London Olympics Protection Plan - Essay Example

London Olympics Protection Plan College: LONDON OLYMPICS PROTECTION PLAN In the recent past, security planning has become an important strategy for countries that plan to host major sporting events. While major sporting events are perceived as important economic boosters due to the legacy they live behind, they are vulnerable to security threats. The London Olympics is one of the major sporting events that attract people from across the world. The high population that attends the event makes it a possible target for criminals and particularly terrorists groups that target crowded places. Since the 9/11 attacks in the US, there has been an increase in terrorism awareness in the fear that such an incidence would occur again. Consequently, the sporting event demanded that the country allocate more resource in security planning to ascertain safety during the period of the event. The protection plan comprised mainly of surveillance technology, air defense, policing, crowd management, and traffic control. The ability of the country to provide adequate security during the 2012 summer Olympics is attributed to effective planning and sufficient resource allocation. The 2012 Summer Olympics was held in London, UK, after the country successfully won a bid to host the event. The event was attended by over 7 million members of public from across the world and the sports person came from different countries that had qualified for the Olympic competition. The high population demanded effective crowd management strategy to avoid commotion and the entry of dangerous weapons. The event was hosted within an area of 200 hectare land that was prepared for the event. While this land was perceived as large enough, it was evidence that the population of attending members of public had doubled and the turn was way above the expectation of the planning team (Coaffee, Fussey, & Moore, 2015). Besides, the London town was flocked and all public roads were busy during the 21 days period. Since the organizing committee had to provide means of transport to the main stadium to facilitate access through their Transport for London Facilities (Graham, 2012). To facilitate smooth flow of traffic, alternative means of transport such as railway which would carry more passengers than vehicles. The main challenge that the organizing team faced is the scrutiny of the entrants into the stadium due to the high attendance. Due to high population and vulnerability of the crowd, security planning was a priority for the UK government. Prior to the London Olympics event, the security structure was under fear due to previous incidences that had contributed to fear within the public domain. As soon as London was declared the host for the event, there was a terrorist attack in the country. Besides, there was high tension after the 9/11 attacks in the US that had severe impacts on the economy. Consequently, the UK security minister was worried that the London Olympics would be possible target for the ongoing terrorism activities. During the planning process, the main challenge was to safeguard the life of over 100 head of states and more than a thousand dignitaries who would attend the opening ceremony. This explains the main reason why the minister increased the security budget by double a few months to this event. The final budget for the operation was estimated as 553 million pounds, which was much higher than the initially estimated value. Besides, the number of police officers and army troops was increased to strengthen the security structure. The first priority during the event was crowd management right from the time they arrive in London. Two weeks prior to the game, the London city was already receiving, and security was becoming a major concern. As a security measure, the government deployed over 17, 000 police officers within town especially in hotels and other social places which were receiving large number of visitors (Graham, 2012). The sniffer dogs were deployed to detect any weapons in the stadium as a measure to ensure that there was no entry into the stadium before the time of the game. At the eve of the game, the police conducted security check within all entry points to ensure that there was no visitor who was carrying any weapon into the stadium. Over 5, 000 police officers were assigned the task of frisking and conducting investigation at the entry points. This measure was put in place to ensure that there was no rogue visitor who would cause the least security threat during the proceedings of the event. The traffic officers conducted a thorough check up for any motorcade within London and ensured that the traffic flow was smooth (Boyle & Haggerty, 2009). During the opening ceremony, traffic officers had to reserve the main roads for the Very Important Persons (VIP) such as heads of state and foreign ministers who had promised to attend this initial kick-off. From a close observation, the presence of VIPs during the first contributed to an increase in the amount of security apparatus. Air defense was an important part of the security infrastructure during the events of 2012 Olympics in London. In mid-July, the UK army stationed 6 missile sites in an effort to curb any potential air attacks. The missiles had the capability of shooting down any airplanes from enemies and with surveillance radar systems that would detect unauthorized planes that could be sent by attackers. Since the events of 9/11 attacks, the world has become conscious of air attacks and UK did not want to live a loophole within its security framework (Coaffee, Fussey & Moore, 2011). Next, the government deployed other army helicopter around the stadium as a measure to counter short-range enemies in case of an attack. The planes went round the stadium during at irregular intervals to ensure the safety of the Olympic site. At the sea, the UK maritime forces held Long Range Acoustic Device attached to a landing craft at the Thames. The ground plan comprised of over 13,000 armies who acted as a back-up plan throughout the event period (Boyle & Haggerty, 2009). The heavy security details was a response to the tension that grown during the preparations for the Olympic. Heavy information technology infrastructure was deployed to safeguard the Stadium from electronic or even bomb attacks. At the main entrance, biometric scanners were used as identification for the visitors who were seeking access to the field. The BT Group Inc. was responsible for wiring the Stadium with CCTV cameras (Boyle & Haggerty, 2009). The cameras were capable of recognizing facial details and detecting any suspicious behavior among the crowd. The CCTV surveillance was intensified close to the VIP podium as an extra measure to safeguard leaders who are the main targets during attacks. Number-plate scanners were used to identify any uninvited guests and the police were strategically involved to check any suspicious vehicles. This measure may have been deployed due to an increase in the number of car bombings in major cities in the world. Next, BT group was assigned the duty of keeping off electronic attacks that may target the Olympics. The company was prepared to handle complex and determined attacks within their systems. However, it was clear that there were few attacks from cybercriminals and only a few spams from young teenagers. The main IT threat was an increase in the number of mass media companies who have compromised systems (Graham, 2012). When they requested to access the Olympics systems, they were denied the opportunity on the ground that they would provide a lose end to the systems. High investment in technology was an essential measure to protect not only human beings, but also sensitive information during the 2012 Olympics. In conclusion, protection plans during major sporting events are expensive and require comprehensive planning. Any country that intends to host a major sporting event must be ready to invest in personnel as well as technology if they have to leverage the economic benefits that come along with such events. The London Olympics of 2012 is a good example of how much a challenge it is to protect major events. The London Olympics attracted high population from across the world with thousands of important persons who need high level of security. Prior to the date of the game, the UK government was under high tension due to increase in the number of terrorist attacks, not only in the country but also across the world. The country was aware that the sport arenas would be a vulnerable target for criminal activities. Therefore, the security minister increased the budget during security planning and reinforced the security framework. To guarantee safety during the opening ceremony, over 5, 000 soldiers were deployed for the purpose of crowd management, security search and traffic control. Air defense was deployed close to the Stadium as a measure to counter any air attacks and to survey the skies for any suspicious flights. At the Stadium, a large number of CCTV surveillance cameras were installed to conduct surveillance and monitor any suspicious moves within the crowd. The BT Company was engaged in protecting the country from electronic attacks to avoid compromising sensitive information regarding the Olympics. References Boyle, P., & Haggerty, K. D. (2009). Spectacular security: mega‐events and the security complex. International Political Sociology, 3(3), 257-274. Coaffee, J., Fussey, P., & Moore, C. (2011). Laminated Security for London 2012 Enhancing Security Infrastructures to Defend Mega Sporting Events. Urban Studies, 48(15), 3311-3327. Graham, S. (2012). Olympics 2012 security: welcome to lockdown London. City, 16(4), 446-451. Read More