A 2010
Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the
Obama administration’s potential use of military force against Americans.
The
directive contains noncontroversial provisions on support to civilian
fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the
Army Corps of Engineers.
The
troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for
the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in
operations against domestic unrest.
“This appears to be the latest step in the
administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive.
Directive
No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec.
29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency
authority under this directive.”
“Federal military forces shall
not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized
by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under
emergency authority,” the directive states.
“In these
circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in
extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the
president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are
unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities
that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances”
under two conditions.
The conditions include military support
needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of
property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public
order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are
unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or
federal governmental functions.”
“Federal
action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized
when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the
directive states.
Military assistance can
include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive
states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.
A U.S. official said the
Obama administration considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher
Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.
Mr. Bundy
is engaged in a legal battle with the federal Bureau of Land Management
over unpaid grazing fees. Along with a group of protesters,
Mr. Bundy in April confronted federal and local authorities in a standoff that ended when the authorities backed down.
The
Pentagon
directive authorizes the secretary of defense to approve the use of
unarmed drones in domestic unrest. But it bans the use of missile-firing
unmanned aircraft.
“Use of armed [unmanned aircraft systems] is not authorized,” the directive says.
The directive was signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary
William J. Lynn. A copy can be found on the
Pentagon website: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdf.
Defense
analysts say there has been a buildup of military units within
non-security-related federal agencies, notably the creation of Special
Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams. The buildup has raised questions about
whether the
Obama administration is undermining civil liberties under the guise of counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts.
Other
agencies with SWAT teams reportedly include the Department of
Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product
Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education
Department.
The militarization of federal agencies, under
little-known statues that permit deputization of security officials,
comes as the White House has launched verbal attacks on private
citizens’ ownership of firearms despite the fact that most gun owners
are law-abiding citizens.
A White House National Security Council spokeswoman declined to comment.
President Obama
stated at the National Defense University a year ago: “I do not believe
it would be constitutional for the government to target and kill any
U.S. citizen — with a drone or with a shotgun — without due process, nor
should any president deploy armed drones over U.S. soil.”
HOUSE HITS ONA DOWNGRADE
The House defense authorization bill passed last week calls for adding $10 million to the
Pentagon’s future warfare think tank and for codifying the Office of Net Assessment (ONA) as a semi-independent unit.
The provision is being called the
Andrew Marshall
amendment after the ONA’s longtime director and reflects congressional
support for the 92-year-old manager and his staying power through
numerous administrations, Republican and Democratic.
Mr. Marshall’s opponents within the
Pentagon and the
Obama administration persuaded Defense Secretary
Chuck Hagel
this year to downgrade the ONA by cutting its budget and placing it
under the control of the undersecretary of defense for policy. The ONA
currently is a separate entity within the Office of the Secretary of
Defense.
Members of the House Committee on Armed Services objected and added the $10 million to the
administration’s
$8.9 million request, along with a legal provision that would codify
ONA’s current status as separate from the policy undersecretary shop.
The
committee was concerned Mr. Hagel’s downgrade would “limit the ability
and flexibility of ONA to conduct long-range comparative assessments,”
the report on the authorization bill states.
“The office has a
long history of providing alternative analyses and strategies that
challenge the ‘group think’ that can often pervade the Department of
Defense,” the report says, noting an increasing demand for
unconventional thinking about space warfare capabilities by China and
Russia.
In addition to adding funds, the bill language requires
the ONA to study alternative U.S. defense and deterrence strategies
related to the space warfare programs of both countries.
China is
developing advanced missiles capable of shooting down satellites in low
and high earth orbits. It also is building lasers and electronic jammers
to disrupt satellites, a key U.S. strategic military advantage. Russia
is said to be working on anti-satellite missiles and other space
weapons.
“The committee believes the office must remain an
independent organization within the department, reporting directly to
the secretary,” the report said.
Mr. Marshall, sometimes referred to as the
Pentagon’s “Yoda,” after the Star Wars character, has come under fire from opponents in the
administration, who say he is too independent and not aligned with the
administration’s soft-line defense policies.
The
ONA is known for its extensive use of contractors and lack of producing
specific overall net assessments of future warfare challenges, as
required by the office’s charter.
One example of the ONA’s
unconventional thinking was the recent contractor report “China: The
Three Warfares,” which revealed Beijing’s extensive use of political
warfare against the United States, including psychological warfare,
media warfare and legal warfare.
“‘The Three Warfares’ is a
dynamic, three-dimensional, war-fighting process that constitutes war by
other means,” the report says.
A
Pentagon spokesman had no immediate comment.
NO DENNIS RODMAN DEFENSE
Navy Adm.
James A. “Sandy” Winnefeld, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Wednesday that the
Pentagon is deploying more and higher-quality missile defenses to counter potential nuclear attacks from North Korea and Iran.
“This
is about ensuring we can deny the objectives of any insecure
authoritarian state that believes acquisition of deliverable weapons of
mass destruction is key to the preservation of its regime,” Adm.
Winnefeld said in a speech to the Atlantic Council. “The number of
states trying to achieve that capability is growing, not shrinking, with
our principal current concern being North Korea, because they are
closest in terms of capability, followed by Iran.”
He added that missile defenses are needed “because we’re not betting on
Dennis Rodman as our deterrent against a future North Korean ICBM threat.”
He was referring to the heavily tattooed and pierced former NBA star, who has traveled to North Korea as a guest of leader
Kim Jong-un. Mr. Rodman calls the dictator his “friend.”
“A
robust and capable missile defense is our best bet to defend the United
States from such an attack and is, in my view, our No. 1 missile
defense priority,” Adm. Winnefeld said.
North Korea is continuing
to develop long-range missiles and nuclear weapons. It recently
threatened to conduct a fourth nuclear test, and analysts say signs from
the closed communist state suggest the North Koreans may test a missile
warhead.
• Contact Bill Gertz at @BillGertz.
