Document Actions
"Homeland Security -- Says Who?" - 25 August 2005 #2
By Dr Dave McIntyre, Director, Integrative Center for Homeland Security, 25 August 2005
Before September of 2001, almost no one had heard of “Homeland Security.” Now, we hear about it everywhere. On the news, at the airport, at work, as we pass through the gate for a ball game – we are all constantly reminded of the need for Homeland Security.
But even now, it is not a term that rolls off the American tongue. “Homeland” – it sounds a lot like a “Fatherland” that demands our obedience, or a “Motherland” that demands our sacrifice.
The “Homeland” after all, is what most American’s left to come here, where we are tied together by our beliefs, not our blood. “Homeland” sounds too nationalistic for some, and too internationalist for others. Almost no one really likes the term. So how did we come to use it?
Well, I”ll tell you, if you will give me “Just a Minute . . . for Homeland Security.
I’m Dave McIntyre from the Integrative Center for Homeland Security at Texas A&M – here to tell you that this curious new term that so affects our lives today came from a few government employees trying to do a good job.
In 1996, many in Congress thought the Department of Defense was too focused on peacekeeping, with too little attention to fighting wars. So they required DOD to review our national military strategy, starting in 1997, and again every four years. The result was the Quadrennial Defense Review – or QDR. Have you hear this term in the news recently? A second QDR was conducted in 2001, and a third is now ongoing, to be finished in 2005.
But for the first version, Congress wanted someone from the outside to check DOD’s work. A review of the review, so to speak. And they commissioned an independent panel – The National Defense Panel -- to take a look.
This group of prominent civilians turned out a rare product – a report that challenged orthodox thinking, and provided valuable insights for the future. Published in December 1997 – nearly four years before 9/11 -- it reached two important conclusions, and coined two new terms that we still use today.
First, it concluded that the Cold War military was changing too slowly – that it needed a “Transformation” to a new high tech force.
Second the report worried that terrorist capabilities were growing around the world -- and that soon we would have to face them at home. We would have to learn, the panel said, to “defend our homeland.”
There was nothing sinister about their words. Staff writers, looking for a way to express their concerns, hit on the term “homeland,” and the senior editors couldn’t think of anything better. So they printed the report – and a few defense specialists took note.
Four years later, when the media began searching for experts to talk about the 9/11 attack, they found that some people were already thinking and writing about this challenge . . . and calling it homeland security. And the name stuck.
I’m Dave McIntyre from the Integrative Center for Homeland Security at Texas A&M, and I hope you’ll join us next week for “Just a Minute . . . on Homeland Security.”