The
Daily Signal
GAO
Report: U.S. Embassies at Risk Because Of Security Gaps
Helle
Dale
June
27, 2014
Security
at U.S. diplomatic posts is falling short, and Benghazi is only the
most visible example.
A new
report on “Diplomatic Security” by the Government Accountability
Office — GAO-14-655 — demonstrates the problem is systemic,
leaving U.S. personnel serving overseas at unnecessary risk. At a
time of rising security threats from metastasizing Al Qaeda spinoffs
and other terrorist groups, this problem must be addressed
immediately at the State Department.
According
to the report, State conducts a range of activities to manage risk at
overseas work facilities, including the setting of security
standards. But GAO found State lacked a fully developed risk
management policy to coordinate these activities. It is unclear what
standards apply to some facilities, and in others, it took eight
years for standards to be identified.
The
report identified other deficiencies, including:
Overseas
Buildings Operations tracks facilities in a database. The report
found that its data had reliability issues.
The
Office of Diplomatic Security and Overseas Security Policy Board
establish security standards, but those standards are not consistent.
Diplomatic
Security and the State Department Office of Inspector General assess
vulnerabilities but not always accurately.
Diplomatic
Security assesses and ranks facilities by level of risk, but its data
can be unreliable.
The
State Department approves waivers for security protocols but not
always according to the rules and regulations.
These
are serious indictments, but they unfortunately ring true. Consider
the actions of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. From her
first testimony before the Senate in January 2013, Clinton maintained
embassy security was not her job and that she never even saw
Ambassador Christopher Stephens’ appeals for additional security in
Benghazi. Clinton told ABC’s Diane Sawyer on June 17 that she did
not “go through all 270 posts,” nor thought she should have
And
yet, attorney Victoria Toensing, in a searing op-ed in the Wall
Street Journal, June 17, titled “Doesn’t Hillary Clinton Know the
Law,” argued that Clinton was by law personally accountable for the
security of U.S. diplomatic personnel.
The
law in question is the “Secure Embassy Construction and
Counterterrorism Act of 1999” or SECCA. It was adopted following
the Kenya and Tanzania terrorist bombings on Aug. 7, 1998 and
enshrined the recommendations of the ARB that followed the bombings.
According
to “SECCA,” the Secretary of State can waive statutory
requirements for all U.S. diplomatic offices to be gathered in one
compound and to be set back 100 feet from the road if security is
otherwise deemed sufficient. The Benghazi consular facility failed on
both counts and would have required a waiver personally issued by
Clinton, a responsibility the Secretary of State “may not
delegate.” Did Clinton sign a waiver when she tasked Stephens with
opening the consulate in Benghazi? The House Select Committee on
Benghazi will need to know.
Read
this and othr articles with links at The Daily Signal
|