What is the protective strategy?

For more than 20 years the United States Government (Department of Homeland Security and the FBI) have utilized the Terrorist/Criminal Attack Planning Cycle for the training of their agents and the creation of protective strategies used to protect at-risk individuals and critical infrastructure. I have personally used it to protect government officials, ultra-high-net worth clients, to train hundreds of FBI personnel and Executive Protection (EP) agents, and I have used it to create protective strategies to assist EP teams involved in difficult work.

When conducting EP program reviews, I always evaluate if the Attack Cycle is part of the team’s protective strategy. Favorably, some EP teams fully understand, embrace, and utilize the proper mitigation strategies that can stop the cycle. Some teams are vaguely familiar with the Attack Cycle and have the beginnings of a protective strategy. And, unfavorably, some teams have never even heard of it. They are using Luck as a protective strategy.

?The cycle is eight separate and distinct steps: Target Selection (General), Initial Surveillance, Final Target Selection, Pre-Attack Surveillance, Planning, Rehearsals, Execution, Escape and Exploitation. The length of time between the steps is not consistent. History has shown attackers work through the cycle in a matter of days, weeks, months, and/or years. Some attacks carry through to the final step and some stop at various steps of the cycle. This is the goal of effective protective strategies - to stop the attack.

There exists a myriad of reasons as to why attacks stop but suffice it to say, the vigilance displayed by the target or the target’s visible security has a significant impact on the likelihood of an attack happening.

As way of example, look at the case of Arthur Bremer who shot Alabama Governor George Wallace in 1972. Bremer indicated in his memoir, An Assassin’s Diary, that his original target was President Richard Nixon. After weeks of physical surveillance of known public appearances, Bremer gave up on that attack due to the vigilance he observed from the United States Secret Service Agents protecting President Nixon. Conversely, when Bremer saw the protection around Governor George Wallace, he accurately assessed he could get close and kill or injure the Governor, which he did.?

The case highlights the Attack Cycle and is an excellent reminder as to the need to use effective protective strategies to manipulate, interfere, and/or stop the planning of those wishing to harm protected individuals. Bremer’s initial target list, Step 1, was a general list in the beginning – American Politician. His initial Surveillance of Nixon (Step 2) indicated President Nixon would be a hard target, so he selected another target Governor Wallace (Step 3). He conducted more surveillance (Step 4), procured a weapon, and planned the attack (Step 5 and 6), executed his plan (Step 7) and was caught during the escape (Step 8).

?Effective EP programs assess multiple areas of a protected person’s life. The most effective programs will apply specific protective measures in areas where the risk is higher to the Protectee. Those areas historically have been secure transportation, known public appearances, travel to areas of the world with a higher risk, at home and at the office.

When looking at the Attack Cycle and the ability to mitigate or stop an attack, it is clear that a full-time protective program has a higher chance of success. This is not about money, though it is much more expensive to have a full-time program, it is about detecting the surveillance and stopping the adversary’s planning before the Execution phase. Doing Surveillance-Detection first, then Counter-Surveillance, not the other way around!

?For example, If company A has full time responsibility for the Protectee’s protective coverage at home, work, in-transit, and during travel, the chances they see the white panel van doing physical surveillance at home, work, along the route or at the FBO is much higher than a situation where the security is not comprehensive. An example of a non-comprehensive program: company A is doing home coverage, Company B or Corporate Security is doing office coverage, Company C is doing the daily driving and Company D handles all travel. What are the chances they see the white van? Chances that they share the information amongst the various security comapnies? The chances are precisely ZERO.

?

When the goal is protection of human life, the protective strategy must be well defined and carefully measured against the known tactics, techniques, and procedures of the adversary.

?

James Hamilton,

Founder, Hamilton Security Group LLC

?

-?????? Copyright 2024 -

?

?

?