Executive Summary
After the 9-11 terrorist attack, the National Commission on Terrorism attack did an extensive investigation to look for security loopholes and address inadequacies in the intelligence community, federal and local governments (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
Although most parts of the report put a lot of emphasis on intelligence failures, some parts of the recommendations report focused on weakness about emergency response and preparedness unit.
Even though the commission paid tribute and congratulated those who helped in responding to the September 11, 2001 disaster (responders), especially the firefighters, police, and the public in general, the recommendation argued that most government units were to blame for not having an adequate plan in place to deal with emergency of such magnitude.
To help in making a secured future and planning adequately for any emergency, the 9-11 commission made three major recommendations to help in areas emergency response and preparedness. First, the commission proposed for adoption and implementation of ICS nationwide, which would be effective in coordination and communication among various units.
Secondly, the commission requested the Congress to pass a legislation that would ensure implementation of mutual aid in all states and their jurisdiction. Lastly, yet very important, the commission requested Department of Homeland security (DHS) to facilitate the implementation of ANS emergency policies in all private sectors to reduce vulnerability. This three major recommendations and others are very necessary and there implementation is good for national security.
Emergence Management
After the destructive September 9, 2001terrorism attack in the US soil, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks carried out an extensive study to indentify security loopholes in order to develop a sustainable solution for safety of American citizens (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
In that attack, quite a large number of individuals (in thousands) were saved although many people lost lives in what is considered to have been caused by inefficient emergency management unit. It is argued that many people lost lives because standard emergency and safety measures were not set in place adequately.
To correct the inefficiencies indentified and ensure that such a situation would not happen in the future, the “9/11 commission” report made some recommendations to be adopted. This paper will discuss the report or recommendations prepared by National Commission on Terrorist Attack and assess whether the proposed changes were necessary and justifiable.
Discussion
In general, the recommendations and changes proposed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (9/11 commission) were made in concern to the security issues facing the US (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The proposals were made on the principles that, there was a need to improve and develop a national emergency squad that would be the ability to handle any form of disaster, be it natural or man-made. After the commission released its recommendations to the public, immediately, a debate rose concerning all the major changes proposed. In this paper, both the implications and consequences of implementing the proposed changes will be assessed in a careful manner.
The proposals made by the “9/11 Commission” put a lot of emphasizes on the need to develop the intelligence community of the US in an attempt to tighten security of the nation for the safety of American citizens (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). In addition to developing the intelligence unit, the commission made a number of recommendations to improve the emergency response unit so as to enhance more efficiency.
This would be made possible by adopting “use of standard modes of organization, legislation, and planning” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).The commission concluded that actions taken by citizens, public safety personnel, and other departments in managing the “horrific event” were to be admired as they played a big role in saving human lives.
On the other hand, the commission argued that the disaster had been very intense due to poor or insufficient preparation, lack of proper organization among different units, and lack of sufficient technological capacity.
According to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (NCTA), the horrific terrorist attack on 9/11 proved that even the strongest emergency response unit could easily be shaken if the attack is of an immense magnitude. Because of this particular crisis, the commission saw the need to improve emergency response unit both in the federal and local governments. In order to assess whether the recommendations or changes proposed were necessary, it is imperative to have an overview of the commission’s findings.
Commission’s recommendations
As a measure to ensure development of a strong emergency response unit, the 9/11 commission made the following three major recommendations.
Foremost, “the emergency response agencies nationwide should adopt the Incident Command System (ICS)” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). Where multiple security bodies are involved, the report recommended that such agencies should adopt and implement a unified command (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The commission made specific recommendations for homeland security urging the agency to use the ICS and unified command by end of October 2004 (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). The department of homeland was urged to support the program by funding and training all its officials in accordance with ICS and Unified command procedures (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The second major recommendation proposed by the 9/11 commission is that the congress would pass legislation to ensure there was support and cooperation in all states as a future disaster plan. The legislation to be passed was to be long-term to ensure that the adoption of public security mutual aid national wide (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The third, yet very important recommendation targeted the private sectors and individuals. The commission proposed the application of the American National Standard Institute’s (ANSI) recommendations for private emergency preparedness (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
In a statement, the commission said, “We believe that compliance with the standard should define the standard of care owed by a company to its employees and the public for legal purposes” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). As such, emergency preparedness in all private sectors was not an option but a requirement that would serve to protect individuals against any form of disaster.
In addition to these three recommendations, the commission also proposed a number of response strategies that would guarantee urgent situation preparedness. The report specifically requested the Congress to re-assess all existing federal emergency response resources (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). This recommendation was directed to the Congress because it has the command and power to influence all involved authorities to revise the existing policies.
Lastly, the commission urged the Congress to tighten up measures in order to re-evaluate the emergency responder and national health program. This measure was to be effected considering that the public and responders (police and emergence agencies) had experienced a number of medical problems since the 9/11 terrorist attack (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). In addition, the congress was requested to carry out regular health assessment to public sectors.
Analysis of the recommendations
In order to assess whether the recommendations are necessary, the paper will look at each of the proposed solution one at a time.
Adoption of the Incident Command System (ICS)
According to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (9/11 commission), an effective disaster plan can only be achieved through full implementation of ICS by all emergency response bodies. For a long time now, the Incidence Command system (ICS) has been effective and helpful in responding to different disasters in different regions and units. In reality, terrorism has been named as one of the highest forms of security hazards in the world today.
If truth be told, terrorism poses a big danger to American citizens and the entire world as well. In a situation where there is terrorism attack not only is the public at risk, but even responders are too (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). This is because other explosives resulting from the primary explosions also pose dangers to tragedy response team.
However, with the adoption of ICS, all responders are protected. Nonetheless, all safety standards must be adhered to as inadequate coordination of crucial strategies may cause of safety hazards hence posing a great danger to responders. This is the reason why training is necessary for proper implementation of the recommendations.
Is this proposal necessary?
A proposal to adopt and fully implement the Incidence Command System would facilitate internal communications (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). One major reason why 9/11 bombing was successful is that the intelligence department lacked adequate coordination and effective communication affecting emergency response (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
With application of ICS, it easy to overcome all challenges that hinder successful coordination and communication in times of crisis. As such, it is clear that recommendations campaigning for adoption of ICS are necessary and justifiable. This is also because 9/11 event brought confusion and lack of coordination among the emergency response personnel.
With proper implementation of Incidence Command, the system can effectively improve and enhance collective security, enhance information distribution, and it can decrease levels of confusion to the respond emergency units. The ICS is effective in facilitating coordination of numerous response actions. Therefore, adoption of ICS is very imperative.
Mutual Aid
The commission requested the Congress to pass legislation to facilitate mutual aid in all sectors (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
With the proposal, all states were integrated in the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) rules, which govern policies accepted by different states to smooth the progress of mutual aid provision whenever any form of disaster occurs (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). Under these policies, officers and Emergency Response Unit workers can offer other states assistance in case of a catastrophe.
Is this proposal necessary?
The proposal to facilitate adoption of mutual aid in all states is very necessary. This is because mutual aid is a basic essential resource in providing a wide range of solutions whenever a crisis of a huge magnitude occurs. Different states have different physical and financial capability to equip its region with appropriate resources necessary to respond to any form of disasters (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
Due to this imbalance, mutual aid helps bring equilibrium, maintain, and put adequate resources together to respond to any form of tragedy such as terrorism attack or floods among others. With mutual aid, states unite resources in the most effective way without incurring the costs of purchasing different emergency response resources.
As such, the mutual aid program is cost effective. In addition to this, the “Mutual Aid system help package” all required crisis responses materials which can fit in different situations. It is also effective in that it entails coordination with other tragedy response units such as Federal Management Emergence Agency (FMEA). Certainly, the proposal to implement adoption of mutual aid is very necessary.
ANSI Emergency preparedness standards
The Commission urged the Department of Homeland Security to encourage implementation of ANSI standards as a procedure of emergency preparedness by all private divisions (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The commission however clearly said that this particular recommendation was deliberate and not mandatory. The commission stated that the Congress and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had a duty to encourage all private sectors to adopt all proposed safety standards (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
Is this proposal necessary?
The adoption of these policies is justifiable. It is estimated that about eighty five percent (85%) of all essential structures in the US belong or are owned by the private sectors (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). In case of any terrorism attack that is not aimed at government facilities or the military structures, the first groups of people who may provide help (responders) are more likely to be civilians.
In such a situation, the DHS and national disaster preparedness team would definitely begin with the private divisions. Just before putting this recommendation forward, the commission had observed that most private sectors were inadequately unprepared for any form of terrorism.
No doubt, lack of such preparedness in all private sectors posed and still poses a great risk to safety of thousands civilians. Over the years, “the National Standard for preparedness” has played a big role in ensuring that all private sectors implement the ANSI safety measures (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
With proper implementation of preparedness in all private sectors, adequate policies to evacuate people in terror attack facilities would be put in place, there would be increased communication capabilities with all involved stakeholders, and a continuity plan operation would be put in place too (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). Thus, the recommendations to adopt ANSI emergency preparedness standards are not only justifiable, but are also necessary.
Conclusion
Emergencies such as terrorism attack, Hurricanes, and Tsunamis are major causes of shock, confusion, and death to both the victims and responders. Because of the outcomes associated with disasters, there is a great need to develop and implement an effective disaster management plan to ensure any forms of tragedies are well catered for before they even happen.
Experts and researchers have argued that lack of coordination and insufficiency in emergency management plan were major reasons why a big damage was incurred and thousands of lives were lost in the 9-11 terrorism attack.
To avoid such a situation in the future, the National Commission on Terrorism Attack was formed (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks). After an extensive investigation, the commission made recommendations that would help the US government to “protect against and prepare for terrorist attacks” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks).
The proposed changes targeted both public and private sectors urging them to increase and improve their emergency capability to effectively deal or rather respond smoothly to any other form of disaster in future days. In this essay, all the recommendations have been discussed looking at the implications and application of each proposed change. After carefully evaluating the benefits associated with all recommended changes, this paper concludes that indeed all the proposed changes are necessary and therefore warranted.
Works Cited
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (NCTA). The 9/11 Commission Report. 2004. Web.