|
 fter
a 1983 terrorist attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon left 241
soldiers dead and 105 injured, President Reagan insisted that the
United States wouldn't back down: "We must be more determined
than ever that [terrorists] cannot take over that vital and strategic
part of the earth or, for that matter, any other part of the earth."
What a shame
if the airport named after that president were to shut down in the
wake of last Tuesday's attacks. Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport remains closed today; it looks like a 21st-century ghost
town. There are some suggestions that it may not open for commercial
air travel ever again.
The reason
is its proximity to Washington, D.C. As anybody who has taken off
to the north knows, some of the most spectacular views of the national
capital may be had by people sitting in window seats on the side
of the plane facing eastward. Just as it probably won't be possible
for a long time to look at jumbo jets and not think of aerial terrorism,
it may not be possible to take in that city scene and not think
about Osama bin Laden's wish list of destruction.
Yet there are
some practical points to be made here. None of the hijacked planes
left from Reagan National. The one that crashed into the Pentagon
departed from Washington Dulles International Airport, which lies
outside the Beltway in Virginia and serves the D.C. metropolitan
area. The plane that was reportedly intended to slam into the Capitol,
before plunging into the Pennsylvania countryside, left from Newark,
N.J. For some reason, these terrorists skipped over Reagan National.
If an airport
in D.C. deserves to be boarded up, why not Dulles — the one
that's close enough to pose a significant threat but far enough
to let a plane gain some deadly speed and altitude? From right across
the Potomac, a plane flying from Reagan National may not have enough
momentum to inflict maximum damage or enough space to maneuver with
much precision. Besides, hijackers presumably need some time to
do their hijacking, which they prefer to do airborne. A takeoff
from Washington, D.C., would be out of sight before that could happen.
If proximity
really is the problem, though, how many other cities have airports
near prime terrorist targets? New York's LaGuardia certainly comes
to mind. Perhaps Washington, D.C., is uniquely vulnerable because
it is the seat of our government. And so perhaps it should become
the most secure airport in the country — armed guards patrolling
the concourses, marshals on the flights, and every employee a U.S.
citizen.
The most compelling
reason to re-open Reagan National, though, concerns symbolism. Following
the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, the Secret Service convinced
President Clinton to block off Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the
White House. That decision undermined the spirit of democracy by
turning the executive mansion into more of a bunker than it already
was. It also seemed possible to reverse: In an interview with NR
last year, candidate Bush said he favored re-opening it.
Now everything
shifts to Reagan National — the Pennsylvania Avenue of this
latest terrorist attack. The irony of President Reagan's words in
1983 — "We must be more determined than ever that [terrorists]
cannot take over that vital and strategic part of the earth or,
for that matter, any other part of the earth" — is that
they turned out not to be true: The United States soon pulled out
of Lebanon entirely.
The terrorists
already have taken too much from us. Let's not abandon Reagan National
Airport, too.
Recommended Reading
Fiamma Nirenstein writes in Commentary on "How
Suicide Bombers are Made".
|
