Thursday, 16 May 2013.
An example of the United States National Security Act 2002
In 2002, during George W. Bush’s reign, the US National Security Act was passed. The President saw the need to initiate security reforms, especially after the 911 attack on the United States. As a result of these reforms, a number of sectors have been affected, including the aviation industry, where the screen mechanisms have become a major concern of the Government. Due to the looming need, the transport security system was launched, which became the largest installation set by the US government after WWII. Nevertheless, there was every reason to conclude that these initiatives were taken as a result of the 911 attack
The view was expressed that the attack remained a security reform, which had resulted in the adoption of the United States National Security Act. In addition, other security threats, such as the Anthrax attacks, make it even more compelling for the Bush administration to carry out security-related legislative reforms. The view was also expressed that the contribution of the public health system was important as the country faced the realities of bioterrorism. Response units are required for handling related cases. The purpose of the United States Internal Security Act is to create and enhance the capacity of internal mechanisms to respond to terrorist threats
The Ministry of Internal Security was responsible for ensuring the security of Americans from terrorist attacks, minimizing the threat of terrorism and improving the response services to reduce the damage caused by terrorism. In other words, this act was based solely on the need for active action against security threats, for the safety of Americans. The Government must therefore take steps to strengthen security in each state. For this reason, the Bush administration was credited with adopting measures and policies that improved coordination among the agencies concerned in dealing with security issues
It should be noted that the implementation of the United States National Security Act has been implemented collectively. This was mainly due to the consolidated activities of the various agencies within the framework of the overall course. Prior to the development of this action, emergency situations in the country were decided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA as the lead player. After it was adopted, it was necessary to adopt the FEMA system, while at the same time its role of emergency preparedness and readiness. The Act also includes various areas, including but not limited to, the protection of the country’s infrastructure, the analysis of information and the atomic countermeasures. It was necessary to adopt the FEMA law in this law because of the previous role it played in dealing with disasters. Given its well-defined roles, FEMA remains relevant and its functioning is not in conflict with the internal security situation. First of all, these two objectives are aimed at the protection of the United States. The view was expressed that FEMA became the main pillar of national security to increase the level of municipal preparedness against terrorist threats
It should be noted that any legislative reform is never an instant. Implementation of the National Security Law began in 2003 slowly because of changes and agreements that were necessary to ensure efficiency. The Federal Government had to make changes, gradually, in order to ensure a gradual transition to disaster management. While implementation is broadly focused on public facilities, it is important to stress that the private sector has also been involved in this process
However, the implementation of this law has faced a number of problems since its adoption. For example, political problems in the United States impede this process. In addition, it was noted that cases of re-centralization had a negative impact on the process. Since these factors are interrelated, these factors hinder the full potential of the National Security Law in the country, even though it was adopted more than a decade ago. For example, the country is highly centralized, as most of the influence of Washington is tapped. While this is necessary to speak in one voice, it undermines efforts to build better communities to cope with the country’s insecurity. He also undermined the full implementation of the law if he was exposing Americans to terrorist threats. Although significant progress has been made, the law has not yet been fully implemented due to existing obstacles and areas to be addressed by the stakeholders
More than a decade ago, the United States passed a law on internal security in the United States. During this period, the country has taken a number of measures to combat threats to the security and safety of Americans. More resources had been allocated to the States to enable them to cope with the impact of natural disasters and to prevent them. Although every American could agree that there had been success, there were several problems that cast doubt on the effectiveness of national security in the country. A good example is that in 2005 most public authorities were unable to respond effectively to Hurricane Katrina, leading to a discussion of the best method. While National Security must be focused on all forms of disaster, the government seems to be paying much attention to terror, leaving Americans vulnerable to other forms of disasters that can strike at any point in time
It is also clear that National Security has received support from the Bush and Obama administration. This is due to the lack of decisive action to abandon the policy. On the other hand, many changes have been made to improve the security situation in the country. For better national security, its audit is necessary to identify its shortcomings, as most of the proposed strategies do not have an impact on policy for many years. Furthermore, collective responsibility was needed to achieve the common goal. Politicians must show the political will to work with citizens to manage the national security program. In addition, the public should be aware of the role of internal security, as other people see it as interference with privacy and the violation of certain rights. First of all, Americans should focus on the positive side of politics, although there may be a few drawbacks
Analysis of the National Security Act 2002. n.d. 22 received
Dye Kelly and Warren LLP,
The Ministry of Internal Security and Public Affairs
Mayer Matt, A., James Carafano and Jessica Zuckerman,
McNeil, Gina B and Mayer, Matt.
United States Government Accountability Office,