of states in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on New York, Wash- ington, and Madrid, senior officials have been challenged to provide adequate levels of domestic security consistent with the resources that advanced Western states have available for these purposes. States have been hard pressed to develop and equip security forces that will be able to perform the tasks required to maintain a high level of homeland security. In many instances, leaders have looked to the military to carry out these key missions. Military forces bring many advantages to these challenges. They are usually well organized, mobile, and well equipped. In many countries, there is a tradition of using military forces in support of civil authorities, a tradition that can be expanded to include a broad range of homeland security tasks. However, military forces are normally trained for missions that are quite different from those necessary for achieving effective homeland security. This is particularly true with regard to the use of force. While law enforcement officers are trained to use force as a last resort, soldiers are trained to use it in the first instance. As a consequence, while the temptation to employ existing military forces to carry out homeland security missions is great, it is also replete with dangers. Soldiers are not police officers, and the danger is always present that they will use force in a manner that is inappropriate in the domestic context. This issue of Connections is designed to look at how a number of states are meeting these challenges. The authors examine how Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, It- aly, the United Kingdom, and the United States have approached the issue of the employment of military forces in domestic security. This collection of essays offers read- ers the opportunity to compare and contrast these experiences and the lessons they of- fer for future contingencies involving the employment of military force in support of civil authorities. These countries have different traditions of using military forces domestically; they have different national security strategies; and they have different perceptions of the level of threat to their domestic security. Each nation approaches these issues in a different manner, reflecting their unique histories and the status of the armed forces in the respective states. This collection examines how these states may choose to employ ∗ Dr. John L. Clarke is a Professor of Leadership, Management, and Defense Planning at the George C. Marshall Center in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. 1 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL military force in support of a range of homeland security missions, with particular em- phasis on defending against potential terrorist attacks. These missions include the protection of critical infrastructure, border and trans- portation security, domestic counterterrorism, protection against catastrophic threats, and military civil support. Civil support includes how military forces may aid law enforcement authorities and provide assistance during periods of crisis or other key events. Many of the military forces profiled here have extensive experience in performing these domestic tasks. The lessons learned from their experiences may serve to help other states’ armed forces that are confronted with a similar range of tasks. These essays provide a basis for examining those lessons. Military forces in Europe and the U.S. have made and continue to be capable of making major contributions to homeland security. The benefits of these future contributions must be carefully balanced with the costs—in terms of both resources and op- portunities—of engaging military forces whose primary mission remains the defense of the country. 2 Homeland Security and Homeland Defense: America’s New Paradigm Colonel Thomas L. LaCrosse ∗ National Policy on Domestic Deployment of Military Forces The United States Constitution divides authority over the military between the president, in his role as Commander in Chief,1 and the Congress, which has the authority to “raise and support Armies … provide and maintain a navy, … and make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces.”2 After the devastating terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush reaffirmed that “The United States government has no more impor- tant mission than protecting the homeland from future attacks.”3 The National Strategy for Homeland Security outlines the policy of the United States to achieve this goal.4 It defines homeland security as “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.”5 Further evidence of the U.S. government’s commitment to this mission can be found in statements made by senior Depart- ment of Defense leadership: “Protecting the United States homeland from attack is the highest priority of the Department of Defense.”6 The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has developed a homeland “defense-in- depth” strategy for covering all defense domains.7 A key element of this strategy is ad- dressing threats at the earliest possible opportunity and as far away from our domestic shores as possible. The strategy acknowledges there will be times and instances when military forces will be employed domestically. These instances can be broken down into three rather broad categories of employment: 1. Lead: The Department of Defense conducts military missions to deter, prevent, and defeat attacks on the United States, its population, and its defense-critical infra- ∗ Director of Civil Support, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Homeland Defense), United States Department of Defense. 1 The Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Section 2. 2 Ibid., Article 1, Section 8. 3 George W. Bush, “Letter from the President of the United States to the American People,” transmitted as part of The National Strategy for Homeland Security, 16 July 2002; available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/book/. 4 The National Strategy for Homeland Security, 16 July 2002. 5 Ibid., 2. 6 Donald H. Rumsfeld, United States Secretary of Defense, “Message to U.S. Forces and Department of Defense Civilians,” 12 September 2001. 7 United States Department of Defense, “The Military Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support,” June 24, 2005. 3 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL structure.8 Flying combat air patrols to ensure airspace security as well as maintaining physical security around military installations and defense-critical infrastructure are examples where the department, always guided by civilian leadership, exercises leadership. 2. Support: At the direction of the president or the secretary of defense, the DoD pro- vides defense support to civil authorities in order to prevent terrorist incidents or manage the consequence of an attack or a disaster. Support is often requested when the DoD has unique capabilities to contribute, or when civilian responders are overwhelmed.9 3. Enable: Efforts to share capabilities and expertise with domestic agencies and inter- national partners reinforce the DoD’s leadership and support activities. At home, the department works to improve civilian capabilities for homeland security by lending expertise and sharing relevant technology. For example, the DoD is sharing training and simulation technologies with the Department of Homeland Security, as well as unmanned aerial vehicle technologies with federal law enforcement organi- zations responsible for surveillance along the nation’s borders.10 Legal Authority for Employment Within civilian communities in the United States, the primary responsibility for protecting life and property and maintaining law and order is vested in state and local gov- ernments. Generally, federal military forces are employed

Load more