Yes, absolutely, sir.
I think one challenge is really bringing in the more civilian side of the security apparatus. That's where the intelligence may be. That's where the need for action may be. There has always been a cultural difference between military and civilian law enforcement. The attitudes are different. The closeness to the citizenry is different. I think that's going to be a difficult bridge to cross.
In the 1980s, when we began doing inter-service cooperation, there was such pride in the navy, such pride in the army, let alone the air force, that it was hard to bridge those cultural gaps. The way we did it was through a lot of joint exercises, a lot of joint training, and a lot of war-gaming. I think where we could do a lot is simply having people on both sides of the law enforcement and military divide in both countries, sort of a four-box matrix, begin working together in test exercises, getting to know each other, and developing some trust. The gear, the equipment, and all those things follow, but you need to do that.
Where governments have created the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, the Military Coordination Commission, we have structures for this. With local law enforcement, at best we've been able to do integrated border enforcement teams, so we have a much weaker infrastructure there. There's a real opportunity to perhaps bring in, through fusion centres—we have set up a number of them—some of the military and civilian forces together to get them training, talking to each other, and understanding each other's cultures.
Maybe the bridge for that is going to end up being the border people. Many of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security border hires we've made since September 11 are veterans who have come from a military background and are now doing something more in the civilian space. They are people who understand both cultures. They could be a good bridge for us in trying to link these communities together.