Asymmetry 101

UPDATE: The President says the packages did contain explosive material. I don't think that changes the basic point below that a limited threat can nevertheless produce asymmetric levels of disruption.

Today's international security alerts still have a lot of unanswered questions attached, so bear in mind that I'm offering some first reactions here, not a considered evaluation. So far it seems that the hard evidence is a few suspicious packages originating in Yemen and reportedly sent to Chicago, perhaps to Chicago synagogues. One is described as a toner cartridge with attached circuit boards. No explosives have been confirmed [SEE ABOVE].

So far, international cargo has been scrutinized at Dubai, East Midlands Airport in the UK, and Newark and Philadelphia in the US, while an Emirates flight origainating in Yemen has been escorted in to New York, first by Canadian and then by US fighter jets.

Now, assuming no explosives turn up, what should we make of all this? Some are suggesting a "dry run," but there isn't much evidence that Al-Qa‘ida believes in dry runs. More likely might be an attempt to test defenses, to judge security by watching the reaction of the security forces in the UK and US.

But I think it's just as likely that the whole purpose was simply to force the security services to spend a lot of time and man-hours coping with these potential threats. If it is, as many seem to be assuming, Al-Qa‘ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and possibly, once again, the long arm of Anwar ‘Awlaqi, it's worth noting that he has talked in the past about emphasizing opreations that produce maximum disruption for limited effort, as opposed to spectacular 9/11-style attacks. This could be an example if, as seems possible, several countries and much of the cargo system has been snarled by a few packages: and packages that might attract attention (if reports that the packages were addressed to Chicago synagogues are true, that would seem to be planting a red flag and waving it).

This could be either a test of defenses or simply a ploy to occupy security forces and force expenditures of effort and money. If so, it may be a classic case of Asymmetric Warfare 101. More later if developments warrant.