Al Qaeda calls for more attacks on US and Israeli flights after horror FlyDubai ‘hijack’

A pro-Al Qaeda publication has called for attacks on US and Israeli aircraft after the attempted takeover of a FlyDubai flight last week, raising fresh concerns about aviation security and the threat of extremist propaganda exploiting a high-profile incident.

This appeal was included in the most recent issue of Al-Bayan, a weekly publication associated with Al Qaeda supporters, as several reports have stated.

The publication linked the incident on Sept 30 involving Flight FZ1073, a flight running from Dubai to Tel Aviv, with the attacks of Sept 11, 2001, and presented the cockpit attack as an example for others to imitate, reported the New York Post.

However, there is no evidence that Al Qaeda ordered the attack, and the Israeli investigators have referred to it as the work of a lone actor.

What took place on FlyDubai flight FZ1073?

The Boeing 737 Max 8, which was carrying 182 people, was approaching Israel when the first officer is said to have attacked the captain in the cockpit, and the aircraft then entered a rapid descent.

The captain succeeded in opening the cockpit door, whereupon the passengers and the crew rushed in to assist. Two pilots who were not on duty and who were on the flight helped to get control of the aircraft, after which it made an emergency landing in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia. Although no passengers suffered serious injuries, the captain did get injured.

Who is the co-pilot, accused of the cockpit attack?

The suspect has been identified as Hamam al-Hammami, who is from Oman. It has been reported that he used to work for Oman Air, where there were supposed to be concerns regarding his activities and the content online, before he then took up flying on commercial routes in other places.

The investigators are also looking into the social-media posts which are allegedly connected with him, some of which are said to have shown Al Qaeda figures and Israeli aircraft. It should be noted that some of this material appeared after his arrest. At this stage, it is not known who posted it or whether it had been planned.

The gap is important; no one can claim that the suspect acted on behalf of any group until it has been closed.

Governments blame one another over aviation vetting

The situation has triggered a difficult debate regarding what each person knew. Israeli authorities have doubted whether sufficient information about the foreign crew members was known before the jet entered Israeli airspace, while the UAE has itself come under review concerning the suspect’s work history.

The finger-pointing should itself be subject to examination. It is not clear what, if anything, the government knew regarding the concerns allegedly raised at Oman Air, or whether any warning ever got out of the file cabinet.

Since aviation security relies on airlines, governments and intelligence agencies exchanging information, a crew member who flies international routes every week goes through all of them.

If the worries had been real and had been recorded, the issue would not only be about how he got to the cockpit; it would also be why no one prevented him. The passengers will demand answers from each of the agencies concerned, not merely from the airline.

What does the Al-Bayan call for in relation to attacks that affect air travelers?

Security experts have for a long time cautioned that extremist organisations use high-profile events to win over supporters and create fear; by connecting the most recent cockpit attack with the attacks of Sept. 11, Al Qaeda sympathisers are given a ready-made narrative, no matter what the facts may be.

The message could also cause anxiety among travellers whose routes include the United States and Israel. However, these concerns should be considered in light of what is already known.

The fact that there has been an unverified call for copycat attacks does not prove that there is an organised plot, and no investigator has stated that the FlyDubai attack was ordered by anyone.

The investigators are yet working to find out why the suspect acted and whether anyone else was involved; their conclusions will show if this was an isolated incident or a warning regarding the gaps in crew screening.

In either case, the episode demonstrates how quickly a single instance of violence on a commercial jet can turn into propaganda. It also illustrates how flaws in screening and in the sharing of intelligence can have repercussions that extend well beyond a single flight.