DOCSLIB.ORG

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin Güvenlik Yardimi Programlari

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin Güvenlik Yardimi Programlari T.C. İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER ANABİLİM DALI DOKTORA TEZİ AMERİKA BİRLEŞİK DEVLETLERİ’NİN GÜVENLİK YARDIMI PROGRAMLARI: 11 EYLÜL SONRASINDA YÜRÜTÜLEN EĞİT-DONAT FAALİYETLERİNİN İNSAN HAKLARI HUKUKU VE ABD İÇ HUKUKU AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ Şener ÇELİK 2502160568 TEZ DANIŞMANI PROF. DR. Yaşar ONAY İSTANBUL – 2019 ii ÖZ AMERİKA BİRLEŞİK DEVLETLERİ’NİN GÜVENLİK YARDIMI PROGRAMLARI: 11 EYLÜL SONRASINDA YÜRÜTÜLEN EĞİT-DONAT FAALİYETLERİNİN İNSAN HAKLARI HUKUKU VE ABD İÇ HUKUKU AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ Şener ÇELİK Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD), İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın sona ermesini müteakiben, dünyanın çeşitli bölgelerindeki farklı devletlere ve devlet-dışı aktörlere sağladığı askeri eğitim ve donatım desteğini yaygın ve sistematik programlar dahilinde yürütmeye başlamıştır. Yardım programları, ABD devlet belgelerinde açıkça vurgulandığı ve literatürde de desteklendiği gibi, öncelikle bu ülkenin çıkarlarına hizmet etmek üzere planlanmakta ve icra edilmektedir Ancak, sözü edilen faaliyetler, ABD iç hukukunda insan hakları ihlali yapan devletlere ve devlet-dışı aktörlere güvenlik yardımı yapılmamasını şart koşan düzenlemeleri ihlal etmektedir. Bu araştırmanın temel amacı, ABD güvenlik yardımları neticesinde meydana gelmiş olabilecek ihlalleri tespit edebilmek için, Kolombiya, Endonezya, Irak ve Suriye’de yürütülen güvenlik yardımı programlarını, uluslararası insan hakları sözleşmeleri; ABD’nin Leahy Yasası olarak bilinen temel güvenlik yardımı yasası ve diğer ilgili düzenlemeleri çerçevesinde incelemektir. Çalışmanın iddiası, 11 Eylül sonrasında güvenlik yardımlarının hacmi arttıkça, ABD’den bu yardımları alan ülkelerde insan haklarının bozulduğudur. Anahtar Kelimeler: Güvenlik yardımı, eğit-donat, uluslararası insan hakları, Leahy Yasası, Kolombiya, Endonezya, Irak, Suriye. iii ABSTRACT SECURITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: AN ASSESSMENT OF TRAIN AND EQUIP OPERATIONS LAUNCHED IN POST-9/11 ERA IN TERMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND US DOMESTIC LAW Şener ÇELİK Following the end of the Second World War, the United States of America (USA) began to provide military training and equipment support to different states and non-state actors in various regions of the world within the scope of widespread and systematic programs. Assistance programs are primarily planned and implemented to serve the interests of this country, as is clearly emphasized in US government documents and supported by the literature. These activities, however, also violate regulations in the US domestic law stipulating that security assistance should not be provided to states and non-state actors who have committed human rights violations. The main purpose of this research is to examine the security assistance programs carried out in Colombia, Indonesia, Iraq and Syria, in order to detect violations that may have occurred as a result of US security assistance, within the framework of basic security assistance law of the United States known as Leahy Law together with its other relevant regulations, and essential international human rights conventions. The claim of the study is that as the volume of security assistance increased after 9/11, human rights in the countries receiving US assistance had deteriorated. Keywords: Security assistance, train-and-equip, international human rights, Leahy's Law, Colombia, Indonesia, Iraq, Syria. iv ÖNSÖZ Bu araştırma, ABD’nin devletlere ve devlet-dışı aktörlere sağladığı güvenlik yardımı programlarının, uluslararası insan hakları hukuku ve ABD iç hukuku açısından değerlendirilmesi amacıyla yapılmıştır. Özellikle Suriye İç Savaşı ile gündeme gelen ve eğit-donat faaliyetleri kapsamında bilinen bu programlar, esasen 2. Dünya Savaşı’nın sonundan beri uygulanmakta olan ve temelde ABD’nin kendi ulusal çıkarlarını korumak amacıyla planlanıp icra edilen silah ve askeri eğitim tedariği projeleridir. Sözkonusu faaliyetler, çoğu zaman bu projelerin alıcısı olan aktörler tarafından, siyasi nüfuz alanlarını koruma; siyasal elit içindeki konumlarını ve ekonomik çıkarlarını güvenceye alma ve maksimize etme; ve egemenlik tesisi için ihtiyaç duydukları askeri imkan ve kabiliyetlere erişme amaçları doğrultusunda kullanılmıştır. ABD’nin amacı ise, genel olarak, yardım yaptığı aktörler üzerinden stratejik önemi haiz bölgelerde askeri külfet paylaşımına giderek vekil kullanımıyla bir güç projeksiyonu uygulamak olmuştur. Güvenlik yardımı programlarını sorunlu hale getiren ise, alıcı konumundaki aktörlerin elde ettikleri silah ve eğitimle, bulundukları bölgelerde yaşayan sivillerin uluslararası sözleşmelerden doğan temel insan haklarını ve özgürlüklerini ihlal etmeleri; ABD’nin ise, bu programlara devam ederek kendi iç hukukundaki yasal düzenlemeleri ihlal etmesidir. Araştırmanın sorunsallaştırdığı, daha doğrusu, güvenlik yardımı olgusunun kendi realitesi gereği sorunsal olan, sözkonusu faaliyetlerin ahlaki ve insani anlamda tanımlanabilecek türde bir yardım olmayıp, yardımı yapan aktörün - bu araştırmada ABD’nin - bu programları daha çok güç kavramı ile ilişkilendirilebilecek bir kuvvet çarpanı olarak benimsemiş oluşudur. İlgi çekici ve paradoksal olarak, aynı aktör, güvenlik yardımı programlarını kendi iç hukukunda ciddi ve kapsamlı insan hakları yasaları ile düzenlemiştir. Tezin yazarı olarak beni bu konuda araştırma yapmaya yönelten etkenlerden biri, ve belki en önemlisi, işte bu çelişki olmuştur. Kuşkusuz hiçbir bilimsel araştırma yazara akademik ve moral destek sağlayan biliminsanlarının ve yakınlarının desteği olmadan gerçekleştirilemez. Bu tez de bu kuralın bir istisnası değil. Araştırmanın hazırlık, yazım ve sonuçlandırma safhalarında pek çok insan bana destek oldu. Burada hepsine teşekkür etmeliyim. v Tez danışmanım Prof. Dr. Yaşar Onay, bir danışmanın sağlayabileceğinin çok ötesinde geniş bir dünya görüşü kazanmamda önemli rol oynadı ve araştırmamın her aşamasında gerek bilimsel gerek moral desteğiyle yanımda oldu. Tez İzleme Komitesi Üyesi Prof. Dr. Gülden Ayman, araştırmayı yapılandırmam ve kuramsal çerçeve olarak bugüne kadar doktora tezlerinde çok da başvurulmayan normatif kuramı kullanmam için beni teşvik etti. Tez İzleme Komitesi Üyesi Prof. Dr. Mithat Baydur, araştırmamda felsefi ve tarihsel bir farkındalık kazanmam için her zaman yol gösterdi ve çalışmanın gecikmesiz olarak ilerlemesi için bana zaman ayırarak büyük bir özveri sergiledi. King’s College Savaş Çalışmaları Bölümü öğretim üyesi Prof. Dr. Mervyn Frost, mütvazı ve yardımsever bir yaklaşımla, normatif kuramın esaslarını hangi eserlerinden, ne şekilde faydalanarak kullanabileceğim konusunda beni aydınlattı. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Öğrenci İşleri Siyasal Bölüm Memuru İsmail Karanfil, tezin yazım, izleme ve mezuniyet sürecinin her safhasındaki tüm idari konularda, samimi ve profesyonel yardımını esirgemedi. Sevgili dostum hukukçu Dr. Onur Sarı, araştırmama şekil ve içerik açısından sağladığı destekle birlikte, dünyadaki hukuki ve siyasi gelişmeler hakkında yaptığımız sohbetlerle araştırmama önemli katkı verdi. Kadim dostum mimar/yazar Murat Akan, araştırmamın tez izleme komitesi ve savunma safhalarında gerek duyduğum tashihleri yoğun iş temposu içinde yaparak çalışmaya anlatım tekniği açısından bir derinlik kazandırdı. Araştırmanın başından beri bana sonsuz ve koşulsuz bir destek veren çok sevgili ve değerli annem Birsen Ertener, babam Ertuğrul Çelik, amcam Akdoğan Çelik, teyzem Sabire Berkman, değerli ağabeylerim İhsan Kural ve Metin Cengiz ile diğer aile mensuplarım, bu araştırmayı başarıyla tamamlamam için her fedakarlığı gösterdiler ve her zaman beni cesaretlendirdiler. Son olarak, bu araştırmanın ortasında aramızdan ayrılan, Ulu Önder Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’ün dedesi Kırmızı Hafız Ahmet Efendi’nin kızkardeşinin büyük vi torunu, gerçek bir subay ve centilmen olan aile dostumuz, çok değerli büyüğüm Dz. Yr. (Em.) Tezer Ülküatam, yıllara yayılan bir aydınlanma dönemi boyunca, bana devletler arasındaki ilişkilere dair geleneksel anlatılarla gerçekler arasındaki farkı nasıl ayırt edebileceğimi öğretti. Tüm bu olağanüstü insanların ve burada isimlerini sayamadığım nicelerinin, basit bir rastlantının ötesinde, belli bir sebeple yaşantıma girdiğine inanıyorum. Onlar olmasaydı, bu doktora çalışması da olmayacaktı. Şener ÇELİK İstanbul, 2019 vii İÇİNDEKİLER ÖZ ............................................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................... iv ÖNSÖZ ........................................................................................................................ v KISALTMALAR LİSTESİ ..................................................................................... xii GİRİŞ .......................................................................................................................... 1 BİRİNCİ BÖLÜM ABD GÜVENLİK YARDIMLARININ KURAMSAL-KAVRAMSAL ÇERÇEVESİ 1.1. Güvenlik Yardımı Terminolojisinde Tanımlar ve Kavramlar......................................... 17 1.2. 11 Eylül Sonrası Güvenlik Yardımı Politikasının Kuramsal Çerçevesi ......................... 21 1.3. ABD Güvenlik Yardımı Stratejisinin Temel Kavramları ............................................... 26 1.3.1. Ortaklık Kapasitesi İnşası Stratejisi ........................................................................ 27 1.3.2. Arkadan Liderlik Politikası ..................................................................................... 29 1.3.3. Küçük Ayak İzi Konsepti.......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Administration of Barack H. Obama, 2009
    Administration of Barack H. Obama, 2009 Executive Order 13526—Classified National Security Information December 29, 2009 This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation's progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation's security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities. Now, Therefore, I, Barack Obama, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: PART 1—ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION Section 1.1. Classification Standards. (a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met: (1) an original classification authority is classifying the information; (2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government; (3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and (4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
    [Show full text]
  • ISOO 40 Years
    resident Jimmy Carter established ISOO with the signing of Executive Order 12065, “National YEARS Security Information,” on June 29, 1978. ISOO replaced the Interagency Classification Review INFORMATION SECURITY Committee (ICRC) which was created by Executive Order 11652, “Classification and Declassification ISOOOVERSIGHT OFFICE P Information security Oversight office of National Security Information and Material,” issued by President Richard Nixon in 1972. President Carter stated that the new Order “will increase openness in Government by limiting classification and accelerating declassification. At the same time, it will improve protection for the information that needs to be kept secret.” In establishing ISOO, he recognized the importance of oversight to TIMELINE ensure agencies followed the procedures in the new Order. ISOO received the authority 1978–Present to review agencies’ rules and regulations and review individual records for compliance; and was authorized to overrule agency regulations and classification decisions if it determined those actions were not in accordance with the Order. The Order also mandated that ISOO report to the President and the National Security Council annually on compliance. President Carter concluded by stating that ISOO “is a key element to the new classification ISOO was established by Executive Order 12065, system, and it will have my strong support.” “National Security Information” in 1978, with the goal of balancing the public’s interest in access to Government information with the need to protect certain national security information from disclosure. Today, the programs of ISOO support the President by ensuring that the Government protects and provides proper access to information to advance the national and public interest.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT to the PRESIDENT from the PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASSIFICATION BOARD
    H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H TRANSFORMING the SECURITY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H REPORT to the PRESIDENT from the PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASSIFICATION BOARD NOVEMBER 2012 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H “It is time to reexamine the long-standing tension between secrecy and openness, and develop a new way of thinking about government secrecy as we move into the next century.” Report of the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy, 1997, Senate Document 105-2, Public Law 236 “…the only effective restraint upon Executive policy and power...may lie in an informed and enlightened citizenry - in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic government. I should suppose that moral, political, and practical considerations would dictate that a very first principle of ...wisdom would be an insistence upon avoiding secrecy for its own sake. For when everything is classified, nothing is classified, and the system becomes one to be disregarded by the cynical or the careless, and to be manipulated by those intent on self-protection or self-promotion.” Potter Stewart, New York Times Co. v. U.S. Images on the following pages are courtesy of the National Archives and Records Administration, with the exception of the images on page 24 and the inside back cover which are courtesy of the National Security Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • SETTING PRIORITIES: an Essential Step in Transforming Declassification
    SETTING PRIORITIES: An Essential Step in Transforming Declassification A SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT of the DECEMBER 2014 PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASSIFICATION BOARD | ii Table of Contents PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASSIFICATION BOARD | iii December 8, 2014 The Honorable Barack Obama President of the United States Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: The Public Interest Declassification Board (the PIDB) is pleased to provide you with Setting Priorities: An Essential Step in Transforming Declassification, a report supplementing key recommendations in our 2012 Report, Transforming the Security Classification System. These two reports address the task assigned by your Implementing Memorandum (December 29, 2009) for the PIDB to work with the National Security Advisor to design a fundamental transfor- mation of the security classification system. We came to realize that prioritizing declassification efforts by important topic areas would be a most effective and efficient way to carry out the PIDB’s open government and transparency objectives. After studying declassification practices in use at agencies and at the National Declassification Center (NDC), we concluded that a coordinated government-wide policy focused on declassifying historically significant records with greatest interest to the public made most sense. The Setting Priorities report lays out the case for that approach. Declassification policy remains virtually unchanged since automatic declassification started almost three decades ago. We credit automatic declassification for driving the declassification of over a billion pages of records since then. However, automatic timelines now increasingly impede agencies and the NDC from thoughtfully managing their declassification work. Queues for Freedom of Information Act and Mandatory Declassification Review requests are increasing as pass/fail reviews impede access to information sought by the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order 13526
    Tuesday, January 5, 2010 Part VII The President Executive Order 13526—Classified National Security Information Memorandum of December 29, 2009— Implementation of the Executive Order ‘‘Classified National Security Information’’ Order of December 29, 2009—Original Classification Authority VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:28 Jan 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\05JAE0.SGM 05JAE0 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:28 Jan 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\05JAE0.SGM 05JAE0 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS 707 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 75, No. 2 Tuesday, January 5, 2010 Title 3— Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009 The President Classified National Security Information This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation’s progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation’s security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: PART 1—ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION Section 1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Classified National Security Information
    EO 13526 Title 3—The President Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009 Classified National Security Information This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles re- quire that the American people be informed of the activities of their Gov- ernment. Also, our Nation’s progress depends on the free flow of informa- tion both within the Government and to the American people. Neverthe- less, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation’s security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: PART 1—ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION Section 1.1. Classification Standards. (a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following condi- tions are met: (1) an original classification authority is classifying the information; (2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the con- trol of the United States Government; (3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of informa- tion listed in section 1.4 of this order; and (4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Can We Finally See Those Records? an Update on the Automatic
    415 Can We Finally See Those Records? An Update on the Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/american-archivist/article-pdf/76/2/415/2052738/aarc_76_2_kr5mr37k15m12110.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Automatic/Systematic Declassification Review Program James David ABSTRACT Executive Order (E.O.) 12958, signed by President William Clinton in April 1995, established an unprecedented declassification procedure designed to release quickly massive numbers of executive branch records dating back to World War II. The pro- gram encountered numerous problems, however, and subsequent executive orders pushed back deadlines and created new grounds to exempt records from its opera- tion. Relatively few high-level records have been released and made available to the public. However, modifications to the program made by E.O. 13526 in 2009 and changes proposed by the Public Interest Declassification Board in 2012 will make important progress in reversing this situation. © James David. KEY WORDS Archival Records, Public Policy, Records Management The American Archivist Vol. 76, No. 2 Fall/Winter 2013 415–437 416 James David his article updates the progress and problems in the automatic/systematic declassification review program since my examination of it in the Fall/ WinterT 2007 issue of The American Archivist. It initially gives a brief overview of the program created in 1995 and the reasons why it did not result in the review of all the subject materials or the release of many high-level records by the Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/american-archivist/article-pdf/76/2/415/2052738/aarc_76_2_kr5mr37k15m12110.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 original or subsequent deadlines.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Federal Citations for the National Insider Threat Task Force
    SUMMARY OF FEDERAL CITATIONS FOR THE NATIONAL INSIDER THREAT TASK FORCE Table of Contents United States Code ................................................................................................... 8 •Title 5 U.S. Code § 552a – Records maintained on individuals (Privacy Act of 1974) .......... 8 •Title 5 U.S. Code § 1304 - Loyalty Investigations; Reports; Revolving Fund (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ............. 14 • Title 5 U.S. Code § 3301- Civil Service; Generally (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ................................................... 15 • Title 5 U.S. Code § 3302 - Competitive service; rules (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ................................................... 15 • Title 5 U.S. Code § 7311 - Employment Limitations: Loyalty and Striking (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ............. 15 • Title 5 U.S. Code § 7312 - Employment Limitations: Employment and Clearance; Individuals Removed for National Security (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ........................................................................ 15 • Title 5 U.S. Code § 7313 - Riots and Civil Disorders (An Act that enacted Title 5, United States Code, “Government Organization and Employees”) ..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order the President Signed on December 29, 2009
    Tuesday, January 5, 2010 Part VII The President Executive Order 13526—Classified National Security Information Memorandum of December 29, 2009— Implementation of the Executive Order ‘‘Classified National Security Information’’ Order of December 29, 2009—Original Classification Authority VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:28 Jan 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\05JAE0.SGM 05JAE0 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:28 Jan 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\05JAE0.SGM 05JAE0 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS 707 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 75, No. 2 Tuesday, January 5, 2010 Title 3— Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009 The President Classified National Security Information This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation’s progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation’s security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: PART 1—ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION Section 1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order 13556 and Its Implementation Challenges Austin Harris
    University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review 7-1-2011 Square Information, Round Categorization: Executive Order 13556 and Its Implementation Challenges Austin Harris Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umnsac Part of the Military, War and Peace Commons, and the National Security Commons Recommended Citation Austin Harris, Square Information, Round Categorization: Executive Order 13556 and Its Implementation Challenges, 1 U. Miami Nat’l Security & Armed Conflict L. Rev. 165 (2011) Available at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umnsac/vol1/iss1/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review by an authorized administrator of Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT NOTE Square Information, Round Categorization: Executive Order 13556 and Its Implementation Challenges Austin Harris ABSTRACT The Obama Administration is committed to establishing an unprecedented level of transparency and openness in order to garner the public’s trust and ensure more effective government. Public access to government information is essential to a democracy, and the ability to share information across federal Executive Branch agencies is critical to the national security of the United States. In theory, President Obama’s goal of increased openness and transparency in government is well served by the recently‐signed Executive Order 13556, which calls for the standardization of Controlled Unclassified Information across the government. The goal of the new, standardized system is to make Controlled Unclassified Information easier to share across agencies and more accessible to the public.
    [Show full text]
  • NDC Prioritization Plan Draft
    THE NATIONAL DECLASSIFICATION CENTER Releasing All We Can, Protecting What We Must National Declassification Center Prioritization Plan I. Background On 29 December 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13526 (E.O. 13526), creating the National Declassification Center (NDC) under the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and a memo entitled “Implementation of the Executive Order, Classified National Security Information.” The following day Archivist of the United States David Ferriero established the NDC to achieve the goals of ensuring that records are reviewed in a timely and efficiently, and making these records available to the public. Once established, the Acting NDC Director began developing a prioritization plan, in compliance with section 3.7(d) of E.O. 13526, for the declassification review and public release of classified records held by NARA. The plan incorporates the interests of NARA’s customers, to include researchers, the general public, the media and Federal agencies, and the Public Interest Declassification Board’s (PIDB)1 recommendation that records of high public interest receive declassification priority. The NDC Director will use the plan to prioritize declassification, and the adjudication of referrals in the Interagency Referral Center (IRC)2 and the Remote Archives Capture (RAC)3 programs. The plan was developed to ensure that declassification resources are applied in a thorough and consistent manner, while focusing on those records of the highest public interest. II. Prioritization Method To achieve the NDC goal of making declassified records available to the public, three factors affect how records will be prioritized: 1) High Public Interest – The NDC will use a variety of sources, including public input through a variety of social media technologies, and information about records requested in the NARA research rooms, and by the public through the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act and Mandatory Declassification Review provisions of E.O.
    [Show full text]