Richard WarnickNORTHCOM Now Has Combat Troops - Should We Worry?
U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) is the combatant command established in 2002 to “provide command and control of Department of Defense (DOD) homeland defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities.” A subordinate command, Standing Joint Force Headquarters North (SJFHQ-N), headquartered at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, Colorado, began operations in January 2004.
We recently learned from the Army Times that for the first time NORTHCOM has been given command of a dedicated active-duty Army unit, the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team stationed at Fort Stewart, Georgia. The 4,500-member force, called a CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF (pronounced “sea-smurf”), is to be on call to respond immediately to any national emergency to include “civil unrest and crowd control.” They assumed this new role October 1.
NORTHCOM Joint Operations Center, Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs
On Monday, the Washington Post revealed that one brigade is just the start. The Defense Department’s role in homeland security will be increased to 20,000 soldiers inside the United States by 2011.
Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — “would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable,” Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted “a fundamental change in military culture,” he said.
All this has been done with very little public debate. Is the creeping militarization of homeland security a good idea, especially when the military is already fighting two wars and is overstretched globally? Don’t we have a Department of Homeland Security that’s supposed to be in charge of, you know, homeland security?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
The best plan for homeland security is a plan for living wages.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Larry,
How in the world will “living wages” prevent an attack like the one that just occurred in Mumbai or prevent another 9/11 attack?
I agree that the concept of having military troops trained and tasked to respond to any national emergency to include “civil unrest and crowd control.”
I don’t see how that isn’t very close or an actual violation of the posse comitatus act.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Bob S.–
I actually thought the Posse Comitatus Act was effectively repealed in 2006, after the Bush administration and supporters tried to use it as an excuse for the federal government’s failure to respond quickly after Hurricane Katrina. I just did a quick check of Wikipedia, and it seems Congress quickly reversed those amendments.
So yeah, good question. What about the Posse Comitatus Act? The WaPo article I linked to paraphrases Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense:
Historically, of course, federal troops have been employed in a law enforcement role under the orders of the President of the United States pursuant to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
It is a very dangerous road we are going down. We believe in keeping our military and civil law enforcement seperate for a reason, the Posse Comitatus Act was designed to protect the American people
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Ken, I agree that the military ought to stay out of law enforcement (with the exception of the military police). However the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was not designed to protect people– quite the opposite, it was a political compromise that ended federal protection for African Americans in the states of the former Confederacy.
December 4th, 2008 at 1:34 am
land of the free and home of the brave, ya know. and if you don’t believe it, we’ll run you over with a tank.