President Trump seized on the terrorist attack in London on Friday to promote the consequences of not having his ban on travel to the United States by Muslims and, in the process, used the opportunity to address likely shortfalls and impact of the event in Britain’s efforts to counter radical-Islamic assailants.

In a barrage in quick succession of early morning tweets, Mr. Trump cited the chaotic scene in a London Underground station as an example of his hard-line policies. Sighting his ban on visitors from seven predominantly Muslim countries, he noted, should be “far larger, tougher and more specific,” a statement that seemed directed to mollify his political base.

While President Trump’s assertion that the terrorists had been known to Scotland Yard and the UK police angered Prime Minister Theresa May, who said it was not helpful for anyone to speculate while an investigation was underway. The President was essentially sending a message to Ms. May and senior officials about the perceived shortfalls in their efforts to counter radical-Islamic domestic terrorism.

What President Trump was addressing and implying this morning in his Tweet is the difference between the UK Counter Terror (CT) policy, procedures, and it’s strategic, operational, and tactical Rules of Engagement (ROE) versus that of the U.S. domestic and foreign CT operations and Strategy. It is the current political mindset, policies and attitudes that will continue to put British police and Scotland Yard behind the power curve in its domestic fight against terrorism in the UK. The difference being the Brits essentially only monitor terrorists and their activities, and will only respond once it is more than obvious they are either about to conduct an attack, or their reaction to an actual terrorist operation such as occurred today. Scotland Yard was not proactive and rarely are … except after the fact. Only in the immediate post-attack phase where as we saw today, do they responded by attempting to take down and apprehend other terrorists, and or terrorist cells. Day-to-day operations are only to monitor and use the massive closed circuit network across the country to monitor citizens, and to encourage citizens to participate in the reactionary monitoring of their neighbors (neighborhood watch).

While that is well and good, unless there are efforts to infiltrate, covertly collect, covertly link cells, and conduct internal surveillance of terrorist entities and groups and their activities, the terrorist will forever have the advantage. You cannot roll-up, sabotage, and compromise or apprehend ring leaders through passive or even active monitoring. The Brits have an exceptional CT capability in the SAS and other forces, but the domestic political restrictions, prevent and restrict the proactive capacity and abilities of those capabilities and forces because of them.

Further, politically, it must be understood the political mindset and position of the political elite in Britain has no interest in allowing citizens the opportunity to dwell on such attacks, let alone radical-Islamic terrorism. So they must move on quickly immediately after ever attack. The most important priority of these politicians is to move on as quickly as possible and to forget that these events ever happen. Essentially, out of sight out of mind. Certainly there is no need whatsoever for the opportunity to come about for British citizens to raise the question, why is this happening and what is the government going to do. Similarly, the politicians do not want the visual that there is a problem and to citizens witness full blown CT efforts to counter the radical-Islam to become a regular part of daily life across the UK. Many, if not most of the political officials would rather ignore it and move on, rather than antagonize the situation and have to deal with the political  consequences, or so they think. Little do they realize that ignoring the current situation will not make it better, and further increases the likelihood of further violent events and the continued erosion of ethnic British society and the country.

The UK’s policies, political mindset, approach to radical Islamic terrorism and overall attitude are the primary concerns President Trump has in his response today regarding the attack in his Twitter response about Scotland Yard reaction. Obviously, the U.S. has the scope on what was transpiring and Trump was trying prompt our ally to move. The uninformed see it as criticism, while others see it as a warning to stop with the foolish political correctness driven policies and to get with the program. While many in this country as well, will criticize President Trump’s response. Understand, he was trying to get the British leadership and the British people to comprehend, use rational thinking and understand that they must be proactive, aggressive, and relentless in stopping these domestic attacks now – the fate of their nation, their history and their society is at stake. As Britain’s Nigel Farage said, “In the end, President Trump will be proven to be right.”

Jim Waurishuk is a retired USAF Colonel, serving nearly 30-years as a career senior intelligence and political-military affairs officer and special mission intelligence officer with expertise in strategic intelligence, international strategic studies and policy, and asymmetric warfare. He served combat and combat-support tours in Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan, as well as on numerous special operations and special mission intelligence contingencies in Central America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He served as a special mission intelligence officer assigned to multiple Joint Special Operations units, and with the CIA’s Asymmetric Warfare Task Force, as well as in international and foreign advisory positions. He served as Deputy Director for Intelligence for U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) during the peak years of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Global War on Terrorism. He is a former White House National Security Council staffer and a former Distinguished Senior Fellow with the Atlantic Council, Washington, D.C. He served as a senior advisor to the Commander U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) and is Vice President of the Special Ops-OPSEC -- which provides strategic and operational security analysis and assessments to governmental and private entities, as well as media organizations on national security issues, policy, and processes. He currently provides advisory and consulting services on national security, international strategic policy, and strategy assessments for the U.S. and foreign private sector and governments entities, media groups and outlets, and to political groups, forums, and political candidates. He is an author and writer providing regular commentary and opinion to national and local TV, radio networks, and for both print and online publications, as well as speaking engagements to business, political, civic and private groups on national security matters – focusing on international strategic policy and engagement, and strategic intelligence, and subject matter expertise on special mission intelligence and operations, counter-terrorism, and asymmetric warfare and conflict.