Tweet
<span style="font-weight: bold">mi still no decide if dis is juss ovah di top, melodramatic r if she mite ha a pint
</span> Hijacked in paradiseHEART TO HEART
Betty Ann Blaine
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Dear Reader, We Jamaicans have become accustomed to a steady daily diet of murders to the point of indifference and apathy, but we are definitely not used to waking up on a Monday morning to the news that a plane was hijacked in our own country. It didn't take long for the images to be flashed across television screens all over the world, and for many Jamaicans, including myself, the incident appeared to be somewhat surreal.
Betty Ann Blaine
As the details unfolded, the sensationalist fervour gave way to more sober questioning of how a lone 21-year-old man could have made his way on to a commercial plane without any major hindrances and obstacles. In the end, the conclusion was that it was not terrorism but a random act perpetrated by someone who appeared to be disturbed. Stephen Fray's obvious amateurism, coupled with the skill and coordination of the joint police and military force brought what could have been a tragic incident to a smooth and tragedy-free resolution - no deaths, no injuries, not even to the perpetrator himself.
The effectiveness and efficiency of the security forces resulted in kudos and accolades being heaped upon their heads from far and wide, and demonstrated to us here at home that our police and soldiers have the capacity to defuse and contain threats to law and order without injury or death. The hope is that the type of cooperation, collaboration and precision with which they undertook the airport hijacking will be applied to community law enforcement operations in every instance in the future.
Admittedly, the hijack had other elements that led to the successful outcome, including the presence on the ground of the prime minister. I suspect that Mr Golding's personal involvement must have influenced a more thoughtful and strategic resolution than what the country is usually accustomed to, even though I believe that the prime minister should have reflected on the wisdom of his "on the spot" involvement and actions.
I'm not sure that hijacking and terrorism experts would agree that the prime minister of a country should be on the ground at the scene of any negotiations with what could have been a potential terrorist, let alone to have been on the tarmac of the airport at any time during or even after the incident.
From what I have seen and heard about potential terrorist plots, the head of state is usually removed completely out of harm's way, and in certain situations like what happened in the US on 9/11, taken to a safe haven immediately.
The conclusion that the hijacking was not terrorism and was in fact random seemed to have come well after our prime minister entered the scene of the hijacking. The questions that come to my mind are: how, and at what time did the PM and his security detail know that Fray was a "lone ranger"? What if Fray was part of a wider conspiracy not only to hijack, but to blow up the entire airport? Did the security forces do bomb searches before our prime minister went onto the tarmac? Why couldn't Mr Golding have involved himself in the negotiations from his office or home in the capital?
Of course, the problem with Jamaica is that it is next to impossible to get unbiased and objective analyses and straightforward answers to critical questions and issues. In the usual partisan-political style, Mr Golding's colleagues and party loyalists found every excuse and argument in the book, including the presence of the Canadian prime minister in Jamaica, to justify our prime minister putting himself in harm's way. While I am certain that Mr Golding's motives were completely pure and that he genuinely felt that he could have helped in the hostage negotiations, I humbly submit that our prime minister should not have made himself vulnerable until it was abundantly clear that Fray was a lone actor and that it was not a broader terrorist plot.
That aside, the hijacking in the tourism capital of Jamaica, and the relative ease with which a man with a gun entered a commercial aircraft raise even more serious questions and concerns about security at our major airport and the tenuousness of the tourist industry as far as crime and violence are concerned.
There are two major points that the hijacking incident amplified in my own mind. The first is the fragility of the tourism product, and second, the growing threat of crime and violence in the tourism capital, Montego Bay. The glaring reality is that it takes only one incident like the hijacking to destroy decades of goodwill and resources encased in the tourism product.
And the threat that currently exists in Mobay is as real as it is ominous. The murder rate in St James continues to grow exponentially, coupled with, and in some instances connected to organised criminal activities like the lotto scam, all of which are capable of paralysing tourism at any given point in time. With scores of young men, idle, illiterate and armed to the teeth, the potential for violence must now be seen as a warning of the clear and present danger that is posed to the tourism sector.
We all thank God that the hijacking incident ended successfully, but the message that it has been sent to the country and to tourism interests is that any story of hijacking in a place considered to be a paradise, is contradictory and counterproductive and therefore needs immediate attention and action.
With love,
Comment