Embracing the Adversary

The adversaries - terrorists, criminals, etc. - have the most important role in a security system. In an efficient security system, they guide every operational and procedural undertaking.

You might say to yourself, “Well, duh.” Doesn’t everyone look at security this way? Not exactly. For most security systems around the world, the adversary has less influence than do issues of … liability, PR and budget. Giving those issues equal or higher importance than the adversary ultimately leads to at best inefficiency, at worst many vulnerabilities in a security system. For instance, if you consider your budget before you consider the adversary, you may end up funding processes, procedures and technology that do not actually reflect the adversary’s MOs. You’re throwing money and resources at threats that don’t exist. Conversely, if you put the adversary before your budget you may find solutions that will prevent or mitigate the adversary’s MO without spending one dime.

A good example is the use of proactive security questioning, a neglected tool in many instances. It is one of the least expensive yet most effective tools against a terrorist or criminal. It is the only offensive tool in a defensive arsenal. It is the one time when the adversary is put on the defensive.

On the other hand, if you look at current security trends in aviation around the world, you see systems that consider through-put, budget, public relations and liability ahead of the adversary. The result is an inefficient and cumbersome system that ultimately costs a lot of money, is a magnet for lawsuits, and projects a questionable public image (to say the least).

Let’s look at the current procedures meant to mitigate or prevent the infiltration of liquid explosives onto aircraft. The procedure with which we are all familiar originates from a 2006 case in Great Britain where terrorists plotted to pass security concealing liquid explosives. Those of you familiar with the configuration of liquid explosive-based bombs know that the current security procedures and technology are at a disadvantage. Let’s be honest, the innocent passenger approaching the security checkpoint who realizes she forgot her expensive perfume in her carry-on may hit upon a creative way to get her perfume through and onto the flight.

Similarly, the insistence of security on treating everyone the same in order to avoid liability actually creates it. Screening people absent a logical reason that coincides with a terrorist MO is illogical and leads to excessive and unnecessary procedures that can result in lawsuits and bad PR and frustration all around. Frustration when the law abiding passenger is left wondering why her 8oz bottle of shampoo was confiscated when it contained only 1oz of liquid. Why the sandals of her one year old baby must be taken off her feet before she passes through the metal detector. Or why the pilot who flies her plane is subject to exactly the same screening procedures as is she.

Some procedures may appear to be the right thing to do (they have a PR value to them) but do little to actually prevent, deter or mitigate the adversary. For example, often government officials and security professionals talk in the media about the need to increase the visibility of security officers and law enforcement in protected environments. The adversary fears the unknown and the invisible, but he can plan and circumvent the visible and the known. For example, having undercover officers in place is much more effective and deterring to a terrorist or criminal who is conducting surveillance in the planning stages of an attack.

Having the adversary as the focal point around which security is built, provides for a security system that is cost efficient, minimizes liability, promotes trust, and is appreciated by the public. In the last forty years, there is one security methodology that has been appreciated for exactly these attributes. It is the Israeli security system that is completely adversary-driven, in which the officers are trained at least as well as the terrorists are in methods of attack. Security procedures are designed ONLY to proactively mitigate and prevent the threat from occurring. This approach is what has given the Israeli security system its reputation. And this approach can be adopted for any protected environment in the world.

Chameleon Associates

<< Return to Newsletters | Print this page