A Target Rich Environment

  • It is impossible to make every potential public gathering place impervious to terrorist attack.
  • Without some form of prior warning, mass casualty attacks are virtually unstoppable.
  • There are concrete steps that may be taken to mitigate the threat of terrorist attack by a significant degree.

Terrorists and Public Space

What do the following have in common?

A football stadium.  A nightclub.  An arena.  A seaside promenade.  A Christmas market.  A museum.  A hardware store.  A street party.  

They have all been the targets of terrorist attacks over the past decade in the West.  The sheer variety of these locations underscores the reality that terrorism can happen anywhere, anytime.

The ideology driving the perpetrators of these acts is less important than the factors affecting target selection. While the venues vary, there is a single common factor: large gatherings of people in largely undefended (and mostly undefendable) environments.

Defending the (Almost) Undefendable

The belief that every venue can be made impervious to an attack is a chimera.  With some limited exceptions – like locations with a single, small entrance that can be protected with sufficient force – terrorists can target most public events with relative ease.  Where these events cover larger footprints (festivals, neighbourhoods, promenades, etc.) there are no guarantees that adequate resources can be deployed to prevent or defend against terrorist violence.  The Oct 2023 Hamas attack on the Nova music festival in southern Israel, an open-air gathering vulnerable from virtually every point around its perimeter, is a good illustration of the challenges associated with organising and deploying counter-terrorism forces. 

Another attack that demonstrates the ease with which an assailant can successfully target a large number of people was the April 2018 mowing down of pedestrians on Yonge Street in Toronto.  The driver, Alek Minassian, mounted the sidewalk several times over a 2.4 km span before his damaged vehicle was stopped by a police officer.  Minassian could have chosen any roadway with heavy pedestrian traffic to achieve his goal.

The message for those responsible for securing events or locations is that, without prior warning (through intelligence, information sharing, or a high number of postings on social media), mass casualty attacks on public spaces are all but unstoppable.  Protectors can push security barriers out as far as reasonable but even then there are limits. Even if bollards had been installed on New Orleans’ Bourbon Street on New Year’s Eve, 2025, the attacker could just as easily chosen a street nearby with similar deadly effects.

Deterrence and Prevention

The good news is that most prospective terrorists are deterred by even a modest security presence. Very few violent extremists have military or paramilitary training and are thus neither willing nor prepared to face a superior force or even a small team with visible arms. Nevertheless, in the case of those determined to die in the effort – suicide attackers – even this may not be sufficient deterrence. Those in charge of securing events or locations should always take several measures to interdict possible attacks, however. These include:

  • Liaison with local law enforcement and, where possible, intelligence officials;
  • Monitoring of open social media to gain a sense of the prevailing sentiments towards a community or group that could be targeted;
  • Choosing an easily protected venue (e.g., single entrance/exit; longer sightlines);
  • Vetting of insiders for possible violent or extremist views;
  • Limiting attendance to fewer people and narrower promotion of the event itself.

A Little Bit of Good News

US terrorism scholar Brian Jenkins once famously wrote: “Terrorists do not want a lot of people dead; they want a lot of people watching.”  This maxim is no longer strictly true as increasing numbers of violent extremists seem to want both. However, it must also emphasized that, in Canada, terrorism is comparatively rare. Relatively few attacks have been planned and fewer still have been successfully executed over our history. Canada’s relative safety is notable in this regard. The likelihood of an attack in this country remains at “medium” (third on a five-point threat scale) where it has remained since October 2014.  There is little open source information to justify raising the threat level at this time.

This Assessment is based on information current as of 1200 hours on July 3, 2025