British Government Doesn't Panic over Al-Qaeda Threat

While HeimatschutzministerTom Ridge led America in metaphorically wetting the national shorts, the British government was oddly quiet about the latest Al-Qaeda threat. Yet, it seems the same information that had the Prudential building in Newark, New Jersey, ringed with machine gun toting police raised suspicions that Heathrow airport might be the target of a planned attack. Rather than raise the local Crayola terror level from puce to burnt umber, the Home Office only said, "If there had been a specific, credible threat then we would let the public know." It was the British media that reported the story, and if there is any credibility lost, it won't be the government's.

The difference in response stems from the relative inexperience the American government has with terror on its doorstep. Pure and simple, Britain has dealt with terrorism longer than America has been independent. The Gun Powder Plot of 1605 was an attempt to bomb parliament that lives on in Guy Fawkes' Day. More recently, the IRA almost killed Margaret Thatcher herself, and did manage to kill her pal Airey Neave as well as Lord Mountbatten, a member of the Royal family.

Also, the police in Britain have fewer restrictions on their actions in detaining possible terrorist suspects (which is not inherently a good thing). Since September 11, 2001, 600 people have been detained under anti-terror legislation in the UK, fewer than 100 of them were charged, and a miniscule 15 have been convicted. The law is there to disrupt plans, not to actually put anyone in jail for years on end. And it does create a lot of ill will against the police in those communities that get extra attention.

Be that as it may, the British government has learned not to make any announcements unless there is a definite and specific situation that demands public knowledge -- as the Home Office statement says. Instead, the media of Britain report as journalists whatever it is they find out (sometimes deliberately leaked), and if it is correct, the public is informed. If not, the egg goes on the faces of the publishers. In this case, The Times, the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail and The Sun all had their versions of the story which claimed unnamed Pakistani sources said attack plans on Heathrow had been found on the computer of a person arrested there. However, the Pakistan's interior minister Faisal Saleh Hayyat denied giving the British any such information.

In other words, the story is muddled, nobody appears to have all the facts, and Heathrow remained open for business. Some wanted further disclosures from the Home Office, but the 13 arrests made on Tuesday by the police suggest that the Home Office has answered all it needs to answer. One of the 13 has already been released, and under British law, the others have to be charged or freed within two weeks (possibly sooner if the courts decide).

After the arrests, there was no "perp walk," and the police have declined to identify the men they are holding -- despite catching one man after a high-speed car chase. Clearly, the British do things differently in fighting terror. Were the Bush administration given to intellectual curiosity, it might learn a bit about handling the public's right and need to know without causing panic. The Brits aren't anywhere near perfect on this score, but no one is saying the Blair government has cried, "Wolf." The same cannot be said of the Bush White House.


© Copyright 2004 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.


Home