Jeff Corkill is a lecturer in intelligence and security and Postgraduate and Offshore Program Coordinator at Edith Cowan University in Perth.

The events on Sunday at Sydney airport have reignited the debate on airport security. In today’s West Australian the issue of CCTV and its importance to the successful investigation and any subsequent prosecution of the offenders has been called into question. The concern is the difficulty created by different systems and varied responsibilities of security stakeholders within Sydney Airport and the problems of acquiring evidence. The focus is on evidence that may be obtained from the system in the post incident environment. Of course the use of CCTV to generate evidence in a post incident environment is wholly appropriate however the question that needs to be asked is how was the CCTV system employed prior to, during and immediately after the incident? Quality CCTV surveillance requires appropriately trained operators who when informed with adequate intelligence and focused with appropriate operational objectives maintain situational awareness and have the cameras pointed in the right place at the right time. If the debate is allowed to be dominated by the issues of systems interoperability, recording mediums etc we will not solve the real surveillance problem. Good surveillance is carried out by well trained operators who understand what surveillance is. The CCTV system is simply a tool which enables them to carry out the task of surveillance.

In recent years the efficacy of CCTV as a crime deterrent, more particularly its effect on the rate of crime occurring in public space environments has been seriously questioned. Consider criticisms by Wheeler in his review of security. Yet in the aftermath of the London subway bombings CCTV was singled out as having played a critical role in the rapid identification of the bombers, and in Australia as a result political interest in the use of CCTV as a security panacea was raised significantly. CCTV is often seen as the solution of all manner of security concerns, the emphasis being CCTV not surveillance. It could be argued that the security policy makers and managers have been to some extent seduced by CCTV technology. The obsession with technology has seen a shift in focus from operator control of the technology to conduct surveillance to one of smart surveillance where the operator to some extent becomes redundant.

Large scale modern CCTV surveillance systems are expensive to establish and in order to achieve an appropriate return on investment it is critical that the system is able to achieve the operational objectives of the owner. Achieving those operational objectives is in fact heavily dependant on the quality of the CCTV operators and their abilities to make appropriate timely decisions. There are a variety of factors that will be likely to have a direct influence on the ability of the operator to make those effective decisions and they include:

- Experience
- Observation skills
- Intelligence
- Commitment
- Vigilance
- Situational awareness
- Technical proficiency
- Target awareness
- Training

Not all operators require the highest levels of professional surveillance judgement as the requirement will be determined by the surveillance or operational objectives of the system owners. Not all environments though require active CCTV surveillance. Those environments requiring active surveillance and needing operators who demonstrate high levels of professional surveillance judgement will include areas in which community safety is at risk from either terrorism or violent crime such as airports, venues of mass gatherings, mass transit systems and certain public environments.
So we return to the original question how was the CCTV system employed prior to, during and immediately after the incident? Whilst post incident evidence is great I would argue that what is really needed is well trained operators supported with appropriate intelligence looking in the right place at the right time detecting potential incidents before or as they occur enabling appropriate response and allocation of resources. This may go some way to reducing the likelihood of the events on Sunday reoccurring in the future.

If you are a scientist and wish to contribute to this Science Blog, please contact the AusSMC.
Comments received are moderated by the AusSMC and placement cannot be guaranteed.

The opinions expressed in this Science Blog are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Australian Science Media Centre.

As the death toll rises after coordinated attacks overnight on several hotels and other key infrastructure across India’s financial capital, Mumbai, several terrorism experts comment on this latest attack.

Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Any further comments will be posted here. If you would like to speak to an expert, please don’t hesitate to contact us on (08) 8207 7415 or by email.

Bill Bailey is an expert in Security Science from the School of Engineering at Edith Cowan University, Western Australia

“The Terrorist developments in India are following an intensification of the conflict between the perceived threats as seen by ‘Jihadists’ against those who are considered enemies of Islam. The partition of India in 1948/49 has never been forgotten or forgiven by a large majority of Muslims especially those who did not make the move to Pakistan staying behind in Hindu dominated India as a minority. The growing tension has been fuelled by the Jihadists, who are also supporting separatist movements in Assam and Kashmir. The continued alignment of India to western ideals and economic development has only intensified the alienation that a large majority of Muslims feel has seen them pushed further and further away from their aspirations of obtaining power within India itself to create an Islamic state. This extremely well orchestrated series of attacks demonstrates the growing sophistication of the terrorist structure indicating a well trained and disciplined force that does not bode well for India or the region.”

Nick O’Brien is an Associate Professor in Counter Terrorism at Charles Sturt University, New South Wales.

“India is used to terrorism; over 2000 people were killed in terrorist attacks in 2007 and these latest attacks in Mumbai, India reveal a degree of sophistication that is disturbing.

The well organised attacks took place in south Mumbai which is an upmarket area which includes the financial centre of the city as well as four and five star hotels. Hotels popular with westerners were targeted and eye witnesses report that some of the terrorists were attempting to locate people from either the USA or the UK.

Different methods of attack were also used from taking hostages to killing people with automatic weapons and grenades.
The number of attackers is so far unclear but reports indicate that four have been killed and nine arrested.
This incident has been well planned and executed and reveals the hallmarks of an organised Islamist group: multiple soft, high value targets where ‘westerners’ were likely to be located and the use of numerous terrorists.”

Dr David Caldicott is an emergency doctor based in Adelaide and is the developer of the course ‘Bombs, Blasts and Bullets’, for emergency responders who would be most likely to be those first facing the horrifying outcome of terror on Australian soil.

“My expertise, and our course Bombs Blasts and Bullets (B3), focuses on medical responses to terrorism, but the events unfolding in Mumbai have a couple of potentially important implications for responders.

Firstly, this represents a clear departure from normal tactics, and may mark a ‘shift’ in tactics. We use the analogy of terrorism as an infectious disease in our B3 course. Some, like pandemic influenza, avoid detection and inflict harm by subtly drifting through their tactics. These ‘drifts’ are anticipatable. ‘Shifts’ in behaviour are far more fundamental, and demand a review of how we respond to a truly novel tactic.

This looks like a return to early Marxist terrorist attacks of the 1960s from the more recent ‘extravaganzas’ so favoured in recent times. We have been planning for responses to large events, in which at least the aggressive element is complete within a very short period of time. This event may take days to pan out.

This appears to have similarities with the Moscow Theatre siege, or the Beslan School siege, with a protracted phase. This has a huge impact on emergency response systems, commandeering resources in anticipation of responding to a tragic outcome. This in turn impacts to the well-being of responders themselves, in terms of fatigue, stress and performance.

In an active event, evolving over protracted time such as this, first responders are often forced to provide treatment ‘over the barricades’, resorting to techniques with have evolved out of the SWAT experience in the USA;

The pattern of injuries from automatic small arms fire and small shrapnel will result in a different injury: death ratio, in turn having the potential to cause a change in the type of ‘surge’ of patients presenting to hospitals.

Whereas in the past, it has been reasonably easy to repatriate injured Australians, the nature of this event is that a greater number of those injured will be in an inner quarantine cordon, and access will be more limited.”

Professor Clive Williams is a Visiting Fellow in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at Australian National University, Canberra. He is a member of the International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators (IABTI), the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and the Australian Institute of Professional Intelligence Officers (AIPIO).

“Events are still unfolding so it is a little dangerous to speculate too much. The group claiming responsibility, the Deccan Mujahideen, is an unknown group. Those responsible for the attack are most likely an Islamist extremist element drawing from SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India) and the Indian Mujahideen. The M.O. (modus operandi) is unusual. Past attacks in Mumbai have been multiple bombings. Previous attacks in Mumbai have targeted Hindus; these seem to have targeted foreigners. The attackers’ reported interest in American and British nationals suggests at least some linkage to American and British actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The last major attack in India involving shooters was in 2001. The attack may be intended to underline that retribution for occupation of Muslim lands can happen anywhere, but it is also a swipe at Hindu dominated India.”

Associate Professor Robert Heath is a crisis management expert at the University of South Australia.

“The group that has claimed responsibility for the attacks is called the Deccan Mujahideen. This is interesting in itself as what that suggests is that this is a state issue that is also connected up with international terrorism or at least has been made to look so.

What we can say is that there was a co-ordinated attack lasting several hours across 6-7 sites. That included an attack on the international airport, an attack on the railway station and at least 5 hotels including the Taj which when last seen was still burning.

In essence this attack was co-ordinated somewhat similarly to the London Underground or Madrid bombings except that it wasn’t bombings, it was physical attack with automatic weapons. So what we are looking at is potentially several dozen people being responsible for executing the attack. To some people the sheer number of people involved is a bit puzzling, 20 or so is the maximum number one expects for an organised activity like this. But that does not surprise me, as you have to remember the large population size in this case, Mumbai is a very large city and India has close to a billion people so even a small percentage of extreme thinking people can still be quite a substantial number. In a city like Mumbai you have also got poverty and some religious friction (as is current right through the subcontinent and India).

Typically in India in the last few years, attacks have tended to be bombings and have tended to take place in the obvious areas like the debated states in the north, rather than the middle or south of India. Even the most recent attack on a hotel prior to this one was an explosion rather than an automatic weapons attack so there is something slightly different here. International experts are tending to say it was targeting westerners but I am cautious about that. I think it was more a targeting of the state and by that I mean the commercial state, if you like, the ownership of the state and that ties itself in with westerners as what happens is that government officials for example tend to go to those hotels in passing or for meals.

However there is one element that is interesting, in that in a number of hotels, possibly the Taj and Oberoi, that the gun men that got into the facility were looking for people with western passports. I suspect that the plan was to round-up a number of westerners to embarrass the Indian government and negotiate something else they wanted. Again this brings us back to the Deccan Mujahideen and if there is something in the local issues that is worth exploring.

Why Mumbai and why this spread of targets? It is very organised but it is very localised, it is all within the high business area of southern Mumbai, there is nothing taking place in northern Mumbai which also suggests to me that there is a focal point to the terror cell. In other words that it is a very local attack, using local groups and that they have targeted local things that are within range of themselves so I am dubious about this being an Al Qaeda type attack although someone may find a link somewhere down the line.”

As details flow in about the tragedy in Finland, in the latest Science Blog, Associate Professor Robert Heath, a crisis management expert at the University of South Australia, discusses several issues related to the shooting

“When people commit an extreme act it is usually a choice between what they consider the worst hurt and least hurt. Humans have limited options in any situation, we think we have an infinite number but usually it adds up to 5 or less. Once you have learned somehow through your experience and your interpretation of that experience, that your life is painful or is going to be more painful or could become extremely painful, you start choosing the least pain.

What happens once you see your options as ‘everybody is against me, I am not powerful enough, the world is bad, I am in pain, I am very angry’, what happens is you start saying ‘if I am going to hurt then other people are going to hurt with me’. Once that sort of broad option hits your head, if you have got access to a gun or mass violence from explosives or even arson or something like that, then the chances are very strong that you will probably activate it.

Unfortunately in most of these cases there are either one or two scripts that end up almost the same way. The first script is “I am going out in a blaze of glory” and that is usually anywhere from the terrorist swing of blowing yourself up or killing yourself but it is often through suicide by cop, that is you force law enforcement authorities to eliminate you as a threat.

In this situation the chances are he was slightly on the second script which is “this will show the world I am a powerful being” and after he has done a few shootings, and it does not take more than a few minutes at times, he suddenly realises that there is not an answer with this either. At that point in time the only thing you can do is end the pain so you kill yourself.

Coming across to the Australian situation, there is tighter gun control but yes it can happen here. So what are the signs people should be looking for? Unfortunately parents, for example, tend to block out changes in their kids, partly because adolescence is not exactly smooth sailing and partly because parents are locked into their own worlds, especially if they are both working or if they have got multiple kids or kids with special needs. Any of those distracters can stop people from completely interpreting the scene.

Also this is accretional growth, that is it is slow. It is not like overnight they wake up saying ‘that is it. I am going to kill everybody’. Its an idea that percolates for a long period of time and they look for conformation that it is the best option they have got. Often this option may be what they end up doing becuase they ignore, overrule or exclude any contrary opinion. This is also how terrorist groups form or indeed any action group.

What can we look for? Shut down signs. What we are looking at is someone who starts excluding the people around them. They will dress diferently, they won’t communicate with certain groups, they become less communicative, they can often have somewhat of a blank face or are unresponsive. Even with people who were ‘mild friends’ they will start shutting them down if those friends do not have the same point of view. What happens of course, especially at school level or that age goup is that kids say ‘if you start excluding me then I will exclude you as well’ so people simple shut down and join another group.

The other thing you look for is when people start saying there is a problem. This person gave a clear signal there was a problem because he expressed an actual intent of violence on Youtube but he never expressed it in a directed way. He never said ‘I am going to shoot you John so and so’ with a directed intent to create harm. If he had, this could have allowed, in some countries, a chance for psychological review or allowed authorities to hold that person for 24 hours and that sort of thing.

The other part to all this is of course that if everybody got prosecuted, put in jail or sent to phychological evaluation for saying things like ‘I am going to kill you’ then there would be a lot of us lined up. Many of us have had that intemperate moment but later we might say ‘that was not me that was just my anger speaking’.

So it is very difficult for psychologists or indeed the authorities or even school and university authorities to actually act on what is formative rather than factual. This is part of the problem, it is also part of the problem with intelligence and looking for terrorists, because yes you can identify people by these patterns and trends but until they actually do something, legally you can’t really do much about it.

So coming back to the Australian circumstance, it is a little less likely but if you notice there are still outbursts of gang violence here and that is another sign of this exclusion/inclusion type of thing going on but it is groups rather than individuals.

It is probably more likely in Australia, that if a person is hurting over exclusions happening to them in their teenage years that we would see more suicide rather than this angst suicide where they take it out on others.”

If you are a scientist and wish to contribute to this Science Blog, please contact the AusSMC.
Comments received are moderated by the AusSMC and placement cannot be guaranteed.

The opinions expressed in this Science Blog are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Australian Science Media Centre.

BRIEFING DETAILS:
DATE: Monday 15 Septemer 2008
START TIME: 11am AEST
DURATION: 90 min

Climate change will increase the risk of insect-borne diseases – to people and animals. Chikungunya, a new disease in humans, has infected one third of the population of several Indian Ocean islands and killed hundreds. Bluetongue, a potentially deadly disease of sheep has moved into British sheep flocks.

The equine influenza outbreak was expensive for the community and for the government. But we were lucky. Foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 cost the United Kingdom over $18 billion including $3 billion in direct costs. And just a few cases of BSE lost the US its share of the Japanese beef market.

And it’s not just livestock diseases that threaten Australia. A range of diseases are also threatening native animals like the Brush-tailed Bettong.

This briefing, ahead of a Biosecurity Parliamentary Forum in Canberra on Tuesday, discussed the threats, how we can better prepare, and how we can push back the barriers by supporting disease control efforts in our region. The briefing included information on several under-reported threats.

Fact sheets and other resources are available by clicking here.

SPEAKERS:

Professor John Edwards, Australian Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre and Dean of the School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences at Murdoch University, WA - Speaking on Emerging diseases in Australia: lessons from Hendra virus, equine influenza and current livestock disease threats to Australia.

Dr Peter Daszak, Executive Director of the Consortium for Conservation Medicine, New York- Speaking on Emerging diseases – what are they, where are they coming from? The role of humans in the arrival of exotic pathogens and the movement of disease by the wildlife trade.

Julie Hall, Deputy Regional Advisor, Communicable Disease Surveillance and Response WHO Western Pacific Regional Office -Speaking on the human diseases that are of greatest concern in our region and the impact of climate change, including the appearance and spread of Chickungunya. What we can do to help reduce the threat, and what pose the greatest risk to Australia?

Karrie Rose, Australian Registry of Wildlife Health, Taronga Conservation Society Australia – Speaking on how we can identify and deal with disease threats to native wildlife?

Full Briefing:
View here (WebEx) | Listen to full audio (mp3)

John Edwards’ Presentation:
View PowerPoint (pdf) | Listen (mp3)

Peter Daszak’s Presentation:
View PowerPoint (pdf) | Listen (mp3)

Julie Hall’s Presentation:
View PowerPoint (pdf) | Listen (mp3)

Karrie Rose’s Presentation:
View PowerPoint (pdf) | Listen (mp3)

Q & A Session:
Listen (mp3)

Jeff Corkill is a Lecturer in Intelligence and Security in the School of Engineering at Edith Cowan University, Western Australia

“Whilst there is likely to be some hype about lack of security following from this event it must be considered in the broader context of the number of regular flights in and out of regional airports with limited passenger and baggage screening capabilities. In reality it is an isolated event, moreover it is an event that was managed well and essentially had a positive outcome. All airports in Australia regardless of the level of passenger and baggage screening implemented are required to have security plans that are appropriate to the level of threat the airport is exposed. These plans are developed in accordance with Australian regulations and local risk assessments.

The fact remains that the threat to regional aviation security in Australia remains low and a knee jerk response to an event in New Zealand by calling for more stringent security measures at regional airports will benefit no one. It will simply increase the cost burden to both industry and the flying public. A more positive outcome for Australia would come from careful analysis of the New Zealand perpetrators’ intent, behaviour and means of defeating existing security measures. This can then be disseminated as intelligence throughout the aviation industry and increase the likelihood of similar indicators being detected in the future such that early intervention prevents a similar security incident occurring. The key to preventing security incidents is understanding people and recognising behaviour that represents a threat and dealing with it before the incident eventuates. As opposed to insisting on more tightened security process and increased deployment of expensive technology.”