Aviation terrorism is the act of unleashing violence on airliners with the aim to harm or intimidate the victims. The occurrence of terrorism has increased with the rise of aviation as a mode of transport. The first known incident of air terrorism was carried out in 1930 by Peruvian insurgents who hijacked an airplane to scatter propaganda leaflets. This practice subsided in the subsequent two decades due to the effect of global factors such as world war two. Modern terrorism started in 1968 when three Palestinian gunmen hijacked a passenger airline of the Israeli Airline El Al on a flight from Rome to Tel-Aviv. They took passengers as hostages and demanded the release of their fellow arms-men in exchange. That was the first time an aircraft was hijacked with the aim of politically pressuring an opponent. The terrorists deliberately created a crisis, endangering the lives of the hostages to create a favorable atmosphere to initiate direct talks with the enemy and make demands.
The Dynamics of Aviation Terrorist Attacks
The number of terrorist acts that targeted the air transport rose rapidly in the late 1960s and 1970s. They exhibited a similar pattern of the forceful seizure of an airline which would then be directed to a safe location, and the terrorists would make politically related demands while threatening to execute hostages. The spread of aviation terrorism as a tool of political pressure had stalled in the 1980s only for it to reappear later (Turkenik, 1998). A different form of air terrorism reoccurred in the mid-1980s, it received a lot of media attention, and this accelerated its growth. Lebanese Hezbollah terrorists hijacked a TWA Boeing 727 airliner in July 1985 which was followed by a hostage drama that ensued for two weeks (Arasly, 2005). The seized airline was then transferred between different airports in the Middle East and one of the passengers killed. All these proceedings were broadcasted on the main television networks in the United States resulting in economic and psychological effects.
Arasly (2005) describes present day terrorism as a type of war which assumes new forms. The war can be attributed to the imbalances that arise when modern and traditional societies engage in global conflict. Non-state groups are unable to endure the confrontation with military forces of developed countries and resort to non-conventional approaches such as terrorism. An example is the terrorist attacks that occurred two weeks apart in different parts of the world in October 2002. Two nightclubs were bombed in Bali, Indonesia and the attempt to shoot down an Israeli aircraft in Kenya with a portable shoulder-launched surface to air missile (Jenkins, 2012). These attacks caused massive damage to the tourism and entertainment sectors as tourist traditionally throng these warm locales. Air operators who work as transport providers for tourist agencies were the worst hit. In the same month, there was an attack against a French Supertanker off the coast of Yemen which resulted in temporarily hiked oil prices worldwide, and airlines had to purchase jet fuel at higher rates (Jenkins, 2012). Therefore, argue that terrorism is a destructive instrument of economic warfare.
Current dynamics of aviation terrorism are characterized by September 11, 2011; attacks also referred to as 9/11. In this case, the airplanes were steered by suicide pilots and instead of being used as leverage, they were used as weapons. The terrorists conducted a series of coordinated attacks on four passenger airliners. These attacks were carried out by militants linked to the Islamist al-Qaeda group (Homeland Security, 2015). They hijacked the planes and carried out suicide attacks against targeted areas in the United States. The terrorists piloted the planes into the World Trade Center towers in New York. Another plane hit the Pentagon just outside Washington, D.C, while the fourth plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. According to Homeland Security (2015), 2996 people were killed during the attack and 6000 others were injured. Property worth at least 10 billion dollars was destroyed, this combined with the infrastructure damage cost a total of $3 trillion (Homeland Security, 2015).
Following the attack, the government needed to assure the public that passenger airliners were still safe for traveling. The government responded promptly by deploying air marshals on the planes, heightening security measures at the airport and expediting efforts to develop new various steps for detecting weapons and explosives (Tangredi, 2004). International partners were also incorporated to help fight the threat of air piracy and sanctions were imposed on nations that sponsored or tolerated terrorist activities. Criticisms ensued on the existing policies and strategies for aviation security in the aftermath of the terrorist attack due to their inability to defend against such an attack and the unpreparedness of the United States. Aviation and Homeland Security were reviewed and strengthened to prevent future attacks.
Despite the beefed up security measures, airliners remained an attractive terrorist target as evidenced by more recent attacks. Security officials ought to be more vigilant to secure air travel to counter the persistent and dynamic terror threat. Terrorists choose airliners because of there is a large number of victims at a time hence maximizing casualties. The helplessness of the passengers also makes such attacks more horrifying. Airliner attacks also receive a lot of media attention which helps to instill fear in the world populations; this is one of the primary intentions of most terrorist operations (Sweet, 2008). Passengers, however, seem unperturbed by the likelihood of plane attacks as commercial air traffic has risen by some thirty percent since the September, 11 attacks.
Given the recent terrorist attacks on civil aircraft, it is evident that some terrorist organizations have concrete knowledge of the existing vulnerabilities and loopholes in the civil aviation security systems. Kamien (2006) describes several options that a potential terrorist can use to breach a security system with the aim of aiding or carrying out an act of terror. One of the methods that the terrorists employ is the use of “the inserted unaccompanied bag” where the airport staff introduces an interline routing bag is into the baggage system. Another option involves the tagging of a bag for an interline route with at least two airports. The passenger fails to show up for the subsequent leg of the interline route, but the baggage is still transferred to the next outgoing flight on the itinerary (Jenkins, 2012). An unknowing compliant passenger can also be tricked into carrying or holding an illegal item. There is also the suicide bomber in who poses as a passenger and brings a potentially harmful object with the intention of causing harm to other passengers and himself.
Classification of Terrorist Attacks
Attacks are classified according to the target, with commercial aviation attacks being those carried out against airliners, airports and airline offices. There is a comprehensive coverage of attacks on planes and airports on the database unlike attacks on airline offices; this is probably due to the relative insignificance to media value. Mode of operation can also classify aviation attacks. The main methods of attack are hijacking, bombing and armed assault with hijacking being the most common type of attack by far (Arasly, 2005). Hijacking is characterized by forceful seizure and subsequent control of the aircraft by terrorists. It can be assumed the motive of the hijacker can influence the outcome of the hijacking. Some of the terrorists' objective has been merely to escape. In this case, the hijacker diverts an airlines travel route so as to arrive at another destination. The terrorist target the aircraft primarily as a means of transportation from an area where they are restricted from exiting to a new geographical location. The terrorists use the passengers as safety guarantees (Arasly, 2005).
The second most common reason for hijacking is extortion and such cases the perpetrators demand something, especially from the government (Arasly, 2005). The state faces the dilemma of saving the lives of the hostages and the need to suppress terrorism as two different tasks. In most cases, the state would have to come up with a way to save the hostages and neutralize the threat. Hijacking an airplane to use it as a weapon of destruction is another terrorist tactic where the plane is used to hit a previously selected target. The passengers act as an addition to the overall damage; these attacks are carried out to incur direct material damage as well as collateral political and psychological harm (Elias, 2010). Terrorists can also hijack airliners as a show of protest. Usually, there are no demands, and the lives of the passengers are not threatened.
Direct actions against aircraft targets both the airline and passenger crew on board, the aim of such an attack is to achieve maximum casualties. “Terrorists typically use improvised explosive devices or Man-portable air defense systems which include shoulder rocket-propelled grenade launchers, anti-tank guided missiles, machine guns, anti-material sniper rifles and assault rifles” (Arasly, 2005, p. 8). These are weapons of mass destruction that can result in massive casualty and they are more appealing to the terrorists. Mueller & Stewart (2011) also report that terrorists used to plant improvised explosive devices inside the target plane before departure. These explosives had timers or barometric-work mechanisms, and they proved to be a very effective way of launching attacks in the 1980s. The intensification of technical security measures has made it difficult to place a destructive weapon aboard an airline, but the threat of ground missiles is still eminent. Arasly (2005) reports that the terrorists successfully used such explosives in destroying the airlines, passengers and crew of Pan American Flight 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland. The attack happened in December 1988 resulting in 271 casualties. A similar attack was launched against French UTA Flight 722, Niger in July 1989 killing 170 people.
Aviation Security in The Aftermath of 9/11
The aviation security policy and strategy in the United States was shaped following the 9/11 attacks. The Bush administration and Congress came up with the best cause of action to ensure that terrorist attacks against aviation and terrorist attacks using aircraft did not occur in future. A wide range of changes was impacted in a bid to strengthen aviation security and restore the confidence of the American people. Some of the changes that have been implemented in aviation security since the 9/11 attacks include passing Aviation and Transportation Security Act by the Congress (Harrison, 2009). This act created the Transportation Security Administration and required that federal agents be in charge of screening at the airports. Passengers and their luggage go through more thorough screening procedures which include going through metal detectors; bags are subjected to X-rays, and the baggage is passed through a system that detects explosives (Price, 2009). More efficient advancement of these systems require the passengers to remove their shoes and prohibits carry-on liquids. Introducing many layers of security by having heavy police presence inside and outside airports as well as improving cooperation between airline operators and security officials has also impacted real change. Apart from conducting physical checks, Aviation Transportation Security Act (TSA) also requires the prescreening of passengers. Also, the TSA requires airlines to submit names of passengers which are then compared with names on a watch list. This practice, however, met objections from liberty groups arguing that watch lists were not always well maintained for sharing passenger data. In light of these concerns, the TSA developed the Secure Flight Program, which seeks to strike a balance between passengers' rights and their security.
Registered Traveler is another program that allows frequent flyers to volunteer background information and biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints, to facilitate their safety screening (Wilkinson & Jenkins, 1999). This program was successfully tried in 2015, but it is yet to be fully implemented. Several new measures have been adopted to prevent hijackings. For instance, pilots are allowed to carry guns on some flights, and cockpit doors fortified to restrict access. Additionally, the Federal Air Marshals strategy which puts armed undercover officers on passengers’ flights has also been expanded. Concerted sensitization efforts to make the public aware of terrorism has changed travelers’ behaviors and they are now more actively involved in preventing terrorist attacks on airplanes.
Aviation Security Issues
Aviation security measures have however been criticized for several shortcomings such as concentrating too much on screening passengers while leaving the aircraft vulnerable in other areas such as cargo security. The lower deck of many airliners, for instance, holds a relatively large amount of air freight in addition to passengers’ luggage. According to Abeyratne (2010), only a small portion of the air cargo is ever inspected. The ease with which airline and airport staff access secure areas also faces criticism since they could sneak a bomb or weapon into the secure area. It is recommended that biometric identification should be used for such access. There is also the concern of the possibility of an attack by terrorists by firing an anti-aircraft missile from the ground given that homeland security has not yet implemented anti-missile systems. Despite the thorough passenger screening, this tool poses security vulnerability since the detection system has failed to show the ability to adapt to the dynamic needs of the aviation industry. More advanced technologies are required to improve screening, but the deployment of new devices has been slow.
Also, there are some human factors associated with screening that contribute to poor performance. For instance, screening is a tiresome, repetitive task that requires one to monitor the unlikely event when a dangerous object might be observed. Other reasons that may affect performance include high turnover whereby there are new officials who might not have adequate training on aviation security. Low pay will also demotivate officials hence making them not to perform their duties efficiently.
Improving aviation safety
Several approaches can be used to improve aviation safety with the most basic being Behavior Pattern Recognition (BPR). This technique relies on observation; clues in behavior are used to identify potential terrorists during passenger screening (Price, 2009). Passengers exhibiting suspicious behavior are identified then selected for an interview with a trained law enforcement officer. These interviews are usually friendly conversations that last for a few minutes. The majority of passengers subjected to these interviews are then allowed to travel, but those who arouse the officer's suspicion have to undergo interrogation and search for an extended period. This method is efficient and works extremely well, and it has resulted in arrests of several terrorists as well as other criminals.
Implementation of advanced technology is widely recognized as the most efficient way of improving airport security. The ultimate incorporation of modern technologies in the screening process includes the use of Backscatter X-rays (Atkinson, 2001). These can trace a person's body outline and reveal any hidden objects such as weapons or explosives. Although it has been argued that these devices reveal too much resulting in privacy invasion, filters can be added to uphold an individual's modesty. Trace-detection portals or “puffers” is a technology designed to dislodge molecules from surfaces by blowing small puffs of air at the person being screened. The air is then sucked into a filter and analyzed for explosive residues. These puffs can be used on a person’s body, clothing or luggage.
Another technology is the Quadrupole Resonance Scanning, which is a way of identifying explosive materials present in the baggage by subjecting the bag to radio waves from the scanner (Price, 2009). It examines the wavelength of the energy emitted by the contents. Polygraphs, although not unique to this setting can also be used. In 2006, the TSA began testing a polygraph-like system for passenger screening (Seidenstat & Splane, 2009). In this new system, passengers enter a booth, places one hand on a sensor and answer some questions on a touch screen. The system measures such things as the level of blood pressure, pulse rate, and sweat levels, scrutinizing them to determine if the person is lying.
Aviation security practitioners and policy makers have to identify possible dangerous threats and take measures to prevent them from becoming real attacks. Funding for safety precautions requires that risk analysis is carried out, historical data must also be obtained and a thorough continuous assessment of developing threats in the rest of the world be conducted. The United States has achieved significant milestones in destroying terrorist networks and annihilating key operatives. New threats, however, keep surfacing, and aviation security has to be frequently updated to ensure safety.
Security measures vary from country to country, but there are general standards for minimum security measures as dictated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). “Its purpose is to ensure cooperation and highest possible degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures and organization regarding civil aviation matters” (Price, 2009, p. 3). ICAO's guidelines are not imposed, but they are commonly observed throughout the U.S aviation security system. The overall responsibility of the ICAO is a security policy, but the implementation of those policies lies with the individual states. Harrison (2009) further explains that the ICAO “established common air routes, standard frequencies, and a common aviation language. It is continuously working to create efficiencies by standardizing ticketing, baggage, and cargo transfer procedures as well as carrier liability for damaged or lost goods” (p. 4-5). It is the responsibility of the respective nations to enforce the security standards routinely as stipulated by the international community. Doing so will enhance the aviation safety and mitigate terror disasters.
Different nations face various terrorism threats at different levels and for different durations of time, how a nation responds, therefore, is dependent on the nature of the threat. Defeating terrorism is however related to combating organized crime and drug trafficking as this would prevent the criminal groups from extending their already established networks to aid terrorist groups (Phipps, & McCreadie, 2007). Successful strategies for combating organized crimes require that the regional government and the international community joins efforts. The crucial role of drawing up an effective strategy to combat organized crimes lies with the government. International cooperation is, however, important in wiping out terrorism activities.
Without a doubt, aviation security was inadequate during the 9/11 attacks. The catastrophic results of those events demanded the increase of air safety awareness to identify existing threats. Moreover, the catastrophe attracted attention on the shortcomings of aviation safety. Lawmakers were prompted to make provisions which ensure that more resources will be devoted to providing aviation security and conducting research and development activities that should promote future airspace security. Basing the argument on economic theory, a strong case can be made that the central government has a significant role to play in aviation safety. The question, however, lies on whether the government role should be limited to setting the policies and overseeing security implementation standards or whether the state should also finance and implement the standards. The most factious change stemming from 9/11 is that the federal government has taken over the responsibility for security provision from the planes and airports. Policymakers allocated the accountability for aviation safety to the central government, principally through the power conferred to the newly created Transportation Security Administration and the Department of Justice.
References
Abeyratne, R. I. (2010). Aviation security law. Heidelberg: Springer.
Arasly, J. (2005). Terrorism and Civil Aviation Security: Problems and Trends. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 4(1), 1-28. Retrieved from http://www.comw.org/tct/fulltext/0503arasly.pdf on June 29, 2016.
Atkinson, R. D. (2001) “How Technology Can Help Make Air Travel Safe Again.” Policy Report, Progressive Policy Institute.
Homeland Security. (September 23, 2015). Aviation Security. Retrieved from https://www.dhs.gov/aviation-security on June 29, 2016,
Elias, B. (2010). Airport and aviation security: U.S. policy and strategy in the age of global terrorism. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Harrison, J. (2009). International aviation and terrorism: Evolving threat, evolving security. London: Routledge.
Jenkins, B. M. (2012). Aviation security: After four decades, it's time for a fundamental review. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Kamien, D. G. (2006). The McGraw-Hill Homeland Security Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mueller, J. E., & Stewart, M. G. (2011). Terror, security, and money: Balancing the risks, benefits, and costs of homeland security. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phipps, D., & McCreadie, N. (2007). Aviation security. Chichester: John Wiley
Price, J. C., & Forrest, J. S. (2009). Practical Aviation Security: Predicting and preventing future threats. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier.
Seidenstat, P., & Splane, F. X. (2009). Protecting Airline Passengers in the Age of Terrorism. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Security International.
Sweet, K. (2008). Aviation and airport security. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
Tangredi, S. J. (2004). Globalization and maritime power. Honolulu, HI: University Press of the Pacific.
Turkenik, C. (1998). Aviation security & anti-terrorism efforts: Hearing before the Committee on. S.l.: Diane Pub.
Wilkinson, P., & Jenkins, B. M. (1999). Aviation terrorism and security. London: Frank Cass
