L441 Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crime

Introduction:

This essay is based on the bombing in London on 5^th July 2005 by a couple of suicide bombers around London. The event soon gained popularity in the name of London 7/7, as it was the first well-organized act of terrorism since 9/11. There are multiple facts to be consider this complex case of terrorist attack that drew attention of the global audience (metro.co.uk. 2017). The following part of the essay will be discussing on the significance of the attack, an event map that will describe the events, perpetrators where a short profile of the group is present and a tactics rational where the discussion will highlight the process of target selection and tactics used. The final part of the essay reflects the impact of the attack and a conclusion that attempts to fit the event with the group’s aim, objective, structure, and strategy.

Significance

The 7^th July 2005 bombing grabbed international attention as it was the first organized event of terrorism the world has seen after 9/11. It was a chain of four consecutive suicide bombing around London. First three of them went off in a gap of 50 seconds in the underground railway of London, whereas, the last one was on a double-decker bus at Tavistock Place. The total number of dead was 52 excluding the four suicide bombers. The notable thing is that the victims were from around the world. Moreover, the bombers are identified as the residents of United Kingdom itself and no outsider. In addition to that, bombs used for the explosion were all home made and police suspected that the event happened differently than planned as they found a number of bombs around the city unexploded. This led the security of London to think of the source of the actual source of terrorism. Three men were arrest on the charges of act of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000. This particular case draw curiosity as the actual source of the inspiration of the attack was unknown to the United Kingdom. However, al Qaeda claim the influence of the bombing of London 7/7. Moreover, the facts are quite surprising as the bombers were all homegrown in London. It raises the question of internal security in the UK. On to it, the video tape made by Khan and Tanweer was more surprising as it reviles that the reason behind the act is to become in their words “soldiers” (telegraph.co.uk. 2017).  

Event Map

London 7/7 attack was an organized terrorist activity that took place on 7^th July 2005. It was an event of four chain bombing took place in four different public places in London. The first three bombs went off in a 50 second gap in the London underground station around 8.50 a.m. The locations of the attacks were Liverpool Street Station, Edgware road Station and a train between king’s Cross  and Russell Square Station and killed about seven, six and 26 people accordingly. The government shut down the system around 9.15 a.m. as British Transport Police confirmed the explosion of Liverpool station. The last suicide bomber triggered the final bomb around 9.47 a.m. on a double-decker bus near Wavistock Place that killed 13 people. All the bus and train services were suspended by 11.07 a.m. Around 11.15 a.m., The European union Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security Franco Frattini confirms the reporters in Rome that the blasts in London are an act of terrorism. Initially, the police suspected six underground attacks which were confirmed as three by the Scotland Yard. Three of the suicide bombers were identified as Shahzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain and Mohammed Sadique Khan by 13^th July and Germaine Morris Lindsay was identified as the fourth bomber on 14^th July. Within the following five days of the attack, over a dozen bombs were recovered from a car parked at Luton Station which leaves the police and security department thinks that the events went differently as planned. The police arrested two men from the airport and one from a house in Leeds unlawfully and maliciously in the charges of conspiring with the bombers. They soon had to release them as the Jury fails to reach a verdict confirming the guild of the accused. However, on 28^th April Shakil and Ali were sentenced seven years of jail for the charges of pre attack conspiracy related to bombing. All the four of the suicide bombers were found to be the residents of London and homegrown. Moreover, police later confirmed each one of them had some kind of criminal records over the recent years. Sadique Khan had the most criminal offence than any other but none of them had any offence directing towards national threat. However, Sadique was suspected to have connection with extremists and was noticed in a training camp under direction of two famous extremists. But the police didn’t find any connection then, nor did they find a connection between them. However three of them lived in Leeds. More interestingly, the bombs that were used for the explosions were home made out of daily life goods. It drives curiosity to the investigators if there is any direct connection between the terrorist organizations. According to the videotape of Khan Claims that the act was necessary for them to become something what they called “soldiers” (cnn.com. 2017).

Perpetrators

The four suicide bombers responsible for the attack were identified as Mohammed Siddique Khan, Shazad Tanveer, Jermaine Lindsay, and Hasib Hussain. Moreover, police arrested three suspects in connection to the attack who names were identified later as Mohammed Shakil, Sadeer Saleem and Waheed Ali (Kirby 2007). 

It is reported that police knew Siddique Khan prior to CREVICE and Khan crossed the path of the police on three occasions. His age was 30 at the time of the attack and he was living in Beeston. He was first arrested in 1993 for assault by West Yorkshire Police and received official caution. The next one is in 2001 when the West Yorkshire Police observed a group of 40 men attending training camp leaded by two known extremists. Khan was one of the 40 men in the camp. The last occasion was on 2003 when a known extremist was for to be given a lift in a car registered in the name of Siddique Khan while following him. The police and the MI5 failed to find connection between the cases (bbc.co.uk. 2017).

Shazad Tanweer, age 22 was the second bomber in the attack. He lived with his parents in Leeds working in a fish and chip shop. Tanweer came across the police twice that were unrelated to the national security. The first one was 1995 when he was arrested for a case of burglary. Personal details were obtained by the police on that occasion except the fingerprint and the DNA and were released without charge. Police took the photograph, fingerprints and DNA on the second occasion in April 2004 when he was given a criminal offence for a public disorder offence (bbc.co.uk. 2017).

The third bomber Lindsay’s police records were also unrelated to the national security as a Flat Brava registered to him drove off from the scene of a robbery in Luton on 27^th May 2005. Later analysis to the attack reviles a match in the telephone number and bank account in both the cases. He had a pregnant wife and a son and lived in Aylesbury. He was only 19 at the time of bombing (bbc.com. 2017).

Hasib Hussain, the last puzzle of the attack also the youngest of them all. He along with his brother and sister-in-law lived in Leeds. He also received a police caution for shoplifting in October 2004. However, he did not have any previous connection to CREVICE (independent.co.uk. 2017).

On the other hand, the suspects who were arrested after the attack were arrested unlawfully and maliciously conspiring with the four suicide bombers and of conspiring to cause explosions. The jury eventually failed to reach any verdict and declared a mistrial. They were even find not guilty in the re-trial for helping to plan the attack. However, Shakil and Ali were convicted of conspiracy in connection with pre-attack reconnaissance mission and received seven year of sentence on April 29^th 2009.

Targeting rationale

No direct links were found with the bombers and any Muslim terrorist groups. However the al-Quida claims the credit for the bombing, telecasting a videotape recorded by Khan and Tanweer. MI5 suspects the videotape had been edited after the bombing. However, they were some influence from the terrorist activities and groups. MI5 failed to link any direct connection from the evidence in hand. The group individually made all the planning and targeting. From the analysis made on the place, timing and the number of death occurred in the incidents, the investigators have restructured a possible targeting and planning of the bombers (Kirby 2007).

Target – The bombers basically targeted the populated areas of the city targeting the international tourists to draw the attention. The places indicated that the number target deaths were much higher than the result. It is because three of the bomb went off in the underground train and the station. Hence, from the above evidence, it can be said that the targets were much higher. Moreover, these places were chosen to draw attention to the international media as these places are always packed with tourists. A number of foreign nationals were injured and killed in the event that confirms the thought (telegraph.co.uk. 2017).

Planning – Planning on the other hand seems to be individual planning of the group as there is no direct evidence of any connection with the major terrorist cults. An organized plan was followed for the event. The timing and the places supports the statement. It was a plan over years as can be suspected from the evidence in hand. Khan, the eldest one had three criminal records in one of which, a car registered under his name was spotted to give lift to an extreme terrorist that confirms some connection. Moreover, the appearance of every single of the suicide bombers in the police records seems suspicious as the last one was reported on 27^th May 2005. The criminal offences of the bombers are suspected to be on purpose. They wanted the police to identify them as on the event (cnn.com. 2017).

Impact Assessment

The impacts of London 7/7 bombing are to be measured on various grounds starting from economical to psychological effects.

Economical Impact – The main economic impact of London bombing cost the country about £2 billion for refurbishment and the extra security that are imposed after the attack. Apart from that, a rapid rebound in shopping and entertainment in London is noticed after a sharp plung in activity immediately after the bombs as per the report of Centre for Economic and Business Research. The managing director of CEBR, Douglas McWilliams calculated the impact of outrage to be 0.2% of points of economic growth in 2005. Moreover, the disruption of the Tube cut London’s economy by 0.5% a retail analysis firm calculated the shopper numbers and concluded that a 77% fall is visible on 7^th July whereas, the sales on the next day increased to 15%. Hence, the numbers show a clear rapid recovery from the event of 7^th July However, I tourism repercussion was visible. The tourism market was devastated after the attack as both the foreign and domestic tourists showed unwillingness to visit due to security threats (londonchamber.co.uk. 2017; Buesa and Baumert 2010).

Physical and Psychological Impact – The bombing event of London scared a psychological distress among the citizens. Around 52 people were killed and nearly 700 were injured in the blasts. The psychological impact on the injured and on the relatives of the dead are obviously greater than the rest. They are undergoing a serious possibility of guild and social withdrawal. The survivors show clear instability in their social life and face challenging feat of continuing their lives without fear or a change in their routine. The have developed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. This is a long-term effect and an increase paranoia and heightened anxiety as well as substance abuse is leading to isolation. The event have a lasting negative impact on those who have closely evidenced the incident and it is still affecting them in their daily life (Rubin et al. 2005).

Impact on British Muslim Community – The Muslims residing in Britain are facing trouble in as evidenced in many of the reports. It confirms a temporary disturbance in faith related hate crimes across UK. The Muslims lived fearful and vulnerable lives in the adjacent time of the bombing (Hussain and Bagguley 2012). A clear discrimination and exploitation on the religious background evidenced by the Muslims as the after math. Luckily, the situation was soon under control due to the efforts of the political and community leader. However, it took time to for the Muslims to regain the acceptance in the community (Choudhury and Fenwick 2011; Shaw 2012).

Security Impact – The security was immediately increase right after the bombing event. Many electronic businesses made a huge amount of profit due to the event as the citizens showed increased concern on their security. The businesses were also instruct to increase the security level at their firm. A huge amount was invested in repairing the Tube and in increasing the security level into it (bbc.co.uk. 2017).

Conclusion:

The act of terrorism on 7^th July 2005 in London seems to fulfill its purpose. From analyzing the above data it can be sated that the group’s aim was to strike terror in the heart of international audience which they have succeeded. The targets selected specifically identifies that the attack was to draw attention of the international viewers as the spots selected in the city is always packed with international tourists. Moreover, a significant number of foreigners have lost their lives in the attack. However, the strategy and structure formulated for the event seems to be incomplete. The evidence of over a dozen of bombs in the car parked in Luton Station supports the fact that the last intended bomb failed to explode on the planned time. On the other hand, the terrorists were successful in identifying themselves with their pre event planning and process. Each one of the suicide bombers made appearance in the police records prior to the attack. The final entry was made on May 2005, when Lindsay was arrested for a minimal crime of shoplifting. This is surely unnecessary before a major event like this. Hence, it can be said that it was a part of their plan. The expected longevity of the attack seems to fade sooner as the economic recovery took place short after the attack. However, the psychological impact lasted long enough and lived its purpose. Though, the effects were noticed with the people evidenced the event directly or lost their relatives in the action. The rest of the population failed to show any as such severe psychological impact as such.

References:

bbc.co.uk. 2017. Effects. [online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6510307.stm [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

bbc.com. 2017. Lindsay's Profile. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12621385 [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

bbc.co.uk. 2017. Sadique Khan. [online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4762209.stm [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

bbc.co.uk. 2017. Tanweer. [online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4762313.stm [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

Buesa, M. and Baumert, T., 2010. The economic repercussions of terrorism. Oxford University Press.

Choudhury, T. and Fenwick, H., 2011. The impact of counter-terrorism measures on Muslim communities. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 25(3), pp.151-181.

cnn.com. 2017. fast Facts. [online] Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/06/world/europe/july-7-2005-london-bombings-fast-facts/index.html [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

Hussain, Y. and Bagguley, P., 2012. Securitized citizens: Islamophobia, racism and the 7/7 London bombings. The Sociological Review, 60(4), pp.715-734.

independent.co.uk. 2017. Bombers' profile. [online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/77-bombings-london-anniversary-live-profiles-of-the-four-bombers-who-killed-52-people-in-london-10369984.html [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

Kirby, A., 2007. The London bombers as “self-starters”: A case study in indigenous radicalization and the emergence of autonomous cliques. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30(5), pp.415-428.

londonchamber.co.uk. 2017. Economic effect of terrorism. [online] Available at: http://www.londonchamber.co.uk/docimages/754.pdf [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

metro.co.uk. 2017. facts of London attack. [online] Available at: http://metro.co.uk/2017/07/07/77-anniversary-13-facts-that-capture-the-horror-of-the-london-bombings-6762561/ [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].

Rubin, G.J., Brewin, C.R., Greenberg, N., Simpson, J. and Wessely, S., 2005. Psychological and behavioural reactions to the bombings in London on 7 July 2005: cross sectional survey of a representative sample of Londoners. Bmj, 331(7517), p.606.

Shaw, I.S., 2012. Stereotypical representations of Muslims and Islam following the 7/7 London terror attacks: Implications for intercultural communication and terrorism prevention. International Communication Gazette, 74(6), pp.509-524.

telegraph.co.uk. 2017. 7/7 London terrorist bombing. [online] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/uknews/11720958/77-London-terrorist-bombings-The-attacks-that-killed-52-people-in-pictures.html [Accessed 16 Sep. 2017].