Infrastructure includes, roads, bridges, tunnels, power plants and
other energy generating sources, railroads and airports. These various
facilities facilitate the world we live in and make life as we know it
possible. However, whose job is it to protect these objects from possible
attack? Let us look at the pros and cons of government versus private yet
again in the context of protecting the nation’s life blood of commerce.
Government: Similar to yesterday, the
government has the advantage of an unlimited money supply to make enhancements
to protect our infrastructure. They can fix it when it is damaged and
maintain it when it is too expensive to repair by private company means.
However, that money spent is not always spent wisely. Contract
overruns, pulled budgets, and corruption take their toll. Also, despite having
an unlimited money supply, printing all that money can cause negative economic
consequences that could increase poverty.
The government also has access to
intelligence networks to prevent and preempt an attack from happening.
Not only does the government have access to its own intelligence network,
but to other allied and neutral countries networks as well. However, like
with the Boston Bombing indecent, intelligence can be, and will be, ignored on
occasion. Thus, despite the sheer amount of resources at the government’s
disposal to react, they may fail to act in the first place.
Additionally, unlike the private sector,
the government has the judicial branch. They can capture people caught in
the act and then prosecute them. However, private as of yet has no means
of performing this delicate function of government.
Private: Private has the advantage of it being small scale
where they can focus on a specific facilities defense exclusively. As such, due
to that focus it is not uncommon for them to innovate to maintain highly
skilled and professional private security forces to act as guards and to
develop security methods indicative to the particular object they wish to
protect. Government has trouble with this as they have a broader blanket
approach to such things.
When it comes to repair, the private
sector innovates to ensure that things can get done quickly and efficiently.
They, who guard the facility, may not have to be able to repair the
facility as they can have individuals hired to do that same task on their
behalf as part of their job. In their contract they can have a clause
that even has them fortify the facility from things like electromagnetic pulse
weapons and other forms of unorthodox attacks.
Intelligence wise, the private sector has
begun to get into the spy game in the same way they got into the use of
mercenaries to protect certain assets. Since the war on terror started
under President George W. Bush, the private sector intelligence groups have
been used by the CIA and other intelligence agencies to gather information on
their behalf, especially when they are shorthanded when there is no focus or
obvious threat from that country.
Conclusion: In certain cases, the government is
better, while in others private is better. For instance a private
security force with adequate intelligence from government and private sources
can protect an airport, a nuclear power plant or a bus depot very efficiently.
On the other hand, a bridge or a tunnel is much harder to protect which
typically leaves government as the de facto protector (as was the case of the
Lincoln Tunnel indecent which NYPD's anti-terror team stopped). On top of
this, private is typically more motivated as they can be fired while the
government can't. Best example is with the TSA guarding our nation’s
airports versus those in private industry guarding our airports. The
private sector security is rewarded for their good work and activities by the
private company. The private company even designs exorcises to enhance quality
and motivation even further leading to a better success rate on finding banned
items in luggage than their government employed counterparts. So you can
see that there is a certain level of difference with respect to how well we
will be protected and by whom when you think about it. So it is all a
matter of applying which group to protect what based on capability. So
yes, I am fine with a private company protecting a power plant and fortifying
it from attack over the government which would be better suited to the
offensives role of terrorist hunting.
No comments:
Post a Comment