The telephone could ring at any time: A distraught voice at the end of the line declaring, ”Our director in Bogota was kidnaped.”
Within hours the crisis management staff at Control Risks Ltd., the Maryland-based subsidiary of a British security firm, would have deployed two staff members–one to the company`s corporate headquarters in this country and one to Bogota, Colombia.
The Control Risks consultant in the United States would assemble an emergency team: members of the company`s senior management and its legal, financial and public affairs departments. Together they would plan their strategy: Will they pay the ransom and how much? How can they assemble, let`s say, $1 million in cash on a Friday night when the banks have closed? Then how can they get it out of this country? And what are Colombia`s currency regulations for getting the cash into that country?
In Bogota the consultant would assess the situation: Who are the kidnapers? How does the group usually operate? Will the terrorists really kill the target? The consultant would contact local authorities. Then he would try to establish contact with the kidnapers and begin negotiations for the release of the American businessman.
Chances are, all this would be carried out in utmost secrecy, and that is one powerful reason the American public has such a distorted view of terrorism. Scenes like this hypothetical kidnaping of a businessman for ransom, known in the security trade as a K&R, are far more prevalent than the hijackings that inspired the breathless live television reports that scared hordes of American vacationers into canceling visits abroad last summer.
No one knows just how many terrorist incidents against business targets abroad there have been in recent years, because corporations work so hard to keep them secret, but the State Department and other authorities say that incidents affecting tourists are rare in comparison with known incidents involving executives. And, in addition to making a political statement, a K&R is customarily carried out to raise money to finance the political activities of the kidnapers.
Apparently the fear induced by the highjackings is subsiding, because as the vacation season nears, the travel industry reports that bookings for European travel are on the rise. But so are terrorist incidents against business.
”Business is a growing terrorist target abroad,” said the most recent report by the U.S. State Department about the subject. And it has been an increasing one throughout this decade, said Gene Bishop, executive secretary of the Overseas Security Council, a joint venture between the public and private sectors to study and combat international terrorism.
Of the approximately 800 international terrorist attacks recorded worldwide by the State Department in 1985, more than 200 were against business interests. Of those 200 attacks, 67 were against American companies. There were more attacks against American business-related targets than attacks against American diplomatic and military installations combined, said the report, ”Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Businesses Abroad.”
Despite the wide public perception that all Americans, especially tourists, are at risk abroad, there are no facts to support that fear, Bishop said. ”Fear is a very difficult thing to deal with,” he said. ”As far as I`m concerned, all that nonsense you heard a year ago–don`t ride in the first-class section of airplanes because terrorists make that their headquarters–is just that, garbage. Ride first class as a tourist every chance you get. There is really an incredibly low risk for American tourists abroad.
”Could a terrorist strike (against tourists) happen. Of course, yes. But the American businessman lives abroad, he works abroad. He develops habits and routines. He may even become a symbol. There are a lot of reasons that the average American businessman is more at risk than the average American tourist.”
The official position of the Travel Industry Association of America is that tourism continues to be important both economically and for the advancement of international relations and does not present particular risk to American travelers. In a statement issued last summer, William D. Toohey, president of the association, said: ”Statistically speaking, the average American tourist has a greater chance in any given year to die of homicide, or an automobile accident, or any number of rare diseases. . . .”
The cost of the 67 terrorist attacks against American businesses, including bombings, kidnapings, sabotage and thefts, against U.S. firms abroad in 1985 was high, according to the State Department statistics. At least two businessmen died, one was wounded and nine were kidnaped. At the end of the year, at least three businessmen still were held captive. Property damage and ransom payments exceeded $5 million.
But the State Department admits that its numbers probably underestimate significantly the real financial costs and perhaps even the costs in terms of human lives. It is the feeling at the State Department and among members of the business community that many kidnapings go unreported.
—
A not-too-tall, not-too-thin man in a pinstriped suit picked up a fat, felt-tipped pen. In a very civilized manner, he began to reduce corporate counterterrorism to points A, B and C on an oversize pad of paper in his Maryland office.
But those seemingly straightforward points, laid out so cleanly in black and white, belie the true nature of an industry in which an executive class of security professionals has stepped from the boardroom into the trenches and staged a counterattack against worldwide terrorism.
The man with the felt pen is Gerald S. Rees, a former Mormon missionary, a former FBI agent and the executive director of Control Risks Ltd.
Control Risks Ltd. is the American division of the prestigious London-based security firm Control Risks Group, which was once a subsidiary of Lloyd`s of London. There is a similar division in Melbourne, Australia. The company was founded 12 years ago when Hogg Robinson Group, one of Lloyd`s major underwriters, began offering kidnaping-and-ransom insurance in response to the growing number of corporate kidnapings worldwide, particularly in Latin America.
”It occurred to them,” Rees said, ”that in order to reduce risks for both their clients and themselves, they ought to put together a special team to serve clients both in a preventive mode and, if that client had problems, in a response mode.” About 1980 the original team, consisting mostly of former British intelligence officers, bought the firm from Hogg Robinson and incorporated as an independent company.
Recently Control Risks has expanded its services from the original kidnaping and ransom area. Its division, Control Risks Information Services, also provides hard-bound reports, updated monthly, or computer reports, updated daily.
Under each geographic heading in the reports are color-coded headings giving historical, political, cultural and economic information, a monthly
”risk” assessment and a synopsis of major crises–bombings, assassinations, guerrilla warfare.
The company also provides ”crisis management” training for corporations. Control Risks is a consulting firm, selling advice and information only, Rees stresses. For that hypothetical kidnaping in Bogota, for example, Control Risks` consultants would not carry any money-stuffed suitcases. That would be the client`s responsibility.
Rees reveals little about his earlier employment in the FBI, saying only that he was involved in criminal investigations and domestic intelligence. When pressed about the latter, he mumbles something about ”rampaging” flower children, radical politics, the late `60s and Resurrection City on the Washington Mall.
But as an executive Rees is willing to talk–if only in general terms
–about this industry. He understands the importance of marketing. Still, he will not reveal the names of his clients or discuss cases.
With the exception of the locked front door to the company, there is little indication in the Control Risks office as to the nature of its business. A few travel posters decorate the hallway. Rees` office has a world map. A replica of the FBI badge and seal are framed behind his desk. His bookshelves contain only heavy binders with security labels and a copy of Ken Follett`s thriller ”Eye of the Needle.”
And the solemn-faced men–the ones who will fly on a moment`s notice to Colombia or Peru or Spain to orchestrate the response to a kidnaping-and-ransom case and work the rest of the time behind the nondescript doors –will say absolutely nothing about their cloak-and-dagger methods.
It is not unusual that these men, whose last names inevitably were once followed by some acronym–CIA, FBI, SAS, are so reticent, said Richard Post, New York-based author and security consultant.
”They couldn`t talk then; there`s no value in talking about it now. It`s the way the system is,” he said. ”They are invisible men. No one sees what they do. The companies certainly don`t want to talk about it. Corporations don`t want anyone knowing their problems.”
”It`s like herpes,” he said. ”It happens in the best of families. But no one wants to talk about it.”
It is a business in which the successes are never publicized.
”There are hundreds of stories about security professionals doing things that save lives that don`t get talked about but perhaps should,” Post said.
”I know of security professionals who have arranged for airlifts for people in emergency situations. Or brought bodies home. That`s difficult, getting a body out of a country before the customs officials say no. Or bailing a guy out of jail because he was assaulted and left naked on some street corner. They don`t just plan trips overseas so executives won`t put themselves at risk.”
Today the private security industry varies dramatically, from in-house departments at major multinational firms, to major contract firms, such as Control Risks, to tiny independent mom-and-pop organizations.
—
In business terms, corporate security is a growth industry because terrorist attacks against the private sector are on the rise worldwide. According to Post, ”Americans are a target. How much of one, and why, depends on the part of the world.”
Tighter security at embassies and other government installations may be making business people and facilities more inviting, according to the State Department report. In addition, American firms are also numerous and often highly visible. ”By targeting U.S. business personnel and facilities, terrorists can maintain pressure on governments, obtain operating funds and gain the publicity they crave,” the report said.
While some of the attacks against American businesses and employees were symbolic, a simple venting of anti-American sentiment, others were
orchestrated for financial gain. Often it is the old-fashioned profit motive that drives the terrorist groups victimizing American industry.
”Kidnaping is clearly a business,” Post said. ”A network of kidnapers has been well documented. In left-wing organizations, in, let`s say, El Salvador, the only reason they kidnap is to get money to fund their political activities. There are different market prices for businessmen in different parts of the world.”
Like almost everything else, those prices are secret.
Many of the Latin American bombings were ”veiled extortion attempts,”
according to the State Department report, which also said that two American oil companies paid ransoms of more than $1 million each for the release of kidnaped executives in 1983 and 1985. Industry members say, however, that the ransoms can go much higher.
Secretary of State George Shultz outlined the full costs to business in a speech he gave two years ago to the American Society for Industrial Security, when he was announcing the formation of the Overseas Security Advisory Council:
”As a former business executive myself, I know how important it is that your people abroad have some degree of confidence in their safety. Without that confidence, doing business effectively is practically impossible. And when America`s businesses have a hard time doing business abroad, all of America suffers. Our nation loses jobs and income. Our balance of payments is adversely affected. And, not least important, the constructive ties that American business creates with our friends and allies around the world are eroded.”
Thus American businesses are approaching the global minefield of foreign cultures and potential political violence with their own ”intelligence”
network. They are protecting their international interests–their businesses, their employees, their profits–by tapping into the nether world of international terrorism with spies for hire.
