There is that terrible equation in counter-terrorism: Success = Complacency = Vulnerability. Canada is well into the complacency stage of things right now, and our vulnerability is growing rapidly. In Counter-Terrorism, it is difficult to measure success by citing statistics of what didn’t happen, and there is often little or no evidence left for crimes that did not occur.
We do have terrorists among us; dozens of Canadians have been associated with al Qaeda and we are no more immune to ‘home-grown’ Jihadis than our European colleagues, the United States and Australia. Hizbollah has demonstrable links into Canada, and the open presence of the LTTE (not that they are given to attacking us) has been a disgrace in recent years. Sikh extremists have not disappeared either and still are noticeable. Other groups have been noticed here, and of course our own ecoteurs, animal rights lulus and neo-Nazi rubbish still occasionally raise a stink.
No truck bombs have gone off outside crowded office towers in our cities; cars loaded with propane tanks have not tried to incinerate our night clubs; groups of gunmen haven’t ranged through our hotels and railway stations shooting everything that moves; and there have been no bombs on any planes here since 1985. So far, everything looks well and good; and that’s where the problem lies.
The current fashion among bean-counters and auditors is to expect demonstrable results of a kind that can be measured against the outlays of time, money and effort. So where are the ‘demonstrables’ for intelligence cells, briefings and training for front-line workers? Other bean counters are wondering about the ‘measurable results’ of police anti-terror sections, training exercises, assessment centres… Penny-wise and pound foolish, that’s us.
In the new security-conscious environment that followed 9/11; Canada finally tightened up on our outrageously lax refugee practices. In the 1990s, there were hundreds of thousands of people who had documents when they boarded airline flights for Canada who mysteriously didn’t have them when they landed. The supporters of terrorist groups were among them, and – especially in the case of the LTTE – refugee smuggling was a big money maker.
When questionable refugees landed, we used to release them on their own recognizance and expected them to turn up for their hearing (Ahmed Ressam was one of the many who didn’t); and those rare cases that were rejected were expected to voluntarily turn up for their own deportation. For a while, we were running detention centres for the questionable types, but — to no great surprise – the expense is being questioned. It also takes about eight hours of paperwork to process an interesting catch, which tend to keep skilled front-line workers bound up in the back office instead of scanning the incoming traffic looking for what is unusual.
It was clear to anyone with a modicum of common sense that our refugee system had evolved into an alternative immigration system. It also evolved into a lucrative industry for legions of lawyers, consultants and activists – at titanic costs to the taxpayer.
All this tightened up after 9/11 and – lo and behold – the number of refugee applicants to Canada fell enormously (with significant savings to our beleaguered taxpayers). Suddenly, it was essential that we tighten up our regulations, start enforcing them, and really learn for a change about just who was entering the country. Sadly, with the diminished urgency of our counter-terrorism efforts (and no end of pressure from the refugee industry), we are quietly reverting right back to the way things were pre-9/11.
The reorganization of our police intelligence agencies had resulted in a quantum improvement in efficiency during the middle part of this decade. Unfortunately, whatever benefits we have realized from this have largely been spent. The RCMP is in disarray and desperately short of personnel, and most other police agencies aren’t much better off. There is, however, no end of work for them to pursue, and retention levels are falling off. Year by year, the aggregate level of experience of the average police officer falls off, as rookies are swamped with minutiae; mid-career officers seek more rewarding fields, and veterans retire without being able to pass on all of their knowledge.
Of course, there are many people who are delighted with this state of affairs, and believe police should be handicapped in their activities by new burdens whenever possible. For example: Fundamentalist clerics might be preaching to young Canadian Muslims? Obviously more sensitivity training is necessary! Babbar Khalsa is devolving into an organized criminal society? This wouldn’t be happening if we recruited more Sikh officers! A police intelligence agency is quietly recruiting Tamil translators and informants? Heck, let’s give the Tiger-sympathizing community newspaper editors inside tours of the operations centre… never mind any embarrassing meetings!
The other problem that police (and crown prosecutors) constantly face attends some of our legal cases. The accused and their lawyers are largely free to say whatever they want outside of the courtrooms, and do so. Usually the following messages come along:
- My client was abused/tortured/degraded etc. while in custody. [Please note: This is Jihadist behaviour 101, right out of their training manual.]
- The charges are ridiculous and can’t stand.
- The Crown is trying to get everything heard in secrecy because their case is so weak.
- This is just a result of some combination of American hysteria and/or racial profiling.
This is usually followed by the standard disclaimer, that the case shouldn’t be tried in the media… when that is exactly what the defence and the friends of the suspect are attempting to do.
Meanwhile, what can the police and security agencies say? Nothing. Well, almost nothing. In 2004, one terrorism suspect made the mistake of launching a law suit against the government, citing the standard complaints. In gleeful response for once, footage was released of the suspect surreptitiously filming in the Toronto subway and around the CN Tower… end of suit.
Someday, perhaps sooner than we think, there is going to be a major terrorist attack in Canada. When the blame gets cast around, just don’t look at our Counter-Terror professionals. If their hands are tied, we are the ones who trussed them up.
