Counterterrorism Blog
The first multi-expert blog dedicated solely to counterterrorism issues, serving as a gateway to the community for policymakers and serious researchers. Designed to provide realtime information about terrorism cases and policy developments.
 

Daily Standard: Practice Makes Terror

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

I have a new article in the Daily Standard today that examines the rash of "false alarms" on airlines since authorities announced that they foiled the transatlantic air terror plot on Aug. 10. In it, I argue that some of these false alarms may not have been false, and that open societies like the U.S. will inherently find it difficult to guard against casings and dry runs. An excerpt:

ALTHOUGH THERE WAS AMPLE REASON before the transatlantic plot to believe that flights were being cased, none of these incidents were remembered as casings. Likewise, the various incidents that have occurred since then may well be remembered as a rash of false alarms.

But some of these alarms may not have been false. In any dry run or casing, terrorists will engage in aberrant behavior similar to that displayed by the passengers aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 42 (or United Airlines Flight 925, for that matter). If terrorists engaged in a dry run or casing have a modicum of foresight, they'll have reasonable explanations for their travel and their behavior. They may in fact not even have to do that much: by August 25, the New York Times declared that the 12 Northwest Airlines Flight 42 passengers were "possibly unaware of international flight rules and security concerns." This seems overly assuming. Is it likely that a dozen international passengers were unaware that they shouldn't use cell phones after takeoff and walk in the aisles with the seatbelt sign still on?

If the terrorists have reasonable stories and don't possess weapons or the means to blow up a flight, their dry run or casing will likely be remembered as nothing more than a false alarm. Actions of this kind are fairly low-risk ventures for terrorists from which they derive two distinct advantages. One is that they can test the limits of our tolerance, determining what behavior will raise red flags and what will not. The second advantage is that, as an increasing number of law enforcement sources suspect, terrorists or their sympathizers may be trying to catch the Federal Air Marshals' attention in order to determine who the marshals are.

THE LIKELIHOOD THAT TERRORISTS can offer plausible excuses and walk away unscathed when caught in the midst of a casing or dry run points to an inherent point of vulnerability for open societies.

Read the whole article here.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://counterterrorismblog.org/mt/pings.cgi/3190