[Peace-discuss] Controlling the military: Executive Order 13528, Jan. 11

[C. G. Estabrook]

In his excellent reply to Gov. Quinn's awful "state of the state" maunderings, 
Green party gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney made a pledge that no other 
candidate for governor of Illinois, Republican or Democrat, will make:

    "...I am the only candidate in the race who is making an issue of the
    illegal, immoral and obscenely costly occupations of Iraq and
    Afghanistan -- by promising to resist these illegal wars as Governor,
    *by vetoing any further overseas deployment of our National Guard*."

Similar things were attempted during Vietnam, when the conscript US military 
essentially revolted against the colonial war that they were sent to fight 
(hence the end of the draft, and the reason it can't be brought back).  And it 
is said that at one point the Pentagon told President Johnson that more troops 
couldn't be sent to Vietnam because they might be needed to control US cities.

The Obama administration is aware of these threats to its war plans. Opposition 
to the Mideast war from the US military will be essential to curb this 
administration. The recession is their best goad to recruitment, and still they 
need expensive Blackwater thugs.

The following suggests that they are taking further steps, steps that can be 
opposed on the state level.  Gubernatorial candidates shouldn't be allowed to 
remain silent on these programs:

	Big Brother: Obama Calls for the Integration
	   of State and Federal Military Forces
	Executive Order Seeks to "Synchronize and Integrate"
	By Tom Burghardt
	Global Research, January 17, 2010

In the wake of the Flight 253 provocation, over-hyped terrorism panics, and last 
year's Big Pharma and media-engineered hysteria over the H1N1 flu pandemic, 
President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13528 on January 11.

Among other things, the Executive Order (EO) established a Council of Governors, 
an "advisory panel" chosen by the President that will rubber-stamp 
long-sought-after Pentagon contingency plans to seize control of state National 
Guard forces in the event of a "national emergency."

According to the White House press release, the ten member, bipartisan Council 
was created "to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal 
Government and State Governments to protect our Nation against all types of 
hazards."

"When appointed" the announcement continues, "the Council will be reviewing such 
matters as involving the National Guard of the various States; homeland defense; 
civil support; synchronization and integration of State and Federal military 
activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining 
to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities."

Clearly designed to weaken the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 which bars the use of 
the military for civilian law enforcement, EO 13528 is the latest in a series of 
maneuvers by previous administrations to wrest control of armed forces 
historically under the democratic control of elected state officials, and a 
modicum of public accountability.

One consequence of moves to "synchronize and integrate" state National Guard 
units with those of the Armed Forces would be to place them under the effective 
control of United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), created in 2002 by 
Bushist legislators in both capitalist parties under the pretext of 
imperialism's endless "War on Terror." At the time, Defense Secretary Donald 
Rumsfeld called USNORTHCOM's launch "the most sweeping set of changes since the 
unified command system was set up in 1946."

The real-world consequences of those changes weren't long in coming.

Following their criminal inaction during 2005's Hurricane Katrina catastrophe, 
the Bush regime sought, but failed, to seize control of depleted Gulf Coast 
National Guard units, the bulk of which had been sent to Iraq along with 
equipment that might have aided the recovery. Bush demanded that then Louisiana 
Governor Kathleen Blanco sign over control of the Guard as well as state and 
local police units as the blood price for federal assistance.

At the height of the crisis, Bush cited presidential prerogatives for doing so 
under the Insurrection Act, a repressive statute which authorizes the President 
to federalize National Guard units when state governments fail to "suppress 
rebellion." How the plight of citizens engulfed by Katrina's flood waters could 
be twisted into an act of "rebellion" was achieved when Orwellian spin doctors, 
aided and abetted by a compliant media, invented a new criminal category to 
cover traumatized New Orleans residents: "Drowning while Black."

Fast forward five years. Given the serious implications such proposals would 
have for a functioning democracy, the media's deafening silence on Obama's 
Executive Order is hardly surprising. Like their role as cheerleaders in the 
escalating wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, media self-censorship tell us much 
about the state of affairs in "new normal" America.

Like his predecessors in the Oval Office, stretching back to the 1960s with 
Pentagon "civil disturbance" plans such as Cable Splicer and Garden Plot, both 
of which are continuously updated, our "change" President will forge ahead and 
invest the permanent National Security bureaucracy with unprecedented power.

Under color of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, an unsavory piece of 
Bushist legislative detritus, "The President shall establish a bipartisan 
Council of Governors to advise the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security, and the White House Homeland Security Council on matters 
related to the National Guard and civil support missions."

The toothless Council, whose Executive Director will be designated by the 
Secretary of Defense no less, "shall meet at the call of the Secretary of 
Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council."

Will such a Council have veto power over administration deliberations? Hardly. 
They are relegated "to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary 
of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security" and "the Assistant to the 
President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism."

Additional entities covered by the EO with whom the Governors Council will 
"exchange views" include, "the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental 
Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland 
Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern 
Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; 
and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the 
Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments 
or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of 
Homeland Security."

In other words, right from the get-go, the Council will serve as civilian cover 
for political decisions made by the Executive Branch and the security apparat. 
EO 13528 continues, "Such views, information, or advice shall concern: (a) 
matters involving the National Guard of the various States; (b) homeland 
defense; (c) civil support; (d) synchronization and integration of State and 
Federal military activities in the United States; and (e) other matters of 
mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil 
support activities."

When news first broke last summer of Obama's proposal to expand the military's 
authority to respond to domestic disasters, it was opposed by the National 
Governors Association (NGA).

Congressional Quarterly reported that a letter sent on behalf of the NGA opposed 
creation of the Council on grounds that it "would invite confusion on critical 
command and control issues, complicate interagency planning, establish 
stove-piped response efforts, and interfere with governors' constitutional 
responsibilities to ensure the safety and security of their citizens," Govs. Jim 
Douglas, R-Vt., and Joe Manchin III, D-W.Va., wrote.

According to their August letter to Paul N. Stockton, Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs, Douglas and Manchin 
III argued that "without assigning a governor tactical control" of military 
forces during a natural disaster such as a flood or earthquake, or an unnatural 
disaster such as a terrorist attack or other mass casualty event, the "strong 
potential exists for confusion in mission, execution and the dilution of 
governors' control over situations with which they are more familiar and better 
capable of handling than a federal military commander."

With slim prospects of congressional authorization for the scheme, in fact the 
2008 language was removed from subsequent Defense spending legislation, other 
means were required. Playing bureaucratic hardball with the governors, this has 
now been accomplished by presidential fiat, further eroding clear constitutional 
limits on Executive Branch power.

These maneuvers as I have previously written, have very little to do with 
responding to a catastrophic emergency. Indeed, EO 13528 is only the latest 
iteration of plans to expand the National Security State's writ and as such, 
have everything to do with decades-old Continuity of Government (COG) programs 
kept secret from Congress and the American people.

Derided by neocons, neoliberals and other corporatists as a quaint backwater for 
"conspiracy theorists" railing against "FEMA concentration camps," Continuity of 
Government, and the nexus of "civil support" programs that have proliferated 
like noxious weeds are no laughing matter.

Indeed, even members of Congress are considered "unauthorized parties" denied 
access "to information on COG plans, procedures, capabilities and facilities," 
according to a Pentagon document published by the whistleblowing web site 
Wikileaks, as are the classified annexes of National Security Presidential 
Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20 (NSPD 51/HSPD 20). 
In a new twist on administration promises of transparency and open government, 
even the redacted version of these documents have been removed from the White 
House web site.

As Antifascist Calling previously reported (see: "Vigilant Shield 09: A Cover 
for Illegal Domestic Operations?"), the Congressional Research Service issued a 
46-page report in 2008 that provided details on the COG-related National 
Exercise Program, a "civil support" operation that war games various disaster 
scenarios.

Among other things, the document outlines the serious domestic implications of 
military participation in national emergency preparedness drills. CRS 
researchers pointed to the Reagan-era Executive Order 12656 (EO 12656) that 
"directs FEMA to coordinate the planning, conduct, and evaluation of national 
security emergency exercises." EO 12656 defines a national security emergency as 
"as any occurrence, including natural disaster, military attack, technological 
emergency, or other emergency that seriously degrades or seriously threatens the 
national security of the United States."

Such programs, greatly expanded by the Bush-era Homeland Security Presidential 
Directive 8 (HSPD-8), also removed from the White House web site, established "a 
national program and a multi-year planning system to conduct homeland security 
preparedness-related exercises." CRS avers, "The program is to be carried out in 
collaboration with state and local governments and private sector entities."

The Defense Department's role during such emergencies were intended to focus 
"principally on domestic incident management, either for terrorism or non 
terrorist catastrophic events." DoD would play a "significant role" in the 
overall response. Such murky definitions cover a lot of ground and are ripe with 
a potential for abuse by unscrupulous securocrats and their corporate partners.

The primary DoD entity responsible for "civil support," a focus of Obama's EO is 
USNORTHCOM and its active combat component, U.S. Army North. However, as with 
almost everything relating to COG and current plans under EO 13528 that propose 
to "synchronize and integrate State and Federal military activities," 
USNORTHCOM's role is shrouded in secrecy.

As researcher Peter Dale Scott revealed in 2008, when Congressman Peter DeFazio, 
Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson and Oversight Subcommittee 
Chairman Christopher Carney sought access to classified COG annexes, their 
request was denied by the White House. Scott wrote: "DeFazio's inability to get 
access to the NSPD Annexes is less than reassuring. If members of the Homeland 
Security Committee cannot enforce their right to read secret plans of the 
Executive Branch, then the systems of checks and balances established by the 
U.S. Constitution would seem to be failing."

One hammer blow followed another. In 2008, Army Times reported, that the "3rd 
Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team [BCT] has spent 35 of the last 60 
months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential 
services and escorting supply convoys. Now they're training for the same 
mission--with a twist--at home."

Analyst Michel Chossudovsky commented, "What is significant in this redeployment 
of a US infantry unit is the presumption that North America could, in the case 
of a national emergency, constitute a 'war theater' thereby justifying the 
deployment of combat units." According to Chossudovsky, "The new skills to be 
imparted consist in training 1st BCT in repressing civil unrest, a task normally 
assumed by civilian law enforcement."

"It is noteworthy, the World Socialist Web Site commented, "that the deployment 
of US combat troops 'as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade 
emergencies and disasters' ... coincides with the eruption of the greatest 
economic emergency and financial disaster since the Great Depression of the 1930s."

"Justified as a response to terrorist threats," socialist critic Bill Van Auken 
averred, "the real source of the growing preparations for the use of US military 
force within America's borders lies not in the events of September 11, 2001 or 
the danger that they will be repeated. Rather, the domestic mobilization of the 
armed forces is a response by the US ruling establishment to the growing threat 
to political stability."

Since USNORTHCOM's deployment of a combat brigade on U.S. soil, the capitalist 
crisis has deepened and intensified. With unemployment at a post-war high and 
the perilous economic and social conditions of the working class growing grimmer 
by the day, EO 13258 is a practical demonstration of ruling class consensus when 
it comes to undermining the democratic rights of the American people.

After all, where the defense of wealth and privileges are concerned corporate 
thugs and war criminals have no friends, only interests...

© Copyright Tom Burghardt, Antifascist Calling..., 2010

The url address of this article is: 
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17006



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.