A Nuance? Or Is Napolitano A Nuisance?

Spiegel's Cordula Meyer interviewed Janet Napolitano, President Obama's new Homeland Security Secretary.

Try this:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?

Napolitano: Of course it does.



I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.

Do you think he had any inkling then?



And wait, it gets, er, 'better':

Napolitano...We will also want to share some experiences with counter-radicalization, how the radicalization of young Muslims in our countries can be prevented.

SPIEGEL: Europe has a problem with just such people, young Muslims who grew up in the West and are still susceptible to radical messages. The terrorists responsible for the July 2005 attacks in London are an example.

Napolitano: In some ways, the problem in Europe is greater than in the United States. But the questions are the same. How do you identify a youth who is susceptible to becoming radicalized? How do you work with that youth, his family and community to give them alternatives to radicalization?

SPIEGEL: Would you characterize such social measures as a task of your agency?

Napolitano: Yes. In fact, we have group within my agency, the civil liberties group, and they have a focus right now on that issue...


SPIEGEL: As governor of Arizona, you counted on new surveillance technologies to secure the border with Mexico. What sort of technology could you use in the fight against terrorism?

Napolitano: ...We scan license plates to help us determine which vehicles we must stop and search.

SPIEGEL...What can Americans and Europeans learn from each other?

Napolitano: That you have to be pragmatic. You have to avoid over-simplification from the far right and from the far left. Ultimately, you need to deal with the underlying immigration law and a reasonable immigration policy. At some point, when the time is appropriate, our president and congress will re-engage on the underlying immigration law. Right now, my task is to make smart enforcement decisions on the law that we have.