| "The terrorists apparently built their wealth of knowledge of the hotel floor plans and security setups from pre-operational surveillance and open-source data, such as the use of commercial imagery providers, according to congressional testimony by Charles E. Allen, undersecretary for intelligence and analysis at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
To deter and detect this type of attack planning, hotels must be on the lookout for anyone surveilling their properties. The entire staff has a role to play in the surveillance-awareness program."
|
On November 26, 2008, terrorists launched a series of coordinated attacks in Mumbai, India. Among the targets were two high-profile hotels: the Taj Mahal Palace and Tower and the Oberoi Trident complex, which is part of The Oberoi Group. Reports indicated that more than 50 people were either trapped in or directly held hostage at the Taj Mahal and about 40 were at the Oberoi. Ultimately, at all of the targets combined, about 300 people were wounded and an estimated 170 died.
The terrorists, whom the Indian government has since said were linked to Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, a jihadist organization that aims to create an Islamic South Asian state, reportedly took cocaine, LSD, and steroids to sustain themselves over the multiple-day siege. They had cell phones and other technology to help them navigate and communicate. They had also clearly surveilled the properties ahead of time.
In addition to the official responders—local police plus national commando and other law enforcement forces—there were heroes at both hotels who risked their lives to help guests and staff members evacuate and find safety. However, there were also major problems. “What you saw in Mumbai was that the reaction plan, if you will, the crisis management plan, was not so fine tuned. I mean, I don’t think hotel staff knew exactly how to react,” says Todd Brown, executive director of the U.S. State Department’s Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC).
OSAC has set up a hotel sector group to exchange information from attacks and develop best practices for improving hotel security and crisis planning. The following lessons learned relate to Mumbai and earlier attacks and are drawn from OSAC and other hotel industry experts and resources.
Detect Surveillance
The terrorists apparently built their wealth of knowledge of the hotel floor plans and security setups from pre-operational surveillance and open-source data, such as the use of commercial imagery providers, according to congressional testimony by Charles E. Allen, undersecretary for intelligence and analysis at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
To deter and detect
this type of attack planning, hotels must be
on the lookout for anyone surveilling their
properties. The entire staff has a role to
play in the surveillance-awareness program.
For example, housekeeping staff should be
trained to notice anything out of the
ordinary in guest rooms, such as the
presence of weapons or drugs.
“You just can’t depend
on the security personnel, because they’re
limited in number,” says Elinor Garely, a
travel writer and business management
professor at the City University of New
York.
“So every person has to
be trained to have the watchful eye, to know
what to look for in guests. And the people
that are not guests,” she says.
Brown agrees. “You have
to have training throughout the entire staff
of the hotel. They have to challenge people.
And they can do that in a nice way. But they
should be asking for room keys for where you
are staying, all those types of things. And
I think in the past, many were sort of lax
in doing that. That is changing.”
There are various types
of behavior that hotel staff and security
officers must be trained to look for. These
range from spotting people who are obviously
out of place, such as an individual wearing
a long or heavy coat in hot weather, to the
less conspicuous, such as when a person is
taking unusual pictures of hotel exits or
security cameras.
Staffers should “be
trained in spotting individuals who may
raise flags in terms of doing advanced
recon,” says Magnus
Ranstorp, terrorism expert with the Swedish
National Defense College. He suggests that
someone be posted in the lobby to observe
individuals and decipher whether they look
suspicious. He acknowledges, however, that
this surveillance can take a lot of staff
time.
Many hotels are
addressing this issue cost effectively by
positioning in the lobby a greeter who makes
eye contact with people entering the hotel
and asks them where they are headed. “That
person has a chance to eyeball that
individual,” says Garely. If suspicions are
raised, depending on the level of concern,
the greeter can have the person escorted so
that he or she is not roaming freely, or the
greeter can discreetly call security.
Since 9-11, many Las
Vegas hotels have stepped up their visible
exterior checkpoints and controls. Vehicles
are often stopped and the driver is
questioned before they are permitted into
the parking garages, says Steven T. Baker,
CPP, PCI, PSP, a security consultant at VTI
Associates. This approach of asking where
people are headed and perhaps even pointing
out more convenient routes or garages can be
thought of as customer service as well as
security, says Baker.
“That’s giving them
time to look at the people, see who they
are, check their mannerisms,” he says,
adding that the casual questioning has been
useful in decreasing normative crime, such
as car thefts, because it encourages thieves
to look elsewhere where they will not be
questioned.
Additionally, reception
desk workers should have an eye out for
suspicious behavior from guests checking in.
The hope is that this vigilance will thwart
attempts at surveillance and deter
attackers, who will prefer a softer target
where they can anonymously assess the site.
Hotels must also ensure
that employee exits and other less visible
entryways are access controlled and
patrolled to discourage anyone from trying
to conduct reconnaissance in those areas. In
this regard, randomness is important.
Security patrols and functions of other
hotel staff must not be predictable, because
this allows attackers to study and counter
them more easily. A lack of variability was
an issue in Mumbai, where the attackers were
able to ascertain security routines of hotel
personnel, according to Allen’s testimony.
Make Security Visible
Hotels often try to
maintain a low-profile security presence to
avoid making guests feel uncomfortable. But
in certain locations, as with the greeters
at the lobby entrance or garage, visible
security can thwart crime and provide a
sense of safety for guests.
“I always use a dual
approach,” says Duane Firmani, security
manager of hotel group Sun International in
South Africa, who employs both visible and
undercover security. “I believe in high
visibility at the boundaries and first
points of contact,” he says, referring to it
as a “tough outer shell protecting the sweet
spot.”
But invisibility has
its place as well. Firmani uses covert
security to determine whether anyone is
conducting surveillance by watching the
uniformed security guards. The covert
personnel also help with quality control of
the security service and overall hotel
operation.
Gather
Intelligence
Preventing terrorists
from gathering intelligence about the hotel
site is only half of the intelligence
equation; the other half is making sure that
the hotel collects and receives the best
intelligence possible about the terrorist
threat. But it’s equally important to
correctly respond to that intelligence once
the information about possible threats is
collected.
According to Allen’s
testimony, intelligence gathered after a
February 2008 arrest of a terrorist suspect
in India suggested that the Taj Mahal hotel
was the target of surveillance. The hotel
was notified about the threat, and
management increased security, only to
decrease it again to routine levels by the
time the attacks occurred, stated Allen.
That chain of events
illustrates the importance of taking a
longer term view toward threat. It is
important to remember that terrorists
themselves take the long view, planning
months and years in advance and biding their
time until the moment seems right. A similar
situation occurred in the United States,
where in July 2001 terrorist chatter led to
a heightened sense of threat in the
intelligence community but that level of
concern had dissipated by September 11.
The Mumbai incident
also illustrates the importance of having a
good relationship with intelligence
services. Fenton says that hotel security
must be proactive on this front.
One example of a hotel
operation that takes a proactive approach to
intelligence is Marriott International
Lodging. For example, Marriott was warned by
Indian intelligence services in late
September about a possible threat, according
to congressional testimony from Alan Orlob,
Marriott’s vice president of corporate
security and loss prevention. The company
acted on the intelligence by sending a
regional security director to Mumbai to make
an independent risk assessment. That
assessment showed that the threat situation
in India had escalated.
Harden Defenses
Based on that
assessment, Marriott raised security to the
highest level, which meant screening
vehicles, inspecting luggage, and having
everyone pass through metal detectors. It is
possible that these measures led potential
terrorists to choose a softer target.
“The tactics used
against the hotels in Mumbai were not new,”
Orlob told Congress. He noted that 16 years
ago, Marriott began to address the threat of
attacks worldwide by forming a crisis
management program that includes training
exercises and constant risk monitoring.
Marriott has added
physical security, such as window film,
bollards, and even explosive vapor detectors
to properties in high-risk locations. While
those measures protect mainly against
explosions, in the wake of Mumbai, Orlob
said, the organization has also developed an
active shooter program. The company uses a
color-coded threat program that allows it to
ramp up security as concerns mount.
Some of the physical
security enhancements, as well as the idea
of setbacks (wider perimeters), are lessons
from earlier car bomb incidents, such as the
August 2003 attack on the JW Marriott Hotel
in Jakarta, Indonesia.
As newer hotels in
high-risk areas are being designed with more
of an eye towards security, “many of the
large hotel developers are going to the same
kind of thing you see for U.S. embassies;
that is, relatively remote sites with
substantial standoff distances from public
roads and heavily reinforced perimeter
barriers,” says Thomas Vonier, FAIA, RIBA,
Paris-based architect.
The farther away
vehicles are kept from hotels, the less the
chance for damage from a blast. However,
Vonier points out that long setbacks can
make deliveries more cumbersome and raise
the specter of perimeter breaches.
Additionally, parking becomes less
convenient when any type of parking facility
is located off-site.
Not every hotel has
enough room for a long setback, but there
are also barriers such as bollards and
planters that can be placed around the hotel
to ensure that no vehicle is driven into the
building and to minimize damage from a
blast. Such tools can only do so much if a
bomb is detonated, however.
A more extreme barrier
can be seen at the reopened Islamabad
Marriott, which now employs what has been
referred to as a “bombproof” wall; it
surrounds the hotel like a fortress. Chad
Callaghan, CPP, vice president of enterprise
loss prevention at Marriott International,
Inc., which has 3,000 hotels in 70 countries
(although it does not own the franchised
Islamabad hotel, which is actually a member
of the Hashoo Group) says that it is not an
attractive addition and would not be
welcomed in most places. However, since that
hotel has been the site of multiple terror
attacks, property owners were forced to take
extreme measures.
If there is a garage
on-site or if vehicles are coming into hotel
grounds, Callaghan advocates having an
access control program in place, as well as
visually inspecting the vehicles for
explosives before allowing entrance.
Car inspections may be
essential in high-risk areas where the
parking is underneath or close to the hotel.
For hotels in less volatile environments,
there are still mild inspections that can be
done.
Building design can go
a long way to limiting blast damage.
Reinforced columns and blast-resistant
windows are infrastructure choices that can
help protect those inside a building if a
bomb does indeed go off. Blast-mitigation on
windows can prevent shards from hurting
people, a top cause of injury in explosions.
However, most hotels have already been built
without these specifications and
retrofitting is expensive. Still, says
Callaghan, his company is retrofitting
hotels where such action is deemed
necessary, based on risk.
Liaise with Responders
Another lesson from
Mumbai is the importance of making sure that
local first responders know your facility.
The Mumbai terrorists, who had done their
homework and were aided by GPS, had a much
better working knowledge of the hotels than
did the responding commando teams. This
should not have been the case, and there are
steps hotels can take to ensure that this
doesn’t happen.
Hotels must reach out
to responders to ensure that they have
up-to-date floor plans and information about
the properties they will respond to. Hotels
in the United States address the issue by
ensuring that there are up-to-date copies of
floor plans and other important hotel
information at an accessible location
off-site.
Some states mandate
that this be done. For example, Nevada state
law requires that various hotels provide the
state repository with a copy of their floor
plans and operation and response plans in a
state repository, according to Baker. Hotels
in high-risk locations must be proactive
about this.
In response to the
lessons learned from the Mumbai attacks, the
New York Police Department has been touring
various hotels and videotaping entrances,
lobbies, and certain rooms, to use as
training tools, according to congressional
testimony by Commissioner Raymond Kelly. It
behooves other high-threat hotels to invite
their local police in to do the same thing
or to do it for them. This information
should be kept on file in a safe location.
Hotels should also
explore opportunities for other productive
partnerships with law enforcement agencies.
Firmani’s group has a public-private
partnership with police. This partnership
facilitated the establishment of a
surveillance network in and around his
company’s principal property.
Partnering with law enforcement can
also help cement relationships that could be
helpful if an attack or other emergency
occurs.
Adapt to
Circumstances
There was confusion
when the terrorists first entered hotels
with regard to whether to tell Mumbai’s
guests to evacuate or shelter in place.
Apparently hotel staff told guests to stay
in their rooms when they might have been
better off exiting the building if they
could have found a safe way out. That’s a
tough call, but the main issue is for hotels
to have a set of plans that can be adapted
to various threat situations and to have
someone in charge ready to make those tough
decisions based on the best available
intelligence at the time.
Train Regularly
A crisis management
plan is only useful if staff know how to
carry it out. That means the entire work
force must be well versed in its details and
their responsibilities. Training can include
anything from tabletop exercises to actually
evacuating staff to ensure that they’re
familiar with fire doors and routes they
would take in an emergency.
When a drill or
exercise is completed, management should
speak with employees about how the training
went. Those discussions will help the hotel
assess what needs improvement.
Drills and training
exercises should be conducted on a regular
basis. Disaster response and recovery plans
should be tested quarterly and supplemented
with tabletop exercises, recommends Philip
Farina, CPP, CLSD of Farina Associates, Ltd.
But he acknowledges that it’s rare to find
hotels doing such drills more than once a
year.
Baker says that the
hotel security industry doesn’t have the
training infrastructure it needs. He says
the training compares unfavorably with that
of, say, law enforcement officers.
“We’ll do a
three-or-four-hour training program and
think that it’s…done. And it’s really just
the start of that,” Baker says.
Garely agrees. Although
most hotels do run training programs, she
notes, “You can’t learn enough or become
vigilant enough in an hour or two, or even a
week or two, of training. It has to be an
ongoing ever-present reality in your job.”
The training needs to
be more than just one-time lectures and must
be followed up and evaluated to ensure that
goals are being met, says Baker. One way to
improve training is to cut programs into
shorter snippets and have supervisors
reviewing those points during preshift times
or during slow times, he suggests.
Terrorism expert Brian
Jenkins said in testimony on the Mumbai
incident that attacks on flagship hotels are
increasing in number and that the success of
Mumbai is likely to invite others to try
similar operations. He warned, however, that
terrorists frequently change tactics.
Therefore, security professionals must learn
from Mumbai but be quick to adapt as
terrorists alter their mode of attack.
What is unlikely to
change is the attractiveness of hotels as
targets. “Terrorists will continue to focus
on soft targets that offer high body counts
and that have iconic value,” said Jenkins.
While no one can remove
the threat, the hotel industry can take
reasonable steps to minimize the risk.
|