The “war on terror” is probably a misnomer. Terrorism is a tactic used in the pursuit of a limited goal, an instrument to cause mayhem rather than to defeat an enemy. In the final analysis, the best way to neutralize such an instrument may be to find ways of responding with the least degree of disturbance to daily routines.
The enormity of the homeland attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, certainly changed the concept of terrorism in the minds of most Americans. It takes a coordinated conspiracy to carry off such a devastating hit, and the U.S. and other nations surely were compelled to strike back at those who planned it. Through the past decade, “terrorism” described a scheme of some complexity that must be dismantled.
There’s been some success. To the extent that the military has mounted counterattacks against terrorist organizations such as al-Qaida, and that government is now better at sharing information and tracking bad actors, the potential for a repeat occurrence of that scale has been diminished.
But the failure to anticipate the Boston Marathon bombings, given the heads-up by the Russian government on one of the perpetrators, shows U.S surveillance systems remain flawed. Congress will continue to seek answers to the inevitable question, “How could this have happened?”
The fact is, it’s startling that such mayhem has not occurred more often. The disruptions caused by suspicious packages found in Kakaako and Waikiki this week underscored just how vulnerable every city can be to such “soft target” attacks.
For nearly five hours on Thursday, a bomb scare at state Circuit Court on Thursday disrupted operations, closed roads and shut down area businesses.
Police declined to confirm details officially. A source told the Star-Advertiser, however, that a package found on the Ewa side of the courthouse building contained plant fertilizer and a galvanized pipe but lacked the mechanism to trigger an explosion.
Law enforcement often is alerted to such threats and usually doesn’t give them such a high priority.
But the possibility of a Boston “copycat” episode raised the level of concern, according to the sheriff’s office. Under the circumstances, the reaction seemed reasonable, and officials dispensed with the threat reasonably well.
Honolulu’s episodes certainly weren’t the only aftershocks following the marathon attack. Numerous bomb scares in cities across the country have been reported.
This may be the shape of terrorism for the foreseeable future: a return to the model followed by countless bombers, and hoaxers, of the past. It may be more difficult now to execute an internationally planned and coordinated attack on a grand scale, but the Internet has disseminated enough how-to information that considerable casualties can result from small events on the margins.
Sadly, vulnerability to such crimes seems to be a fact of modern life. An awareness of suspicious behavior and untended packages must become second nature to us all. Attacks on an unarmored populace must be met with an equally populist defense. Protocols for reporting possible threats must be taught, enabling trained law-enforcement details to respond early.
And then, just as important, we must get on with our daily lives. That, above all, can defeat the aim of those who want us to live in fear.
