Even in the tense and surreal atmosphere affecting London, the killing by police of a suspected terrorist, pumping five bullets into him at close range, stood out as a remarkable event. The news of Friday’s shooting of the man at Stockwell Tube station, which quickly flashed around the world, underlined the extent to which a Rubicon had been crossed in the fight against terrorism. Even for those who have long since abandoned the avuncular image of the British bobby, this was a significant moment. It reinforced the impression of a city under siege.
Yesterday’s revelation that the dead man was unconnected with the attempted terror attacks last Thursday represents a huge setback. Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, originally said the shooting was “directly linked” to the terror attacks on London. Now it appears that the only direct link was that the victim lived in the same property as a terrorist suspect. If the police are operating a shoot-to-kill policy against suspected suicide bombers, they have to be sure of their targets.
An innocent man, possibly a South American according to some reports, scared out of his wits by armed police, was chased into the Tube, pinned down and shot. He was, indirectly, a victim of two terror attacks on London in the space of a fortnight and the mood of paranoia they have generated. Directly, however, he was a victim of police failure. Serious questions need to be asked by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Nobody pretends that these things are easy. Had the man not been stopped, and had he turned out to be a suicide bomber, the police would have faced even more criticism. As Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights organisation Liberty, put it last night: “Our hearts go out to the family of the dead man and to the officers involved in this tragic incident. No one should rush to judgment . . . These are knife-edge split-second decisions made in moments of grave danger. We have a massive shared interest in the protection of innocent lives.”
Even so, Friday’s shooting generated unease even before yesterday’s revelation. Inayat Bunglawala, of the moderate Muslim Council of Britain, said: “There may be reasons why the police felt it necessary to unload five shots into the man and shoot him dead, but they need to make those reasons clear. Quite a lot of Muslims are distressed about what may be a shoot-to-kill policy.” Massoud Shadjareh, of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said: “We have raised concerns about the Met sending officers to learn from the Israelis about suicide bombers. They have a policy of assassinating people — why should our police learn these tactics and these values?” The record of Britain’s police in this area, is mixed. Two Metropolitan police officers are being investigated over the killing six years ago of Harry Stanley in Hackney, shot while carrying a table leg they believed to be a weapon. Police were criticised over the shootings of Derek Bennett and Cherry Groce. Alas, all armed police forces make mistakes. The key is to follow procedures that minimise them.
These are extraordinarily jittery times. The devastating bombs on July 7 on the Tube and a London bus were followed by last Thursday’s attempted repeat attack, whose consequences could have been just as terrible. The bombings yesterday in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, with at least 88 fatalities, including two Britons, show that we are caught in a global epidemic of terror. Last weekend a British tourist died in a bombing in Turkey, while three soldiers were killed in Iraq by a roadside bomb. Horrific suicide attacks have become commonplace in Iraq. Wherever fundamentalists have a grievance, they are reaching for explosives.
In the past three weeks Londoners have got used to an almost permanent state of alert; the almost unceasing sirens, the alarm of passengers evacuated from the Tube and the concern that the next big attack is just around the corner. That is the terrorists’ aim. Thursday’s failed attack achieved almost as much in its psychological impact as that of July 7.
We need reassurance that the government, the police and the intelligence services are able to keep us safe. It is not enough for Sir Ian Blair to warn of further attacks. Despite a visibly heightened police presence, four men were able to carry explosives onto the Tube and a bus last Thursday and attempt to detonate them. Only good fortune prevented them from succeeding.
What more can the police do? Since July 7 many Tube travellers have reported the uncomfortable sensation of sitting near somebody who fits the profile of a suicide bomber. The police should use their stop-and-search facilities more widely, and not be held back by considerations of political correctness. Those who look suspicious should be searched, if only to reassure other passengers. Most passengers have readily accepted heightened and intrusive security on airlines in the belief that they will be safer. Michael Bloomberg, the New York mayor, announced last week that police will conduct random searches on the city’s subway, albeit with the rider that passengers of all races and religions will be subject to them.
Greater vigilance is only a partial response. Both attacks have exposed worrying gaps in our intelligence. September 11, 2001, made the state finally alert to the activities of terrorists living apparently normal “sleeper” lives in our midst. In truth, however, that was merely a late wake-up call. Muslim extremists have been using Britain as a base for decades, provoking anger among our allies. Now it appears that the web of extremism in Britain has spread much wider. The security services and the police need urgently to raise their game. America’s 9/11 commission exposed intelligence failings and provided important lessons for the future. There is a case, in time, for a similar independent investigation in Britain. It will need also to take in conduct of the police since Friday’s shooting.
The state needs to think about its conduct too. It must identify those who help recruit the gullible young to acts of terrorism, close down their propaganda networks and punish with all severity those who abet treason against this country. In his classic analysis of revolutionary warfare, Mao compared his guerrillas to fish needing to swim in the water of popular support. That water needs to be drained here in Britain.
