Grants to fight Terrorism are only the beginning

By Thomas S. Warrick

Thomas S. Warrick is a nonresident senior fellow with the Middle East programs group at the Atlantic Council and the Director of the Future of DHS Project. From August 2008 to June 2019, Mr. Warrick was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism Policy at the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and a career member of the Senior Executive Service. From 1997 to 2007, he served in the US Department of State on Middle East and international justice issues. He led the State Department’s “Future of Iraq” project and served in Baghdad and Washington. From 1979 to 1997, he was an international lawyer in private practice for 17 years, representing companies in connection with investments in the Middle East and elsewhere.

By Javed Ali

Javed Ali has over twenty years professional experience in Washington, DC on national security issues, to include senior roles at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and National Security Council focused on counterterrorism. He is an Associate Professor of Practice at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.

Thomas Warrick was DHS Deputy Assistant for Counterterrorism Policy from August 2008 to June 2019 and is now Director of the Future of DHS Project at the Atlantic Council. 

Javed Ali held senior counterterrorism positions at DHS, the FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Council. He is a Towsley Policymaker in Residence at the University of Michigan.

EXPERT OPINION — The Department of Homeland Security told state and local governments on February 25 they can apply for more than $1.8 billion in grants to strengthen security at the state and local level. What makes this so important is that—for the first time—DHS has elevated domestic terrorism to a “National Priority.” In grants-speak, this means that state and local governments will need to spend at least 7.5% of what they receive under this program, or at least $77 million across the country, to address domestic terrorism—an exponential increase over previous years.

Given that the January 6 Capitol attackers are believed to have come from at least 40 states and the District of Columbia, a nationwide approach is absolutely essential. While $77 million is a good start, we need a much more comprehensive and better-resourced effort to deal with a wave of domestic terrorism that has more adherents and supporters in the United States than al-Qa’ida did before September 11, 2001.  In other words, they are already here.

The two of us together have more than thirty years’ experience in homeland security and counterterrorism at DHS, the FBI, and the White House. We know that while the February 25th announcement is welcome news, it will take a lot more than $77 million spread across the entire country to stop this latest wave of domestic terrorism, which is driven by a mix of ideologies, including white supremacism and other forms of racially motivated extremism, anti-government and anti-law enforcement extremism, violent conspiracy theories, and even apocalyptic beliefs. Even more disturbingly, some of those charged in the January 6 attack on the Capitol are, or were, government officials, including a few from the military and law enforcement.

The United States successfully overcame previous peaks of domestic terrorism in the 1870s, the 1920s, the 1970s, and the 1990s; however, we are now in the middle of another peak that started at least a decade ago. Despite some unique challenges this time around, we can overcome this one as well.

Law enforcement is taking the January 6 mob attack on the US Capitol very seriously, even though signs point to continued threats in our social media-driven, politically divided country. The Capitol Police chief testified on February 25 that militia groups have expressed a desire “to blow up the Capitol and kill as many members of Congress as possible with a direct nexus to the State of the Union,” a speech President Joe Biden will deliver to Congress in March.

The $77 million for domestic terrorism should get state and local governments thinking creatively about how to address these threats. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas and the Biden administration deserve praise for taking these steps. The one drawback is that none of what was announced on February 25 represents “new” money. This money was appropriated for fiscal year 2021 by Congress late in the Trump administration. DHS’s February 25 decision merely affects how this year’s grant money can be spent. And since the money will likely be allocated widely, individual grants will be small and can only help to spur the start of much-needed training, outreach to communities of concern, or specific protection-related efforts.

Right now, Congress also needs to pass an emergency supplemental appropriation in the first half of 2021 to address a number of extremely urgent homeland security priorities, including addressing the growing surge of young migrants at the Southwest border and protecting the integrity of the 2022 midterm election. A third pillar of that effort needs to be more seriously addressing the threat of domestic terrorism, building on the initial $77 million announced on February 15, by giving the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice sufficient resources for a serious effort to take on domestic terrorism.

No one is suggesting a “blank check,” but if we wait until fiscal year 2022 to start to address these urgent homeland security needs, Congress and the Administration will have lost a full year. Now—in early 2021—is the time to start address domestic terrorism with the urgency and seriousness that this threat to American democracy deserves.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief


Related Articles

Search

Close