As President Barack Obama attempts to assemble an international coalition to go after the Islamic militant group that calls itself the Islamic State, we are reminded that the threat of global terrorism is still an ever-present reality. But since our declared war on terrorism shortly after 9/11, are we any safer from a coordinated attack against the United States than we were on that fatal day 13 years ago? The answer to the question is complicated and subjective. Preparing against a terrorist plot is akin to preparing for the next viral outbreak. The threat is global, diffuse, and constantly evolving in unpredictable ways. Natural selection almost guarantees that even our best defenses will eventually be outmaneuvered. As a result, we are forced to be reactionary with our goals, focusing on identification, containment and future prevention of threats.
Our safety depends largely on two factors: global stability, particularly in the Middle East, and homeland security. Achieving global stability itself is a formidable task and one that is largely out of our control, but it’s clear that U.S. foreign policy has matured in the aftermath of the Iraq War and the Arab Spring. While many have criticized the Obama administration for a lagging and indecisive response to the self-proclaimed “Islamic State,” the president knows that escalating the conflict without global cooperation will only hurt our cause. And despite our outrage at the beheadings of American journalists by these Islamic militants, the American public is weary of war and would most likely not support an on the ground effort through the long-term. However, our increasing abilities to monitor and launch air strikes using a combination of drones and special operations forces have allowed us to subtly assist Kurdish fighters push back the militants in many parts of Iraq as we work on a more coordinated global effort. This approach to combating global terrorist organizations has better long term implications in promoting stability in the Middle East compared to the heavy handed interventions of the past.
However, regardless of these efforts, we have to anticipate that there will be terrorist organizations who will attempt to launch an attack on U.S soil sometime in the future.
Advances in data mining capabilities have allowed security organizations to assess vast amounts of electronic communications data for suspicious content. The efficacy of this approach is questionable, though, as one would assume a terrorist would only communicate through channels they believed to be secure, and real issues regarding personal privacy remain, especially with the inherent risk of false positives.
According to a report released by the federal 9/11 commission, the al Qaeda operatives behind 9/11 were able to get away with the preparation of false documents and statements to border patrol agents, despite the presence of suspicious indicators. Such an effort would be significantly harder to pull off today than it was 13 years ago, when border security was not considered a major priority.
Finally, our final security strategy is to stop these plots as they’re being carried out. While there have been many new security technologies implemented at airports and other locations they’ve largely been a disappointment according to sources such as James Jay Carafano, director of the Center for Foreign Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
Technologies such as full body scanners have seen a major backlash due to privacy concerns, and others such as “puffer machines” or explosive trace detection devices have been shown to be unreliable in distinguishing environmental contaminants and truly dangerous materials.
Other technologies such as facial detection and activity monitoring using visual surveillance is still in its infancy to and too unreliable to be considered an effective anti-terrorism measure. The issue is that these technologies are often deployed without adequate testing due to pressure from government agencies. However, patents filed by Boeing say that the aviation company has allowed remote control technology for its aircraft, effectively preventing future hijackings.
While advances in security have helped mitigate the chances for another 9/11 type attack, the most dangerous threats are the ones we have yet to anticipate. We must continue to innovate and evolve our own technologies as real vulnerabilities still exist and the threat of terrorism is constantly adapting to us.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.