Terrorists of the ‘80s have machine-gunned their way through airports,
bombed U.S. Embassies and military facilities, pirated airplanes and ships, and
tortured and murdered hostages as if “performing” on a global theater screen.
These international criminals have seized not only innocent victims but also
the attention of viewers who sit helplessly before televisions around the
world.
International terrorism is clearly a growing problem and priority,
requiring expanded cooperation with other countries to combat it. Emphasis must
be placed on increased intelligence gathering, processing and sharing, improved
physical security arrangements, more effective civil aviation and maritime
security, and the ratification and enforcement of treaties.
It is equally essential, however, that our defense against terrorism be
enhanced domestically. For unless the trend of terrorism around the world is
broken, there is great potential for increased attacks in our own backyard.
The Task Force’s review of the current national program to combat
terrorism found our interagency system and the Lead Agency concept for dealing
with incidents to be soundly conceived. However, the system can be
substantially enhanced through improved coordination and increased emphasis in
such areas as intelligence gathering, communications procedures, law
enforcement efforts, response option plans, and personal and physical security.
Terrorism is a bipartisan issue and one that members of Congress have
jointly and judiciously addressed in recent years. Significant bills have been
passed that markedly expand U.S. jurisdiction over terrorists and close
prosecution loopholes.
However, there are stronger legislative proposals that are now before
Congress that would further strengthen the nation’s ability to combat terrorism
both at home and abroad. Many of these proposals merit strong Administration
support. It is also essential that the Executive Branch agencies continue to
work closely with Congress in reviewing our current programs and recommending
other legislative initiatives as appropriate.
Terrorism deeply troubles the American people. They feel angry,
victimized, vulnerable and helpless. At the same time, they clearly want the
United States Government to have a strong and consistent national antiterrorist
policy. While such a policy exists, the Task Force believes that better
communication is necessary to educate the public to our policy and to the
ramifications of using force during a terrorist attack.
Americans also believe that terrorists take advantage of our free press
to achieve their goals. News coverage of terrorism has created a dilemma for
media executives: how to keep the people informed without compromising public
security. Solving this problem will have to be a joint effort between media and
government representatives. The government must improve its communications with
the media during a terrorist attack. At the same time, the media must maintain
high standards of reporting to ensure that the lives of innocent victims and
national security are not jeopardized.
In December 1985, the Task Force on Combatting Terrorism completed its
comprehensive examination of terrorism both internationally and domestically.
It also finished its review of our nation’s policy and programs for combatting
terrorism.
The resultant findings emphasized the importance and appropriateness of
a no-concessions position when dealing with terrorists. Some of the
recommendations must remain classified, but the following unclassified Task
Force recommendations are in keeping with that national policy and are intended
to strengthen and streamline our current response system.
Currently a number of agencies and departments within the Executive
Branch are responsible for the elements of our national program to combat
terrorism. While this is a reasonable and appropriate approach, the various
elements should be compiled in a single programming document. Such a
comprehensive listing would allow quick identification of agencies responsible
for dealing with particular aspects of terrorism and their available resources.
The Task Force believes that such a document is necessary for the most
effective coordination of the department and agency activities that comprise
our national program. The NSC staff, in conjunction with OMB and the
Departments of State and Justice, would maintain this national programming
document.
Because acts of terrorism vary so much in time, location, jurisdiction
and motivation, consistent response is virtually impossible. However, the
Interdepartmental Group on Terrorism should prepare, and submit to the NSC for
approval, policy criteria for deciding when, if and how to use force to preempt,
react and retaliate. This framework will offer decisionmaking bodies a workable
set of standards by which to judge each terrorist threat or incident. The use
of this framework also would reassure the American people that government
response is formulated consistently.
Criteria for developing response options might include the following:
• Potential for
injury to innocent victims
• Adequacy and
reliability of intelligence
• Status of
forces for preemption, reaction or retaliation
• Ability to
identify the target
• Host country
and international cooperation or opposition
• Risk and
probability of success analysis
• U.S. public
attitude and media reaction
• Conformance
with national policy and objectives
A full-time NSC position with support staff is necessary to strengthen
coordination of our national program. Working closely with the designated Lead
Agencies, the position will be responsible for:
• participating
in all interagency groups
• maintaining
the national programming document
• assisting in
coordinating research and development
• facilitating
development of response options
• overseeing
implementation of the Task Force recommendations
Clear communications by appointed spokespersons and coordination of
public statements during a terrorist incident are vital. Interagency working
groups should provide specific guidance to all spokespersons on coordinating
public statements. Without coordination, inaccurate information may result,
intelligence resources may be compromised and political distress can result
among friends and allies throughout the world — at a time when international
cooperation can save lives.
Designation of spokespersons and response guidelines are especially
important given the intense media pressure for comment during terrorist
incidents. A misstatement or failure to consider legal issues before commenting
to news media could jeopardize a criminal investigation or an eventual
prosecution.
Actions already have been taken to strengthen security of U.S.
installations and to reduce personnel in dangerous areas. However, to date
these efforts have not been fully coordinated among all agencies. The
Department of State should direct Ambassadors in all designated high-threat
areas to thoroughly review personnel requirements to determine if further personnel
reductions are possible at U.S. facilities overseas. This review should include
careful consideration of physical vulnerability of embassy-related facilities.
The Department of Defense also should conduct a similar review for military
commands abroad.
International cooperation is crucial to long-term deterrence of
terrorism. It can be achieved through multilateral and bilateral agreements.
While progress in achieving a multilateral agreement has been slow, efforts
should continue to reach an agreement to show that many nations are committed
to fighting terrorism as an international crime against society.
In the absence of a multilateral agreement, the Department of State
should aggressively continue to seek international cooperation through:
• general
resolutions or agreements, in the United Nations and in other specialized
organizations, concerning civil aviation, maritime affairs and tourism
• enhanced and
more widely-ratified international conventions on subjects such as hijacking,
hostage-taking and protection of diplomats
• less formal
agreements that illustrate an international consensus to take effective action against
terrorism
• improved
implementation of existing agreements to fight terrorism
The United States itself is sometimes used as a safehaven for
terrorists. Present extradition treaties with other countries preclude the
turning over of fugitives wanted for “political offenses,” an obvious loophole
for terrorists. The State Department should seek extradition treaty revisions
with countries with democratic and fair judicial systems to ensure that terrorists
are extradited to the country with legal jurisdiction.
The process of closing these loopholes has begun with the United
Kingdom in the form of proposed revisions to the US/UK Supplementary Treaty.
The State Department should vigorously pursue Senate approval of this treaty
and continue the revision process with other countries to ensure that
terrorists are brought to justice.
It is a fact that certain governments actively support terrorism. These
states sometimes use their diplomatic missions as safehavens for terrorists or
as caches for their materiel—a direct violation of the Vienna Convention. The
State Department should continue working with other governments to prevent and
expose violations of the Vienna Convention. A U.N. General Assembly resolution
condemning the protection of terrorists in diplomatic missions could complement
U.S. efforts to counter this abuse.
Pre-flight screening of passengers and carry-on baggage is a
cornerstone of our domestic security program. Since 1972 these procedures have
detected over 30,000 firearms and resulted in 13,000 arrests. However, the
recent terrorist acts against international aviation and maritime interests
indicate a need for continual monitoring and updated security procedures. This
is especially true at ports and on board ships where there are no international
or federally prescribed security measures.
The interagency Working Group on Maritime Security, chaired by the
Department of Transportation, should survey security procedures and the threat
potential to vessels, passengers and crew members. It also should review
statutory authority. If adequate authority does not exist, recommendations
should be made, in consultation with other appropriate agencies, for new
legislation. In addition, legislation should be pursued to allow for a criminal
background investigation of individuals working in restricted areas at airports
and terminals. Finally, the Department of State and the Coast Guard should
continue to work through the International Maritime Organization to develop
internationally agreed measures to protect ships’ passengers and crews.
Intelligence gathering, analysis and dissemination play a pivotal role
in combatting terrorism. Currently, while several federal departments and
agencies process intelligence within their own facilities, there is no
consolidated center that collects and analyzes all-source information from
those agencies participating in antiterrorist activities. The addition of such
a central facility would improve our capability to understand and anticipate
future terrorist threats, support national crisis management and provide a
common database readily accessible to individual agencies. Potentially, this
center could be the focus for developing a cadre of interagency intelligence
analysts specializing in the subject of terrorism.
U.S. intelligence gathered by technical means is adequate and pursued
appropriately. At the same time, there is clear need for certain information
that can only be gained by individuals. An increase in human intelligence
gathering is essential to penetrate terrorist groups and their support systems.
The national intelligence effort relies heavily on collection and
liaison arrangements that exist with many friendly governments. Such exchanges
with like-minded nations and international law enforcement organizations have
been highly useful and should be expanded to support our own intelligence
efforts.
Currently, it is not a crime under U.S. law to murder an American
citizen outside our borders—with the exception of diplomats and some government
officials. Legal protection of diplomats should be extended to include all U.S.
nationals who are victims of international terrorism. The Departments of State
and Justice should continue urging Congress to adopt legislation, such as the
Terrorist Prosecution Act of 1985, that would accomplish this objective.
While there is legislation that allows the imposition of the death
penalty if a death results from the seizure of an aircraft, there is no
specific legislation that would allow for the same penalty for murder of
hostages in other situations. The Justice Department should pursue legislation
making anyone found guilty of murdering a hostage under any circumstances
subject to the death penalty.
Procedures that the Executive Branch must follow to keep the Select
Intelligence Committees informed of intelligence activities need streamlining.
Adoption of a Joint Resolution introduced last year by Congressman Hyde would
create a Joint Committee on Intelligence. This Resolution would reduce the
number of people with access to sensitive information and provide a single
secure repository for classified material. The Department of Justice should
lead an Administration effort to secure passage of the Hyde proposal.
The 1984 Act to Combat International Terrorism authorizes payment of up
to $500,000 for information in cases of domestic and international terrorism.
Many feel this legislation does not go far enough.
The State Department should lead an interdepartmental push with Justice
and CIA for legislation to develop a unilateral and/or bilateral program to
encourage individuals to provide information about terrorists’ identity or
location. In addition to monetary rewards, other incentives include immunity
from prosecution for previous offenses and U.S. citizenship for the individual
and immediate family.
Authorized rewards should be publicized to both foreign and American
audiences and consideration should be given to raising the current $500,000
ceiling to $1 million.
The International Trafficking in Arms Regulations have been
strengthened to require a license to train foreign persons in the use of
certain firearms; however, mercenary/survival training camps still operate
domestically within the law. Appropriate agencies should closely monitor the
extent to which foreign nationals are being trained in the United States in the
use of firearms and explosives and seek additional legislation if necessary.
Members of terrorist groups may have used the Freedom of Information
Act to identify FBI informants, frustrate FBI investigations and tie up
government resources in responding to requests. This would be a clear abuse of
the Act that should be investigated by the Department of Justice and, if
confirmed, addressed through legislation to close the loophole.
International and domestic legal systems are adequate to deal with
conventional war and crime. However, on occasion, questions of jurisdiction and
authority arise when it comes to terrorism. For example, there are ambiguities
concerning the circumstances under which military force is appropriate in
dealing with terrorism. This lack of clarity about the international law
enforcement relationships and legal systems could limit governments’ power to
act quickly and forcefully. The Departments of State and Justice should
encourage private and academic study to determine how international law might
be used to hasten—rather than hamper—efforts to respond to an act of terrorism.
In some cases individuals and companies have paid ransoms to terrorists
for the return of kidnapped employees or stolen property. Such action is in direct
conflict with the national policy against making concessions or paying ransoms
to terrorists. The Department of Justice should consider whether legislation
could be enacted and enforced to make such payments to terrorist organizations
illegal.
Due to the intense pressure of a hostage situation, some family members
of hostages have pressured the highest levels of government for information.
While this is understandable, such activity has the potential to delay return
of hostages by giving terrorists the media attention they seek or the belief
that their demands are being considered. Further, the inadvertent disclosure of
sensitive information could jeopardize efforts to gain the release of hostages.
The family liaison program, conducted by State’s Bureau of Consular
Affairs, should provide a broader outreach program to include visits,
hot-lines, information on private counseling services and a personal contact
for each family for communication even when there is nothing new to report.
Such an expanded contact program will help the families understand that the
hostages’ interests are being given the highest priority by our government.
Because of the lack of understanding and currently available
information concerning our national program for combatting terrorism, a broad
education effort should be undertaken to inform the American public about our
policy and proposals as well as the many ramifications of the use of force
against terrorism, including death of innocent people, destruction of property,
alienation of allies and possible terrorist reprisals. The education effort
would take the form of publications, such as this report, seminars and speaking
opportunities by government officials.
Terrorists deliberately manufacture sensations to capture maximum media
attention—a ploy that often takes advantage of U.S. press freedom. This
activity can be offset by close communication between media and government. The
U.S. Government should provide the media with timely information during a
terrorist crisis. The media, in turn, should ensure that their reporting meets
the highest professional and ethical standards.
Regular meetings between media and government officials on the coverage
of terrorism could contribute to more effective government-media relations.
Numerous federal departments and agencies contribute to the national
program to combat terrorism. The following provides a detailed listing of the
various activities of those agencies with major responsibilities.
The Department of State carries out programs for combatting terrorism
in the following ways:
• Discharges
its Lead Agency responsibilities for terrorism outside the United States
• Maintains the
security of U.S. overseas diplomatic and consular facilities
• Cooperates
with U.S. businesses as part of its effort to enhance the security of private
U.S. citizens abroad
• Conducts
research and analysis on terrorism
• Provides
security for visiting foreign diplomats and dignitaries
• Protects the
Secretary of State
• Provides
training for personnel of U.S. overseas missions on security and crisis
management
• Provides
antiterrorism training and assistance to civilian security forces of friendly
governments.
The principal offices involved in these functions are the Office of the
Ambassador-at-Large for Counter-Terrorism; the newly created Bureau of
Diplomatic Security; the Bureau of Intelligence and Research; the Office of
Foreign Building Operations; the Foreign Service Institute; and the Office of
Foreign Missions.
The Department of Justice pursues the following counterterrorism-related
activities and programs through the FBI, the Justice Department’s Criminal
Division and the Immigration and Naturalization Service:
• Carries out
its Lead Agency function to prevent, respond to, and investigate violent
criminal activities of international and domestic terrorist groups within U.S.
jurisdiction
• Investigates
terrorist acts abroad under the new Hostage-Taking Statute that makes the
hostage-taking of U.S. citizens overseas a federal crime
• Collects and
investigates intelligence on terrorists to predict potential movement or
criminal activities
• Investigates
terrorist incidents and related criminal activities using investigative
techniques to identify, arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate those responsible
• Maintains
operational liaison with local law enforcement agencies throughout the United
States
• Provides
training in the field and at the FBI Academy, Quantico, Virginia
• Participates
with local and state authorities in joint terrorism task forces
• Provides
computer-assisted research and analytical capability to other law enforcement
and intelligence community agencies involved with counterterrorism
• Maintains
contact with and conducts limited joint investigations with allied national police
and security services on terrorism through 13 legal attaché offices
• Collects
technical information regarding terrorist explosives and bombings within the
United States and disseminates it to international bomb data centers
• Heads the
national Hostage Rescue Team, a special group of highly trained FBI agents who
deal with critical terrorist situations.
• Provides
legal direction and support during terrorism investigations
• Supervises
and coordinates subsequent prosecution of members of domestic and international
terrorist groups whose acts violate federal criminal law
• Inspects and
determines eligibility for applicants to enter the United States
• Maintains
national and local lookout systems containing data relating to excludable
aliens, including suspect or known terrorists.
The Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration,
U.S. Coast Guard and the Office of the Secretary conduct antiterrorism programs
by carrying out the following:
• Conducts Lead
Agency responsibilities through the Federal Aviation Administration by
promoting the security of civil aviation, including prevention of air piracy,
sabotage and criminal activities within the jurisdiction of the United States
• Provides
assistance to law enforcement agencies in interdicting movements into the
United States of dangerous drugs and narcotics that may be connected with
terrorist activities
• Maintains
operational, investigative, communications, and liaison arrangements, with many
foreign governments and private organizations such as aircraft manufacturers
and airline pilots’ associations
• Devotes
substantial resources to airport and aircraft security programs both inside the
United States and abroad
• Assures the
safety and security of vessels, ports, and waterways, and their related shore
facilities
• Offers
transportation safety courses at domestic facilities in support of the
Department of State’s Anti-Terrorism Assistance Program
• Advises on
transportation security matters; provides security programs to protect
personnel, communications equipment, and facilities
Defense Department agencies involved in combatting terrorism include
the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. Individual armed services antiterrorist programs supplement
the overall Defense Department effort. After the Iranian hostage rescue
attempt, the Department of Defense established a counterterrorist organization
with permanent staff and specialized forces. These forces, which report to the
National Command Authorities through the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provide a range
of response options designed to counter specific acts of terrorism.
Additionally, the Defense Department maintains worldwide technical
collection systems for gathering round-the-clock information on terrorism,
which it disseminates to other federal agencies. It also contributes
intelligence analysis and operational support to the national counterterrorism
effort, maintains data on terrorist groups and produces publications on
incidents and advisory and warning messages.
The Central Intelligence Agency and other elements of the intelligence
community contribute vitally important intelligence to the NSC and the Lead
Agencies before, during and after terrorist incidents. This organization is
particularly crucial in the flow of information between the United States and
other countries.
Analytical units of the CIA prepare both current and long-term reports
on terrorist organizations, individuals and trends, and disseminate these
reports on a timely basis to all government agencies with counterterrorist
responsibilities. Should the White House direct military action in a
counterterrorist situation, the CIA is prepared to provide intelligence support
to the Defense Department.
The Director of Central Intelligence has overall coordinating
responsibility within the intelligence community for counterterrorism. He has
designated the National Intelligence Officer for Counterterrorism as the focal
point to coordinate national counterterrorism intelligence activities and to
ensure counterterrorism priorities are established for the intelligence
community.
Treasury’s role in the fight against terrorism involves protection,
investigation, intelligence, interdiction, training and response. Its
activities range from thwarting an assault on the President, to investigating
an arms export case, to imposing and enforcing economic sanctions on state
sponsors of terrorism.
Principal Treasury agencies are the United States Secret Service, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the United States Customs Service,
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and the Internal Revenue Service.
Numerous interagency bodies contribute significantly to the national
program. The major coordination effort, however, is carried out by the
Interdepartmental Group on Terrorism, which is chaired by the Department of
State and comprised of representatives from over a dozen departments and
agencies.
Specific working groups have been established under the auspices of the
Interdepartmental Group on Terrorism. Some of the more noteworthy are:
• Technical
Support Working Group—assures the development of appropriate counterterrorism
technological efforts
• Public
Diplomacy Working Group—designed to generate greater global understanding of
the threat of terrorism and efforts to resist it
• Anti-terrorist
Assistance Coordinating Committee—coordinates the antiterrorism training
programs of State, Defense and the CIA
• Rewards
Committee—develops procedures for the monetary rewards program for information
on terrorists
• Exercise
Committee— coordinates antiterrorism exercise programs
• Maritime
Security Working Group—assesses port and shipping vulnerabilities to terrorism
• Legislative
Group—reviews legislative proposals and develops future antiterrorist
initiatives.
