Reviewing Our Defenses, Four Years After 9/11

By Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton

Published September 09, 2005, issue of September 09, 2005.
  • Print
  • Share Share

The fourth anniversary of the attacks of 9/11 is a time of mourning and reflection for all Americans. It is also an opportunity to assess what has been done — and what has not been done — to make our country safer.

Since that terrible day, we have been spared another major attack on American soil. This is a significant achievement, made possible by the diligence of many courageous Americans defending us at home and overseas.

But the threat that struck so terribly on 9/11 remains extremely dangerous. Al Qaeda and its affiliates have continued to strike at American and allied interests around the globe — most recently in London and Aqaba, Jordan. These attacks are a reminder that the Al Qaeda network is an adaptable enemy, willing to exploit any complacency or oversights in our defenses. It is also a patient enemy: The attacks of 9/11, for example, were conceived by Khalid Sheik Mohammed in 1996. We can only assume that Al Qaeda and its affiliates continue to desire, and plan, further attacks against our homeland.

The passage of historic intelligence reform, and the creation of a National Counterterrorism Center to integrate and ensure timely action on terrorism information, have made us safer. But many of the deficiencies that plagued our response on 9/11 remain. The recent difficulties in the initial response to Hurricane Katrina are a reminder of the challenges we would face in responding to another catastrophic terrorist attack, especially one involving weapons of mass destruction.

A number of common-sense recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission in its final report would address these deficiencies but remain unimplemented. The 9/11 Public Discourse Project, the nonprofit successor to the commission, will issue a series of reports over the next four months to assess government’s implementation of the commission’s recommendations, and highlight what remains to be done.

The first report, later this month, will assess progress in implementing the commission’s recommendations on homeland security. Future reports will assess the status of recommendations on institutional reform, foreign policy and securing nuclear materials.

A number of commission recommendations in these areas remain unaddressed — all of which would improve the safety of the American people. These include:

•Adopt a risk-based approach to homeland security. The Commission recommended that federal homeland security grants to states and localities be allocated solely on the basis of assessed risks and vulnerability, not based on politics. Unfortunately, since 9/11 the Department of Homeland Security has distributed $6 billion in badly needed homeland security assistance without any provision for terrorist risk or vulnerability. Congress should pass legislation before the end of this year mandating that all homeland security grants be distributed based solely on the basis of assessed risk and vulnerability, not as general revenue sharing. The Department of Homeland Security should also complete the nationwide risk assessments that will make risk-based funding possible.

•Improve collaboration among local responders. On 9/11, emergency responders at the World Trade Center site had difficulty communicating over the limited radio frequencies available. Four years after 9/11 this problem still has not been rectified. Congress should act this year to make new frequencies available, at the earliest possible date, for public safety use. Local governments should adopt the Incident Command crisis management system, and designate one agency to lead any major emergency response. These steps would reduce the duplicative search and rescue, and other coordination problems, seen on 9/11 and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

•Keep the world’s most dangerous weapons out of the hands of terrorists. The greatest threat facing our country is a nuclear weapon in the hands of terrorists. In addition to the human toll, a nuclear weapon detonated in an American city would have profound consequences for our economy, our liberties and our very way of life. The commission recommended a maximum effort to “lock down” vulnerable nuclear materials around the world, so they do not fall into the hands of terrorist groups. Congress and the administration should provide full support to the various programs, in the Departments of State, Energy and Defense, devoted to this critical task.

•Better communicate our message to the Muslim world. In the Cold War our success in the battle of ideas was a key element in our ultimate victory over communism. In the war against Islamist terrorism we are not winning that battle. We must redouble our efforts to convey the core values that define the American people, our system of government and our way of life to the world. A successful strategy for public diplomacy will involve educational and cultural exchanges, diplomatic efforts to directly engage local populations, international broadcasting and substantial involvement from the American private and nonprofit sectors.

•Reform Congress for the post-9/11 era. Because much of the work of intelligence and homeland security occurs outside the public eye, the American people rely on committees of the Congress to ensure that this work is being done effectively. Unfortunately, Congress is not currently organized to provide effective oversight of the federal agencies created to address the threats of the post-9/11 era.

The committees responsible for overseeing the Department of Homeland Security and the intelligence community should be given the carrots and sticks they need to hold those agencies to account. This means having full and exclusive oversight jurisdiction over those agencies’ activities, and greater control over their funding.

The 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission flowed directly from our inquiry into the facts and circumstances surrounding the 9/11 attacks. They were issued not to assign blame or point fingers, but to chart a path to a safer America. As former commissioners, we remain committed to the work of making the American people more secure.






Find us on Facebook!
  • From kosher wine to Ecstasy, presenting some of our best bootlegs:
  • Sara Kramer is not the first New Yorker to feel the alluring pull of the West Coast — but she might be the first heading there with Turkish Urfa pepper and za’atar in her suitcase.
  • About 1 in 40 American Jews will get pancreatic cancer (Ruth Bader Ginsberg is one of the few survivors).
  • At which grade level should classroom discussions include topics like the death of civilians kidnapping of young Israelis and sirens warning of incoming rockets?
  • Wanted: Met Council CEO.
  • “Look, on the one hand, I understand him,” says Rivka Ben-Pazi, a niece of Elchanan Hameiri, the boy that Henk Zanoli saved. “He had a family tragedy.” But on the other hand, she said, “I think he was wrong.” What do you think?
  • How about a side of Hitler with your spaghetti?
  • Why "Be fruitful and multiply" isn't as simple as it seems:
  • William Schabas may be the least of Israel's problems.
  • You've heard of the #IceBucketChallenge, but Forward publisher Sam Norich has something better: a #SoupBucketChallenge (complete with matzo balls!) Jon Stewart, Sarah Silverman & David Remnick, you have 24 hours!
  • Did Hamas just take credit for kidnapping the three Israeli teens?
  • "We know what it means to be in the headlines. We know what it feels like when the world sits idly by and watches the news from the luxury of their living room couches. We know the pain of silence. We know the agony of inaction."
  • When YA romance becomes "Hasidsploitation":
  • "I am wrapping up the summer with a beach vacation with my non-Jewish in-laws. They’re good people and real leftists who try to live the values they preach. This was a quality I admired, until the latest war in Gaza. Now they are adamant that American Jews need to take more responsibility for the deaths in Gaza. They are educated people who understand the political complexity, but I don’t think they get the emotional complexity of being an American Jew who is capable of criticizing Israel but still feels a deep connection to it. How can I get this across to them?"
  • “'I made a new friend,' my son told his grandfather later that day. 'I don’t know her name, but she was very nice. We met on the bus.' Welcome to Israel."
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.