Posts Tagged war
Turf War Waged Over Troops: Departments Square Off About Soldiers at Border
Posted by sandiegotbi in Infrastructure, Security on July 1, 2009
WASHINGTON – A proposal to send National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to counter drug trafficking has triggered a bureaucratic standoff between the Pentagon and Department of Homeland Security over the military’s role in domestic affairs, officials in both departments said.
The debate has engaged a pair of powerful personalities – Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Defense Secretary Robert Gates – in what their subordinates describe as a turf fight over who should direct and pay for the use of troops to assist in the fight against Mexican cartels.
At issue is a proposal to send 1,500 additional troops to the border to analyze intelligence and provide air support and technical assistance to border agencies. The governors of California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico made the request in January, drawing support from Napolitano but prompting objections from the Pentagon, where officials argue that it could lead to a permanent, expanded mission for the military.
President Barack Obama has signaled that he is open to the idea, asking Congress for $250 million to deploy the National Guard while also saying he was “not interested in militarizing the border.” The issue, which has been stalled before a National Security Council committee, will be decided by the president.
Neither Napolitano nor Gates has made the disagreement personal, although some of their aides have privately expressed exasperation at what one called an interagency “food fight.”
“It should not be that we always rely on the Department of Defense to fulfill some need,” said Gen. Victor Renuart Jr., head of the U.S. Northern Command, which is responsible for defending the continental United States.
Border law enforcement agencies should have adequate funds to do their job, Renuart said. If the Guard is tapped, it should be for capabilities “that do not exist elsewhere in government,” he said. “When we send the National Guard, they go with specific missions, with specific purposes. And we put some duration on that so there is an end state.”
Homeland Security officials and governors counter that there is a legitimate need for troops to back up border agencies against the most serious threat to the Southwest and that a deployment would not represent a new military mission. Under a 1989 law, the National Guard already assigns 577 soldiers to help states with anti-drug programs that “can easily expand,” the four governors wrote Congress in April.
Napolitano, who as governor of Arizona prompted President George W. Bush to send 6,000 National Guard troops to the border in 2006, has supported the governors.
The debate goes to the heart of the military’s role, which has expanded since the September 2001 terrorist attacks, with an increasing commitment of troops and resources to homeland defense, particularly to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear attack or other domestic catastrophe. The deployment of new troops to the border would represent a mission the military has not traditionally embraced.
“What we’re seeing here is a move toward reframing where defense begins and ends,” said Bert Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College’s Center for Strategic Leadership.
The fight is largely over money. For the past two years, Pentagon budget officials have tried to slash funding for state drug-fighting operations, citing the financial strain of waging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And military officials say governors could pay for their own Guard units. But governors contend that securing the border is a federal responsibility and that Washington should cover the cost.
NY Times (Editorial): War Without Borders
Posted by sandiegotbi in Economy, Security on July 1, 2009
Drug-related murders in Mexico doubled last year, to 6,200, as cartels fight for the American addict’s dollar while relying on American gun dealers for their weapons. A new report to Congress traces over 90 percent of guns recovered in Mexican drug crimes in the last three years back across the border, where legal and illegal American dealers flout federal laws rife with loopholes.
The findings contradict gun rights groups’ claims that foreign dealers are supplying the cartels’ arms. In fact, 70 percent of 20,000 weapons recovered were traced to legal gun shops and unregulated gun shows in Texas, California and Arizona, according to the Government Accountability Office report.
The report confirmed the arguments of Mexican officials who are pressing Washington for stricter gun controls. While the Obama administration has sketched a new strategy to combat gun trafficking, the report warns of considerable obstacles.
It found that the separate American agencies charged with controlling the sales of firearms and policing immigration are doing a poor job of sharing information and coordinating policy. Gun tracking software is yet to be translated into Spanish for full use by Mexican authorities. What is also clear is that the American gun dealers — 6,700 of them clustered along the border — are supplying increasingly powerful military style weapons as the cartel wars intensify.
America must finally act. Private home-based dealers and gun show armorers should finally be regulated as rampant threats to public safety. Congress must repeal restrictions that prevent a national gun registry and bar local enforcement agencies from sharing in federal tracing information.
The report underscores Washington’s political cowardice and the frightening cost, as the mayhem spreads south of the border and threatens to move northwards.
