Dignitary Protection

Our next dignitary protection class is scheduled for April 12-17, 2015.  We are very proud of the class we offer.  It has been taught to federal law-enforcement agencies, state and local police departments with dignitary protection missions, and corporate security outfits.  It is an intense class.  In six days we train for about 80 hours.  This includes, theory, practical skills, and many drills and exercises.

One thing that always amazes me is how the perception of dignitary protection, for most people, is still skewed.  Most people think of this:

Not to say that the big goon with a gun has no room in dignitary protection, but reality is that the field has evolved to a professional breed of security providers.  These individuals are not dependent on size (muscles or guns), but rather on proper application of risk prevention and mitigation processes.  Reality is that if the security specialist ever has to draw his sidearm, or engage a threat, than two things are off: he failed to plan in advance and avoid the risk, and he is now busy addressing a threat rather than evacuating and protecting his principal.

Again, sometimes there just isn't any other choice.  There is value in deterrence, and if things do go bad (we can never plan for all contingencies, even though we should most definitely try), we MUST win.  This picture from president Reagan assassination attempt shows that things can, and indeed do go south.  Note the one secret service agent evacuating the president, while another shields with his body.  Not in the picture are other agents drawing their guns to address the threat.

But this should be a rare occasion rather than the norm.  A true security detail should be like a chess game.  You should evaluate all risks, take steps to avoid them, and position yourself (your principal and detail members) in positions of advantage.  The advance work done prior to the detail, the surveys of sites and routes, the collection of intelligence on the principal and threats, conducting counter-surveillance, and remaining vigilant throughout the process, will assure the principal is safe and guns can remain holstered and concealed.

Generally speaking there are three type of security details (many sub-categories and overlapping possible details do exist):

The Bodyguard:  Typically used as means of intimidation, or as a status display.  it says "look at me!  I am important and have a bodyguard."  This is not always a bad thing, and for some it is exactly what is needed.  These individuals may also be well trained, but the fact of the matter is that they were likely hired due to their size and looks.  Size also acts as a deterrent...although several times we saw this go wrong when such untrained individuals who were hired for pure size and demeanor act in unprofessional manner that reflects badly on their principal...like this guy:

Then you have the Covert Professional:  This individual is a security expert.  Typically hired by corporate clients, and is there to assure safety is maintained.  This person is well-versed in the theory of security, use of technology, and he may have additional skills, such as trauma medicine or language skills.  Please note that the term 'covert' may be a misnomer.  These security personnel may very well be presenting themselves as such, but they are not dependent on size and intimidation to achieve their goals.

Lastly we have the Overt Professionals.  These individuals typically operate in high risk environment and are hired to prevent risks.  These professionals accomplish that, amongst other means, by show of force.  And in the event of a true threat, they are very well trained in tactical disciplines.  

I hope this shed some light on what a true dignitary protection specialist should be.  The class we offer is aimed to provide the participants with the knowledge and skill set to determine risk factors, take preventive measures, and if the need arises to defuse it as effectively as possible.  No one training program is ever complete.  Dignitary protection is a profession that one hones over years of experience and practical applications.  We try to provide people with the skills they need to do the job right from the start.

As always, stay safe and watch your six!

BK Blankchtein

Masada Tactical Protective Services.

Security: How Culture Plays a Part

I recently been contracted to go to Israel and perform vulnerability assessments on ten different installations.  People questioned why send an American to a country filled with security experts?  wouldn’t it be more cost effective and logistically simple to have one of the locals perform the job?  And these people may be right.  What they do not understand is that we bring to the table is a unique aspect of security operations few others have.  We are the perfect blend of Israeli and American fusion.  Gaining academic knowledge in America but feeding off practical experience in Israel, we are able to draw on the best of both worlds.  Over the past sixteen years we have been able to implement lessons forged in fire from Israel right here in America, and alternately, leverage technology and processes developed in the USA back in Israel.  Flow of information goes both ways.

But how different are the two?  After all, a shooter is a shooter, whether it is rooted in terrorism or workplace violence, is there truly a difference?  Is the way to mitigate a risk at a school in Israel fearing their students would be kidnapped by Palestinians that different than a school in America worried about an Active Shooter incident executed by a disgruntled and mentally unstable student?  The answer is: that even though the risks is similar, i.e. mass casualties due to wounds associated with small arms caliber rounds, the means to address it sure are fundamentally different.  The reasons for the disparity in response options stem from dozens of years of having to execute a mission a certain way.

Israel is a military country.  What I mean by that is that most people living there served in the military.  Many went career.  The leadership is mostly retired generals, and all major corporations are ran by former military officers.  The way of thinking therefore is very much a product of a military framework.  Furthermore, the Israeli Defense Forces are limited in resources, making the dependency on ingenuity and creativity much higher.  There is less dependance on technology (although that is somewhat changing), but more on how to maximize the available resources to achieve a goal.  Every soldier in Israel learns from day one to "do more with less"...and win.  If a school in America will depend mostly on CCTV systems, alarms, intercom systems, and other technologies, a school in Israel will prefer depending on behavioral analysis and development of training programs for armed staff.  Lower cost, higher return on investment.

Lastly, at least for the scope of this article, is the focus on Defense versus Deterrence.  The two are integral part of any security mechanism.  The goal is always to deter a potential attack, and if one takes place than to effectively initiate a defense process.  However, one can see how the emphasis between deterrence and defense shift between the two nations.  Americans are big on surveillance, and in the event that something grave happens there is a dependance on police response.  Deterrence in the US is based on flaunting various technological items, such as cameras, as if saying “we are secure.  Go somewhere else”.  Israel’s security is based on a posture of “don’t mess with us”.  You may not see as many cameras, or as many gates, and you may even play down the effectiveness of the guard at the door, but there is an unspoken understanding that if you were to try something then the results would be very grave for you, and the scenario would typically be solved by the people on-site.

Is one better than the other?  Absolutely no.  The two have merits.  The two have value.  And in a perfect world we could implement both.  But Israelis don’t have the fiscal resources that Americans have and thus depend on the human element, while Americans are too worried about political correctness that any sort of “profiling” is viewed as negative, thus depending on technology instead.  

So when I perform a security assessment in either country I benefit from my experience and knowledge from both countries.  I am able to recommend to organizations in Israel security elements from America and vice verse. In either country I am viewed as the one that “thinks outside the box”, when essentially I am just thinking in a different box.  

As always, stay safe and watch your six.

BK Blankchtein

Masada Tactical Protective Services.