Remarks by Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge To the National Press Club
Date: November 05, 2003Source: Computer Crime Research Center
... education, science and commerce is, whether we like it or not, we don't need to be a nation state to develop chemical, biological, or crude radiological and nuclear weapons.
NextSo while we're mindful of the possible connections between a nation state and a group of terrorists, we also need to be mindful that, in time, terrorists can build up their own capacity to develop these weapons themselves.
MS. LYTLE: Will we ever go to Code Green? And would that put you out of business?
SECRETARY RIDGE: I hope so, I believe so, but I don't think we'll ever be out of business. We're always going to -- I think the President's decision to take on the largest reorganization since the reorganization of the Defense Department is based upon a belief -- and I think we need to accept it -- that the 21st century world and beyond will have to deal with the threats of international terrorism for the foreseeable future, if not permanently.
This is a permanent reorganization predicated by the notion that it is a permanent change in the condition in which the international community operates. I think it is the most responsible thing to do. But there will be a time, hopefully, prayerfully, that based on the threat assessment, that we'll proceed down from yellow, and maybe to blue, and maybe one of these days to green. But regardless of -- even if we get to the lowest level, we're going to have to remain vigilant, we're going to have to remain on guard, and the institutions that we're setting up will have to still perform effectively and efficiently.
Frankly, the stronger we get our ability to reduce our own vulnerability as we enhance our capacity to prevent terrorist attacks -- we'll always have to sustain that capability within our country.
MS. LYTLE: Has the department deterred any specific terrorist attacks and apprehended any potential terrorists?
SECRETARY RIDGE: Well, we believe as a fundamental principle that overt security, the big movement to talk to the governors and the private sector to put visible signs of enhanced security personnel around critical infrastructure sites, transportation sites, and the like, in and of itself, is a deterrent. And I guess you never know what you don't know.
But the bottom line is that we know from discussion with people that have been apprehended, as the United States and other countries have prosecuted the war on terrorism, that there's a method and a procedure that involves a great deal of surveillance and planning. And when you disrupt that surveillance and when you disrupt that planning with enhanced security measures or changed security measures, if you modify your security patterns, that, in and of itself as a deterrent, has a very strong deterrent effect.
And I think it's pretty clear that in the months we've seen in the past I believe our law enforcement community has very successfully apprehended and prosecuted those who potentially -- well, they've been prosecuted because they violated the law, and they were terrorists in the making.
MS. LYTLE: Is the National Guard stretched too thin from its Homeland Security duties with so many units being shipped overseas? And should the National Guard be part of your Department?
SECRETARY RIDGE: First of all, the profile of the individual National Guard member is rather remarkable I think. A lot of the men and women in the National Guard wear a public service uniform back home.
I mean, it's amazing the number of policemen and firemen and local law enforcement personnel were called up to the National Guard. So these men and women on a fairly regular basis have been in one capacity or another have been working to secure our homeland for a long time. They just change uniforms. Sometimes they did it domestically. Sometimes they've done it overseas. So they're a remarkable group.
I think it is pretty clear that the role of the National Guard has been and, until the Congress and Executive Branch determine otherwise, will continue to be an integral part of the defense apparatus of this country.
One of the advantages, however, with Secretary Rumsfeld's reorganization of the Department of Defense and the development of the North American Command is that we are in a position in the months and years ahead to work in advance of their use of the National Guard and some of the special assets they bring to Homeland Security to work very productively towards plans where we'd be able to use them domestically for Homeland Security purposes.
I don't think they're ever going to become part of the Department of Homeland Security, although there is presently some discussion that down the road, perhaps, they should be assigned to us. But that would be clearly a public and very important public debate between the Executive Branch with Congress.
So right now we are very comfortable and gratified that there is a North American Command with whom we can work, and are working on a fairly regular basis, as we set up the Department of Homeland Security and develop plans to use the specialized assets of not only DoD but the National Guard.
MS. LYTLE: If we go years without an attack, how do you convince Americans to keep up their alert, especially folks who live far away from Washington and New York which were so affected on 9/11? And how will that affect your pleas for funding for Homeland Security?
SECRETARY RIDGE: Well, I certainly hope that we have that advocacy challenge in years ahead. It would be wonderful if the world was immune from a terrorist attack for the next two or three years.
But unfortunately as we view the world and view the threats that we have an opportunity to assess every morning, that is - it's very unlikely to occur. And unfortunately - or fortunately, we will be reminded on a fairly regular basis as to the threat of international terrorism, because it is going to be reported, and we are going to see evidence of it and read of evidence of it in the months and years ahead.
And regardless of whether or not - and this is something that's very important for Americans to understand - although I believe we understand it now far better than ever before, these terrorist organizations as decentralized and networked as they are, al Qaeda -- and there’ll be a successor to al Qaeda - while they may initiate terrorist activity in other parts of the world, the United States is still the primary target.
So I hope that down the road Secretaries of Homeland Security have to beg and borrow more money from the Congress of the United States because we haven’t had any terrorist attacks, but I think that's very unlikely. But even if there a sustained period of time when we have not been attacked, we may conclude that one of the reasons we haven't been attacked is because over the preceding months and years we have upgraded our capacity to prevent an attack and reduce our vulnerability, and the terrorists have decided to look elsewhere to take their evil and their hatred.
MS. LYTLE: As you weave together these disparate agencies into one department, what are the major challenges you face in the next six months or a year? And especially, how do you pull together such a hodge-podge of information and computer systems?
SECRETARY RIDGE: First of all, there are a lot of people that believe this is really almost an impossible task; I will tell you that the glass at the outset is half-full. It's not as if we've got to go out and recruit and then train 180,000 men and women. Because until 9-11, in subsequent public discussions of what goes on at the border and what goes on at the airports and every place else, people never really saw their neighbors who may have one of those jobs as being responsible for the safety and security of the neighborhood or the country.
So I've got the advantage of working with 180,000 people who know what their mission is. They've been doing it for a long time. But suddenly it's been elevated in the public's eye so that people begin to appreciate on a day-to-day basis, just like the police and firemen, the folks at the border, the folks at the airport, the folks at the national labs, the folks in the Coast Guard, the folks at FEMA - they're integral and absolutely essential to us maintaining the security of this country and preparing ourselves in the event of an attack.
So we start with the glass half-full. Clearly there are some organizational challenges. There are dozens of personnel systems, dozens of pay systems, but those are systems. That has as much to do with enterprise architecture as it does with anything else.
The biggest challenge we have, I don't think, is unifying the department because I think these men and women are pretty much unified around the mission - you know, one team, one fight, one enemy. And they've been doing this a long, long time.
I think one of the most critical initiatives that we've undertaken, and the Congress gave us the capacity to do that, is to create a human resource system, a management system based on the principles of merit and fairness, but a management system that isn't based upon classification of personnel that's 40 and 50 years old - gives us an opportunity to build a 21st century management system to deal with issues of pay and recruitment and retention and gives us a kind of flexibility that we want in order to put -- move people around when necessary and take advantage of the talent and experience and...
Add comment
Email to a Friend
