Terrorist Warnings Don’t Help the Public
The United States warns its citizens to be careful when traveling to Europe because there’s an imminent danger of terrorism. They’re right. But the warnings are far too vague.
The dangers of terrorism remain high in the Western world. Al-Qaida appears to be turning Yemen into its new headquarters. In Afghanistan, one hears that there are supposed terrorist plans to attack as yet unnamed targets in Europe. A captured German-Afghan allegedly gave that information to American intelligence; naturally, there are varying assessments as to what that means. France is putting more police personnel on the streets; Germany isn’t.
So far, business as usual. Since the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in 2001, the world has been living with the threat of terrorism. Security agencies in the U.S., as in Europe, have been successful in preventing anything worse. What al-Qaida would define as a successful terrorist attack hasn’t occurred in Western Europe since the London attacks and not in the United States since 2001.
Therefore, the more stringent security measures now announced by the U.S. State Department seem puzzling. American citizens should be alert when traveling by air or rail, they announced. After that warning, nothing but silence.
And now the speculations run wild. The luxury Hotel Adlon in Berlin, television towers or even the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame cathedral or Berlin’s main railway station, maybe even the British royal family: Any or all of them could be al-Qaida targets, according to America’s Fox News network. And the list could go on and on. It would be equally valid to warn travelers against a trip to New York since a car bomb was recently found in Times Square. Or perhaps people should be wary of visiting American military installations since a U.S. Army doctor shot several people to death at one.
For the sake of security, multiple messages are usually sent out. To the terrorists: We’re watching you. To the public: Stay alert. And in general: We’re on our guard. But the question remains: Who does that help? And what should we do, exactly? Since 2001, we’ve learned to coexist with the fears that occasionally surface when we board an airplane or get on the subway. We expect to be made aware of each and every danger so that we can react appropriately. It all just needs to be a bit more specific.
The dangers of terrorism remain high in the Western world. Al-Qaida appears to be turning Yemen into its new headquarters. In Afghanistan, one hears that there are supposed terrorist plans to attack as yet unnamed targets in Europe. A captured German-Afghan allegedly gave that information to American intelligence; naturally, there are varying assessments as to what that means. France is putting more police personnel on the streets; Germany isn’t.
So far, business as usual. Since the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in 2001, the world has been living with the threat of terrorism. Security agencies in the U.S., as in Europe, have been successful in preventing anything worse. What al-Qaida would define as a successful terrorist attack hasn’t occurred in Western Europe since the London attacks and not in the United States since 2001.
Therefore, the more stringent security measures now announced by the U.S. State Department seem puzzling. American citizens should be alert when traveling by air or rail, they announced. After that warning, nothing but silence.
And now the speculations run wild. The luxury Hotel Adlon in Berlin, television towers or even the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame cathedral or Berlin’s main railway station, maybe even the British royal family: Any or all of them could be al-Qaida targets, according to America’s Fox News network. And the list could go on and on. It would be equally valid to warn travelers against a trip to New York since a car bomb was recently found in Times Square. Or perhaps people should be wary of visiting American military installations since a U.S. Army doctor shot several people to death at one.
For the sake of security, multiple messages are usually sent out. To the terrorists: We’re watching you. To the public: Stay alert. And in general: We’re on our guard. But the question remains: Who does that help? And what should we do, exactly? Since 2001, we’ve learned to coexist with the fears that occasionally surface when we board an airplane or get on the subway. We expect to be made aware of each and every danger so that we can react appropriately. It all just needs to be a bit more specific.