Lessons
Egypt’s aviation minister said it right that when you weigh all the options, “the possibility of having a terror attack is higher than the possibility of having a technical (failure)”. A targetted hit is not very likely. As numerous international channels following the story have pointed out, the Paris-Cairo route, from the heart of Europe, across the Mediterranean, to the Arab-African world, is one of the world’s most significant and hence most monitored airways. Technical failure, so far, is considered the least likely option. This particular A320 was, according to reports, in tip-top condition; having been inducted in ’03.
If this was actually a terrorist attack, then the most likely method would be planting a bomb on board. That, of course, would not be the first incident of its kind. The Russian airliner, that exploded mid-air soon after taking off from an Egyptian tourist resort not too long ago, was the first to suffer such a fate. Back then IS was quick to claim responsibility. It has battled Sisi’s government in the Sinai for years now, and considers Egypt very much a part of its wars of the caliphate.
But if true it would imply that terrorists were, once again, able to bypass security at an extremely sensitive international airport. Paris has been shut water-tight since the Nov13 attack. If the enemy is able to regularly bypass state of the art security systems then the fight against terror still has a long way to go. Some analysts explain no claim of responsibility for EgyptAir so far – in the case this really was a terrorist attack – to protect ‘operational integrity’ which, in turn, would imply more attacks in the future. More will, of course, become apparent as the investigation progresses. But, considering the circumstances, the hand of terror can never really be ruled out.
