...but CSIS moves quickly to distance itself from article and put it in context

On Friday, August 26, the Boston Globe published a story by Karen Schafer entitled "Analysts warn of small-plane terrorism threat." In it, she quoted Mr. Phil Anderson, "a senior associate at the [Center for Strategic and International Studies] who specializes in homeland security issues." In the story, Anderson is quoted as saying that "...the possible scenarios include situations in which Al Qaeda members could use a small aircraft, such as a single-engine, four-seat Cessna 172, to cause catastrophe. One potential target could be a stadium packed with tens of thousands of people."

The reaction to this and other statements in the story was immediate and swift, but here at ANN we were somewhat surprised at where it came from: CSIS itself. In a press release obtained through AOPA, CSIS distanced itself from the conclusions presented in the article and made it clear that the statements made by Anderson and David Heyman, director of the homeland security program at CSIS, were of a personal nature and did not reflect the conclusions of an ongoing study. The following text reflects the content of the press release in its entirety:

An article in the August 26, 2004, edition of the Boston Globe that suggests that the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is scheduled to release soon a report on aviation security that has reached conclusions regarding the general aviation industry is incorrect.   

CSIS has a number of efforts underway in the homeland security arena, including examining transportation systems. However, CSIS has not yet drawn any conclusions regarding the current vulnerability of, or recommendations to benefit, the entire transportation industry or general aviation in particular.

In addition, personal statements made before a study’s completion -- including by CSIS staff or associates and, particularly, those that, in this case, do not place into context the full range of threats against the transportation system of the United States – cannot be fully representative of the final conclusions of a CSIS study report.

“As a result, the Globe article is incomplete and does not take into account a broad range of findings that are still under development,” said Jay Farrar, CSIS vice president for external relations. “We are not faulting the Globe reporter. We simply want to put the article into the appropriate context.”

Over the past few years, CSIS has examined a broad range of issues in the area of homeland security.  All forms of transportation have been examined, and in fact continue to be examined, as part of our work on homeland security. Among those issues are transportation methods, including ocean shipping, overland vehicles, rail, scheduled airlines and cargo aircraft, and general aviation assets.  CSIS study methodology always looks at the full spectrum of possible scenarios in order to assess the range of probable outcomes and policy responses. 

In 2002, CSIS conducted a threat scenario exercise called SILENT VECTOR that examined the policy fault-lines in countering a terrorist attack that made use of transportation assets.  It was posited along the track that credible but imprecise intelligence reporting indicated a transportation-based terrorist threat against energy infrastructure in the United States.

CSIS work in the transportation area of homeland security is ongoing, and the Center will release reports as and when final conclusions are reached. 

(This is not the first time that the Boston Globe has published stories attacking GA with little more than overactive imaginations in support of the arguments.  Read the other stories that ANN has published about the Boston Globe. -- Ed. JJ)

FMI: www.csis.org