TOPICS
TOPICS
Homeland Security to boost staffing at 'fusion centers'
A top Homeland Security Department official told the U.S. Conference of Mayors Friday that DHS agents are critical to the success of the "fusion centers" the department is setting up nationwide to coordinate with local law enforcement and public health workers.
"Our primary contribution is the people, the DHS officers who are there with you every day, side by side, going to every meeting with you," said Chet Lunner, deputy assistant DHS Secretary for intelligence and analysis. "They're the link between your folks and DHS and can be the link between you and DHS."
Currently, there are 22 DHS agents assigned to 20 fusion centers, Lunner said, and the department expects to add 13 more this year. Homeland Security planned to include agents from component agencies to meet the specific needs of different areas, he added.
The legislation that created DHS gave the department "encouragement to get more of our components in, so if you have Coast Guard in your area, you'll see more of those components rather than just a single person, coming in," he said.
DHS wanted to make the best assignments and would negotiate with human resources managers to assign personnel to the fusion centers, according to Lunner.
"As the fusion centers stand up, we'll staff them," he said. "We're confined by the human resources bureaucracy of the federal government, among other things. We want to make sure we have the right people in these assignments as well."
Agents assigned to fusion centers have to communicate intelligence produced on a national level and help coordinate local information and responses, in addition to training local law enforcement and public health personnel, so they must be able to adapt to the needs of the community to which they are assigned, Lunner noted.
"We tell them that we work for the person who runs the Florida or California or New York fusion center, so we're increasingly tuning the information to those needs," he said.
That attention to local needs is critical to Homeland Security's mission, Lunner added.
"Like all politics, all terrorism is local," Lunner said. "This is not a federal issue. This is a national issue. [And] this is not a lecture, it's a dialogue."
COMMENTS
- Mike L, I'll be another to stand up and cheer on your comments. As a 19 year career intelligence professional, it still shocks me that DHS beleives that law enforcement offices/investigators can perform the duties of an intelligence analyst (HUMINT, CI/CT all source, etc). It's not a knock on anyone but they're just not trained s such. Just like I wouldn't have the first clue of what to do at a crime-murder scene. mrdaveo Posted March 5, 2008 12:57 AM
- George, I love the issues you and Mike L raise. Having been both an Army officer and a federal criminal investigator, I feel very comfortable saying that the skill sets that make you good at one of those jobs, often, though not always, make you good at the other. Many fusion centers are operated by State Police and the federal representatives need to be able to relate with Law Enforcement officers, particularly at the preventive stage. If you think any state police, who now generally are reporting directly to a governor or state attorney general, are going to report to anyone other than a state police officer voluntarily IMO you are tilting with a big windmill with a short lance. Accepting your own order of battle is just as important as understanding the enemy’s order of battle. The fusion centers locations are political decisions as much as anything else, but there are real concerns, like cost. I disagree with you about placement of fusion centers. In many places fusion centers are located where they are convenient to state leaders and NOT proximate to high value targets. What you are suggesting would be akin to placing your brigade TOC or CP with the most forward rifle platoon. Having worked with one fusion center, states see them as a place from where after a disaster logistics could be marshaled by surviving leaders. Putting it in a safer place, not at ground zero, works for the states under that thought process. The attacks of 9-11 were contained in relatively small areas. There is no reason to assume the same will be true when the next attack occurs. High population areas and airports are not good locations. Perhaps you recall that Mayor Guiliani took a lot of flak for having the NYC emergency command post in 7 WTC as it was in such a high value target area. (The critics tend to ignore the fact NYC had secondary and tertiary locations, but how many back up fusion centers can most states afford and staff?) You are correct about upward movement. The civilian side of the federal government, outside the beltway, has very slow upward movement. On the other hand, I don’t think you would enjoy the brain ablation that apparently comes with working inside the beltway. Jim Kaley Posted February 1, 2008 11:19 AM
- There is definitely a need for these fusion centers and as some of you have stated they need to be manned by experienced intelligence analysts. I wouldn't want to try to fathom what might come from an agent or even a detective that has not had the training to identify and classify the information that is coming to them. As a former intelligence officer in the US Army, the only jobs that someone with my training and background could find was in DC, which is so expensive you have to have a second job to afford lunch, or overseas with the government. I am glad that they are going to increase the fusion centers, I just hope that they will start by putting them where they are needed. Why put one in a town with 50,000 people, an airport that serves less than 1,000 passengers a day and has no major industry that a terrorist would be interested in attacking. DHS needs to have there fusion centers in the cities that have the category X airports, the major financial centers and even nuclear power stations. I work for DHS now and can tell you that away from DC it is very hard to stay in a government job and have any upward movement. Some of us have the training and background. DHS needs to be aware that they have assets in place and start using them to the best advantage possible. George Posted January 30, 2008 10:30 AM
