After having begun a series of investigative stories
criticizing the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in May 2008, CNN
reporter Drew Griffin reports being placed with more than a million other names
on TSA�s swollen terrorism watch list. Although TSA insists Griffin�s name is
not on the list and pooh-poohs any possibility of retaliation for Griffin�s
negative reporting, the reporter has been hassled by various airlines on 11
flights since May. The airlines insist that Griffin�s name is on the list. Congress
has asked TSA to look into the tribulations of this prominent passenger.
In a recent op-ed in the Washington Post, probably responding to the controversy
over Griffin, Leonard Boyle, the director of the Terrorist Screening Center,
defended the watch list, claiming that because terrorists have multiple
aliases, the names on the list boiled down to only about 400,000 actual people.
If there are 400,000 terrorists lying in wait to attack the United States, we
are all in trouble.
But wait a minute. There has been no major terrorist attack
on U.S. soil since 9/11 -- almost seven years ago. Where are all these
nefarious evildoers?
Boyle says 95 percent of these people are not American
citizens or legal residents and the vast majority aren�t even in the United
States. He rather sheepishly defends the size of the list by writing, �Its size
corresponds to the threat. It�s a big world.�
That brings up a very important issue. The U.S. government
regularly tries to police the world and combat threats to other nations -- in
the process, usually generating more enemies. Examining the 44 organizations on
the State Department�s highly politicized list of Foreign Terrorist
Organizations (FTO), one finds that only a very few currently focus their
efforts on U.S. targets. And the U.S. government has even flirted with one
anti-Iranian group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq, which was put on the FTO list long
ago.
Similarly, the State Department�s list of five state
sponsors of terrorism has included Cuba and North Korea -- neither of which has
actively participated in terrorist attacks in decades. These two countries
continued to be on the list for other reasons -- namely U.S. government
aversion to them. On its website, the State Department even admits that, �The
Democratic People�s Republic of Korea (DPRK) was not known to have sponsored
any terrorist acts since the bombing of a Korean Airlines flight in 1987.� The
website also contains an implicit admission that keeping selected countries on
the state sponsors list can reap ulterior political benefits for the United
States. The website notes that under the umbrella of the Six-Party Talks, the
United States intends to remove North Korea from the list as that nation takes
actions toward getting rid of its nuclear weapons program. Even the remaining
three nations on the list that do sponsor terrorism -- Syria, Iran, and Sudan
-- don�t support groups that focus their attacks on the U.S.
Thus, the humongous terrorist watch list for airline travel
and the excessively large FTO and state sponsors lists are a few more examples
of the United States taking on other nations� security burdens. Trying to be
the �big man on (the world) campus,� however, comes at a horrendous cost to
American freedom at home.
The terrorist watch list is downright unconstitutional. Under
the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, no warrants shall be issued unless
there is probable cause that a crime has been committed. If the government has
such probable cause that a passenger is conspiring to commit a terrorist act on
an airplane, it should not hassle that person at the airport when trying to fly
or ban him or her from flying; it should arrest them. But of course the
government does not have the evidence to do that for the vast majority of the
400,000 people on the watch list.
And it�s apparently not easy to get yourself off the list
once you are on it. Although Boyle claims that the TSA constantly scrubs the
list for possible mistaken identities of people who have frequent �encounters�
with the list, even if they don�t file a complaint, Griffin uncovered an
innocent passenger with a common name -- James Robinson -- who has complained
endlessly and has received no resolution of his case. Senator Edward Kennedy --
also with a common name -- experienced endless hassles and red tape trying to
get his name off the list. If such a well-known figure has such problems, the
average misidentified traveler is in big trouble.
And as the economists would say, what about opportunity cost
to real security? The U.S. government should spend the time it devotes to
scrutinizing 400,000 people on the watch list, and the vast majority of the 44
FTOs and all of the five countries who don�t sponsor anti-U.S. terrorism, on
the again rising alleged principal threat from Osama bin Laden, Ayman
al-Zawahiri, and their tens of hard core al Qaeda followers operating out of
Pakistan. The American public would be much safer. As the famous Prussian
military ruler Fredrick the Great (and closet economist) said, �To defend
everything is to defend nothing.� Moreover, under current government policy, we
have neither liberty nor security.
Ivan
Eland is Director of the Center
on Peace & Liberty at The Independent Institute and Assistant
Editor of The
Independent Review. Dr. Eland is a graduate of Iowa
State University and received an M.B.A. in applied economics and Ph.D. in
national security policy from George Washington University. He has been
Director of Defense Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, Principal Defense
Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office, Evaluator-in-Charge (national
security and intelligence) for the U.S. General Accounting Office, and
Investigator for the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Principal Defense
Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office. He is author of the books, The Empire
Has No Clothes: U.S. Foreign Policy Exposed, and Putting
�Defense� Back into U.S. Defense Policy.