Office for Foreign Relations and Information 

"Prevention is indispensable and important, but I don't believe that to prevent with a high probability, for instance, something that happened in London is possible. And this case is a typical example: British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been saying for years that there exists a danger that something similar can happen to London. There were even many concrete signals indicating such danger. However, nothing ever happened and in the end there is the attack and nobody was able to predict anything." says Karel Randak.

What can security forces actually do now?

The problem is that we don't have enough information. It does not arise from the fact that London is busy and doesn't have time to provide us with something. The trouble is that neither the British nor any other partners simply have any information. The event is completely different from September 11, 2001 in America. There existed some clue; the names of people on board were known. After the attacks in Madrid the Spanish partners had information regarding the suspected persons, because they had been monitored before that event. Here, there is almost no information available.

What does it indicate?

It indicates, for instance, that it is not clear at all who did it. According to our information sources there is no evidence that the group that claimed responsibility for the attack exists. It can be an existing organization that has changed its name or an organization that has been established recently.

What have the Czech secret services achieved since the attacks on the USA in 2001?

I have to admit that there are no obvious achievements at this moment. Our sources - human and financial - were transferred to the issue of terrorism; nevertheless, this particular case proves that it is very difficult to prevent the attacks.

So, does it mean that we have to get used to the fact that terrorist attacks simply cannot be prevented?

Well, I wouldn't like to cause panic. I simply think that prevention is indispensable and important, but I don't believe that it is possible to prevent with a high probability, for instance, something that happened in London.

Are we to pay secret services at all, if they are not able to warn against attacks, although it has been their main task during the last few years?

I will of course say that we are. But there are other people who decide that. Personally, I think it isn't possible to just accept the fact and wait until it explodes. Even if the secret services manage to prevent just one attack, it is worth it.

Is the presumption that the Czech Republic is not a priority country for terrorist still valid?

Yes. I don't think that the participation of the Czech Republic in various counterterrorist actions, either in Afghanistan or in Iraq, was so noticeable. With respect to the participation in counterterrorist operations, there are countries - such as Italy, Poland or some other countries - which are more likely targets.

After the September 11 even Czech politicians started to speak about the need to prepare the society for the fact that an effective fight against terrorism is at the expense of personal liberty. Has it had any significant effects in practice?

I have noticed only some verbal statements related to it; but as for concrete actions, nothing has been done. I think that it will happen only at the time when something happens in the Czech Republic.