INTRODUCTIONIn the days and weeks following 11 September 2001, rumours spread that some of the terrorists had entered the United States from Canada. Although these proved be false, the view gained credence that American was dangerously exposed along its northern, undefended border. It was an assessment furthered and encouraged by widespread criticism in Canada that for years Ottawa had failed take the terrorist threat seriously, especially by its failure properly control and monitor its immigration policies.Whatever the validity of these arguments, with over 85 percent of its foreign trade dependent on access the US market, the Canadian government immediately realized that it now had a stake in American security. As Desmond Morton recently observed, Canada's priority today is as it has been throughout our history, to do what we must do make the Americans feel secure on their northern border. Americans may remember 9/11; we must remember 9/12, when American panic closed the US border and shook our prosperity its very core.1This article examines United States policy and its impact on Canada. It looks at nature of American defence policy with particular reference the role of the departments of and defence. It then examines Ottawa's response, including with regard the Canadian forces (CF). paper makes two related arguments. First, that despite the largest reorganization of the US government since the Second World War in order better defend the American people and economy at home, remain significant problems in implementing and some degree in even agreeing what is involved in the role of the military. Second, that in light of these difficulties, efforts north of the border compare favourably with those taking place the south. Indeed, in a number of significant respects, the government of Canada, in seeking reassure Americans that their is not threatened from the north, has also moved quickly and effectively secure the Canadian homeland.PROTECTING THE AMERICAN HOMELAND: BETWEEN SECURITY AND DEFENCEIn July 2002, President Bush stated that, there is an overriding and urgent mission here in America today, and that's protect our homeland. We have been called into action, and we've got act. 2002 homeland act created the Department of Homeland security, (DHS), involving the largest reorganization of the American government in US history. The national strategy for security lists three main goals: prevent terrorist attacks within the United States; reduce America's vulnerability terrorism; and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur. For the fiscal year 2005, the DHS will have $40.7 billion available it, including $28.7 billion in net discretionary spending at a 6.6 percent increase over fiscal 2004.2 Overall spending on is now approximately equal the annual defence expenditures of both Russia and China.But according one assessment, setting up the Department of Homeland Security has been disastrous.Far from being greater than the sum of its parts, DHS is a bureaucratic Frankenstein, with clumsily stitched-together limbs and an inadequate, misfiring brain. No one says merging 170,000 employees from 22 different agencies should have been easy. But, even allowing for inevitable transition problems, DHS has been a disaster: under funded, undermanned, disorganized, and unforgivably slow-moving.3There have also been some problems with helping states and municipalities improve their emergency preparedness. Under the Patriot Act, is a complicated formula ensure that all states, regardless of population and regardless of whether they contain high profile targets likely attract terrorist attacks, receive a certain percentage of the funds allocated improve the capabilities of local and state first responders. …
Read full abstract
Feb 16, 2005
Volker Krause + 1
Open Access