Comprehensive Report on the US Department of Homeland Security

This report provides a comprehensive overview of Homeland Security in the United States, beginning with its origins in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent formation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It details the DHS's structure, mission, and its role within the U.S. intelligence community, emphasizing its focus on counter-terrorism and the coordination of various federal agencies. The report then examines the key agencies under the DHS umbrella, including the Transportation Security Agency (TSA), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Coast Guard, and the Secret Service, outlining their specific responsibilities and contributions to national security. Furthermore, the report analyzes the government's role in Homeland Security, highlighting the establishment of a joint network security system, the concept of a "defense front", and the involvement of agencies like the FBI in international cooperation and cyber security. The report underscores the evolution of Homeland Security from a counter-terrorism focus to a broader approach encompassing various aspects of national security and the crucial role of inter-agency collaboration.

Running head: HOMELAND SECURITY
Homeland Security
Student’s Name
Institution
Date

HOMELAND SECURITY 2
Origin of Homeland Security
The 911 incident of 2001 shocked Americans very much. This was a heavy blow to the
United States. The 911 Commission of Inquiry made a long and lengthy investigation report on
the incident. What is most noticeable in the report is that it pointed out that the U.S.
government's response to the incident before and after the incident was frustrating, and various
departments were talking to each other and the command was chaotic (Keeney and von
Winterfeldt, 2011). "It was a mess in the performance"-objectively speaking, the US
government's post-aid assistance was still good, but it was just hacked by the media . In
particular, in advance of the warning, the FBI and the CIA each obtained relevant information
about the terrorist attack, but because of the inherent flaws and bureaucratic style of the US
intelligence system at that time, they were unable to take a coordinated action and watch the
attack occur. It is important to say here that the U.S. intelligence community with 16 intelligence
agencies did not have a well-designed system from the beginning. Its membership additions and
changes, leadership changes, and mission functions were replaced by the federal government,
parliament, and the military. As a result of the game between various political forces, such a
system experienced many intelligence errors during the Cold War, but it did not form a strong
stimulus to the Americans, and the 9/11 incident really hurt Americans (Bureau of Justice
Assistance 2016).
They painstakingly introduced the "United States Act by Taking Appropriate Measures to
Stop and Stop Terrorism", also known as the "Patriot Act", and the Homeland Security Act in
2002, and the 2004 The Three Acts of Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention are the
most important US national security laws since 9/11. The three laws have three things in
common. The first is to expand the authority of the intelligence service and lay the foundation

HOMELAND SECURITY 3
for the prism plan. The second is to emphasize that the key task of US national security in the
future is anti-terrorism, which has not changed. The unified coordination of the various federal
agencies in national security affairs has been strengthened. The National Intelligence Director,
the Department of Homeland Security and the Northern Command are the products of this spirit
(Applegate, 2016).
These three common points, plus the "syllogism" of counter-terrorism, all set the tone for
the birth and nature of the Department of Homeland Security: there must be an effective
mobilization of the country's large resources to prevent terrorist activities and combat terrorist
organizations. The department that restores the consequences of terrorist attacks, and this
department must also attach great importance to the use of intelligence. There is no doubt that
the Department of Homeland Security is such a department. The fight against terrorism is not
just a matter for the national security department, but requires the participation of the entire
society. This has long been the consensus of governments. In our words, it is to fight terrorism in
a "people's war" manner. The Americans are also well aware of this. The fight against terrorism
involves intelligence reconnaissance, border control, social security, economic supervision,
disaster relief, cultural propaganda, and military operations. Only by forming a joint force in
these areas can we effectively counter terrorism, and in order to effectively To manage and direct
these matters, you need a department with sufficient power to coordinate all of this. In addition,
when this powerful counter-terrorism department is involved in all aspects of national security, it
can no longer be regarded as a pure counter-terrorism department (Crowther, 2014). Its task area
far exceeds the task of counter-terrorism itself, that is, the prevention and combat of terrorist
activities. To restore the aftermath of the terrorist attack. It can be understood in this way that the
extreme pursuit of anti-terrorism effects has led to the construction of other aspects of national

HOMELAND SECURITY 4
security, or that good anti-terrorism effects can only be achieved if all aspects of national
security are well-constructed. The Department of Homeland Security is a cabinet-level
department that co-ordinates the construction and management of US Homeland Security, led by
counter-terrorism. This department is also a member of the US intelligence community.
Agencies related to Homeland Security
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Intelligence and Analysis Office's role is to
monitor U.S.-based activities that have potential homeland security risks, including activities in
sensitive groups in the U.S., and dynamics of violent or extremist organizations to form a U.S.-
based threat Intelligence and analysis panorama. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis is
headed by a U.S. Senate-approved Undersecretary of Homeland Security--authorizations he has
include oversight of the Homeland Security Intelligence System within the U.S. federal
government, management of intelligence sharing within the Department of Homeland Security,
and interaction with the U.S. intelligence community The other agencies of the United States
interface with the intelligence needs related to homeland security, and communicate with the US
state's Fusion Center (U.S. Department of Homeland Security 2014).
The Department of Homeland Security works with a number of agencies(Carter, 2016).
One of the agencies is the Transportation Security Agency (TSA). In the United States, airport
security is under the jurisdiction of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). These
TSA staff have the major mission of flight safety. Coupled with the United States' response to
terrorist attacks, security inspection policies are often adjusted and upgraded, and their work has
become increasingly difficult.

HOMELAND SECURITY 5
The other agency is the Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP). The main
purpose is to prevent terrorist and terrorist weapons from entering the United States. It is also
responsible for arresting individuals attempting to enter US illegally, illegal drugs and other
contraband
There is also the Immigration Enforcement Agency (ICE). Its main functions is to
investigate criminal cases seized by sister agency CBP. The agency also enforces US
immigration and custom laws to protect the US and public safety.
Another agency is the Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. National Oceanic
Commission, and the U.S. Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration represent marine
management agencies at three levels: law enforcement, decision-making, and technology .
Among them, the United States Coast Guard is a law enforcement agency that uniformly
exercises maritime law enforcement powers and has the vast majority of maritime law
enforcement powers and responsibilities (Carter, Carter, Chermak & McGarrell, 2017). The
Coast Guard has a large number of personnel and complicated work, but its composition
structure is very clear, and the task assignment is relatively clear, which effectively avoids
management overlap and overlap. At the same time, while performing different tasks, the US
Coast Guard in addition to the President and the National Oceanic Commission, the need to be
responsible for the Interior, the Minister of Environmental Protection Secretary Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, or according to the type of task , such a system designed to It can
reduce the information transmission link as much as possible in the complicated and changeable
marine affairs, thereby saving time cost and improving law enforcement efficiency.
There is also the Secret Service (Secret Service). The Secret Service 's main jurisdiction
is to prevent and investigate counterfeiting of US dollars and bonds, as well as to protect the

HOMELAND SECURITY 6
President, Vice Presidents, President-elects and Vice-Presidents, former presidents and their
spouses (except for the remarriage of the spouse), 120 days before the election presidential
candidate and vice presidential candidates identified, current and under 16 years old children and
grandchildren of former president, visiting foreign heads of state and government heads of state
and their spouses, individuals designated by presidential decree and ... the Secret Service 's. The
main jurisdiction is to prevent and investigate counterfeiting of US dollars and bonds. The U.S.
Secret Service uniform is responsible for protecting embassies in the United States, the US Navy
Observatory, and the White House in Washington, DC. There are also secret service missions
that remain confidential (Orehek, 2012). To put it simply, the US Secret Service is the president's
personal bodyguard. They are of a higher rank. They belong to the US Department of Homeland
Security and are composed of agents and uniform employees! Due to the many assassination
experiences of the US president, the US government attaches great importance to the issue of
security by the president, so the Secret Service is responsible for the president's security tasks.
The president is not very human. Strictly selected "agents" ... The people of the United States
Secret Service must not only be very familiar with various guns and ammunition, but also have a
high level of shooting, as well as various driving skills and the ability to investigate crimes.
Bullets, they are the personal bodyguards of the President of the United States!
Lastly, there is the National Protection and Projects Agency (NPPD), which is
responsible for network security and critical infrastructure protection, have established their
intelligence units (Darroch & Mazerolle, 2015).
Government role in Homeland security agencies
First, government helps to build a joint network security system to drive the development
of the network market. The strategy emphasizes the construction of a US-level network

HOMELAND SECURITY 7
information system security assurance system and the improvement of the overall stability and
security of network systems. In the past, the cyber security documents issued by the federal
government focused on emphasizing the construction of cyber security systems in a specific
federal agency (such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Homeland Security,
etc.) or in individual fields (Carter, Carter & Chermak, 2013). The strategic design emphasizes
the coordinated construction and centralized management of federal units and agencies led by the
Ministry of National Defense, and the establishment of a network security linkage system in
which the federal government's constituent departments and the U.S. military jointly participate
and deeply cooperate to realize the network. The overall leap of defense and offensive systems.
In addition, the strategy also emphasizes economic services, protects the federal government's
network information security, optimizes the division of responsibilities of various departments
and agencies in network security, focuses on protecting the security of network systems related
to critical infrastructure, and increases the crackdown on cybercrime (Carter, 2015).
The government also facilitate the formation of defense front. What deserves special
attention is that the strategy of the Ministry of Defense has proposed a new concept of "defense
front". The concept of "active defense" was used in the "Cyberspace Action Strategy" released
by the Ministry of Defense in 2011, with the purpose of "synchronizing, real-time detection,
detection, analysis and prevention of cyber risks and threats, and development of new defense
action measures and calculations. Facilities to prevent malicious behavior before the network is
affected (Coats, 2017). " In contrast, the "defense front" in this strategy is designed to not only
prevent and control cyber risks from the source, but also move the strategic goals forward and
prevent, before threatening behaviors are made, Stop, or even preempt, strike or eliminate
entities that could create "potential threats". Compared with the previous emphasis on "risk

HOMELAND SECURITY 8
control" in previous cyber security strategies, this strategy is full of words such as "cyber war"
and "defense preparation". Therefore, the concept of "defense front", although it is called
defense, The emphasis is offensive, requiring the US military to have the ability to attack and
undermine the opposing network defense system while preparing for its own strategic defense.
In addition, government, through FBI, has measures to strengthen international
cooperation, improve the technical capabilities of business personnel, and apply new cyber
investigation techniques in criminal investigations to enhance cyber security defense. The
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), affiliated with the U.S. Department of Justice, is one of
the world's important police agencies. It is headquartered in the J. Edgar Hoover Building in
Washington, DC, and has 10 functional departments. In charge of technical identification,
criminal investigation, training services, etc., and set up field offices and more than 400 "local
branches" in 59 cities across the country, as well as overseas offices in 22 countries around the
world (Darroch & Mazerolle, 2013). The mission of the FBI is to investigate specific criminal
activities in the country, to maintain national security and prevent organized terrorist activities,
to collect intelligence information from abroad, and to combat all types of activities that may
endanger the national security of the United States. International agencies that perform legal
duties. The FBI has the highest priority in combating violent crime, drug crime, violent crime,
organized crime, job crime and espionage. With the cyberization of crime forms, maintaining
cybersecurity and combating cybercrime have become one of the important tasks of the FBI.
In addition to traditional cyber security threats such as virus emails and malicious links,
new types of cyber security threats, such as "zombie" networks, "phishing" websites, and DDOS
attacks, are intensifying. FBI Director Christopher Wray stated at the International Cyber
Security Conference in January 2018 that the FBI needs to strengthen international cooperation,

HOMELAND SECURITY 9
improve the technical capabilities of business personnel, and apply new cyber investigation
techniques in criminal investigations to enhance cyber security defense (Silke, 2013).
Strengthening international cooperation is a necessary measure to enhance the defense
capabilities of cyber security. In the decentralized, network interconnected information era,
whether it is to combat cybercrime or jointly build a network security defense platform, effective
international cooperation is required (Cilluffo, Clark & Downing, 2011). In the investigation and
punishment against AlphaBay and Hansa, the largest dark web market in the United States in
July 2017, not only the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Agency, and Europol, but also the relevant countries of the Netherlands, Thailand, Canada, and
Britain and France mechanism. The use of new Internet investigation technology (NIT) provides
strong technical support for the FBI to crack criminal cases. In the past, law enforcement
officials first collected information such as the suspect's IP address through network technology
and sent it to the FBI server to find out the actual identity of the Tor user (Chermak, Carter,
Carter, McGarrell & Drew, 2013). Not long ago, the FBI used network investigative technology
(NIT) to insert a series of codes in a victim-produced video, which successfully identified the IP
address of the suspect and eventually removed the information of a suspected blackmailer. The
criminal suspect was arrested and brought to justice. In addition, the FBI focuses on training
related personnel in modern network technologies such as big data, the Internet of Things, and
information intelligence, and strengthens the staff's business literacy and technical capabilities in
order to comprehensively improve the basic ability to respond to cybersecurity threats.
Issues affecting Intelligence reforms
The first issue affecting intelligence is the emergence of cyber-based attacks. Cyberspace
has increasingly become the fifth space to completely change the world after land, sea, sky and

HOMELAND SECURITY 10
outer space. Cyberspace security is not only a necessary prerequisite for the stable and
continuous operation of the Internet system itself, but also the healthy and long-term
development of human future social life and economic order. In terms of international games in
the field of cybersecurity, the Cybersecurity Strategy issued by the Department of Homeland
Security embeds the content of international cooperation into many established goals and
implementation processes (Guikema, 2012). Looking at the future, it is not difficult to imagine
that the Department of Homeland Security will emphasize the promotion of American-style
international cooperation ideas in order to promote its international strategy. The main goal is to
work with partner countries to create a free, open, interoperable, secure and stable international
Internet environment as claimed by the United States. The Department of Defense's attention and
investment in the field of cyber security has been increasing rapidly. In the construction of the
U.S. cyber security governance system and the planning of cyber security policies, the role and
leadership of the Department of Defense has become increasingly prominent (Jenkins, Liepman
& Willis, 2014). Its standpoint is not only to maintain national defense and cyber system
security, but also to build an international cyber security strategy Global attempts of the system
(Marcus, 2017). As the "executor" of cyber security governance in the United States, the FBI
mainly emphasizes strengthening technical methods, improving staff's business literacy, adopting
new cyber investigation technologies, and conducting targeted international cooperation to
effectively combat cyber security crimes. , To improve network security defense capabilities
(Government Accountability Office 2013).
As the country with the most developed intelligence system in the world, the U.S.
national security intelligence mechanism has always attracted attention from all sides. The
September 11 incident gave birth to a comprehensive and thorough reform of the US intelligence

HOMELAND SECURITY 11
system. After more than a decade of hard work, the United States intelligence community has
achieved a major transformation from a decentralized system of institutions to an organic whole
led by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (Kteily, Hodson & Bruneau 2016).
From the perspective of the overall mechanism, the U.S. intelligence community has now formed
a two-wheel drive system that integrates intelligence agencies with mission integration. Its
intelligence transmission network not only covers vertical transmission among three levels of
leadership, coordination, and execution, but also includes different intelligence agencies.
Horizontal coordination among them has basically achieved intelligence integration and
information sharing. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has become the de facto
leader of the U.S. intelligence community. Its counter-terrorism, anti-proliferation, counter-
intelligence, and cyber intelligence centers form the four pillars of the National Security
Intelligence Classification and Transmission Mechanism. By comparison, the most mature of the
four classification delivery mechanisms is the counter-terrorism center, followed by the counter-
intelligence and security center, again the cyber threat intelligence integration center, and finally
the counter-proliferation center. Due to the different development levels of various intelligence
mechanisms, the challenges they face in the reform process are also different. The "bottleneck"
in the reform of the U.S. national security information transmission mechanism includes both
structural difficulties caused by insufficient development and challenges brought about by
changes in the external security environment. In addition, a series of policy measures since the
Trump administration took office has given a new trend to the direction of the US national
security intelligence system.
Conclusion

HOMELAND SECURITY 12
Terrorism in its manifestations is one of the global problems, the solution of which is
impossible without the combined efforts of various states. As a result of this, much attention is
paid to the fight against terrorism at the international level in international documents
(agreements, treaties, conventions, etc.) in order to influence certain social relations. We agree
with the view that the legal support of anti-terrorism activities is a prerequisite for the interaction
of countries in the fight against international terrorism. Recently, a large number of international
agreements on countering terrorism have been adopted. On December 9, 1994, in New York, UN
General Assembly resolution 49/60 adopted the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate
International Terrorism [2], a programmatic document that largely preceded the development of
other international treaties aimed at countering terrorism as a whole. Most of the legal and
policing responses are comprehensive. Terrorism is closely linked to drug trafficking, weapons,
money laundering, activities of illegal armed groups, smuggling of nuclear and other potentially
deadly materials, as well as a number of other crimes. The importance of international
cooperation in this matter, including through the conclusion of regional agreements, in order to
approve practical and effective measures to prevent, combat and eliminate all forms of terrorism,
should be noted

HOMELAND SECURITY 13
References
Guikema, S. (2012). Modeling intelligent adversaries for terrorism risk assessment: Some
necessary conditions for adversary models. Risk Analysis, 32(7), 1117-1121.
Kteily N., Bruneau E., Waytz A. & Cotterill S. (2015). The ascent of man: Theoretical and
empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 2015;109(5):901.
Marcus, J. (2017). Syria conflict: Unravelling the puzzle. BBC News. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39284722
Orehek, E. (2012). Terrorism as intergroup communication. In H. Giles (Ed.), The handbook of
intergroup communication (pp.141-152). New York, NY: Routledge
Rae, J. (2012). Will it ever be possible to profile the terrorist? Journal of Terrorism Research, 3.
Shughart, W. F. (2011). Terrorism in rational choice perspective. The handbook on the political
economy of war, 126-153.
Silke, A. (2013). Chapter 8. In Risk Assessment of Terrorist and Extremist Prisoners (1st ed., pp.
108-111). Retrieved from Academia.edu Web site: http://www.academia.edu
Kteily N., Hodson G. & Bruneau E. (2016). They see us as less than human:
Metadehumanization predicts intergroup conflict via reciprocal dehumanization. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 110(3):343.
Keeney, R. L., and von Winterfeldt, D. (2011). A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland
Security Decisions. Risk Analysis, 31(9): 1470–1487.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2014). The 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security
Review. Retrieved from: nhttps://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/qhsr/the-
2014-quadrennial-homeland-securityreview-overview.pdf

HOMELAND SECURITY 14
Bureau of Justice Assistance (2016). National gang center. Retrieved from:
https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/
Applegate, T. (2016). Reassessing the threat of homegrown violent extremism in the United
States: Overstated or underestimated? Bethesda, MD: Small Wars Foundation.
Carter, J. G. (2015). Inter-organizational relationships and law enforcement information sharing
post 11 September 2001. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 522-542.
Carter, J. G. (2016). Institutional pressures and isomorphism: The impact on intelligence-led
policing adoption. Police Quarterly, 19(4), 435-460.
Carter, J. G., Carter, D. & Chermak, S. (2013). Intelligence training. Law Enforcement Executive
Forum, 13(2), 1-18.
Carter, J. G., Carter, D., Chermak, S. & McGarrell, E. (2017). Law enforcement fusion centers:
Cultivating an information sharing environment while safeguarding privacy. Journal of
Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(1), 11-27. doi:10.1007/s11896-016-9199-4
Chermak, S., Carter, J., Carter, D., McGarrell, E. & Drew, J. (2013). Law enforcement’s
information sharing infrastructure: A national assessment. Police Quarterly, 16, 211-244.
Cilluffo, F., Clark, J. & Downing, M. (2011). Counterterrorism intelligence: Law enforcement
perspectives. Washington, DC: Homeland Security Policy Institute, The George
Washington University.
Coats, D. (2017). Statement for the record—Worldwide threat assessment of the US intelligence
community—Senate select committee on intelligence. Washington, DC: Director of
National Intelligence.
Darroch, S. & Mazerolle, L. (2013). Intelligence-led policing: A comparative analysis of
organizational factors influencing innovation uptake. Police Quarterly, 16(1), 3-37.

HOMELAND SECURITY 15
Crowther, K. (2014). Understanding and overcoming information sharing failures. Journal of
Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 11, 131-154. doi:10.1515/jhsem-2013-
0055
Darroch, S. & Mazerolle, L. (2015). Intelligence-led policing: A comparative analysis of
community context influencing innovation uptake. Policing and Society, 25(1), 1-24.
Government Accountability Office (2013). Information sharing: Agencies could better
coordinate to reduce overlap in field-based activities. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Accountability Office.
Jenkins, B., Liepman, A. & Willis, H. (2014). Identifying enemies among us. Santa Monica, CA:
Rand Corporation.