After a few days of everyone reflexively shooting off their mouths about the Nigerian Christmas terrorist, it seems thinking is now becoming a little more reflective, focusing more on finding solutions that might be effective, rather than knee-jerk measures that solve nothing.
On December 29, for example, the Washington Post stepped back a bit from its overwrought editorial the previous day, and came out in favor of equipping the TSA on an urgent basis with the scanning equipment that could detect liquid explosives or other foreign objects under clothing. Today, they plumped in favor of better communication and coordination among intelligence agencies, an idea that's also been the centerpiece of Pres. Obama's statements about "systemic failure." Both these are sensible suggestions, and both have far more potential to be effective than superficial measures like keeping everyone in their seats for the last hour of a flight.
Both ideas are eminently practical but let's keep in mind a few things as we go about devising a response:
- Improved scanners, better intel cooperation: the concepts are all the more sensible since they were promised -- but not delivered -- by the Bush administration more than 8 years ago. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't implement them now, though, if we can - it seems Republican politicians might even in favor of doing so (but will they still, when they realize it costs money?). The point here is not to bash Republicans (though those now accusing negligence might wish to recall they dwell in the same glass house), but to highlight that politics, inertia, and conflicting priorities do tend to intervene in the best-laid plans; what can we put in place to ensure that there will be enough follow-through (by both parties, in the national interest) to implement whatever we decide to do now?
- It was only by chance that Abdulmutallab happened to be on any list at all. He might just as easily have been someone whose history and activities had not attracted any intelligence attention. This means that who-shot-John recriminations about why he wasn't on this list or that list are unhelpful, and take our eye off the target. Terrorists will soon learn to recruit complete unknowns, so while streamlining watchlists may be helpful, it's only a short-run tactic.
- So let's not put all our eggs in that one basket - or any other one basket, because what we're really doing is fighting the last battle. We should recall that 9/11 became possible only because flight crews were trained to acceed to terrorist attempts to take over an airplane. We had failed to think outside the box as well as the terrorists did, failed to consider that a plane full of people could be a very effective bomb. We can ill afford to make the same mistake again.
Comments