Washington, Dec 30 (Inditop.com) The Christmas Day foiled attack on a US passenger plane was most likely a proof-of-concept attempt, and had it worked then more attacks with similar devices could have followed, according to a US strategic think tank.
Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s failed attempt to detonate an improvised explosive device (IED) on a Northwest Airlines Amsterdam-Detroit flight “has shown the ability of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to design innovative improvised explosive devices”, it said.
“The attack’s failure means the bomb maker will have to think up a new design and will continue trying to attack US targets – assuming he is still alive after recent attacks on AQAP in Yemen,” said Stratfor, which calls itself the global intelligence company.
“This means security efforts must focus on looking for the bomber, not just on looking for bombs,” it said Tuesday.
Noting several similarities with Richard Reid’s shoe bomb attack attempt, Stratfor said AQAP’s involvement in such a plot to attack a plane using an IED design should come as no surprise.
Stratfor said as that the group had already demonstrated, it was using innovative bomb-making methods that threaten aviation security.
Since Abdulmutallab was the only operative dispatched with such a device on Christmas, the operation probably was a proof-of-concept mission, similar to the bombing of Philippine Airlines Flight 434 by Abdul Basit Dec 11, 1994 or the shoe bombing attempt by Richard Reid Dec 23, 2001.
If Abdulmutallab’s attack was a trial run and had it succeeded, it is likely that other attacks with that type of device would have been conducted, Stratfor said. But its failure has likely sent the bomb maker back to the drawing board to find a more reliable design and another method of concealment.
Noting that there are many ways to smuggle IED components on board an aircraft if a person has a little imagination and access to explosives, Stratfor said: “Existing vulnerabilities in airport screening systems demonstrate that an emphasis also needs to be placed on finding the bomber and not merely on finding the bomb.”
Finding the bomber will require placing a greater reliance on other methods such as checking names, conducting interviews and assigning trained security officers to watch for abnormal behaviour and suspicious demeanour.
It also means that the often-overlooked human elements of airport security, including situational awareness, observation and intuition, need to be emphasised now more than ever, Stratfor said.
