WHEN Glasgow Airport was the target of a terror attack in the summer, emotions understandably ran high. Within hours, Kenny MacAskill, Scotland's Justice Secretary, said in a statement that the suspects held by police were not "home-grown terrorists"
. They were not "born or bred" in Scotland and had only lived here for "a period of time".
Given the fears in Scotland's Asian community of an angry backlash against Muslims and their businesses, MacAskill's remarks were probably a good idea. Yet when I heard them I felt distinctly uneasy. There seemed to be a subtext that bordered on self-congratulation. The message seemed to be: "Here in Scotland we don't do terrorism. You might get home-grown terrorists in England and elsewhere, but not here. Not in Scotland. No way."
The fact that 200 terror suspects are currently under police surveillance in Scottish cities shows that any such confidence was misplaced. Yet still I encounter a half-formed belief in some people's minds that Scotland will escape the worst manifestations of Islamic terrorism. Why would they want to attack us? Everyone loves us, don't they?
This may be a hangover from decades of Irish republican terrorism, when Scotland was indeed insulated from the murderous bomb attacks the IRA inflicted on civilians in mainland Britain. With our new enemies, this dispensation no longer applies. Any complacency about our status as a potential target is unjustified and dangerous.
We are everything the jihadist hates: we live in a secular state; we are a democracy; we like a drink; we let women have an education, drive cars and wear what the hell they like; we do not believe in the utter destruction of America and Israel; and Scottish soldiers are currently battling the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, with some success. Make no mistake, we are the enemy.
Last week MacAskill was again talking about Scotland and terrorism, and I can't say I was terribly surprised at what he said. Dismayed, yes. Surprised, no.
MacAskill criticised the 14,000 spot checks that have been carried out on Scottish rail passengers by members of the British Transport Police since July. "It's a genuine cause for concern," he said. "I think we need answers from British Transport Police on why these figures are so high – particularly when our eight local constabularies have always been able to react to similar threats and challenges yet only used these special powers on a much smaller scale."
Senior officers in the British Transport Police are furious with the Justice Minister. They believe his comments could have cost them the backing of the public for an operation they regard as essential to Scotland's security. Crucially, they point to the fact that throughout the period of these checks – which of course have the potential for causing inconvenience and offence – the transport police have received not one single complaint.
The Scottish public is capable of understanding that in a time of danger precautions have to be taken, and if random checks make it harder for terror groups to scout, plan and carry out atrocities, then they should be accepted as a price that's worth paying. Such reasoning, it seems, is beyond the Justice Secretary. His argument is fatuous. Of course there is going to be a difference between the stop-and-search records of ordinary police and transport police. A moment's thought explains this. Britain's transport hubs have always been the terrorists' prime targets.
Anyone who questions whether al-Qaeda would be interested in a railway needs one word whispered in their ear: Madrid. The al-Qaeda-inspired attacks on the Spanish capital's rail network in March 2004 remains the jihadists' most successful European operation. It left 191 people dead and 2,050 people injured. Waverley and Queen Street and Glasgow Central are just as much prime targets as Madrid's Atocha station or London's Edgware Road, scene of one of the 7/7 Tube bombings.
MacAskill is not a politician afraid of tough action when required. He's the minister who promised to ban cheap booze promotions in Scotland's supermarkets. He's committed to tough action against knife crime and has pledged to "banish Scotland's reputation for violence within 10 years". On spot checks, however, he is way out of line. It's the kind of comment you would expect from an opposition politician seeking a cheap headline, not a senior member of the Scottish Government who has the demanding job of keeping Scotland safe.
Let's imagine for a moment that the transport police did indeed heed MacAskill's advice. Let's imagine that they acquiesced and cut back the checks in Scotland to a bare minimum. Where, then, would the terrorists be more likely to strike? Railway stations down south where the vigilance remained high, or railway stations in Scotland where vigilance had been deemed unacceptable?
At a time of terrorist threat, what we need from a Justice Minister is a cool head, a firm will and a determination that public safety will not be compromised, however politically inconvenient that proves to be. Judged on these criteria, and on these comments, Kenny MacAskill is not up to the job.
Join Scotland on Sunday columnist Kenny Farquharson from 5pm GMT today for an online chat about the issues of the day. Add your questions or comments below – now – and visit here later today for the live discussion.The full article contains 934 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
