CONNECTIONS The Quarterly Journal Volume V, Number 2 Fall 2006 Editors’ Foreword....................................................................................................... 1 Peter Foot and Sean S. Costigan Lessons Learned from the Establishment of Border Security Systems: General Information on Past, Present, and Future Activities.................................................... 3 International Advisory Board for Border Security, DCAF Border Security: Key Agencies and Their Missions................................................. 47 Blas Nuñez-Neto Immigration and Terrorism: Moving Beyond the 9/11 Staff Report on Terrorist Travel......................................................................................................... 55 Janice L. Kephart The Long Shadow of History: Post-Soviet Border Disputes—The Case of Estonia, Latvia, and Russia................................................................................... 98 Claes Levinsson An Assessment of Operation Safe Place................................................................. 111 Paul Holtom Emerging Technologies in the Context of “Security”............................................. 121 Border Security and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles .................................................... 154 Jason Blazakis Generational Change: Implications for the Development of Future Military Leaders ................................................................................................................... 160 Paul Whelan i Editors’ Foreword When Franklin D Roosevelt delivered his famous “Four Freedoms” address in January 1941—calling for freedom of speech and worship, and freedom from want and fear— he could have had no idea that, sixty years later, effective border security might be both the guarantor of those freedoms and their greatest challenge. Terrorism, security- sector reform, counter-insurgency, demographics, ethnicity, commerce, migration and free movement of labor, environmental and energy management, disease, human traf- ficking and transnational crime: these are just some of the subjects that intersect with border security. How to manage them all is one of the most pervasive challenges of good government. This issue of Connections is largely devoted to the subject of border security. As with many of the new agenda items in the field of security studies, border security is a subject that overlaps with numerous others. As such, this poses a problem not just for politicians and governments, but for editors and for teaching and research institutes as well, in that it is as hard to draw a neat line around the subject and its related areas of expertise. Intellectually, it is as interdisciplinary as it is international and multi-agency in terms of policy and practical application. It is also a relatively new area of academic and policy inquiry, and it will be interesting to see how its exponents determine the shape of the sub-discipline going forward. With the new challenges facing the nation- state, have the normal functions of frontiers altered? To address some of these issues, we have chosen a selection of articles that focus on border security as a governmental and technical problem. Two studies from either side of the Atlantic lay out the progress that has been made to date: one from the Ge- neva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces shows the breadth and de- velopment in this area; the other, from the Congressional Research Service, is a report reflecting current U.S. homeland security efforts. Janice L. Kephart, from the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., has recommendations for U.S. policy- makers based on individual case studies. Two studies then take specific matters as their focus: Claes Levinsson’s piece details the challenge of overcoming the legacy of the three Baltic States’ Russian border difficulties, and Paul Holtom’s examines the perva- sive problem of the cross-border movement of small arms and light weapons. Technology may offer solutions to some of the pressing problems in securing na- tional borders, particularly those in which time is of the utmost importance—e.g., maintaining security and the speed of commerce. In his December 2000 Foreign Af- fairs article “Beyond Border Control” Stephen Flynn, a dedicated analyst of border se- curity and Senior Fellow for National Security at the Council on Foreign Relations, stated, “Fortifying the frontiers is no solution—it would slow down trade and global- ization. International companies and government regulators need to invest in new tech- nologies to help border control keep pace with booming commerce.” In order to pro- mote understanding of some of the technical strategies that are being contemplated, we have included two reports exploring the potential that exists to use technological solu- tions to improve border management. The first of these, by the European Commission 1 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL Joint Research Centre SERAC Unit, examines the status of technical and industrial trends in the context of legislative and societal changes, while the second considers the role of unmanned aerial vehicles in border control. It is also clear, however, that the context for the global management of migration and the movement of individuals has changed. As they come into power, do younger generations share the ethos that created most of the national and international institu- tions that presume to deliver security? Many in these generations have opted to make individual choices based on market decisions. Small wonder that among these choices is the one to move at will, often across borders, for financial advantage (but on occa- sion for far less respectable motives), regardless of whether the authority structures involved in this push-and-pull view this level of mobility as necessary, desirable, or legal. The final article is an essay from a Partnership for Peace country, Ireland, which reminds us that borders are not just about facilitating, selecting, or preventing the movement of people, goods, and services, legal or otherwise. Generational and profes- sional boundaries also exist, and need to be studied in the light of the implications for change in our militaries and societies. Deference to authority appears to be on the de- cline, and governments have seen their reservoirs of public trust diminish from the high levels that prevailed immediately after 9/11. Was that spike in trust in government eva- nescent, or did it portend something larger? How does the study of border security— as a concern of governments everywhere—address the issue of trust? As a crucial ele- ment of the larger equation of delivering good and accountable governance while ena- bling the movement of goods and services, border security will remain one of the most important concerns of our age. Peter Foot Sean S. Costigan 2 Lessons Learned from the Establishment of Border Security Systems: General Information on Past, Present, and Future Activities International Advisory Board for Border Security, DCAF ∗ Recent changes in the perception and understanding of security have made effective and efficient border security systems a basic requirement for all states. In many cases, improving a country’s frontier controls in this way necessitates extensive organiza- tional and structural changes. In order to assist the Western Balkan (WB) governments in the creation of new border security systems, the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) has developed a program intended to address the strategic needs and issues involved in this process. The participating countries are: Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia, and Montenegro, with activities aimed in particular at the respective ministries of the interior in each country, which are responsible for border security. DCAF appreciates that Croatia, who has already been invited to nego- tiation talks by the EU, is willing and able to assist its neighbors through the sharing of its own national experiences. Through a series of customized workshops entitled “Lessons Learned from the Es- tablishment of Border Security Systems,” DCAF is (together with seven donor coun- tries) offering an inside look at how Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Russia, Slo- venia, and Switzerland developed their own respective border security systems, and what lessons they learned in the process. Initiated in November 2001, the program will continue at least until 2007. The entire plan of activities, designed to support the crea- tion and development of reliable border security systems that will be in line with EU requirements, has been drawn up according to the specific security needs of South Eastern European countries. Despite the results achieved so far in establishing reliable border security systems in countries undergoing transition, there is a need for these forums of discussion to be organized, because there is still an absence of recognized operational norms and con- cepts in this area. These arenas can be regarded as supplementary work to previous ef- forts. The ensuing pages provide an insight into the program, which is composed of two phases, and is aimed at four different levels. The first phase, which ran from 2001–03, involved a general overview of European border guard agencies and the elaboration of general principles in border security. The second phase, which started in June 2003, represents a shift away from general over- views to a focus on concrete topics, ranging from legal reform to training and educa-