Since the events of September 11, 2001, the United States has poured over $1 trillion directly into the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) along with trillions more into military actions labeled as counterterrorism efforts.
These funds facilitated the establishment of a vast security infrastructure designed to safeguard the nation, leading to safer airports, unified intelligence-sharing systems, improved disaster relief protocols, and the creation of counterterrorism units at various governmental levels.
However, since President Donald Trump took office in January, many of the advancements made in national security have been significantly undermined.
The sobering reality is that Americans today may be just as vulnerable to threats from both foreign and domestic terrorism as they were on that fateful day more than two decades ago.
In fact, with the rise of domestic violent extremism and the political encouragement of such ideologies, the current climate could arguably leave citizens even more at risk.
As a former 9/11 first responder with the New York City Fire Department, this situation feels particularly poignant to me.
It prompts reflection on the profound loss of life from the attacks, the ongoing health impacts of toxic exposure at Ground Zero, and the sacrifices made by countless individuals during the subsequent years.
The series of investments made post-9/11 signaled what many homeland security professionals believed to be a permanent shift toward a more robust defense system against both transnational and domestic threats.
There were hopes of a strengthened information-sharing protocol amongst federal, state, and local governments as well as a public safety infrastructure adept at detecting and responding to future crises.
Regrettably, the actions taken under the Trump administration have led to the deterioration of these critical homeland security capabilities.
One notable change is the establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), promoted under the Trump administration as a necessary streamlining effort.
However, the ramifications for the DHS and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have been significant and detrimental.
Since DOGE’s inception, there have been mass reorganizations, the addition of politically motivated appointees lacking in relevant expertise, and a diversion of resources away from critical terrorism prevention initiatives.
Particularly concerning is the pressure on FEMA to intertwine disaster relief with immigration enforcement, which detracts from its primary mission of aiding Americans in times of crisis.
This political interference undermines the clarity of FEMA’s mission and diminishes the country’s preparedness for future emergencies.
Worries over privacy and civil liberties have escalated due to DOGE’s initiatives, especially with DHS and the Department of Justice’s partnership with Palantir Technologies.
The two agencies are now gathering extensive datasets, including financial, social media, and travel records of Americans, which could potentially be used for surveillance purposes.
Originally designed for counterterrorism efforts overseas, these tools risk being misapplied domestically against U.S. citizens.
The blurred lines between counterterrorism and domestic surveillance present clear dangers to democracy.
Post-9/11 measures, including the Patriot Act and expanded surveillance powers, already compromised individual rights, but under the current administration, the focus of these tools has changed dramatically.
The recent closure of DHS’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) has further exacerbated the situation, stripping away a vital oversight function that monitored compliance with constitutional protections and sought to safeguard against surveillance abuses.
The office had historically highlighted mission creep and potential overreach in both counterterrorism and immigration enforcement.
Without the CRCL, there remains no independent body within DHS to challenge governmental overreach, leaving all Americans vulnerable to unwarranted surveillance and discrimination.
The Trump administration has also taken steps that have severely weakened the FBI, particularly by removing experienced agents from key positions.
Agents involved in the investigations related to the January 6 Capitol attack have faced harassment and threats, branding them as political adversaries rather than public servants conducting lawful investigations.
This assault on the FBI’s integrity only emboldens domestic extremists who harbor beliefs about a rigged system.
Moreover, the diversion of FBI resources to immigration enforcement operations detracts from the agency’s essential mission of protecting the homeland from terrorism.
This shift in priorities marks one of the most alarming policy changes in the post-9/11 era, as it diverts counterterrorism specialists from their critical work of preventing future terrorist attacks.
Such changes further limit the federal government’s capacity to adequately address threats, especially with foreign terrorist organizations like ISIS-K continuing to pose significant dangers.
Despite the administration’s claims of vigilance in combating terrorism, conflating drug cartels with terrorist organizations leads to a misallocation of resources, undermining the fight against genuine threats.
Trump’s framing of cartels as ‘narco-terrorists’ detracts from the pressing issues posed by ideologically driven extremist groups dedicated to violence against Americans.
On the domestic front, a dramatic decline in the effectiveness of terrorism detection initiatives has been noted, particularly evidenced by slashed staffing in the FBI’s domestic terrorism unit.
Moreover, DHS is dismantling programs intended to address domestic threats, actively removing language connecting violent extremism with far-right ideologies.
Simultaneously, extremist narratives have shifted in favor of January 6 participants, now frequently painted as ‘political prisoners’ by right-wing figures.
This rebranding sends a dangerous message to potential extremists: acts of violence in service of the ruling party may not only be tolerated but celebrated.
Consequently, this distorts deterrent messages that are crucial in preventing future violence.
Branding members of the opposing political spectrum, particularly left-leaning groups, as domestic extremists poses significant risks.
Trump has frequently suggested designating ANTIFA as a domestic terrorist organization, which could lead to the criminalization of dissent and has the potential to open the door to widespread law enforcement abuse.
Such actions would set terrifying precedents for political persecution and civil liberties violations in the U.S.
Recent calls from figures close to Trump, labeling the Democratic Party as a ‘domestic extremist organization,’ have inflamed political polarization that breeds extremist violence.
The vilification of various communities, including migrants and LGBTQ+ individuals, further exacerbates these tensions and increases the risk of violence.
These groups have already faced heightened levels of harassment and violence, demonstrably evident by the alarming number of anti-LGBTQ+ bills proposed across the nation.
The political climate has not only created tensions but is also fostering the emergence of extremist ideologies on the left, with groups advocating for anarchic principles and related violence.
While these groups may not yet have engaged in violent actions, the potential for such occurrences is alarming.
For homeland security professionals, the evolution and radicalization of such groups using modern technology for recruitment and organization pose formidable challenges.
As overt political violence escalates, the threats to American democracy become increasingly pronounced.
The recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist, represents a grim step in this trajectory of violence.
Such incidents are not isolated; they are a stark reminder of the growing normalization of political violence in contemporary society.
Capitol Police have reported a troubling rise in threats against lawmakers, reaching a record number of nearly 9,500 cases in 2023.
This figure underscores the urgent need for addressing the rising tide of extremism poised to erode the foundations of the democratic process.
Under the Biden administration, DHS has registered encounters with hundreds of individuals on terrorist watch lists at the U.S. border, reflecting a concerning gap in national security.
Despite efforts aimed at locking down the border, experts recognize that significant dangers may already exist within the country.
Compounding the issue, the leadership of DHS’s key counterterrorism office is currently in the hands of a young individual with virtually no relevant experience.
This mismanagement is jeopardizing the credibility and effectiveness of initiatives tasked with preventing violence and building community trust.
In tandem, the administration’s disinterest in maintaining or expanding critical programs such as the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention grant program and Nonprofit Security Grant Program signifies a troubling retreat from active engagement in protecting vulnerable communities.
These budget cuts come at a time when such support is more critical than ever, eroding defenses against the threats of extremist violence.
DHS’s cybersecurity initiatives, initially established in response to rising cyber threats, are similarly under scrutiny.
Following conflicts over election integrity, the dismantling of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is particularly alarming.
Weakening CISA while foreign actors continue to develop sophisticated plans for election interference is reckless and undermines democratic stability.
As someone who experienced firsthand the horrors of 9/11, the need for vigilance remains at the forefront.
The reality is that threats are not confined to those who espouse foreign ideologies but include fellow Americans who may turn to violence in seeking redress for perceived grievances.
Under President Trump, the DHS has devolved from a comprehensive agency designed to address complex violent threats to a singular focus on immigration enforcement.
To honor the lives lost on September 11, 2001, and the ongoing sacrifices made by first responders and military personnel, it is crucial to restore the commitment to comprehensive national security strategies.
Each year, we repeat the mantra “Never Forget,” yet the present reality seems to indicate that many in the current administration have disregarded this solemn promise.
In conclusion, the assessment reveals a palpable deterioration in the nation’s ability to confront terrorism threats, leading to a heightened concern that the worst may still lie ahead.
image source from：justsecurity
