Eric----------------------------------------------------------------------
The
Fear Factor
John Horvath 26.08.2004
European Security Research
Programme: The business side to the war on
terror
In the beginning
of August, the Department of Homeland Security in the
US raised its terror
alert from yellow (elevated) to orange (high),
meaning there is a high risk
of a terror attack. As a result, armed
police with machine guns stood at
barricades in front of designated
buildings in places like New York and
Washington.
Not only are many Americans confused by the alert system
established in
the wake of 9/11 -- namely the various colour schemes and
what they
entail -- but many have also grown weary of the repeated warnings.
Indeed, the reaction to the August alert was one of skepticism, in that
it was widely suspected that the Bush administration used the terror
alert for political advantage. Such skepticism subsequently gained a
measure of credibility as it later emerged that much of the
intelligence
that the terror alert was based on was dated -- up to
three years old. Tom
Ridge, the head of Homeland Security, simply
responded by saying that
although the intelligence may have been dated,
his department only recently
received it.
A new mega-industry of fear is emerging
While this
latest political fiasco in the US can be said to be
symptomatic of the Bush
administration, it goes without saying that
politicians the world over have
been, in one way or another, also
taking advantage of the recent wave of
fear generated by the war on
terror (as opposed to the terror itself). In
many ways, it's a
replication of the Cold War, the only exception being that
the "enemy"
isn't a recognised state power. This, in turn, makes this second
Cold
War ambiguous and one with potentially no end in sight.
While
many are aware of the political implications to the war on
terror, few
realise how governments and big business have been turning
paranoia into
profits. A new mega-industry has emerged, and many
governments are now
turning their attention -- and money -- to it.
Because threats are
supposedly very fluid and unpredictable in today's
world, security is
regarded as not purely a military matter, but one
which requires the pooling
of resources -- intelligence, police,
judicial, economic, financial,
scientific, and diplomatic -- all under
the umbrella of modern technology.
Consequently, with the increasing
flexibility and complexity of modern
technology, many new discoveries
inevitably span both civilian and military
fields. In other words, a
device originally developed for security purposes
could have commercial
spin-offs. It's this potential for developing
dual-purpose killer-apps
which have governments and big business ploughing
funds into the fear
industry.
European security research
As
a result, in Europe a coherent strategy has been developed to
coordinate all
military and civilian research across the European Union
(EU). This includes
a billion-euro boost in research spending for
security-related projects.
Accordingly, EU member states will have
their their security systems
harmonised to create a single EU-wide
security structure. This means
networks to exchange information and run
EU-wide crisis-management
operations will be set up in addition to the
coordination of all military,
security, and civilian research. If all
goes according to plan, a
fully-fledged European Security Research
Programme (ESRP) should be up and
running in the EU by 2007.
Unlike other research programmes adopted by
the EU, this one would see
governments more financially involved. The
rationale for this is that
since some of this research must be geared to
government requirements
and cannot be adapted for commercial use, up to 100%
government funding
may be needed. Moreover, in order not to be left behind,
the ESRP's
budget should match that of the Department of Homeland Security
in the
US. This would necessitate giving security research in the EU a boost
of 1 billion euro per year.
As with the defense industry, the fear
industry is generally seen by
pundits as good for industrial growth and the
economy. Not only this,
it's one of the few avenues of corporate welfare
still left open to big
business. What is more, with the increased sense of
insecurity being
peddled by politicians, it looks set to grow even further
as technology
is relied upon to detect and "neutralise" an increasing array
of
potential security threats. For the European Commission (EC) in
particular, it's hoped that with its research experience and expertise
in other fields such pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, and
telecommunications, Europe will be able to soon develop a top-class
security system that it can then sell to governments elsewhere.
In
order to get things moving for this new security programme, the EU
General
Affairs Council already agreed back in November 2003 to create
an agency to
promote research for future defense needs. Its remit was
to set up rules and
procedures and build networks between sponsors,
companies, research centers,
and "customers" in the run-up to the
launch of the ESRP. The ultimate aim is
to nurture technologies that
could have both civilian and military uses.
Consequently, at the end of June this year a preparatory action was
launched by the EC, resulting in a submission of around 175 proposals.
Just over 70% of the proposals relate to technical mission-related
research projects, addressing a wide range of security topics such as
situation awareness, protection of networked systems, protecting
against
terrorism, crisis management, and interoperability. The
remaining proposals
relate to supporting activities such as studies on
security research road
maps, identification of critical areas and
understanding human factors, as
well as technical feasibility studies,
awareness, and best practice
activities.
The proposals were submitted from a variety of sources. It
should come
as no surprise that large industry was well represented
(including the
aeronautics, information and communications technology,
system
integrators, and defense sectors). Most proposals originated from the
EU-15, but the EC also points to "important participation" from the new
member states of Central and Eastern Europe.
Security technology
produces new problems and binds resources
Although the EC considers the
preparatory action a relative success, if
the EU wishes to eventually fund
the full version of the ESRP, many
existing research programmes will have to
pay in terms of decreased
support and slashed budgets; others may have to be
abandoned
altogether. In order to justify such a drastic move, the EC's
response
is simple: current research planning fails to promote dual purpose
technologies, thereby missing out on some of the potential industrial
innovations that could bring benefits across the board.
Despite the
promises of more security, on the one hand, and economic
growth, on the
other, what is missing in the overall equation are the
people in the middle
-- the citizenry -- who are supposed to gain an
increased sense of security.
Unfortunately, much of what is proposed is
actually quite controversial as
there are unresolved issues of privacy
and confidentiality which must be
dealt with first.
Take, for instance, the notion of "information
fusion". Information
fusion basically means the collection and collation of
data from many
sources in order to yield intelligence. Examples include
gathering
information from sources such as telephone calls, hotel
registrations,
and airline bookings to identify individuals who may pose a
terrorist
threat, or analysing hospital admissions and sales of
pharmaceuticals
to warn of an unfolding biological attack. The problem here
is that the
distinction between "work as prescribed" and "work as practised"
is
frequently overlooked.
Another concern is that this massive
security programme is being
developed not so much as to guard against
terrorist attack, but to
suppress domestic opposition, such as the
anti-globalisation movement.
For many heads of government, there is little
distinction between
terrorism and protest. Indeed, some have even gone so
far as to
categorise protesters as terrorists.
Rather than
concentrating on the symptoms of terror using
state-of-the-art security
systems -- which in a few years will be
redundant anyway as those bent on
wreaking havoc will use either new
technology or the innovative application
of so-called "primitive"
methods -- more effort and resources should be put
into dealing with
its underlying causes. International terrorism, organised
crime, and
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are the three
greatest
fears Europeans have, this according to a recent EU poll. In
particular, the set of threats governments the world over face are
energy insecurity, nuclear proliferation, poverty, drought, and failed
states.
Given this, it's quite apparent that the problems facing the
world
today have more to do with the politics of colonialism and imperialism
than with the need for a more robust security apparatus.
Links
Telepolis Artikel-URL:
http://www.telepolis.de/english/inhalt/te/18187/1.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright
© 1996-2004. All Rights Reserved. Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Heise Zeitschriften
Verlag, Hannover