The United Nations and its international collaborators are comprised of a plethora of institutions around the world that conduct important diplomatic, humanitarian and peacekeeping activities. However, these organizations and their operations, staff and property may be a target by those who do not want them to succeed. Buildings at high risk of attacks are often iconic structures symbolizing ideas that the aggressors believe need to be eradicated, or they may host meetings or discussions by very important persons (VIPs) on issues abhorrent to a group of aggressors. If some target buildings are too difficult to attack, soft targets with similar purpose, but are low-profile and more accessible, may be selected.

Bomb attacks are commonly aimed at buildings because explosions are quick and easy to execute using readily available materials, likely to cause the most casualties, can be inconspicuously carried out, for example by driving into targets, and are highly visual, thus gaining more media attention. It is therefore vital that those responsible for constructing and maintaining the international community's facilities understand the strategies and tools available to improve safety and security, reduce their vulnerability to terrorist attacks and protect the people. It is also worthwhile to provide the same levels of protection to all buildings belonging to a single organization, regardless of location or profile.

A progressive collapse of a building due to explosive attacks has been the major cause of most fatalities; therefore, preventing it is the most important security objective. One way to protect and safeguard buildings against terrorism is to incorporate structural changes. Engineers with expertise in explosion mitigation design can evaluate and recommend structural design requirements to minimize the effects of a defined explosive threat, including measures to reduce structural damage and optimize evacuation and rescue efforts. Existing buildings can be retrofitted and upgraded to improve response to and reduce the hazards associated with destructive explosions.

Based on past incidents, the majority of injuries from a destructive explosion are caused by glass breaking into thousands of pellets, with sharp edges flying at near-supersonic speed. This is evident in the bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad on 19 August 2003, where glass lacerations were cited as the major cause of injuries, as anti-shatter films on windows were not installed prior to the attack. In contrast, it was reported that the bombing of the HSBC headquarters in Istanbul on 30 November 2003 had caused minimal injuries because of anti-shatter films. When it comes to breakage of walls and windows, the objective is to limit it to a localized area and reduce the hazard of flying fragments or debris. It is therefore necessary not only to be aware of safeguard precautions, but also to take the appropriate action towards building protection.

Security is now considered an ugly necessity rather than a natural and sensible part of the structural environment. However, security options can be attractive as well as functional--for example, they do not have to make the building into a bunker that is unpleasant to work in or visit. Blast engineer consultants can help find the right solution to maximize protecting people inside while maintaining the architectural integrity of the buildings, even the historically significant ones, without dramatically changing their appearance. In fact, these buildings had employed security measures routinely when they were originally built. There are also ways to provide substantial protection to a building against a car bomb or hand-carried explosive attack. Limiting access and creating a buffer zone to keep vehicles as far away as practical from the building are key preventative measures since explosive attacks can be less lethal with distance.

Ultimately, solutions are based on the characteristics of a site or a building. Preventative measures typical for densely populated areas include: closing adjacent streets or eliminating traffic to the building; allowing only authorized vehicles to park near the building; providing anti-ram barriers along the curb; and placing landscaping features, such as fountains and statues, to create a navigational obstacle for vehicles to get to the building. One example is the Financial District of London, where during the IRA bombings, truck traffic was monitored and restricted in the area, while roads were deliberately narrowed to limit the size of the vehicle that could drive through the street.

Another important factor is to modify the use of space so as to cluster secured areas, separating them from public spaces. Buildings with internal courtyards--a style that is indigenous to many cultures in warm climates--are perfect for this purpose as they present a blank wall to the street and face inward instead. This style is consistent with basic security principles and attractive as well. Another design concept is to have an entry pavilion and/or loading dock outside the main building structure. Where public roads are adjacent to a building, it is worthwhile to consider relocating personnel, especially VIPs. As was the case of the bombing of the UN Baghdad headquarters, the partial collapse of the building and the subsequent debris caused the death of 21 UN staff members, including Sergio Vieira de Mello, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Childcare centres, including outdoor playgrounds, should be situated in the most protected location possible. The convenience of placing them near the front entrance for easy drop-off is outweighed by the risk of casualties. It is recommended that the centre should not be situated above, below or adjacent to public lobbies, loading docks or mailrooms. Play areas can be placed on the building roof, as is common practice in Israel.

The international community is not helpless against the threat of terrorist explosions. It is critical that we take a reasonable, unobtrusive approach to protect organizations and people, because terrorists will have won if we have created an oppressive environment that is inconsistent with the freedoms we strive for.