100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 7 pages.
1Risk Assessment of Counter terrorism efforts Jasmine HoltColumbia Southern UniversityIntroduction to TerrorismProfessor Michael B. Simmmons
2Risk Assessment of the FBI’s Counterterrorism EffortsMark G. Stewart and John Mueller write an investigative article evaluating the costs and benefits of counterterrorism spending that utilizes four variables, including the consequences of asuccessful attack, the likelihood of a successful attack; the degree to which the security measuresreduces risk; and the cost of the security measures. In reviewing the Department of Homeland Securities' spending on terrorism, Stewart and Mueller found little evidence of risk analysis capabilities, no attempt to describe absolute risks, and preference of only describing relevant risks. The article called "Risk Assessment of the FBI's Counterterrorism Efforts" dives into the FBI's counterterrorism approach to assess if it confidently reduces the terrorism risk enough to justify its costs.Summary Stewart and Mueller argue that counterterrorism agencies seem to focus more on identifying a potential threat and then doing something about it and less on systematically evaluating the magnitude of harm that could be caused by a future terrorist attack. Now counterterrorism activities pre 9/11 costs the FBI roughly $600 million; however, post 9/11 became the FBI's top priority. Counterterrorism activities today cost the bureau approximately 3 billion dollars (36 percent of FBI expenditures). The article argues whether or not these efforts reduce the risk of terrorism because terrorist attacks are rare. It argues that it is difficult to assess the actual risk. It does not seek to discredit the efforts the FBI's counterterrorism activities have had in reducing the risk and the threats against our nation. Stuart and Mueller argue that since the