May/June 2023 - 25

SECURITY
Because Israel focuses on the traveler
and not the baggage, it's understandable
why the tour guide was questioned
and became a cause for concern.
What we are talking about is profiling.
In North America and most of
Western Europe, profiling is frowned
upon, if not legally forbidden. However,
profiling has made Ben Gurion
Airport one of the safest airports in
the world.
While it cannot be denied that
U.S. airports are much safer today
than they were years ago, according
to Marc Grynberg, writing in this
publication in November 2019, " the
sheer volume of what goes on in an
airport requires nothing short of a
robust set of supervisory tools and
powerful oversight to see at a glance "
if airport security is working.
Although it has been debated
often, because of the increased
uncertainty in our world, it may be
time to give profiling another look.
This discussion would likely involve
the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA), as well as airport
administrators.
The point being, and what my firm
has witnessed over the past 20-plus
years, is that profiling remains a hot
topic that many airport administrators
would like to re-consider.
The History of
Profiling in the U.S.
Profiling has a long history in the
United States. In the 1960s and 1970s,
the U.S. witnessed a wave of hijackings.
At one point, another passenger
plane was hijacked every five days.
Concerns mounted when a passenger
was boarding with a one-way ticket.
According to one airport employee,
during the " hippie era, " males with
long hair and one-way tickets were
considered immediately suspect.
Because metal detectors were not
used in the 1960s, airports and airport
administrators used profiling procedures
and found them to be one of
their best options to determine if
someone was a threat. And just like
in Israel, they based this determination
on passenger behavior. It was
accepted, and profiling was viewed
as needed and justified.
However, by the 2000s, airport
administrators, along with the FAA,
and later the Department of Homeland
Security, faced growing criticism
that profiling was unethical, illegal,
violated American freedoms, and at
the very least, needed more regulation
and oversight.
" The notion that the government
is in any position to judge who
is trusted and risky is very problematic, "
said Jay Stanley, a senior policy
analyst at the American Civil Liberties
Union. " Any attempt to predict
who is likely to engage in that type of
thing [referring to criminal or terrorist
behavior in an airport] is inevitably
going to sweep up a vast number of
innocent people. "
To address these concerns, profiling
was limited or eliminated. And if
it were to continue, airport administrators
and TSA would have to detail
screen everyone using their facilities.
The problems are that we would need
more human resources to do this, the
costs would be tremendous, and the
sheer number of people that would
have to be profiled would result in
mistakes - allowing potentially dangerous
people to board a plane.
Security remains a top-priority
problem for airports and a growing
one at that. What are referred to as
Improvised Explosive Devices, for
instance, are making it harder and
harder to detect if someone boarding
a plane is carrying a weapon or
could potentially turn an airplane into
a weapon. Because of this, profiling,
in one form or another, may need to
be considered.
Security and Risk
Assessments
In some ways, we are inching toward
different forms of profiling already.
Airports around the world are collecting
data on passengers, developing
ways to screen out those who could
potentially cause harm. However,
many airport administrators want
to take a more proactive approach to
ensure airport safety now. To accomplish
this, airport administrators are
having physical security and risk
assessments conducted.
A physical security assessment
would include such things as:
* Analyzing ingress and egress
points at the airport.
* Examining all current security
measures in place and determining
if more effective technologies
are needed.
* Interviewing key security personnel
to determine if they have
the security training needed in
an airport environment.
* Observing the exterior of the
facility and determining if there
are vulnerabilities that need to
be addressed.
Most airport administrators are
already aware of what a physical
security assessment involves. However,
they might not know that a risk
assessment goes several steps further.
Read more at www.
AviationPros.com/53060979
What Israelis Think of Profiling
One of the few surveys on what Israelis and others think of profiling in Israeli
airports was published in 2012 by the American Law and Economics Review.
When asked whether airport security checks are justified given Israel's security
situation, 95.4 percent of Israeli Jews surveyed said yes; 80.3 percent of foreign
passengers and 66 percent of Israeli Arabs also agreed.
MAY/JUNE 2023 \ AVIATIONPROS.COM / 25
http://www.AviationPros.com/53060979 http://www.AVIATIONPROS.COM
May/June 2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of May/June 2023
