Services Release Findings of Internal Threat Reviews

WASHINGTON, Nov. 12, 2010 — The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps will update their poli­cies and pro­ce­dures to bet­ter assess inter­nal secu­ri­ty threats, accord­ing to reports the ser­vices filed this week in response to last year’s shoot­ing ram­page at Fort Hood, Texas.
In reports filed Nov. 9, ser­vice lead­ers wrote of the need for bet­ter coor­di­na­tion and infor­ma­tion shar­ing among the ser­vices, the Defense Depart­ment and out­side law enforce­ment agen­cies, as well as men­tal health pro­fes­sion­als, to pre­vent anoth­er pos­si­ble attack.

Maj. Nidal Hasan, an Army psy­chi­a­trist, is charged in the Nov. 5, 2009, shoot­ing at Fort Hood that left 13 dead and 43 wound­ed. A Defense Depart­ment report, “Pro­tect­ing the Force: Lessons from Fort Hood,” issued to Defense Sec­re­tary Robert M. Gates on Jan. 15, found that force-pro­tec­tion mea­sures focused sole­ly on exter­nal threats are no longer suf­fi­cient and alert­ed the depart­ment to the need for mon­i­tor­ing threats from “self-rad­i­cal­ized” mil­i­tary per­son­nel.

The department’s report rec­om­mend­ed that each ser­vice con­duct its own in-depth review of whether process­es and poli­cies are in place to detect such inter­nal threats and respond to pos­si­ble attacks.

In the Army’s review, offi­cials said the ser­vice has imple­ment­ed or is tak­ing action on 66 of 79 rec­om­men­da­tions made in the department’s review. Some of those changes include:

— Cre­at­ing the Threat Aware­ness and Report­ing Pro­gram to iden­ti­fy and report insid­er threats, empha­size aware­ness and report­ing and improve infor­ma­tion shar­ing;

— Devel­op­ing the Inter­net-based iWatch and iSalute pro­grams, pat­terned after civil­ian Neigh­bor­hood Watch pro­grams, to elic­it reports of sus­pi­cious activ­i­ty, includ­ing pos­si­ble ter­ror­ism;

— Pro­vid­ing secu­ri­ty offi­cers access to the Nation­al Crime Infor­ma­tion Cen­ter;

— Estab­lish­ing the Army Per­son­nel Secu­ri­ty Inves­ti­ga­tion Cen­ter of Excel­lence at Aberdeen Prov­ing Ground, Md., to pro­vide for bet­ter secu­ri­ty screen­ing; and — Imple­ment­ing train­ing pro­grams for bet­ter infor­ma­tion shar­ing, improved inci­dent respons­es and anti-ter­ror­ism aware­ness.

Lessons learned from the Fort Hood ram­page already have made the Army bet­ter pre­pared, Army Sec­re­tary John M. McHugh said dur­ing a Nov. 5 remem­brance cer­e­mo­ny at Fort Hood. “In my judg­ment, there is no ques­tion today that we are a stronger Army,” McHugh said. “We have learned from the things that unfold­ed that day, and we are a safer Army.”

Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr. agreed that the Army “has made good progress.” The ser­vice has improved effi­cien­cies in threat aware­ness and report­ing, coor­di­na­tion and shared intel­li­gence, and improved train­ing of base secu­ri­ty and readi­ness forces, he said.

How­ev­er, Casey not­ed, “When you’re in the secu­ri­ty busi­ness, you’re nev­er done.”

In the Air Force report, offi­cials wrote of the need for air­men to be “wing­men” in detect­ing inter­nal threats, which they note “is not an exact sci­ence.”

“Unit lead­ers must col­lect iso­lat­ed bits of infor­ma­tion – like dis­parate points of light – to con­cen­trate into a sin­gle beam focused on pre­vent­ing vio­lence affect­ing Air Force per­son­nel and instal­la­tions,” it says.

The Air Force team con­clud­ed that a “new force-pro­tec­tion cul­ture” is need­ed to pre­pare its unit lead­ers ade­quate­ly to find and act on inter­nal threats.

Changes not­ed in the Air Force report include:

— Train­ing all air­men to under­stand indi­ca­tors of threats;

— Bet­ter infor­ma­tion shar­ing with fed­er­al, state, and local law enforce­ment agen­cies;

— Updat­ing poli­cies, pro­ce­dures and prac­tices to bet­ter assess inter­nal risks; and

— Rein­sti­tut­ing post-deploy­ment psy­cho­log­i­cal reviews and ensur­ing that such inter­views become rou­tine prac­tice.

In the Navy review, offi­cials cit­ed the impor­tance of lead­er­ship – “the oblig­a­tion to act and the dis­cre­tion avail­able to a com­man­der” – and the need to con­sid­er the impact of pro­posed poli­cies on civil­ian per­son­nel.

The Navy’s fol­low-up actions include

— Exten­sive reviews dur­ing exer­cis­es to iden­ti­fy and man­age inter­nal threats and bet­ter share infor­ma­tion; and

— Updates to Ship­board Force Pro­tec­tion Con­di­tion mea­sures.

The Marine Corps report­ed devel­op­ing a vio­lence pre­ven­tion and response pro­gram, revis­ing its law enforce­ment man­u­al to include best civil­ian prac­tices in tar­get­ed areas, and pro­vid­ing bet­ter infor­ma­tion shar­ing.

The Marine Corps report also rec­om­mends field­ing an emer­gency call­ing sys­tem at all of its instal­la­tions that inte­grates mil­i­tary and civil­ian com­put­er-aid­ed dis­patch, as well as oth­er tech­ni­cal upgrades to bet­ter man­age and share infor­ma­tion.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twit­ter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →