*Note: All times are adjusted for EST.
On Friday afternoon, Dubai Police seized a suspicious package from a cargo plane that originated in Yemen. Initial tests revealed a sophisticated triggering mechanism but no apparent trace of explosives.
Later that day, officers from the Leicestershire Constabulary and Scotland Yard seized another suspicious package from a cargo plane originating from Dubai. Initial tests revealed again no explosives but an apparent triggering mechanism using cellphone parts and timers.
That same afternoon, NORAD fighter jets were scrambled to intercept an inbound Emirates flight, originating in Yemen and flying into JFK. The plane was safely escorted down and Port Authority and New York Police officers met and secured the plane and cargo. No incident occurred but more suspicious packages were discovered and quarantined.
Acting on the same information, US police searched cargo depots at Philadelphia and Newark airports and another package was removed from a cargo plane.
Several hours later, forensics teams from Dubai reported that the package did in fact contain the explosive PETN and was wired for detonation. Reports described the bomb as being "professionally done".
Later, US and British forensics teams reached the same conclusion, stating that the bomb was so sophisticated as to have the explosive elements undetectable to dogs and upon initial inspection. Further questions are raised about the amount of explosives being shipped, the intended target of the bombs and if this was in fact a real terrorist attack or a dry run to probe Western defenses.
President Obama speaks later and confirms that this was a "credible terrorist plot" and confirmed that the packages originated in Yemen, strongly suggesting the involvement of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). However, the President stops short of blaming AQAP. The President also extended his thanks to Saudi Intelligence for assisting in the investigation and discovery of the bombs.
On Saturday afternoon, British police report that the bombs were designed to detonate in mid-air and destroy the cargo planes. This answers the question as to the relative lack of a large quantity of explosive but raises the question of why a Synagogue in Chicago was on the address label for both packages found in the US.
Yemeni security personnel arrest a woman in a manhunt for the bomber, her exact involvement is unclear as of now. Yemen also seizes dozens of other suspicious packages.
---
This is the third terrorist plot to have been discovered/foiled in the past 2 weeks. The first being the "Mumbai in Europe" attacks about which a great deal is unknown (including if they have really been stopped, and how far along the planning is) as well as the Metro Bomber who was recently captured and now this. These events are particularly interesting because they showcase three different types of attack from three different outfits. This is a very clear example of the nature of the threat we face and the importance of international cooperation on these matters. Let's run these down one by one. But first, some history.
The 2008 Mumbai Attacks was arguably the most successful terrorist attack since 9/11. It was low cost, high sophistication and high impact. Over the course of 3 days, 10 gunmen armed with small arms and grenades brought the financial capital of India to a standstill as they ravaged notable landmarks, taking hostages and murdering civilians. Indian police were ill equipped to handle the attackers, armed only with long wooden sticks or antique rifles. Eventually the intervention of the National Security Guards, India's elite counter-terror unit, was needed to put an end to the carnage. By the time the guns fell silent, 166 civilians were killed along with over 300 wounded. 9 of the 10 attackers were killed and one was arrested.
This attack bore several unique characteristics, most importantly it's emphasis on shock and awe. It had become common knowledge in intelligence circles that the next attack would emphasize low cost and high impact, but the targets were thought to be airplanes or government buildings, and the methods suicide bombing or simple bomb planting. History had borne this out -- India had often been the victim of bombings and as such was not prepared for this type of attack. This attack, however, was designed as much for the killing as the media attention. A bombing is a bombing, and as horrible as it is, it's over relatively quickly. Business had returned to normal by the end of the workday in Moscow after the bombings there earlier this year. But hostage taking in the heart of the financial capital? That would rule the airwaves for far longer. Considering that the main goal of any politically motivated terrorist group is not simply to kill, but to gain exposure and influence domestic politics, this type of attack was wildly successful.
It was only a matter of time before this type of attack was brought to the West. Details are still very unclear, but it seems that simultaneous targets in Germany, the UK and France were going to be hit in a very similar fashion to Mumbai. The case broke when Ahmed Siddiqui was arrested by US forces in Afghanistan, apparently coming from an al-Qaeda base in Pakistan. Information provided by him helped to bring the case to western attention as having been planned by al-Qaeda proper in Pakistan and even having the blessing of Usama bin Laden. The US immediately began a fierce drone offensive, hitting dozens of suspected bases, in an effort to stall or cripple the plan before it could be implemented. The drone barrage has subsided, but it is not yet known how much damage was done to the plan, but several EU citizens were killed who were presumed to have been the would-be gunmen upon returning to their home countries.
This type of attack though, especially in the EU, would have had a great number of obstacles to overcome. The first and foremost being training -- while low cost this type of attack still relies on a great deal of sophistication and training on the part of the attackers. One of the reasons that the Mumbai attack was possible was the implicit/explicit support of the Pakistani Army which supplied training and safe haven to the attackers. But getting an EU citizen to cross into Afghanistan/Pakistan, train for months, and come back without raising flags would be difficult. Also difficult is the relative lack of easy access to assault rifles and explosives in the EU. In Mumbai, this was overcome by not passing through any official checkpoint from their arming and equipping station to their target. Traveling back from Pakistan would require passing through EU customs. The attackers would only be able to bring back their knowledge, weapons would need to be procured somewhere in the target city/area -- not impossible but difficult, and another high visibility event (events that make you stand out and noticeable to police). The last large hurdle is the far more effective nature of European police and counter-terror units. As opposed to India, all three countries -- France, Germany and the UK -- have highly mobile and specialized units to deal with hostage situations and terrorist attacks -- GIGN, GSG 9 and SO13 respectively. While it would still be a bloody attack and garner plenty of media attention, the chances of the attackers paralyzing Paris for a 3 day siege would be next to nothing.
Regardless, the plot is still a very serious one and it still must be dealt with as if it is still active and poses a threat; whether it is and does if left as an exercise with the reader. But it is interesting for the type of terrorism it is advocating (low cost, highly specialized and high media impact) and the implications for domestic police and security. It is also interesting to note that a very similar idea was posited in the most recent issue of Inspire, AQAPs occasional rag that documents attacks and makes suggestions to would be Jihadists. The idea is clearly gaining popularity among al-Qaeda's various affiliates as they grow increasingly frustrated in their inability to strike the West at home.
The DC Metro Bomber is a totally different type of terrorist, one that is perhaps the hardest to track and discover. While not enough has been made public to concretely speak of the issue, it is free for speculation.
In terms of his goals -- bombing the DC Metro, sowing havoc, the (alleged) terrorist Farooque Ahmed was pretty white bread. Even his status as a Naturalized US Citizen didn't raise the eyebrows it used to. But perhaps it should; Ahmed is a nice example of a domestically radicalized terrorist. He sought out al-Qaeda, not the other way around. This is a troubling development -- a man who has never met an AQ operative, never been to a training camp and never been on the radar before, was brought to the point of killing innocent civilians with absolutely no assistance from al-Qaeda. While not quite the example he uses in his book, this is part of an increasing trend towards a "Leaderless Jihad" where terrorists are born, bred and attack in the United States with no need to travel to Yemen or Pakistan for training or indoctrination. It used to be the case that US Muslims were too well integrated into society to become terrorists. Then it was US Muslims are unwilling to strike innocent civilians in a traditional manner. Then it was US Muslims are unwilling to strike in the US. Then it was US Muslims need to travel abroad to get the training and indoctrination necessary to carry out attacks. And now? Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people at Virginia Tech with no training and no forced indoctrination. Does anyone doubt that had the thought occurred to Ahmed, we might be picking up the bodies from the Metro?
While we don't as of yet have an example of a fully "Leaderless Jihadi" if you will, I am seeing an increasing trend in that direction. The threat from al-Qaeda continues to morph and evolve, often faster than we can react. Unlike the other two plots discussed here, this one involved no action from AQ or AQ affiliates (though, not for lack of trying). Leaderless or no, the Jihad is certainly decentralizing.
And now we have the Packages Plot (my given name to it). While we don't know for sure, it seems that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is to blame. This again represents another evolution of the original al-Qaeda model of expeditionary terrorism. As in the Embassy Bombings and 9/11, the Expeditionary Model relies on sending agents to a foreign environment to attack a given target. All the training and preparation occurs out of the national boundary of the target. The attackers may spend their first days in the country planning the attack and conducting surveillance. This is perhaps the easiest type of terrorism to foil as it requires crossing a national border (high visibility) and procuring weapons and explosives in an alien environment (high visibility).
The Packages Plot is an interesting twist -- the export is no longer terrorists but instead the bombs themselves. I originally had speculated that the bombs were being send to agents in the United States for assembly or delivery, then I suspected they were designed to detonate at the Synagogue in Chicago and now it appears that they were designed to destroy the cargo airplanes carrying them somewhere over the Atlantic Ocean. Why, you may ask, would AQAP target a cargo plane? Only 2 or 3 people would die and the cargo is likely nothing terribly important, so why go through all the trouble? Well, firstly it just reinforces the notion that AQ isn't after body counts so much as it is the impact those body counts have on the West's political and economic situation. Dead Americans isn't an end, it's a means for AQ to achieve its larger goals of causing economic harm and influencing the political discourse. But it is also a reflection of their increasing frustration with their inability to cause harm and spread terror. There hasn't been a successful terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11* and that is causing increasing frustration on the part of AQ. This episode just goes to show that they will use any methods they can to harm us.
Our enemy continues to evolve, to use increasingly difficult to track methods and is astonishingly innovative and resilient. These three plots over the past 2 weeks just highlights the trends we have seen: al-Qaeda proper remains deadly and operational but the Leaderless Jihad phenomenon also seems to be manifesting itself. Now, it is too early to write anything particularly scholarly about these attacks, so little is known for sure, but it does appear that these attacks are good representations of the three major types of threat we face at home from al-Qaeda and its affiliates.
*Yes, Ft Hood. But that attack was an attack against a military target, not a civilian one -- thus it is not technically terrorism. A distinction without a difference, perhaps -- but isn't that what Academia is all about?
No comments:
Post a Comment