Preface

AuthorThomas McK. Sparks - Glenn M. Sulmasy
PositionCaptain, US Coast Guard - Commander, US Coast Guard
Pagesxiii-xv
Preface
Inthe summer of2004, asense ofnormalcy had returned to the homeland ofthe
United States. One could say the "sleeping giant" that had awakened on 9/11
had fallen back "asleep." Military victories in Afghanistan and in Iraq had been
achieved. Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF) were officially declared as examples of military successes. Domestically, the
USA PATRIOT Act had been passed and was implemented. The reorganization of
the government had occurred and the National Security Strategy of 2002 had be-
come part of US strategic culture. US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) had
been created. Establishment of the Department of Homeland Security resulted in
the merging of 22 federal government agencies and adepartment staffed by over
177,000 personnel. Bringing the war on terror to the enemy overseas was seen as
necessary to protect the homeland. This new war, one that mixes law enforcement
and armed conflict, was the challenge of the 21st century and the United States was
preparing for a long-term struggle. The Bush Administration clearly articulated its
belief that in "taking the fight" to the terrorists overseas, our homeland would be
more secure.
With this in mind, legal scholars, practitioners, judge advocates and warriors
gathered in Newport, Rhode Island at the US Naval War College in late June to re-
view, debate, and challenge the myriad legal issues surrounding the evolving reality
of the Global War on Terror.
The need for a reasoned, rational legal regime to enhance domestic security be-
came critical after 9/11. Jihadists, and the Global War on Terror itself, do not fit
squarely into existing laws or custom. The predominant enemy we now fight is
neither warrior nor criminal but ahybrid of both. In addition, the war being
waged is at times against lawful combatants (e.g., the armed forces of Iraq) and at
times against entities deemed illegal combatants. Some of these "enemy combat-
ants" would have protections afforded by the law of armed conflict and some
would not. Agrowing nexus between international law and the concept of home-
land security had emerged. Ambiguity as to this intersection of international law
and national security law (homeland security) provided aunique backdrop for
two and ahalf days of intense debate and intellectual exchange on the seminal le-
gal issues of our times.
The Honorable Ryan Stiles, Associate Counsel to the President and Deputy
Counsel to the White House's Homeland Security Council, initiated the debate

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT