After Mumbai: Assessing The Threat

Security expert Bruce Schneier has taken issue with the FBI's recent warning that 'al-Qaeda' might be planning to attack the New York subway system this Thanksgiving:

I have no specific details, but I want to warn everybody today that fiery rain might fall from the sky. Terrorists may have discussed this sort of tactic, and while there is no evidence yet that it's in the process of being carried out, I want to be extra-cautious this holiday season. Ho ho ho.

My gut reaction is to agree with him- the announcement seemed like fear mongering at worst, ass-covering at best. But my question is, after Mumbai, do we have the luxury of disregarding such warnings? I don't believe for a minute that the same group who attacked Mumbai is capable of attacking New York, but last night's events were a reminder of just how terrifyingly effective asymmetric warfare can be.

As one Twitter user put it, "Apparently 'highly coordinated' now maps to 'bunch of guys with watches set to the same time.'" How can New York, Mumbai, or any other city, legislate for a group of men armed with light weapons and synchronised watches?

[photo via keerthi]

Mumbai Latest (7:30 p.m. local time; 2 p.m. British time)

Twenty-one hours after the first attacks and stand-offs continue at the Taj and Oberoi Hotels. The Times of India reports all hostages released at the Taj, and CNN International is reporting 10 hostages released at the Oberoi. Five attackers and 14 policemen are reported dead, and The Times of India says more bodies are in the Taj Hotel.

As the stand-off moves to resolution, attention will turn to responsibility for the attacks. Right now, the media is spinning with frustration that they have nothing beyond the claim of the shadowy "Deccan Mujihadeen". While some journalists are speculating --- I think with little evidence --- about an Al Qa'eda assault, I suspect that Canuckistan's comment on a Pakistan connection may be far more important. In the context of the downward spiral in Pakistan, a renewal of Indo-Pakistani conflict, either between Government forces or between India and Pakistan-based insurgent groups, is cause for concern.

The War on Terror: At Least We Caught the Driver

Breaking News that US authorities are going to release Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's driver, from Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay. A few months ago, he was given a six-year sentence on the charge of "supporting terrorism", but having already been detained for more than five years, he will be allowed to serve out the remaining two months in his native Yemen.

So, after shredding international law and bypassing the US courts to run this facility since 2002, our top felon is the guy who chauffeured Al Qa'eda which meant --- surprise, surprise --- that there were weapons in the boot of the car. With the facade of the military tribunal system collapsing and with US federal judges now ruling that there is no cause for holding some of the almost 300 folks who are still in the Camp, the War on Terror's limbo is now becoming even more apparent.

Good news, however: the detainees are going to be given art lessons and video games to keep them happy and de-radicalised. (I'm presuming that the War on Terror boardgame is not going to be amongst these goodies.)

Al-Zawahiri Slams Obama

I guess someone forgot to tell al-Qaeda's no. 2 that the president-elect is a secret Muslim.

CIA Director Steps Back In Time

This morning I've been reading the reaction to CIA Director Michael Hayden's talk on 'The State of al Qaeda Today'. The BBC provides a good summary here, and there's a short video at the Atlantic Council's site.

Aside from the expected appraisals- cause for optimism, support for al-Qaeda falling in Muslim nations, bin Laden on the run- a number of Hayden's assertions really jar. For me his analysis is stuck some time in late 2001, back when we thought we could declare war on terrorism and actually win. Despite his mention of "core al-Qaeda" and "unaffiliated extremists", Hayden really seems to think of al-Qaeda as a single, unified terrorist army- bin Laden is its "iconic" leader, and "this is an organisation that has never been through a change at the top". Is he serious? Does he really believe that if bin Laden had been caught at Tora Bora that the bombers of, say, Bali or London would have given up and, lacking a leader, drifted apart? But the platitudes don't stop there. According to Hayden's view the 'war on terror' is as simple as ever- the "civilised world" is going to defeat its barbaric enemy, the terrorist. And while we don't know what would happen if bin Laden was killed or captured, he's "willing to bet that whatever happens, it would work in our favour." If only it really was that simple.

[Photo: Atlantic Council]