Articles
An Analysis of Past Gender Budgets in India
July 22, 2024
Budget 2024-25: Striving for effective transit planning
July 31, 2024Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump: New Challenges to Personal Protection Mechanisms
Image Credit: Evan Vucci/AP
Context
In the backdrop of the attempted assassination of the former US president, Donald Trump, the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party in 2024 US presidential polls, the article examines the new challenges in the personal protection field. Some of these issues include:
a) Generation of protection intelligence and its proper sharing and follow-up among main stakeholders.
b) Inherent difficulties in the effective enforcement of access control mechanisms in open or public functions attended by VIPs because of the overriding approach of dignitaries, close aides and fans and followers.
c) Challenges emanating from the intricate and innovative technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), robotics, drones, UAVs, etc. that the terror or extremist outfits or ‘non-state actors’ use to strike their targets.
While suggesting macro and structural measures to confront such challenges, the article highlights the need for deployment of right personnel with physical stamina, integrity and commitment for personal protection duties. Only such a professional force can fulfil the protection doctrine that ‘there is no 50 per cent or 80 per cent; it is either ‘cent per cent or nothing.’
In the midst of hectic campaign for the US Presidential Elections, 2024, Donald Trump, the former President of the US and the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, survived an assassination attempt on July 13, 2024, while addressing a campaign rally near Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump suffered a graze wound to his ear, while one rallygoer was killed and two others critically injured. The assailant, Thomas Matthew Crooks, a 20-year-old man from Pennsylvania state was subsequently shot and killed by the US Secret Service’s Counter Sniper Team. He fired eight rounds from the roof of a building located around 120 metres from the stage.
The incident has created serious rumblings in the US security establishment. Ms. Kim Cheatle, the Director of US Secret Services and the second woman to hold the top job, resigned, owning responsibility for the attack. She called the shooting “the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades,” which the right-wing media professionals and sections of lawmakers misinterpreted as the security failures of female secret service agents in duty. Christopher Wary, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), has come under criticism from sections of the members of the House Judiciary Committee on matters of the sharing of intelligence and its follow-up action.
The ongoing FBI investigation has brought about certain crucial factors connected with the episode. On obtaining a recent intelligence input that Iran may try to assassinate Donald Trump, the US authorities/ secret services beefed up his security, especially first-line security around Trump. The security agencies have warned the Trump campaign managers against holding outdoor rallies. The warning, however, was general in nature. The assailant, Crooks, was not associated with any suspicious or undesirable outfits but has interest on ‘public figures and politicians.’ The exact reason or motive behind the assassination is yet to be known.
Crooks started preparations well in advance to execute his plan. Around one week before the attack, he became very focused on Trump and the rally in Pennsylvania. He browsed data on the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas in 1963, which included the nature of the weapon used and the position and distance of Oswald, the assailant, before firing at Kennedy. Ahead of the rally, he managed to fly a drone and capture footage of the venue, Butler Farm Show grounds. He used a rifle with a collapsible stock, which made it easier for him to disguise the weapon before climbing onto a roof.
The manner in which the assailant sneaked onto the roof of a nearby high-rise building with a gun perhaps reminds us of Frederic Forsyth’s character ‘Jackal’ whose target was the French President General De-Gaulle! Just like Trump, mere luck saved De-Gaulle from the hands of an assassin! In fact, the Secret Service personnel spotted Crooks near the venue in suspicious circumstances around 15-20 minutes before the shooting. Later, several bystanders who spotted him on the roof top carrying a gun alerted the security personnel minutes before the attack. A local police officer on duty tried to climb up the roof and tried to neutralise him without success.
The July 13 attack unfolds many complexities and challenges in the field of personal protection. Basically, the threat against VIPs can emanate from any corner at any time for any reason. It may be ideological, part of the vengeance or vendetta of individuals or groups or an obsession or publicity craze of psychic or mentally deranged persons. The magnitude of the challenge has now become manifold in view of the emergence of well organised terror/ extremist and radical outfits and ‘non-state actors’ operating beyond the contours of countries or continents. Now the threat vectors come in multiple forms and from a variety of directions and they are always evolving. Thus, the generation of ‘protective intelligence’ and its timely and proper sharing among the stakeholders are of paramount importance. Such inputs not only improve the understanding of the threat matrix and risk level but also trends, problems, solutions and ideas to support the protection mission.
Another crucial area is outdoor/open functions and access control mechanisms. No doubt, there are statutory guidelines or institutional mechanisms to streamline and enforce strict access control. On many instances, such guidelines or measures are diluted due to the overriding attitude of the dignitaries or their close aides. It is a world-wide phenomenon that VIPs have an enormous band of fans or admirers who flock together to get a glimpse of their ‘icons’ while they appear in public. The participation of such fans and followers would be greater during election campaigns/ conventions or victory parades/ celebrations. Seldom had the restrictions on such functions been appreciated, nor were the security warnings seriously taken note of. Ultimately, such an attitude or approach leads to security hazards at the cost of the lives of dignitaries!
The advancement of science and technology and new innovations such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Robotics have also posed new challenges. Till recent years, the security agencies were more concerned over plastic explosives, sophisticated remote controlled detonating mechanisms, sensors, etc., which were ingeniously used by terror/ extremist groups to strike their targets with great precision. Now the scenario has drastically changed with more intricate and innovative mechanisms such as UAVs/drones, the radio-controlled aero dynamic air module, stand-off weapons, flash batteries, etc. Perhaps the best example is the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the Iranian nuclear scientist, near Tehran in November 2020. Despite the highest level of personal security, the assassins struck him using automated gun/ high-powered bomb mounted on a parked vehicle on his route, remotely controlled and executed with the help of AI/Robotics. On many instances, the Anti-Sabotage Check (ASC) or similar exercises fail to detect such devices.
Those macro or structural level issues need to be resolved through timely initiatives and reforms. However, one of the vital elements of personal protection/VIP security is the deployment of the right personnel with physical stamina, integrity and commitment to protection duties. For example, in the US, personnel who excel in swimming, fire-fighting, driving, shooting, hand to hand combat, etc. are hand-picked and deployed for the protection duties of important personalities. Other qualities such as alertness, a high degree of commitment and even the courage to face the bullet, quick reflex action, right judgement, etc. are crucial in successfully undertaking the protection duties or challenges. Such qualities of personnel, on a number of occasions, had saved the lives of VIPs. The best example is the 1981 assassination attempt on former US President Ronald Reagan at the Hilton Hotel in Washington, DC. The timely and courageous actions of Special Agent in-charge Jerry Parr and Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy virtually saved Reagan from more than half a dozen bullets fired by the assailant John Hinckley Jr. within 1.7 seconds from close proximity.
Many of these qualities are inborn but can be enhanced through proper training, motivation and incentives. Financial or other logistical constraints should not come in the way of regular drills and exercises, which are vital in ensuring their physical stamina, alertness and right attitude. The selection of proper weapons and equipment and imparting proper training to the personnel for effectively handling/using them are vital for maintaining the professionalism of the protection team. And above all, better coordination among various security agencies and stakeholder groups is crucial for the smooth performance of personal protection duties. Then only the personal protection doctrine ‘there is no 50 per cent or 80 per cent; it is either ‘cent per cent or nothing’ could be fulfilled.
Views expressed by the author are personal and need not reflect or represent the views of the Centre for Public Policy Research.
K V Thomas is Senior Fellow at CPPR. He has over 36 years of distinguished service in the Intelligence Bureau (Ministry of Home Affairs) of India where he rose to become the Associate Director. He can be contacted at [email protected]
