The Cipher Brief sat down with Former Director of Analysis at the NYPD, Mitch Silber, to discuss the implications of Thursday’s terrorist attack in Nice, France.
The Cipher Brief: What about France makes it a prime target for terrorist attacks, such as what we saw Thursday night in Nice?
Mitch Silber: France is in a uniquely difficult situation compared to any other country in Europe. They have by far the most citizens who have gone abroad to Syria and Iraq—by rough estimates about 1,700—and also the highest number who have potentially returned—a couple hundred people. Those people may have been trained and may have been further radicalized, and it will be an ongoing challenge for France to monitor them so that they are able to prevent future attacks.
At the same time, France also has a significant Muslim population where some segment of it will be attracted to the ISIS message, whether they travel abroad or not. With something like ten percent of France’s entire population being Muslim, that’s a large population to be concerned about even if only small numbers are attracted to ISIS’ ideology.
Furthermore, as I had previously mentioned in the lead-up to the Euro 2016 soccer tournament, France was specifically identified in September of 2014 as a top target by the chief spokesman/chief of external operations for ISIS, Abu Mohammed al-Adnani.
TCB: The use of a truck as a weapon in the Nice attack is reminiscent of vehicle attacks in other countries such as Israel. Is this something we should be concerned about moving forward?
MS: There are a number of different types of modalities for terrorists to use that are frankly, almost unlimited. Just like we saw the use of vehicles in Israel and other locations, it was only a matter of time before it was used in a Western environment. And there have already been some examples. In 2006, there was an attack at the University of North Carolina, where an individual drove a truck into a crowd of people (injuring nine people).
So we shouldn’t necessarily be shocked by the use of a truck. What is shocking is the scope of the carnage that it caused.
TCB: How can law enforcement work to prevent these types of attacks?
MS: Law enforcement and intelligence have to focus on detecting the people, first and foremost, regardless of what modality they might use for their attack. Ongoing and robust human intelligence efforts are the most effective.
At the same time, there are additional precautions that can be taken. In this case, where we are dealing with using a vehicle as a weapon, blocking access to those streets is critical. For example, in New York City when there are big events, there are different barriers set up to prevent some type of ramming effort. That’s something on the physical side that can be an upgrade to those efforts.
TCB: What has France done to buff up its security since the Paris attacks last fall? Have these efforts been effective?
MS: In May, France extended its “state of emergency,” which dates back to the November 2015 Paris attacks, so that it would cover the Euro 2016 soccer tournament. This provides French authorities with a range of augmented powers, including the ability to place individuals who are believed to be a security threat under house arrest.
In a sense, France is already fighting a two-front war against ISIS. While French Mirage and RAF Typhoon fighter jets bomb Raqqa and other Islamic State controlled areas in Syria and Iraq, French police and intelligence work the apartment blocks of the banlieues outside Paris, Marseille, and other cities to try to identify which of the 250 Frenchmen (out of 1700), who went to fight in Syria and Iraq, have returned to France as terrorist operatives with spectacular attacks as their plan.
It’s tough to tell if these tactics have been effective. We don’t know what they have stopped.
TCB: Is this solely France’s problem or could other countries neighboring France face similar situations?
MS: This is a pan-Western European problem. Germany, France, and Belgium are probably three of the most vulnerable countries on the continent, and then the UK right after that. But the UK may be a little bit better protected, because it’s a little more difficult to get back into the UK from Syria and Iraq.
TCB: What do these types of attacks do to ISIS’ standing and prestige even if there is no direct link?
MS: There still is a lot we don’t know about how connected Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel is or isn’t to ISIS. We just know who he is. It will be interesting to dig deeper on that issue.
Nonetheless, this is certainly a boon to ISIS, and it’s almost self-perpetuating. This is beyond the scope of this particular attack. But there is a strong argument to be made that because ISIS was allowed to grow in ungoverned territory and have its own space, it’s become more readily the cause du jour, whereas you don’t see attacks around the world being carried out in the name of al Qaeda. That is because al Qaeda was degraded to the point of being non-operational in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Self-motivated terrorists are no longer doing something in al Qaeda’s name.
The fact that ISIS was left relatively alone for such a long time, allowing them to achieve battlefield success and make a claim to creating a long vanished utopian Caliphate, increased their prestige and the rationale for “Islamic State” inspired terrorists to act in the organization’s name.
