Review of Jordan Tama's book Terrorism and National Security Reform: How Commissions can Drive Change during Crises published in the Journal of Conflict Transformation and Security (JCTS), Vol. 2, no. 2, October 2012, pp. 268-270. Issuu and PDF
The oldest stunt in every politician’s playbook when one encounters a crisis is to create a commission. The conventional view of commissions is well captured in a joke Tama shares (p.4). The joke by Lloyd Cutler, who was advisor to Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton goes something like this:
The joke succinctly captures the widespread perception of commissions; that they are created for purposes other than creating results and most do not produce results. It is this conventional view of conventions that Tama sets out to challenge and manages to unsettle with a great deal of success.[1]
The book originates out of Tama’s doctoral thesis at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. This in itself holds several valuable lessons for readers and students of national security which is an issue I will deal with a little later in the review.
Firstly, the book is divided into three parts. The first part outlines the research questions and delineates the existing body of knowledge and the conventional view of commissions. This is followed by outlining the central argument and the method of testing the argument. The next section titled ‘Patterns of Commission Influence’ has two chapters wherein Tama outlines a Theory of Commission Influence and the Impact that National Security Commissions. This section tries to identify the focal points and tries to identify under what circumstances commissions are able to exert the maximum influence. This is followed by the third part titled ‘Commissions and Counterterrorism Policy’ which comprises of detailed case-studies of several blue-ribbon, executive commissions beginning with the Long Commission to the 9/11 Commission and Intelligence Reform.
“A retiring president leaves his successor three envelopes to be opened in sequence, to learn what to do each time he faces a serious crisis. The first envelope says, ‘Blame your predecessor.’ The second says, ‘Appoint a commission.’ The third says, ‘Prepare three envelopes.’”
The joke succinctly captures the widespread perception of commissions; that they are created for purposes other than creating results and most do not produce results. It is this conventional view of conventions that Tama sets out to challenge and manages to unsettle with a great deal of success.[1]
The book originates out of Tama’s doctoral thesis at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. This in itself holds several valuable lessons for readers and students of national security which is an issue I will deal with a little later in the review.
Firstly, the book is divided into three parts. The first part outlines the research questions and delineates the existing body of knowledge and the conventional view of commissions. This is followed by outlining the central argument and the method of testing the argument. The next section titled ‘Patterns of Commission Influence’ has two chapters wherein Tama outlines a Theory of Commission Influence and the Impact that National Security Commissions. This section tries to identify the focal points and tries to identify under what circumstances commissions are able to exert the maximum influence. This is followed by the third part titled ‘Commissions and Counterterrorism Policy’ which comprises of detailed case-studies of several blue-ribbon, executive commissions beginning with the Long Commission to the 9/11 Commission and Intelligence Reform.