Terrorism; What if it Happened Here?

WHAT If it happened in America??

Advice on Emergency Services and Media Affairs

By C. L. Staten, Asst. Chief Paramedic (Ret.), Chicago Fire Dept.

Chicago, IL., September 5, 1995 -- Three series of events, that have occurred in 1995, that should cause Americans to stop, pause, and consider both their luck and preparedness. The series of tragic events involve multiple terrorist attacks in Tokyo, Japan, Tel Aviv/Jerusalem, Israel, and recently in Paris, France. The psychological and emotional impact of these events is just beginning to be understood.

In both France and Japan the public response, in some quarters, to the continued attacks, has reportedly bordered on hysteria. The Israeli response, steeled by years of conflict and continued battles with its Palestinian neighbors, seems to have made its residents more stoic in the face of continued assault. In both France and Japan, government officials have blamed the media for much of the fear and concern among citizens and have called for restraint of the coverage of such events. The Israeli press covers an on-going conflict on a much more frequent basis and appears to have a much more "matter of fact" approach to the atrocities. The rhetorical question is obvious...to what can we attribute the differences in the public attitudes in France, Japan, and Israel? Further, what kind of public response could be expected in America, should she be subjected to a series of devastating bomb threats, bombings, or public gas poisonings?

On of the frequently overlooked aspects of counter-terrorist (CT) operations would appear to be a developmental understanding of the public's perspective towards terrorist act (s). A prevailing attitude among at least some CT experts seem to be that the best answer to this issue involves finding some way to invoke complete public ignorance of the circumstances or implications of the act. Another opinion involves the the 'sand-bagging" of the press with "no comment" remarks and the citing "security concerns" as a reason not to explain the situation to the public. Yet another view actually purports the use of misinformation or misdirection in hopes of affording some sort of "operational security".

In order to understand the public response to a terrorist act, it is also necessary to ask what effect the acts of those managing the event will have on the public psyche. If anything can be learned from the management of other disasters or major traumatic events, it is that ignorance of the situation frequently leads to panic, misunderstanding, and criticism and alienation between rescuers and the public. A far better approach has been developed by many civilian emergency management systems. It begins, in at least some ways, to try to directly answer questions from that public and press and attempts to explain the inexplicable...a major act of terror.

To gain a better understanding of this process, several points should be considered:

An overriding goal is to cause fear in the populace.
One of the terrorist main goals is to foster and spread mistrust between a government and its citizens.
A third goal is change public perceptions and attitudes toward the government, its policies, or its anticipated actions
On given occasions, unexplained benevolent acts, such as releasing hostages or providing medical care to enemies, are done to gain publicity and/or favorable public attention
It is likely that in several recent terrorist acts that no claim of responsibility is being made, out of fear of public criticism or discontinued support for the sponsoring organization (s) (aside from attempting to escape apprehension or retribution)
Misinformation and falsifications by official agencies are often, if not always, exposed at some future date and frequently reflect dishonesty/discredit on those perpetrating any fraud, regardless of the alleged motivation.
"The Press", if not made an ally in during the incident, may well become an adversary during it and after it is over. If they are not given some facts as the story develops, they will undoubtedly "reach their own conclusions," as they and their "consultants" may see fit, in order to meet the public need for more information.

It should be noted that none of these comments are intended or should be construed as attempting, in any way, to compromise real operational security issues. It is well understood that the withholding of essential information, equipment, methods, tactics, and strategies is often a necessity in successful counter-terrorist operations. But, withholding information for a period of time is not the same as "no comment," misdirection, or misinformation. The operational necessities of an event shouldn't prevent the operation managers from providing on-going "sanitized" news releases to news organizations and the public in general, and eventually, the real facts of the story.

The idea is to foster the support of the news media and the public, both for the government involved, and the operational forces that are attempting to resolve the crimes or on-going crisis. In effect... it is an attempt to counter the effects of fear and mistrust being caused by the terrorists. Further, it may prove useful to actually publicize the successful intervention/resolution of an act (s), attempted act (s), or the apprehension of those responsible. To do so may actually act as a deterrent to those that would commit future acts and certainly help to minimize the detrimental public effects that terrorists would hope to cause.

In light of these aforementioned observations, one could surmise that a more proactive response to public opinion formulation and public education would serve American counter-terrorist forces well. The American press can be expected to be as vociferous as their brethren in Europe and the Mid-East, if not more so. The American public hue and cry, in a country that is unaccustomed to insurgent assault, can be expected to be loud and demanding. Public careers will undoubtedly be made or broken, depending on the outcome of given events surrounding possible frequent acts of violence directed against America. Much of what occurs and how it is accepted by the public can be determined by how "the media" and how provision of public information is managed.

Two things are certain. This issue deserves more study...and that if America's counter-terrorist analysts and operatives don't manage the American perspective of terrorists and terrorism, our avowed enemies will...

(c) Emergencynet NEWS Service, 1995
All rights reserved, except as assigned.
Emergency Response & Research Institute
6348 N. Milwaukee Ave., #773, Chicago, IL 60646
(773) 631-ERRI - Voice/Voice Mail
(773) 631-4703 - Fax
(773) 631-3467 - Computer/Modem-EMERGENCY BBS-14,400bps

Return to the Counter-Terrorism Page