It is still unclear exactly what caused EgyptAir flight MS804 to crash. So far however, intelligence officials say the confluence of data points to an act of terrorism.
There was no SoS from the pilots. The plane was out of control with no obvious signs of bad weather. Then there is the overall level of threat history of airport security lapses at all the plane’s destinations.
If terrorism was behind the crash, then many questions over airline and airport security will have to be reassessed. There also needs to be a re-examination of how information is released and relatives informed.
In the hours immediately after the plane’s disappearance from air traffic control radar, contradictory accounts from Greek and Egyptian officials suggest a less than coordinated international approach in the management of information.
This is not the first time such confusion has prevailed following airline crashes. Not only can this lead to wild and potentially incendiary speculation but exposes relatives of victims to even more emotional trauma.
Above all else, though, it is security that will come under scrutiny. In the case of Flight MS804, it was on its fifth flight of the day, having already flown from Paris to Cairo and back. It had also been to Tunisia and Eritrea. While these kinds of journeys are normal for commercial airliners, the plane’s stopovers in Tunis and Asmara mean it had been in places facing above-normal challenges in terms of terrorism and security.
It also means a large number of people had access to the aircraft in four countries including airport personnel, passengers and flight employees. And that does not even account for the checked luggage.
Security is only as strong as the weakest airport security in any chain of flight destinations. Aircraft are often not thoroughly examined at every stop.
Many developed countries already fund joint efforts to try and ensure there is security consistency across airports raising best practice at those their countries fly planes to. There are immense challenges in this however especially in dealing with certain airports in the Middle East, some African airports and others in the developing world.
That said it is also wrong to assume this is where any security lapses may have occurred in the case of flight MS804. If the flight was the target of a terrorist operation, global aviation authorities will have to confront the fact that the last line of defence against such an attack would have been at Charles de Gaulle (CDG) Airport in Paris, nominally one of the most secure facilities in Europe.
But CDG itself has been shown recently to be vulnerable to what security officials call "insider threats", where people working in secure areas may be terrorists or have been compromised by them.
After last November's Paris attacks, some airport staff had their security clearance revoked over fears of links to Islamic extremists.
Clearly more stringent screening and background checks of employees should now be implemented as part of any security overhaul.
No security precautions are entirely failsafe. But whether terrorism was or was not the cause of the EgyptAir crash, it is time to think again. Reassessing, modifying, and improving security in the face of shifting threat levels must take priority.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here