No one would dare to seem soft on terrorism these days but the new security measures imposed on travel to the United States have sparked strong reactions around the world, with many suspecting it’s little more than political campaign in a Presidential election year.There is widespread agreement that coming to the United States will not be more enjoyable because of what William Gaillard, head of communications at the International Air Transportation Association, calls ‘‘the hassle factor’’.‘‘People are not afraid of flying, but all these security measures take the fun out of flying; it’s as simple as that,’’ Gaillard said in Geneva. ‘‘Is the Bush administration trying to make a point in an election year?’’Part of the difficulty in analysing the new US security measures is figuring out just what they are. One component is the new procedure that went into effect on Monday that requires the fingerprinting and photographing of visitors from most countries around the world. The other component is emergency measures linked to intelligence that terrorists had plotted to commandeer planes. In some countries, the fingerprinting requirement has tapped into deeply rooted resentments of the United States. A Brazilian judge was so furious that Brazilians would have to be fingerprinted and photographed that he ordered American visitors to Brazil will have to do the same.The most contentious part of the new security scheme is the use of armed marshals on flights; the US first deployed them some 30 years ago after hijackings to Cuba. The number went up after 9 Switzerland has been using air marshals since 1970. Some countries and airlines have announced that they will ground their planes rather than succumb to US demands to put armed marshals aboard.
