DOCSLIB.ORG

War on Terrorism: Immigration Enforcement Since September 11, 2001

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
War on Terrorism: Immigration Enforcement Since September 11, 2001 WAR ON TERRORISM: IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT SINCE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 8, 2003 Serial No. 21 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/judiciary U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 86–954 PDF WASHINGTON : 2003 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., Wisconsin, Chairman HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina HOWARD L. BERMAN, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina WILLIAM L. JENKINS, Tennessee ZOE LOFGREN, California CHRIS CANNON, Utah SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama MAXINE WATERS, California JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts MARK GREEN, Wisconsin WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts RIC KELLER, Florida ROBERT WEXLER, Florida MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JEFF FLAKE, Arizona ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York MIKE PENCE, Indiana ADAM B. SCHIFF, California J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ, California STEVE KING, Iowa JOHN R. CARTER, Texas TOM FEENEY, Florida MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee PHILIP G. KIKO, Chief of Staff-General Counsel PERRY H. APELBAUM, Minority Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana, Chairman JEFF FLAKE, Arizona SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas ZOE LOFGREN, California ELTON GALLEGLY, California HOWARD L. BERMAN, California CHRIS CANNON, Utah JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan STEVE KING, Iowa MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania GEORGE FISHMAN, Chief Counsel LORA RIES, Counsel ART ARTHUR, Full Committee Counsel CINDY BLACKSTON, Professional Staff NOLAN RAPPAPORT, Minority Counsel (II) C O N T E N T S MAY 8, 2003 OPENING STATEMENT Page The Honorable John N. Hostettler, a Representative in Congress From the State of Indiana, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims ............................................................................................ 1 The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration, Bor- der Security, and Claims ..................................................................................... 2 The Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress From the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary ......... 4 The Honorable Lamar Smith, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas ................................................................................................................. 5 The Honorable Linda T. Sa´nchez, a Representative in Congress From the State of California ................................................................................................ 5 WITNESSES Mr. Kevin Rooney, Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Depart- ment of Justice Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 7 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 9 Mr. Michael Dougherty, Director of Operations, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 12 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 14 Mr. Jay Ahern, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 20 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 23 Ms. Laura Murphy, American Civil Liberties Union Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 28 Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 30 APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD Prepared Statement by the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas ................................................................. 55 Prepared Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress From the State of Michigan ........................................................... 56 The New York Times article, January 20, 2003, submitted by Laura Murphy, American Civil Liberities Union, on U.S.-Deported Pakistanis: Outcasts in Two Lands ........................................................................................................ 57 (III) WAR ON TERRORISM: IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT SINCE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2003 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:10 p.m., in Room 2237, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Hostettler (Chair- man of the Subcommittee) presiding. Mr. HOSTETTLER. The Subcommittee will come to order. In prep- aration for the Attorney General coming to testify before the Judi- ciary Committee later this month on the implementation of the USA PATRIOT Act, we are having this hearing to examine immi- gration law enforcement since September 11, 2001 in the war on terrorism. Of course the immigration functions of the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service which used to exist in the Justice Department have been transferred to the Department of Homeland Security. Accordingly, we have two witnesses here from DHS, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Bureau of Cus- toms and Border Protection to explain immigration law enforce- ment since the transfer to DHS. We also have a witness from the Executive Office for Immigra- tion Review, an immigration component that remained with the Justice Department to discuss immigration court activity since Sep- tember 11, 2001. No one would argue that all aliens are terrorists, but no one can deny that all of the terrorist hijackers who committed the most egregious attack on our country in its history were aliens. I take issue with the misguided accusation that the Government must stop equating immigration with terrorism. If the Government equated immigration with terrorism, all immigration would have ceased. Clearly, the Government has not pursued ending all immigra- tion, but we do need to be more creative than the terrorists in find- ing loopholes in our immigration laws, closing those loopholes and not creating new immigration loopholes. Terrorists have not struck America again since 9/11. This is part- ly the result of the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security having undertaken crucial initiatives to close some of these loop- holes. (1) 2 For example, although alien registration has been on the law books for decades, the INS was not enforcing it. As a result, Gov- ernment officials did not know when many aliens entered the U.S., where they were residing, or when they left the country. By any standard, this lack of enforcement was dangerous and ripe for abuse by aliens wishing to stay below the radar, including terror- ists. After 9/11, the Justice Department began the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, or NSEERS, an initiative to close this loophole. Since the implementation of NSEERS in September 2002, more than 138,000 aliens from over 151 countries have been registered. NSEERS has resulted in the identification of 11 aliens linked to terrorism, the arrests of more than 120 criminal aliens and the issuance of more than 12,000 charging documents placing deportable aliens in deportation proceedings. This program is now run in DHS. It has received unfair criticism that we will put to rest today. The Justice Department has also informed the Board of Immigra- tion Appeals while this is not an obvious immigration enforcement tool, it is actually a prerequisite for effective law enforcement. The Board of Immigration Appeals had a backlog of cases as long as 6 years old. Aliens with appeals pending so long at the Board were walking our streets, including criminal aliens who were free to commit further crimes. Streamlining has permitted the Board to more quickly decide nonsubstantive appeals while spending its resources on novel ap- peals rather than spending equal amounts of resources on both types of appeals. As a result the backlog has been significantly reduced. I support the Board’s streamlining initiative. Delay is in every interest for aliens seeking to remain unlawfully in the United States. Justice delayed is justice denied for the majority of Americans who want to see the removal of illegal and criminal aliens. I look forward to hearing from today’s Government witnesses about their other
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Politics of Security in Ninewa: Preventing an ISIS Resurgence in Northern Iraq
    The Politics of Security in Ninewa: Preventing an ISIS Resurgence in Northern Iraq Julie Ahn—Maeve Campbell—Pete Knoetgen Client: Office of Iraq Affairs, U.S. Department of State Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Advisor: Meghan O’Sullivan Policy Analysis Exercise Seminar Leader: Matthew Bunn May 7, 2018 This Policy Analysis Exercise reflects the views of the authors and should not be viewed as representing the views of the US Government, nor those of Harvard University or any of its faculty. Acknowledgements We would like to express our gratitude to the many people who helped us throughout the development, research, and drafting of this report. Our field work in Iraq would not have been possible without the help of Sherzad Khidhir. His willingness to connect us with in-country stakeholders significantly contributed to the breadth of our interviews. Those interviews were made possible by our fantastic translators, Lezan, Ehsan, and Younis, who ensured that we could capture critical information and the nuance of discussions. We also greatly appreciated the willingness of U.S. State Department officials, the soldiers of Operation Inherent Resolve, and our many other interview participants to provide us with their time and insights. Thanks to their assistance, we were able to gain a better grasp of this immensely complex topic. Throughout our research, we benefitted from consultations with numerous Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) faculty, as well as with individuals from the larger Harvard community. We would especially like to thank Harvard Business School Professor Kristin Fabbe and Razzaq al-Saiedi from the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative who both provided critical support to our project.
    [Show full text]
  • Chasing Success
    AIR UNIVERSITY AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Chasing Success Air Force Efforts to Reduce Civilian Harm Sarah B. Sewall Air University Press Air Force Research Institute Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama Project Editor Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dr. Ernest Allan Rockwell Sewall, Sarah B. Copy Editor Carolyn Burns Chasing success : Air Force efforts to reduce civilian harm / Sarah B. Sewall. Cover Art, Book Design and Illustrations pages cm L. Susan Fair ISBN 978-1-58566-256-2 Composition and Prepress Production 1. Air power—United States—Government policy. Nedra O. Looney 2. United States. Air Force—Rules and practice. 3. Civilian war casualties—Prevention. 4. Civilian Print Preparation and Distribution Diane Clark war casualties—Government policy—United States. 5. Combatants and noncombatants (International law)—History. 6. War victims—Moral and ethical aspects. 7. Harm reduction—Government policy— United States. 8. United States—Military policy— Moral and ethical aspects. I. Title. II. Title: Air Force efforts to reduce civilian harm. UG633.S38 2015 358.4’03—dc23 2015026952 AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE AIR UNIVERSITY PRESS Director and Publisher Allen G. Peck Published by Air University Press in March 2016 Editor in Chief Oreste M. Johnson Managing Editor Demorah Hayes Design and Production Manager Cheryl King Air University Press 155 N. Twining St., Bldg. 693 Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-6026 [email protected] http://aupress.au.af.mil/ http://afri.au.af.mil/ Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the organizations with which they are associated or the views of the Air Force Research Institute, Air University, United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or any AFRI other US government agency.
    [Show full text]
  • US Military Policy in the Middle East an Appraisal US Military Policy in the Middle East: an Appraisal
    Research Paper Micah Zenko US and Americas Programme | October 2018 US Military Policy in the Middle East An Appraisal US Military Policy in the Middle East: An Appraisal Contents Summary 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Domestic Academic and Political Debates 7 3 Enduring and Current Presence 11 4 Security Cooperation: Training, Advice and Weapons Sales 21 5 Military Policy Objectives in the Middle East 27 Conclusion 31 About the Author 33 Acknowledgments 34 1 | Chatham House US Military Policy in the Middle East: An Appraisal Summary • Despite significant financial expenditure and thousands of lives lost, the American military presence in the Middle East retains bipartisan US support and incurs remarkably little oversight or public debate. Key US activities in the region consist of weapons sales to allied governments, military-to-military training programmes, counterterrorism operations and long-term troop deployments. • The US military presence in the Middle East is the culmination of a common bargain with Middle Eastern governments: security cooperation and military assistance in exchange for US access to military bases in the region. As a result, the US has substantial influence in the Middle East and can project military power quickly. However, working with partners whose interests sometimes conflict with one another has occasionally harmed long-term US objectives. • Since 1980, when President Carter remarked that outside intervention in the interests of the US in the Middle East would be ‘repelled by any means necessary’, the US has maintained a permanent and significant military presence in the region. • Two main schools of thought – ‘offshore balancing’ and ‘forward engagement’ – characterize the debate over the US presence in the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations
    S. HRG. 109–130 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations Department of Defense Appropriations Fiscal Year 2006 109th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION H.R. 2863 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES Department of Defense Appropriations, 2006 (H.R. 2863) S. HRG. 109–130 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H.R. 2863 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Department of Defense Nondepartmental witnesses Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 99–854 PDF WASHINGTON : 2005 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CONRAD BURNS, Montana HARRY REID, Nevada RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HERB KOHL, Wisconsin JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire PATTY MURRAY, Washington ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MIKE DEWINE, Ohio TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARY L.
    [Show full text]
  • Mythology and the Air Campaign in the Liberation of Iraq
    Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, Spring 2005, Vol. 7, Issue 3. MYTHOLOGY AND THE AIR CAMPAIGN IN THE LIBERATION OF IRAQ Major J.R. McKay, DAT 4-6 (Capability and Force Development Training Support), Department of National Defence Myths about the Liberation of Iraq Despite the unprecedented degree of media scrutiny, the coalition’s liberation of Iraq in 2003 strayed into the realm of mythology with regard to the air campaign. Two myths have developed about the air campaign and these are: • Its simultaneity. • Its ‘strategic’ focus, that is the air campaign sought to deal with Iraq’s ‘capacity to wage war’ through attacks on Iraq’s strategic command and control systems, its infrastructure and forces out of contact with the coalition’s forces. Such myths are not borne out by the available body of facts and can lead to faulty conclusions about the nature and role of air power in contemporary war. This article will dispel these two myths. The coalition’s presence in Iraqi skies between 1991 and 2003 allowed the coalition to prepare and execute operations well in advance of the recognised start of the war (the air attack against a leadership target early on 19 March 2003) let alone land operations. It will also demonstrate that the intended focus of air effort was placed against Iraq’s fielded forces as opposed to its war-making capacity, and as such was ‘tactical’ as opposed to ‘strategic’. Launch of operations The 1991 Gulf War represented the sequential application of air power and ground forces where an air campaign preceded the commencement of offensive operations on ©Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Saddam's Generals: Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq
    SADDAM’S GENERALS Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq War Kevin M. Woods, Williamson Murray, Elizabeth A. Nathan, Laila Sabara, Ana M. Venegas SADDAM’S GENERALS SADDAM’S GENERALS Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq War Kevin M. Woods, Williamson Murray, Elizabeth A. Nathan, Laila Sabara, Ana M. Venegas Institute for Defense Analyses 2011 Final July 2010 IDA Document D-4121 Log: H 10-000765/1 Copy This work was conducted under contract DASW01-04-C-003, Task ET-8-2579, “Study on Military History (Project 1946—Phase II)” for the National Intelligence Council. The publication of this IDA document does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official position of the Agency. © 2010 Institute for Defense Analyses, 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22311-1882 • (703) 845-2000. This material may be reproduced by or for the U.S. Government pursuant to the copyright license under the clause at DFARS 252.227-7013 (November 1995). Contents Foreword............................................................................................................................................ vii Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 1 Summary and Analysis........................................................................................................................ 5 Background ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Anglosphere: a Genealogy of an Identity in International Relations
    THE ANGLOSPHERE: A GENEALOGY OF AN IDENTITY IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Srdjan Vucetic, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Ted Hopf, Adviser _____________________________ Professor Jennifer Mitzen Adviser Professor Alexander Wendt Political Science Graduate Program © Copyright by Srdjan Vucetic (2008) ABSTRACT The Anglosphere refers to a grouping of English-speaking states, whose core is said to consist of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. In international relations, the term is usually used to describe and/or prescribe civilization, empire, military coalitions, customs union or even a political association. The Anglosphere is a neologism, but one rooted and reflected in long-standing international phenomena such as the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the Australia-New Zealand-United States Pact (ANZUS) Pact and the Commonwealth of Nations. In addition, quantitative research on the sources of international security cooperation clearly shows a pattern of behavior particular to the Anglosphere. While it offers no shortage of explanations of international conflict and cooperation across different groupings of states, the field of International Relations (IR) is silent on the subject of the Anglosphere. This dissertation seeks to open up the research agenda by investigating two basic questions: how did the Anglosphere become possible and what effects does it have on international politics? The dissertation considers these questions in parallel, via two complementary analytical tasks. The first task is to provide a genealogy of the Anglosphere as a grouping of states characterized by shared identity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Discourse Trap and the US Military from the War on Terror to the Surge
    Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 The Discourse Trap and the US Military From the War on Terror to the Surge By Jeffrey H. Michaels Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd iii 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 the discourse trap and the us military Copyright © Jeffrey H. Michaels, 2013. All rights reserved. First published in 2013 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN® in the United States— a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Where this book is distributed in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world, this is by Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries. ISBN- 13: 978-0230-37204-7 Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Michaels, Jeffrey H. The discourse trap and the US military: from the War on Terror to the surge / by Jeffrey H. Michaels. p. cm. ISBN 978– 0– 230– 37204– 7 (alk. paper) 1. United States. Dept. of Defense— History— 21st century. 2. United States— Armed Forces— Public relations— History— 21st century. 3. Military planning— United States— History— 21st century. 4. United States— Military policy— Decision making. 5. Military doctrine—United States— History— 21st century. 6. Afghan War, 2001— United States. 7. Iraq War, 2003– 2011— United States. 8. War on Terrorism, 2001– 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Airpower, Afghanistan, and the Future of Warfare an Alternative View
    After you have read this research report, please give us your frank opinion on the contents. All comments––large or small, complimentary or caustic––will be gratefully appreciated. Mail them to CADRE/AR, Building 1400, 401 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6428. Airpower, Afghanistan, and Wills the Future of Warfare An Alternative View Cut along dotted line Thank you for your assistance. COLLEGE OF AEROSPACE DOCTRINE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION AIR UNIVERSITY Airpower, Afghanistan, and the Future of Warfare An Alternative View CRAIG D. WILLS Lieutenant Colonel, USAF CADRE Paper No. 25 Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112-6615 November 2006 Air University Library Cataloging Data Wills, Craig D. Airpower, Afghanistan, and the future of warfare : an alternative view / Craig D. Wills. p. ; cm. – (CADRE paper, 1537-3371 ; 25) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 1-58566-161-9 1. Airpower—United States—Evaluation. 2. Afghan War, 2001– 3. Unified opera- tions (Military science) 4. Interservice rivalry (Armed Forces)—United States. I. Title. II. Series. III. Air University (U.S.). College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Edu- cation. 358.4/00973—dc22 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. This CADRE Paper and others in the series are avail- able electronically at the Air University Research Web site http://research.maxwell.af.mil and the AU Press Web site http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons of Iraq
    House of Commons Defence Committee Lessons of Iraq Third Report of Session 2003–04 Volume I: Report HC 57-I [incorporating HC 695-i to-xii, Session 2002-03 and HC 57-i to-viii, Session 2003-04] House of Commons Defence Committee Lessons of Iraq Third Report of Session 2003–04 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 3 March 2004 HC 57-I [incorporating HC 695-i to-xii, Session 2002-03 and HC 57-i to-viii, Session 2003-04] Published on 16 March 2004 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Bruce George MP (Labour, Walsall South) (Chairman) Mr Crispin Blunt MP (Conservative, Reigate) Mr James Cran MP (Conservative, Beverley and Holderness) Mr David Crausby MP (Labour, Bolton North East) Mike Gapes MP (Labour, Ilford South) Mr Mike Hancock CBE MP (Liberal Democrat, Portsmouth South) Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Mr Frank Roy MP (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rachel Squire MP (Labour, Dunfermline West) Mr Peter Viggers MP (Conservative, Gosport) The following Members were also a members of the Committee during the inquiry. Mr Gerald Howarth MP (Conservative, Aldershot) Jim Knight MP (Labour, South Dorset) Patrick Mercer OBE MP (Conservative, Newark) Syd Rapson BEM MP (Labour, Portsmouth North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces for More Information on This Publication, Visit
    C O R P O R A T I O N BRYAN FREDERICK, STEPHEN WATTS, MATTHEW LANE, ABBY DOLL, ASHLEY L. RHOADES, MEAGAN L. SMITH Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2533 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0078-9 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: U.S. Army photo by Spc. Andrew McNeil Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This report documents research and analysis conducted as part of a project entitled Limited War: The Role of Ground Forces in Extended Deterrence and Escalation Management, sponsored by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans, and Training (G-3/5/7), U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lessons of the Iraq War: Executive Summary
    SIS___________________________________ Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006 (202) 775-3270 (To comment: [email protected] For Updates see Executive Summary: http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_instantlessons_exec.pdf; Main Report: http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_instantlessons.pdf) The Lessons of the Iraq War: Executive Summary Eleventh Working Draft: July 21, 2003 (Note: This is the last prepublication version. The CSIS book to be published this fall will have substantial additions and corrections, and comments on this draft will be incorporated into the book, and the ongoing CSIS Lessons of War project. Comments --and requests to cite, quote, or reproduce any part of this document should be requested in writing or by e-mail to [email protected].) Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair for Strategy Cordesman: Lessons of the Iraq War 7/23/03 Page 2 Index Introduction................................................................................................... 6 ANALYZING THE MORE DETAILED LESSONS .............................................................................................. 8 The War Plan and Transformation Debate ............................................... 9 THE “NEW WAY OF WAR” DEBATE ........................................................................................................... 9 The Need to Remember the Past ........................................................................................................... 9 The New “New Way of War”?...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]