THE US and the UK have both said intelligence points to the strong possibility that a bomb brought down Russian Airbus 321 in the Sinai Peninsula last week that killed all 224 on board shortly after leaving the resort town of Sharm El-Sheikh. Egyptian authorities, meanwhile, are going by the book, looking at all the options in search for what caused the crash, insisting that it is too early in the investigation to reach conclusive proof as to what happened to the Metrojet. Investigators can now affirm from the cockpit recorder that a loud noise could be heard on board 24 minutes after takeoff, followed by deadly silence. It is this loud sound, which is being debated: was it an explosion from an engine, a fuel tank or from an explosive device? French aviation officials say the noise was not caused by a technical failure and, consequently, the crash, too, they add, was not caused by engine trouble. The observation is a theory not being discarded by the Egyptians but again, they appear unwilling to rush to judgment, not least because of the implications of a massive security airport breach would have on Egypt's vital tourist industry which depends greatly on Russian and British tourists who flock to Sharm, especially before their winters come in full force. That loud sound heard aboard the ill-fated plane's final few minutes is not the only question. If indeed British and American authorities, who first came up with the theory that a bomb was placed either in the luggage compartment, or in the form of a suicide bomber sitting with the passengers, had information partially based on monitoring of internal messages between terrorist groups, why is it not being shared with the Egyptians and, at the beginning, with the Russians, the two countries most directly involved in the tragedy? Instead, the Egyptian government has been forced to play catch-up, getting its news from the media, just like the public. Any kind of intelligence gathering before or after the crash should be shared because in the end, this is a global fight against terrorism in which any country can be a target. Information in this regard is not supposed to be privy to a select few. It is also not explained why the mass exodus of thousands of British tourists from Sharm El-Sheikh. Flights from Russia, Britain and at least half a dozen other West European countries to Sharm have been suspended for clear safety precautions. But why the huge British tourist rush to leave Sharm en masse to the point where they have to leave their clothes behind? There is nothing to suggest their lives are in imminent danger. Though Russia is sending planes for repatriation, the operation is not described as an emergency evacuation nor as chaotic as that of the British. Daesh (so-called IS) has more than once announced responsibility for the crash. If it is responsible, the group would have gone some ways to avenging the recent Russian airstrikes on Daesh in Syria, as well as hitting back at the Egyptian government whose present leaders two years ago toppled the government of Mohamed Morsi, Egypt's president at that time who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, the granddaddy of all Islamist extremist groups, including Daesh. And Daesh would certainly have reason, in its own twisted logic, to celebrate the crash, as chatter indicates, for it is one of the worst terrorist attacks, if that's what it was, since 911. The way the plane's debris was scattered over a wide area indicated the Airbus broke up in mid-air, but why that happened needs nothing less than a thorough and exhaustive investigation.
