Paralleling globalization is democratization among nation states, such as the former Soviet Union. Few nations attempting this transition have employed any well-regulated strategic transition plan. This lack of governmental, social and economic transition plans has exacerbated the amorphous chaos associated with globalization.

Global chaos has been accompanied by growth in organized crime, terrorism, varietal extremism, the spread of infectious disease, bio-contamination of food and water sources, "ungovernability", and economic and social discord.

Emerging transnational criminal and terrorist alliances have outpaced governmental capabilities to combat them. Local cell operations of criminal and terrorist operations now emerge abruptly and become encroached locally with unprecedented, and nearly indefensible, speed. These growing threat group alliances have destabilized entire nations' economies and governments. The global nature of these growing threat sources has substantially increased the need for cooperation among federal to local law enforcement agencies, and even the military. The venues for cross jurisdiction and interagency cooperation include intelligence sharing, interdiction and incident reaction.

Domestically, these conditions have given rise to a proliferation of national security initiatives designed to address them. These initiatives have originated broadly as federal legislation, Executive Orders, Presidential Directives and National Security Decision Directives (see list of selected nat sec initiatives below).

Many of these national security initiatives, implicitly or otherwise, call for increased cooperation among federal, state and local law enforcement and emergency management agencies. The initiatives also call for increased assimilation of national security responsi- bilities by local law enforcement agencies as "domestic defenders" and "first responders" for criminal and terrorist activities, nuclear-biological-chemical (NBC) incidents, and natural disaster.

The bulk of these initiatives are subject-specific, or "threat source" specific, and do not provide any guidelines for nation-wide uniform strategic planning.

These increased domestic defense & incident response burdens for local law enforcement agencies carry both operational and economic consequences for law enforce- ment at the local level. And the consequences clearly have impacts on local government budgets to accommodate these new additions to the missions of local police, sheriffs and state police agencies.

Among the resources currently needed by many local law enforcement agencies are intelligence databases & intel- ligence operations centers, computer statistics systems, local threat assessment functions, NBC incident response equipment, and mobile command & communications centers. The costs of these resources and related manpower requirements is significant, particularly when measured against the relative resources available to municipal governments already plagued by budget austerities and shrinking resources.

While governance at the municipal and state level varies with local customs and laws, the global nature of these threat sources inherently calls for some degree of uniformity in law enforcement standards, operations and communication to effectively combat them.

These conditions call for consensus-building, resource- sharing, partnership-development and strategic planning among municipal and state government and law enforcement agencies. The International Association of Police Chiefs (IACP), the National Sheriff's Association (NSA), the National Native American Law Enforcement Association, National League of Cities (NLC), the National Association of Counties (NAC), National Governor's Association (NGA), and others, are likely candidates for joint efforts to develop dialogue and consensus on addressing the partial shift of national security operations from federal to state and local government.

Ideally, municipal and state governments would coordinate these efforts with key federal agencies such as Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Energy (DOE), Inter-Agency OpSec Support Staff (IOSS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP).

In this regard, the FBI's Louis Freeh reported to congress that a critical element resulting in the failure of an April 1998 federal biological incident exercise ("table top") was local agencies' lack of equipment and preparedness for such an event.

Virtually none of the local law enforcement agencies contacted were aware of either the details of this exercise, or the recommendations (if any) that were made to remedy lack of local incident preparedness. More significantly, virtually none of the local law enforcement agencies contacted were aware of the current national security environment (see list of selected initiatives below) which place significant incident preparedness burdens on local government agencies. This presents local agencies with mission responsibilities which starkly contrast with their traditionally reactive nature.

While a nation-wide collaboration is an undertaking of immense scope, the threat sources posed by today's global chaos and convergence are of equal scale and gravity. For want of such a nation-wide collaborative effort, or strategic plan, current threat conditions risk nothing less than mass squandering of tax moneys as well as jeopardizing public safety and health, and governmental stability for generations to come.

National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 298
National OpSec Program
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdd298.htm

Joint Security Commission (JSC) Report
Redefining National Security
( To SECDEF & DCI )
(Includes specific reference to TA / VP function)
http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/jsc/

Critical Infrastructure Protection Program
Executive Order EO 13010 (13025, 13041, 13064)
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo13010.htm

Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 39
US Policy on Counter Terrorism
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd39.htm

FEMA Abstract on PDD 39 (Unclassified)
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd39_fema.htm

FEMA Federal Response Plan
Terrorism Incident Annex - re: PDD 39
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd39_frp.htm

National Security Council Policy
Technical Surveillance Counter Measures (TSCM)
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd-tscm.htm

PDD 62
Re: Failure of Federal Disease Incident Table Top Exercise
See related story NYT 4/26/98 pg 1
http://www.usia.gov/topical/global/terror/pdd62.htm
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/direct.htm
Gives NSC, HHS, FEMA new responsibilities for coordinating
federal counterterrorism policies

PDD 63
Re: Failure of Federal Disease Incident Table Top Exercise
See realted story NYT SU 4/26/98 pg 1
http://www.usia.gov/topical/global/terror/pdd63.htm http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/direct.htm
FBI NIPC to head National Infrastructure Protection Plan

Pentagon (DOD) Statement on Infectious Diseases
http://www.usis-israel.org.il/publish/press/defence/archive/june/dd1_6-13.htm

Domestic Counter Terrorism Act of 1997
H.R. 2353
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Effective Anti Terrorism Tools for Law Enforcement Act of 1997
H.R. 275
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996
S. 1745
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Chemical and Biological Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 1997
S. 495
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Federal Gang Violence Act of 1997
S. 54
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Anti-Gang and Youth Violence Act of 1997
S. 362 IS
H.R. 810 IH
http://thomas.loc.gov/

National Narcotics Leadership Act
Amendments of 1997
H.R. 2610 RFS
21 USC 1501
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Related EO:
Executive Order EO 13008
Amending EO 12880
(Office of National Drug Control Policy)