How Is Trump s Wall Going to Stop Any Terrorist Attacks From Happening Again
A Border Wall to Stop Terrorists? Experts Say That Makes Little Sense
WASHINGTON — President Trump has repeatedly warned that terrorists are pouring into the United States from United mexican states, in one of his central justifications for building a border wall.
Merely his own government'due south assessments conclude that Mr. Trump has seriously overstated the threat. And counterterrorism officials and experts said there had never been a case of a known terrorist sneaking into the country through open areas of the southwest border.
Despite the assistants's focus on security threats at the border, a White House strategy document sent to Congress last month outlining steps needed to monitor and intercept terrorists included no reference to the demand for construction of barriers, fences or walls. Separately, an intelligence analysis concluded that cyberattacks are the top threat to the United states of america — not terrorists at the edge.
"There is no wave of terrorist operatives waiting to cross overland into the Usa," Nicholas J. Rasmussen, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said on Tuesday. "It but isn't truthful."
In a rare prime number-time address to the nation, circulate at 9 p.m. on Tuesday, Mr. Trump was expected to describe a national security crunch brewing at the Mexican border. It was his opportunity to straight defend his demands for $5.7 billion for a border wall — funding that congressional Democrats accept refused to provide, fueling the xviii-day government shutdown.
Many Latin American countries take border law enforcement gaps — limited police force enforcement capabilities and established smuggling routes — that extremists could exploit to harm the Usa, according to the Land Department'southward latest Country Reports on Terrorism.
But, the report concluded, that has not happened.
"These vulnerabilities offering opportunities to foreign terrorist groups, simply there have been no cases of terrorist groups exploiting these gaps to move operations through the region," the report said.
The latest ranking of urgent national security vulnerabilities, compiled annually by American intelligence agencies, puts the terrorist threat from the southwest border low on the list so mentions it in a discussion of how "worldwide product of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine is at tape levels."
Over the last several days, White House and Department of Homeland Security officials have relentlessly pushed the case that the situation at the edge is both a national security crunch and a humanitarian ane.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said on Sunday that "virtually iv,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally," and added that the "most vulnerable point of entry is at our southern border."
A twenty-four hours later, Kellyanne Conway, the White Business firm counselor, called those comments "an unfortunate misstatement."
At the same fourth dimension, in a memo sent to journalists late Monday, Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary, cited "more than than 3,000 'special-interest aliens' — individuals with suspicious travel patterns" who posed a potential national security risk.
"The threat is real," she wrote in a serial of tweets on Monday afternoon. "The number of terror-watchlisted encountered at our Southern Border has increased over the concluding two years. The exact number is sensitive and details about these cases are extremely sensitive."
Former national security officials and analysts accept pushed dorsum — specially on the notion that terrorism suspects or their sympathizers use the southwest border as a door to the United States.
"That iv,000 number was bull," said Westward. Ralph Basham, who served every bit commissioner of United States Community and Border Protection from 2006 to 2009, during the Bush administration.
"The thought that y'all have that many terrorists flooding beyond the border when y'all take all of these defended agents focused on stopping that kind of activity is ridiculous," Mr. Basham said.
A senior American counterterrorism official said on Tuesday nighttime that an annual average of three known or suspected terrorists — all of whom were on spotter lists — had tried to enter the United States at a legal edge crossing or entry point over the last several years, and had been denied.
A 22-page National Strategy to Gainsay Terrorism Travel, overseen by the staff of the National Security Quango and under Mr. Trump'south signature, cited a broad commitment to making it "more than hard for terrorists to cross U.Due south. borders."
Sent to Congress on Dec. 21, the 24-hour interval before the government shutdown began, the document urged data sharing and improved coordination with foreign partners to place terrorists before they travel. It did non urge the construction of a border wall.
The only explicit reference to "border security" in the document, which was obtained on Tuesday by The New York Times, is a listing of executive orders that Mr. Trump has already signed. It also included strategies to "interdict" potential terrorists with plans to "maintain the equipment and technology" necessary to stop bad actors and share real-time information between police force enforcement agencies.
The 2022 cess by the Function of the Director of National Intelligence ranked cyberattacks against utilities, communications systems and markets equally the top threat to the United States. Published annually by American intelligence agencies, the ranking has not changed much over the past five years.
Video
transcript
transcript
Cyberconflict: Why the Worst Is Yet to Come
Despite the devastation cyberweapons have caused around the earth over the terminal decade, they are even so in their infancy. David East. Sanger, a New York Times national security correspondent, explains why the threat is growing.
-
Cyberconflict right now, at this very moment, is similar this aeroplane. It was the offset military plane that was ever built — back in 1909. Merely in just a few decades, planes would be capable of destroying entire cities. Correct, so when nosotros talk virtually cyberweapons, we're still basically in 1909. "That's why you have to have some humility about what'south going to happen in the globe of cyberconflict." David, here, is a national security correspondent for The Times, and he's written a book virtually cyberconflict. It seems like we're hearing more than and more — "One of the worst cyberattacks always." — about state-sponsored cyberattacks. "Occasionally, there are going to be breaches like this." "And this weapon volition not be put back into the box." "Nosotros take more than to lose than whatever other nation on earth." And then, we actually wanted to find out merely how bad things are. And how bad they could get. Should we be agape? "Yes, you should exist afraid, merely non for the reason you think — not considering somebody is going to come in and turn off all the power between Boston and Washington. Yous should be worried about the far more subtle uses of cyber." For example, not an overt attack on U.Due south. troops, only instead, perchance hacking into war machine health records and switching around people's blood types. Information technology still causes havoc. "Think terrorism —" "Nearly a third of the building has been diddled away." "— instead of full-calibration war." "Why do you call it the perfect weapon?" "Because it's deniable. If you can't figure out right away where the attack's coming from, you lot can't actually retaliate." Plus, you can fine-tune the strength of cyberattacks. You can brand them only strong enough to do real damage, only not so strong that they trigger a military response. "It's cheap compared to, say, nuclear weapons. You only need some xx-somethings who are good at programming, a little bit of stolen lawmaking and maybe some Red Bull just to go on them awake during the night." That'southward why cyberweapons take only merely begun to spread. "And cyber is the perfect weapon for a land that's broke." "And we tin confirm that North korea engaged in this assail." Take that time North korea hacked into Sony — "Because of a satirical motion picture starring Seth Rogen and James Flacco." What if they didn't accept cyberweapons? "Possibly they would have landed some commandos at Long Beach, called an Uber, stuck some dynamite underneath the Sony estimator center and run like hell." And then really, North korea's but selection was to apply cyberweapons. But it wouldn't be and then piece of cake for the U.Due south. to hit North Korea's cybernetworks. "They accept fewer IP addresses — Internet Protocol addresses — in North Korea, than you have on any given block of New York City." All the same, nosotros wanted to know who's the best at cyberconflict. "Russia, China, Islamic republic of iran, they use it regularly to advance their political agendas. The Russians to disrupt, the Chinese frequently to steal data, the Iranians to show that they can reach the United States." "How good or bad is the U.S. at this stuff?" "Amid the very best at cyberoffense. The problem is that while we're good at criminal offense, we're the most vulnerable in the defensive globe because we've got and so many networks that form such a big target. The United States has vi,200 cybersoldiers." "Are these people sitting in military fatigues behind a computer?" "They are sitting in military fatigues behind a computer. Simply the Russian hackers, or the Chinese hackers, may not be in uniform. They may exist in blue jeans. They are probably sitting at the beach somewhere — someplace that's got a really skilful internet connexion." All this cyberconflict really kicked off in 2008. Right, that'due south when the U.S. and Israel attacked Iranian nuclear facilities. "It was the most sophisticated apply of cyber by one country against another, and information technology opened upwards the Pandora's box." And remember — it's still but the showtime. "We haven't seen a full-blown war, and nosotros don't know what ane looks like." "What's the most challenging part well-nigh covering this shell?" "The hardest office nearly covering the state use of cyber, is the enormous secrecy that the U.S. regime wraps around it. Merely nosotros've hitting the bespeak where the secrecy has really begun to impede our ability to deter attacks. Because others don't sympathize what we tin practise to them, and what we're willing to do to them. In other words, we're non setting any ruby-red lines out there."
But the government shutdown has furloughed nearly half of the piece of work strength of the Department of Homeland Security's new Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is advertised as the first line of defense force against network attacks. Mr. Trump has likewise dismantled the office of the White House cybersecurity coordinator, the job that was supposed to sew together together offense and defense confronting the daily avalanche of cyberattacks.
After cyberattacks, the peak threats to the United States include the rise of smaller, more deadly nuclear and biological weapons; terrorist attacks by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda; and Russian-style influence campaigns and threats to the United states' infinite assets.
Counterterrorism officials have long discounted the threat of Islamic State or Qaeda terrorists entering through the southwest edge. In some cases, the opposite has happened, said Seamus Hughes, the deputy director of George Washington Academy'south programme on extremism, citing homegrown American extremists who crossed into Mexico to avoid being detected on no-wing lists.
Officials included the case of Jason Ludke of Milwaukee, who pleaded guilty in October to conspiring to provide fabric support to the Islamic Land. He and a co-conspirator were headed to the border in Texas, with plans to join the Islamic Country in Syrian arab republic or Republic of iraq, when they were arrested.
According to the plea understanding, Mr. Ludke had planned to work nether the Islamic State'south management and command and recorded a video of himself pledging his fidelity to the terrorist grouping's leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Mr. Ludke told an surreptitious F.B.I. agent that he had grooming in jujitsu and computers, which he believed would benefit the Islamic State.
Even every bit Mr. Trump has lobbied for the wall, he has also pressed the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security to immediately tighten security on the border.
On Dec. 27, homeland security officials asked for assistance that the Pentagon later estimated would require iii,000 additional armed forces personnel to be sent to the border, according to memos exchanged by the two departments over the final 2 weeks. The strength could include a combination of National Guard troops, active-duty military personnel and volunteers, simply that was not fabricated clear in the documents, officials said. Information technology remains an outcome of hot fence within the Pentagon.
The Homeland Security Section also requested 146 mobile surveillance vehicles to be sent to iv edge states, along with enough personnel and textile to install 150 additional miles of barbed concertina wire. The homeland security memo also over again asked Defence Section officials to provide additional aviation back up to monitor and control the menstruation of immigrants.
The Pentagon has not yet approved the request. It included guidelines for Ms. Nielsen and other homeland security officials to "take the lead" on strategic communications intended to highlight the Pentagon's function. It also fabricated clear the troops would carry no weapons.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/trump-border-wall-terrorists.html
0 Response to "How Is Trump s Wall Going to Stop Any Terrorist Attacks From Happening Again"
Post a Comment