TSA’s liquidity trap
When the TSA banned liquids and gels on flights in response to a potential terrorist plot uncovered by British police, I largely agreed with the folks who showered rare praise on the agency for instituting a reasonable response. But, two weeks or so later, continuing the ban indefinitely, as the agency apparently plans to do, seems silly. If you’ve ...
When the TSA banned liquids and gels on flights in response to a potential terrorist plot uncovered by British police, I largely agreed with the folks who showered rare praise on the agency for instituting a reasonable response. But, two weeks or so later, continuing the ban indefinitely, as the agency apparently plans to do, seems silly.
If you've flown in the last two weeks, you probably know what I mean. Last Friday, I flew from Washington Reagan National Airport to Chicago. I arrived at Reagan, checked in, and went to security. The screeners were confiscating bottles of water and tubes of toothpaste like they were bubble gum in a junior high school classroom. Once past security, mind you, bottled water, beer, or whatever else your thirst desires is for sale (at a substantial premium). You just can't take such items past security. The same ritual takes place when planes are boarded. As I boarded my flight, two TSA employees looked in purses and briefcases, grabbing bottles of water and other new forms of contraband. They apparently got bored, however, because they left my gate with only about half the passengers on board the plane. More pressing matters must have called (smoke break anyone?).
I'm all for making air travel safe. But continuing the ban on liquids only spreads fear and causes inconvenience without making America any safer. "The threat is not over," a TSA spokesman recently said when asked why liquids would continue to be banned. Well, yes, but it never will be. Terrorists have historically repeated both their targets and the means used to attack them. So instead of instituting reactionary, knee-jerk safety procedures, let's look forward and focus on policies and procedures that really make America safer. Wouldn't that highly trained TSA employee standing at the gate be better off doing something -- anything -- other than confiscating the bottle of water I just bought at the airport newsstand?
If you’ve flown in the last two weeks, you probably know what I mean. Last Friday, I flew from Washington Reagan National Airport to Chicago. I arrived at Reagan, checked in, and went to security. The screeners were confiscating bottles of water and tubes of toothpaste like they were bubble gum in a junior high school classroom. Once past security, mind you, bottled water, beer, or whatever else your thirst desires is for sale (at a substantial premium). You just can’t take such items past security. The same ritual takes place when planes are boarded. As I boarded my flight, two TSA employees looked in purses and briefcases, grabbing bottles of water and other new forms of contraband. They apparently got bored, however, because they left my gate with only about half the passengers on board the plane. More pressing matters must have called (smoke break anyone?).
I’m all for making air travel safe. But continuing the ban on liquids only spreads fear and causes inconvenience without making America any safer. “The threat is not over,” a TSA spokesman recently said when asked why liquids would continue to be banned. Well, yes, but it never will be. Terrorists have historically repeated both their targets and the means used to attack them. So instead of instituting reactionary, knee-jerk safety procedures, let’s look forward and focus on policies and procedures that really make America safer. Wouldn’t that highly trained TSA employee standing at the gate be better off doing something — anything — other than confiscating the bottle of water I just bought at the airport newsstand?
More from Foreign Policy
Is Cold War Inevitable?
A new biography of George Kennan, the father of containment, raises questions about whether the old Cold War—and the emerging one with China—could have been avoided.
So You Want to Buy an Ambassadorship
The United States is the only Western government that routinely rewards mega-donors with top diplomatic posts.
Can China Pull Off Its Charm Offensive?
Why Beijing’s foreign-policy reset will—or won’t—work out.
Turkey’s Problem Isn’t Sweden. It’s the United States.
Erdogan has focused on Stockholm’s stance toward Kurdish exile groups, but Ankara’s real demand is the end of U.S. support for Kurds in Syria.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
