Lee Kair is a Principal at The Chertoff Group. Lee has 28 years of senior security and acquisition experience at six Federal agencies and departments in operational and acquisition roles. At Lee’s most recent Federal agency, he oversaw the 54,000 front-line employees at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) implementing national domestic security operations as Assistant Administrator for Security Operations as well as Head of Contracting Activity (HCA). He also held the position of Department of Homeland Security Attaché to Germany and is a founding member of DHS. Additionally, Lee is an editorial board member of Homeland Security Today.
As we approach the quarter century mark following the 9-11 attacks, it is vital we remember the lessons learned by those of us who lived through the events of that day and who worked to address and mitigate the threat in the days, months, years and decades that followed.
Having served as a founding member of the Department of Homeland Security, the Transportation Security Administration lead on six large scale international plots against the global aviation sector, and now the practice lead for Transportation and Innovation at The Chertoff Group, I draw on the lessons learned from and following 9/11.
Terror attacks do not reflect the Hollywood movie Mission Impossible style reality many Americans envision – that’s not how terrorist organizations operate. They opportunistically leverage security weaknesses and employ simple tactics to inflict the highest level of damage.
Those working in fields to combat terrorism must recognize the simplistic, overlooked vulnerability points, maintaining a sense of vigilance and adaptive awareness. Do not rely solely on technological intelligence advantages at the expense of the ingenious. We require innovative minds combatting and investigating loopholes and weak points – don’t allow intellect to overshadow instinct.
A review of the 9-11 attacks and subsequent terrorist attempts and thwarted plots illustrates the degree to which terrorist organizations focus, study, evaluate and train on the visible security procedures of the aviation sector. Terrorists assess detection capabilities and procedure limitations to choose targets with the highest chance of success and the lowest risk of failure.
The following examples briefly review and highlight the terrorist pattern of using high impact, low tech, low probability of detection methodology.
9-11 (2001): Al-Qaeda operatives took advantage of vulnerabilities in airline procedures, such as the requirement for crew compliance during hijackings and the lack of restrictions on box cutters, enabling them to execute the attacks.
Liquids Plot (2006): Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists targeted security gaps by using liquid explosives, which were powerful and undetectable at the time, as large quantities of liquids were not yet prohibited.
Underwear Bomber (2009): An Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) operative attempted to detonate a non-metallic explosive on an international flight from Amsterdam to Detroit. At the time, screening primarily relied on metal detectors, which were ineffective against non-metallic explosives, and there were no provisions for physical screening of sensitive areas of the body, allowing the device to go undetected.
Cargo Plot (2010): AQAP operatives hid explosives on cargo planes bound from Yemen to Chicago, exploiting weaknesses in global cargo screening procedures. The bomb materials, including PETN and timers, were cleverly disguised as normal printer components, appearing harmless when X-rayed.
Similar tactics were employed in the 2001 Shoe Bomber Attack, 2017 Portable Electronic Device Plot, and 2017 Australian Bomb Plot. Explosives were embedded in everyday allowable items undetectable by technology at that time. The existing holes in screening and security procedures were identified and manipulated to result in the largest loss of life, damage to infrastructure, confidence and economy.
For the next generation of counter-terrorism experts and security equipment providers, it’s crucial to prioritize ongoing innovation and advancements in artificial intelligence to enhance our capabilities against current threats. At the same time, experts must be mindful of the terrorist mindset when developing future mitigations. Terrorist groups frequently use straightforward, calculated tactics to overcome advanced security measures, so our strategies should remain adaptable and aware of both high-tech and low-tech threats.