With just weeks to go before the US presidential election on 5 November, the threat environment in the country is fluid and evolving. In the first episode of International SOS’ new podcast series, Chief Security Analyst – West, Mike Rogers and Lead Security Analyst – North America and the Caribbean, Tim McShane set the stage by discussing the current security landscape. They also delve into drivers of escalation and discuss scenarios for the remainder of the electoral cycle. 

Chris Giles - Presenter

Hello, and welcome to the US Election Threat Briefing, a new series from International SOS, the leading health and security risk services company. I'm Chris Giles. Well, as election day approaches on November the 5th, we'll be tracking the current threat environment and offer you advice taking in the ever-evolving risk scenarios.

Well, before we speak to our guests, let's recap on some of the main stories.

There's been a second assassination attempt on former president Donald Trump as a gunman targeted him at his golf course in Florida.

Trump and Harris have returned to the campaign trail after they went head-to-head in the TV debate.

Well, joining us on today's episode is International SOS Chief Security Analyst West, Mike Rogers, and Tim McShane, Lead Security Analyst for North America and the Caribbean. And I started by asking Mike how he feels now the campaign has begun stepping up a gear.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

It is getting quite close, Chris. Believe it or not, it's less than two months away at the time that we're speaking, which feels simultaneously impossibly close, but also when you consider all the things that can happen between now and November 5th, a lifetime away at the same time. And to be frank, threat analysts and security managers they have a really tough job right now.

They clearly need to be game planning for the considerable opportunity for escalation that election day and the period immediately surrounding it presents. But simultaneously, there's a number of threats that can manifest between now and that period beginning. So politically motivated violence, for example, disruptive and potentially violent demonstrations. And we've seen these already over the last weeks and months.

Chris Giles - Presenter

So, Tim, could you just give us a flavour of how busy you and the team have been over recent weeks, talking to clients and helping them to prepare ahead of the vote?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Well, Chris, absolutely, we've been very busy answering client questions as they come in directly. And then myself, Mike, the other analysts, have been preparing a number of reports that we're going to be issuing throughout the election cycle.

Chris Giles - Presenter

And Tim, what's the current state of play right now in the campaign?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Right now, Kamala Harris has largely pulled into a statistical dead heat with former President Donald Trump. This is pretty remarkable, given how far the Democrats had fallen behind. This is also acutely important in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin - the states that are going to decide the election for the country.

And I want to note that tensions are very high across the country, particularly following this recent second attempt on the life of Donald Trump at his golf course in Florida. And there's reason to believe that there could be additional acts of political violence through election day, including additional assassination attempts on Harris and Trump.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Well, we'll be keeping clients up to date on any changes to the risk environment. But Tim, how do you see the rest of this election campaign panning out?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

The candidates have really been filling their schedules up quite tight with a number of events. I think we can expect to see quite a number of rallies held by Donald Trump, his vice-presidential candidate JD Vance, along with Vice President Harris and her vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz. So campaigning season is in full swing. We're going to see a lot more events.

And I would just like to highlight too that the swing states are really coming into the forefront and are going to be a major target of these campaign events and rallies. We're talking places like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, even North Carolina.

These are not only seeing a bunch of surrogates from the campaigns visit and attempt to drum up support, but also a massive investment of treasure to really fund political advertisements, canvassing campaigns, phone banking, and other campaign activities. And kind of as you would expect in these swing states or purple states as they're also known, the political temperature has risen a little bit higher than in some of the more solidly blue or red states. But tensions around the country remain pretty high, as you would expect in this era of polarisation. And as we get closer and closer to November, you can expect these tensions and the temperature around the country to continue to rise.

Chris Giles - Presenter

So perhaps you both can give me an idea of what the threat environment looks like across America over these next couple of months.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

Yeah, absolutely. Frankly, that's a question we've been looking to answer for several months now. And our analysis has certainly evolved over that time. But to answer that, the team here has employed what's known as a structured analytical technique. And this one in particular is called the Cone of Plausibility.

Chris Giles – Presenter

So how does that work?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

The Cone of Plausibility is intended to generate a spectrum of scenarios by identifying key drivers, making assumptions about those drivers, and then using those assumptions to build a baseline scenario. Then once you have those, you challenge those assumptions and create alternative outcomes. So let me talk to you really quickly about how the team actually got together and did this.

Chris Giles - Presenter

So, when did you guys start putting your plans together regarding the election scenarios?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

Chris Giles - Presenter

So, Mike, tell me a bit more about how the team was able to build the analysis now.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

Yeah, sure. So, the first part is about generating key drivers, right? Like what are the real factors, the most important things that are going to influence the evolution of the threat environment. And like I said, at first, the team was just throwing things at a wall, right? There was no wrong answer, and it was just brainstorming. So, the team is shouting out suggestions, writing them down on a whiteboard, things like Donald Trump's trials, conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, inflation, things of this nature, right? Were all written down on this whiteboard until there were dozens and dozens and dozens of factors that were identified by the group.

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

So, and then with all these dozens of factors that the team has identified, I kind of take them all in and refine them a little bit and put them in groups or get related factors together. Just as an example, partisan news media, foreign influence, miss or disinformation, those all could be grouped together in a driver that we call information environment.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

And then as a group, we make assumptions about each driver that we've identified. So, we say, what is our current understanding of how this particular key driver is going to influence the threat environment? It's sort of a continuation of the status quo. And we poke and play with those drivers until we're all comfortable as a group that they are as accurate and as realistic as they can be. Once we have those assumptions, we then use them to build a baseline scenario, right? So, if everything that we believe is correct about these key drivers, then what does this look like?

Once we have that baseline scenario, which is our most likely in our estimation, our most likely scenario, we then go back to our assumptions and our drivers. Because we need to challenge our assumptions. What if we're wrong about something important? That would have a critical impact in the ultimate outcome. So, we go back to these assumptions, and we say, what if we got this one in particular wrong, or these two wrong? What would that look like?

We use these changed assumptions to then build out this spectrum. So, we would end up with a perhaps a higher risk scenario. What if we were wrong about global conflicts, which we'll talk about in a little bit here, and the US involvement actually expanded? That would be a really, really big change, and it would really spell things, different circumstances with respect to the threat environment here in the US.

So, we would take those altered assumptions now, and then use that to build, in this case, a higher risk scenario, which we would then evaluate. Now, we would then do the same with a more positive scenarios. So, what if we were wrong in the other way? Things actually turned out to be more stable. Then we would use those altered assumptions again to build a more positive or lower risk scenario.

And then lastly, a sort of plausible out-of-the-box wildcard is the last element to complete the spectrum. So, you're left with this pretty wide spectrum of potential outcomes, and then we indicate which ones we feel are more likely. And the idea is you have a good understanding of how do you know which path we're on at the moment.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Sounds like a lot of work was done there. So now you've got to the key drivers. Can you tell me what you were able to establish or what you'll now base your assumptions on for the threat environment over the coming weeks and months?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

So, one of the first drivers that we identified once we grouped together the various factors that the group had highlighted was the information environment and public engagement to it. And this is a driver that is quite complex, frankly, and a bit conceptual, but bear with me.

It refers to this vast network where information is spread and consumed and ultimately received by Americans through various sources and channels, mainstream media, social media, sort of these extremist and fringe channels, if you will. And it is highly volatile and negatively impacted by things like misinformation, disinformation, foreign influence, and partisan coverage of these events. But it's ultimately a really important factor in how the American public engages with the rest of these drivers that we've identified.

Chris Giles - Presenter

I know that you've identified global conflicts, presumably like Ukraine and the situation in the Middle East right now. What sort of things did you discuss there

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Yeah, absolutely. And these global conflicts, as you highlighted, the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Gaza conflict have certainly become major issues that have reached the forefront of the American consciousness. This is not only measuring the level of public support for America's involvement in the conflict, but also the degree to which America is involved in these conflicts. For example, is the United States government providing support in the form of intelligence or diplomatic support at the UN? Or are they shipping weapons? Or are they actively involved in the conflict with boots on the ground or it being engaged in kinetic strikes?

Chris Giles - Presenter

What about the candidates and some of the wedge issues that come with them?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst - West

Yeah, that's right, Chris. For the next driver, we looked at some of these domestic, sensitive issues that really divide the American population ideologically and politically. So, these are the really politicised domestic issues, things like abortion and immigration, election integrity, LGBTQ plus issues and things of this nature. And the very divergent platforms or agendas, if you will, that the two candidates have with respect to those issues, we felt that that as well would be a really important driver in how the threat environment here in the US plays out of the next few months.

Chris Giles - Presenter

And I guess the economy is a big issue and a big part of the campaign.

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Yes, I believe the economy is at the forefront of almost every presidential election. As one of Bill Clinton's campaign advisors said in the 90s, “It's the economy, stupid.” And particularly now, it's a major issue that the American public is paying a great deal of attention to. And I want to really point out that it's not only how the economy is actually performing, it's the perception of how it is performing that matters to the people. Because perception ultimately is reality at the end of the day.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

Tim, I think that's so well said. And Chris, just the last driver that we selected in this exercise was the guardrails. It was essentially the various law enforcement agencies and organizations; the sort of social mores and institutions present in the United States that serve as this counterbalance to the prospect of an escalation in the threat environment during this period.

Chris Giles - Presenter

So, Mike, let's just look at some of these scenarios that you've been working on. What's the baseline scenario for this election?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

So, Chris, the baseline scenario is what we, at the time, putting the analysis together, considered to be the most likely scenario. And that is operating under the assumption, so to speak, that all the assumptions that I outlined associated with our drivers were accurate. So, in that scenario, we are seeing a situation in which there's partisan news coverage that takes this increasingly urgent tone as the election cycle progresses. There's certainly the presence of dis and misinformation that is affecting the information environment, although as we'll get into, not to the extent that we would see, perhaps in a high-risk scenario. Very importantly, global conflicts continue in this scenario, but they do not draw more direct US involvement. The US’ role in those conflicts in supporting their partners and allies is solely through munitions and funding and intelligence, but not actual direct involvement.

We have in this scenario wedge issues that continue to spark protests, demonstrations in small towns and large cities alike, but importantly, widespread unrest is uncommon. And then lastly, what I want to highlight in this baseline or most likely at the time, what we considered based on these assumptions is that complex acts of political violence in which there are multiple perpetrators that are communicating with one another in order to coordinate Those are thwarted by authorities, but these sort of lone actors operating individually, engaging in small scale acts of political violence, those do occur in this scenario.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Tim, how does the high-risk scenario differ to that?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

So basically, we're seeing an escalation in the risk factors for safety and security across the country. Some things you're going to see in this higher risk scenario include higher levels of foreign disinformation and a much more urgent tone to mainstream media that is going to affect public opinion. You might see more direct US involvement in global conflicts, whether that be boots on the ground or engaging in direct kinetic strikes.

Protests are going to be widespread across the country and will often result in violence between protesters and counter protesters, or protesters and the security forces. You'll see political figures are calling for or applauding acts of violence that are occurring in the country. And something we've already seen happen twice is an assassination attempt on a political figure.

And then a series of successful politically motivated attacks. This could be in reference to what Mike was talking about earlier, successful organised attacks by groups of individuals or a series of attacks by lone actors who are copying each other.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Given the two attempts on Donald Trump's life, how does that figure into the wildcard scenario that you had predicted months ago?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

Yeah, right, Chris. It's a great question. The wildcard scenario certainly has evolved over the life of this analysis, if you will. Essentially, the wildcard scenario, as currently conceived, would involve a candidate being hospitalised or detained or incapacitated in some way, potentially by assassination, before the election, but also importantly, potentially after the election, but prior to the inauguration. The candidate potentially being removed from the ballot in one way or another is another consideration in the wildcard scenario. Now, I just want to highlight this.

When this analysis was first put together in this structure, a wildcard scenario back in February and March did consider the possibility of a candidate, admittedly, it was Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket at the time, being removed due to some health issue, legal issue, or being otherwise incapacitated. And in the analysis, we considered the possibility of an assassination. And I think it is a strong reminder to all of us as analysts that the analysis needs to continue to evolve across the study period, if you will, because the wild card scenario nearly became reality twice in the span of about two weeks between the near assassination of Donald Trump on July 13th in Butler, Pennsylvania, and then not two weeks after Joe Biden dropping out of the race amid concerns about his viability as a candidate due to essentially what amount to health concerns.

Chris Giles - Presenter

So, as you say, those scenarios need to be constantly monitored and updated. Where are we now with your current assessment of what's to come in this election campaign?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Well, Chris, Mike, I think right now it's safe to say that we're somewhere between our baseline and the higher risk scenario. We're hopeful that the US will not be drawn into global conflicts with boots on the ground or regular kinetic strikes on global adversaries. Right now, protests are occurring over wedge issues like abortion and immigration, but they are relatively sporadic, and they remain largely peaceful. And importantly, major political figures are not calling for violence.

But all of that being said, there are still some very clear elements of the higher risk scenario that are worth mentioning. As of today, there have been two assassination attempts on Donald Trump, including the one in July, that came within a matter of inches of being successful. And this is significantly raising the political temperature and tensions across the country, so to speak. The information environment is also inundated with misinformation and disinformation. We're seeing out of Springfield, Ohio, debunked rumours about immigrants eating cats and dogs that have nevertheless really captured the imagination of the country and are being widely spread online.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Given what you've just told me, what does your team recommend that clients should be doing right now with a couple of months to go before election day?

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

You know, as Mike previously stated, it is a very difficult time for security managers right now. But there also is time to conduct really deliberate and thorough planning to help mitigate some of the risks that we are going to see in the run up to the election and even post-election.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

Yeah, Tim, I completely agree. And I'll just add, if not done already now is absolutely the time to carry out some sort of mapping exercise that would help you evaluate your organisation's exposure to these threats that we've outlined and what that looks like over the next six, eight weeks, etc. I'd also look to identify specific drivers that could increase the vulnerability of your workforce and that's going to be different for each organization, right? Needs to be contextualized within the individual workforce that you're supporting.

Now is the time for simulation exercises and scenario planning. And in those, you should be at least testing what would a baseline and a higher risk scenario mean in terms of impact for your personnel and for your business operations.

It's also a really good time for what we would call red teaming or pre-mortem. Those are analytical techniques in which you sort of test your response capability and see how prepared you as an organisation are. So, you might bring them together and say, something has gone wrong in our planning and have them think backwards from there. What could it possibly be and get sort of creative finding these potential gaps in your policies?

The last two things I want to highlight is just, again, proactive communication to the workforce regarding the organisation's posture and the resources that are available to staff. They go a long way in terms of assuaging concerns among the workforce and just making sure everybody is prepared for what they might encounter.

There are certainly a lot more recommendations for this period of time. I strongly recommend you read our recent Insight report that details this, these scenarios and the recommendations for planning at this stage, but also engage with our security partners and our regional security centre, where you need support in this particular tasking. You know, it is a really tough job right now for security managers, as we pointed out a few times now, but we're here to support you along the way. So please do reach out.

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

And we are currently working on another Insight report surrounding the not only the pre-U.S. election security environment, but also the post-election security environment. And you can look forward to that in the next few weeks. I think it will be a good read and prove very helpful to any security managers.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Okay, Mike, Tim, thank you so much for talking us through all these scenarios. And I just wanted to see if we can just whet the appetite for our next podcast. And Mike, what sort of things will we be discussing then?

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

Yeah, Chris, I'm really looking forward to further conversations with you here and discussing some of the topics that we feel are really valuable for our clients in terms of framing their understanding of the threat environment and preparing their personnel to navigate it safely.

So some of the things we have in mind, I look forward to talking about misinformation and disinformation, how does that feature into the threat environment and how does one navigate that minefield, election day scenarios that I know Tim is doing a lot of planning for and how can you prepare for and respond to those and a number of other topics that as they come up, we'll look forward to discussing them.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Okay, well, just time for me to say thank you very much to the both of you for joining me for this episode and we'll look forward to speaking to you again in the future.

Mike Rogers - Chief Security Analyst – West

Thanks so much, Chris. Thanks, Tim.

Tim McShane - Lead Security Analyst, North America and the Caribbean

Thanks, Chris. Thanks, Mike. It was great talking with y'all.

Chris Giles - Presenter

Well, that's all for now, but just a reminder that you'll be able to access all the latest information and updates on the security situation surrounding the US election from our website. That's internationalsos.com. And from there, you can find out about our global network of assistance centres. They're available to clients 24-7. But until next time, thank you very much for listening and goodbye.