While U.S. troops continue to mobilize for war half a world away, the American people are being warned in startlingly blunt terms about the increased threat of new terrorist attacks on our own soil. The coinciding events raise questions about our government's priorities. White House officials have made meticulous plans for war against Iraq, but they are offering little more than duct tape and plastic to Americans looking for ways to protect themselves here at home.

Officials of the Bush administration argue that the crisis in Iraq is directly linked to the threat of terrorism at home, and it is true that Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons programs might eventually be shared with terrorist groups hoping to use them against American targets. But the White House's focus on that potential threat should not divert attention from our government's central responsibility: protecting the homeland from terrorists who already have killed thousands of Americans and are actively plotting even more devastating attacks.

The color-coded system of terror threat levels symbolizes the shortcomings of Washington's homeland security efforts. The decision last week to raise the threat level from yellow to orange succeeded in unnerving millions of Americans, but it provided them with precious little practical guidance. In the absence of more substantial civil defense planning, the advice to stock up on products such as duct tape and plastic sheeting is as pathetic in the age of global terrorism as schoolroom duck-and-cover drills were during the nuclear tensions of the Cold War.

The Bush administration's questionable priorities on homeland security are evident in more tangible ways as well. Cash-strapped states and local governments are still waiting for the billions of dollars Washington promised them for enhanced homeland security. President Bush and congressional Republicans last month worked to defeat efforts to add $3-billion to $5-billion in funds for state and local emergency workers, FBI investigators and security improvements at airports, energy plants and other potential terrorist targets.

At the same time, the president has failed to tap the American people's great capacity for shared sacrifice. During past wars and other crises, presidents have initiated conservation programs and encouraged citizens to volunteer for civil defense projects and other forms of community service. In every case, the American people have responded in a spirit of generosity and patriotism. Today, we are blithely told, even in periods of heightened alert, to continue our normal activities -- except for the duct tape, of course.

The terrible reality is that the primary battleground in the war against terrorism will be found not in Iraq or Afghanistan but right here at home. Going to war in Iraq may eventually make us safer at home, but Washington's focus on Iraq should not come at the expense of homeland security in the here and now. Our intelligence services have had many unreported successes since the Sept. 11 attacks, and there is no doubt that our government and people have made strides in the effort to protect us from future attacks. Yet there remains an uneasy sense that those incremental efforts do not match the urgency of the threat.

CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that the threat of an imminent attack on Americans from terrorists using weapons of mass destruction "is the most specific we have seen" and is based "not on idle chatter on the part of terrorists and their associates." We know our government's mobilization for war against Iraq is going well. But are you confident that your government -- and your family -- has done everything it could to prepare for new terrorist attacks on American soil?

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page