Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff?s shift to a more risk-management orientation and emphasis in US homeland security efforts is certainly a more astute, sophisticated, and prudent posture for defending the US homeland against terrorist attacks. In particular, what seems to be Chertoff?s aim of marshaling limited counter-terrorism resources and efforts to more protect advantageously not every potential terrorist target against every potential attack scenario, but rather the most likely terrorist targets from the most likely attack scenarios should be applauded as a shrewd, prudent approach to homeland security. One side of the calculation of determining the most likely terrorist targets and attack scenarios includes identifying vulnerable targets, as well as vulnerable means of covert terrorist infiltration and operations. The other, and arguably more important, side of terrorist threat calculation is an analysis of the terrorist group strategic mindsets, modus operandi, and group behaviors to develop an assessment of the groups? likely attack and threat scenarios?an assessment based not exclusively on what the groups can attack, but rather, through an understanding of the mindsets of the group’s membership and leadership, what the group wants and intends to attack. This approach will give greater insight into the particular targeting, attack, operational, and behavioral preferences and characteristics of the group. This understanding and analysis of group strategic mindset, group behavior, and modus operandi is particularly critical in the development of analytic frameworks and assessments of terrorism Indications and Warning (I&W) intelligence?the intelligence function that focuses on identifying pieces of intelligence that might indicate an imminent terrorist attack.

By utilizing these particular group mindset and behavioral assessments and synthesizing them with creative, adventurous, and forward looking approaches to analysis, a more insightful and accurate range of estimates of likely terrorist threats can be developed for each group. This approach can also act as an analytic ballast or guide for revealing valuable context and insight into the daily counter-terrorism warning intelligence and can serve to highlight potentially threatening derivative trajectories and scenarios that may warrant warning. Thus, such expertise and analysis would seem to complement the new, more sophisticated risk-management approach to homeland security directed by Secretary Chertoff.

<