U.S. Calls for Marshals on Foreign Jets

The United States notified foreign airlines Monday that they will be required to deploy armed air marshals on selected flights to, from or over this country to thwart possible terrorist plots.

The government said that if the airlines did not comply, those flights could be canceled.

When fully effective, the new policy announced by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge essentially would compel any country whose airlines fly to the U.S. to develop an air marshal program. Some U.S. experts said the move represented a long-overdue security upgrade for global aviation. Although pilot unions and airlines in Britain and Mexico expressed reservations, an official of an international airlines association predicted the industry would comply with the requirement.

“Any sovereign government retains the right to revoke the privilege of flying to and from a country,” Ridge said at a news conference. “Ultimately, the denial of access is the leverage that you have. But I must say, it’s pretty clearly understood by our aviation partners that the threat to passenger aircraft is an international challenge.”

The directive, issued as a set of three “emergency amendments,” would cover all foreign passenger and cargo flights, but the U.S. set no deadline for compliance.

Ridge offered to help other countries train marshals, presumably along the general lines of the U.S. Federal Air Marshal Service. Several thousand federal marshals are assigned to U.S. flights, but their exact number and specific assignments are classified. Most countries would need fewer, perhaps no more than several dozen.

The announcement came in the second week of an orange, or “high,” terror alert that Ridge said could be expected to continue for perhaps weeks into the new year. Authorities say their chief concern remains a repeat attack by Al Qaeda using hijacked commercial airplanes.

The availability of international air marshals would give American officials more options short of canceling foreign flights when intelligence information indicates a threat.

U.S. air marshals are sometimes assigned to a particular flight when intelligence raises questions but is not substantial enough to identify suspects. Half a dozen Air France flights were canceled last week because of intelligence concerns about a Paris-to-Los Angeles flight, but the investigation has not produced arrests.

Although France normally does not use air marshals, the French government agreed last week to deploy armed commandos in civilian clothes on air routes that, according to U.S. intelligence, were potential targets of a suspected holiday plot.

Several countries, including Israel, India, Germany, Australia, Singapore and Canada already have marshals. Britain, Mexico and others are developing forces.

Officials said Monday’s action was not taken in response to a specific threat, but as part of an ongoing effort to shut down possible avenues of attack during a time of high alert. “We don’t want to be caught short,” said Brian Doyle, a Homeland Security spokesman.

The U.S. set no timetable for other countries to train and deploy their marshals, but officials here stressed that they are now free to ask for additional protection on foreign flights when needed.

“We will ask whenever we think it’s appropriate; whether the percentage [of flights] is large or small depends on the information we have,” Ridge said.

Marshals would fly on some cargo flights because intelligence reports have said that Al Qaeda may be planning to hijack either a passenger or a cargo flight. There are concerns that terrorists could stow away on cargo flights.

As the U.S. has tightened aviation security, government officials, pilots and industry experts have voiced fears that foreign airlines could become more tempting vehicles for the next attack.

“The notice today is in recognition that this is an international challenge,” Ridge said.

Security standards were toughened around the world after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but their application varies from country to country.

“This is a move that should have been taken a long time ago,” said aviation consultant Billie Vincent, a former security chief for the Federal Aviation Administration.

“If the U.S. government had to shoot down another nation’s plane in response to a hijacking, you can imagine what the consequences would be,” Vincent said. “Any time you can do something to the security system to avoid a situation like that, it’s worth it.”

The British government declared plans Sunday to post armed air marshals on undisclosed British flights to the U.S.

Home Secretary David Blunkett, Britain’s top law enforcement official, said the marshals would be assigned to selected flights “where appropriate.” In a joint statement with British Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, Blunkett said the decision to place armed guards aboard flights came in direct response to the heightened state of alert in the U.S. and was “a responsible and prudent step.”

The U.S. cannot tell other countries how to organize their aviation security systems, but it can force foreign airlines to abide by American requirements as a condition of flying here. That kind of leverage is routinely applied in instances involving safety standards. The FAA requires foreign airlines to make any repairs or improvements that are also required of U.S. carriers.

Some governments already provide marshals on selected flights to the United States.

“They would be echoing exactly what our air marshals do,” said David Adams, a spokesman for the Federal Air Marshal Service.

To quickly deploy marshals, governments could draw them from the ranks of active commando units or recent retirees from such outfits.

“If there was an emergency communicated by the U.S. government, most governments and airlines would want to cooperate,” said David O’Connor, Washington representative for the International Air Transport Assn., which represents foreign carriers. “No airline wants another attack like Sept. 11.”

But the British government’s announcement that it is putting marshals on flights seemed to catch Britain’s airlines and pilots by surprise. Spokespeople for both groups repeated their criticism of armed guards aboard passenger planes, arguing that ground security should be tightened.

A British Airways spokeswoman told Britain’s Press Assn. on Monday that the airline has “always said we have concerns about having armed people on aircraft. We feel it is best to have strong security on the ground, and that is where the focus of attention should be.”

Jim McAuslan, the British Airline Pilots Assn.’s general secretary, complained that the pilots union had not been consulted in advance.

McAuslan initially called for pilots to refuse to fly if they are uncomfortable at having sky marshals aboard. “Our advice to pilot members is that if they are not comfortable with arrangements, they should not fly,” McAuslan said Sunday. “We cannot agree with the government’s decision to put air marshals on aircraft, as we believe this will do more harm than good.”

By Monday, the pilots union seemed more resigned to the government’s decision. The union instead issued demands, saying British pilots want, among other things, to be informed if a marshal is aboard, and insisting that the captain retain his status as the highest authority on the plane.

Ridge said the Mexican government has been cooperative.

In Mexico City, Agustin Gutierrez Canet, a spokesman for President Vicente Fox, said Mexico had not yet received formal notification of the new security measure. “But we are willing to cooperate for flights which are subject to any suspicion or when there is reasonable information to presume some risk,” he said.

Gutierrez Canet said he understood that Mexico would supply armed marshals for any Mexican carrier under perceived threat, while American marshals would fly out of Mexico on any U.S. carrier, such as Delta and Continental, that might be targeted by terrorists.

Francisco Esquivelzeta, a spokesman for Mexico’s 2,300-member airline pilots union, said an armed marshal might create new perils in the air. “Any firearm aboard is very risky to the passengers, the plane and the people on the ground under it,” he said.

Another official of the Mexican union, Jose Angel Rodriguez, said there also was concern that a marshal might undermine the authority of any pilot over the aircraft.

The Mexican union said it would not resist the addition of marshals. But Rodriguez said pilots on planes equipped with armored cockpit doors might choose to shut them when marshals are aboard. A spokesman for Aeromexico, Carlos Bonilla, said all of its aircraft that fly to the United States are equipped with armored doors.

Speaking to reporters Monday, Interior Minister Santiago Creel said a special group from Mexico’s Federal Preventive Police had been trained for in-flight security and would be deployed aboard U.S.-bound Mexican carriers “in very isolated cases” when requested by the United States. “This collaboration is indispensable,” he said.

U.S. counterterrorism officials told The Times last week that authorities were paying special attention to Los Angeles-bound flights by Aeromexico, among other carriers, for fear that they might be exploited by Al Qaeda. Aeromexico is Mexico’s largest carrier.

Times staff writers William Wallace in London, Sebastian Rotella in Paris and Richard Boudreaux in Mexico City contributed to this report.