Theoretically this build up could be bypassed by extremely well planned and covert terrorism or a determined strike by a foreign aggressor, but realistically and thankfully this seems highly improbable. Defence Minister Philip Hammond MP has said that there is no specific threat and that the military will be in the background as 'ultimate reassurance'.
The gap then could be exposed in a much more mundane and frustrating way; low level disruptive acts carried out by those not wishing to kill or maim, but those wishing to damage credibility, cause disruption and generally hamper the success, image and idea of the games, host country and the capitalist ideals that accompany the former.
The reports of threats from anarchist groups such as the Informal Anarchist Federation, wishing to cause low level warfare against the Olympic games points to the kind of threat in which little can be done in preparation for.
If we consider the disruption and problems caused by the theft of cable from rail infrastructure, an idea of some of the available tactics become apparent. To speculate even more, the options for a determined anarchist to cause low level damage, they need only find important cabling, electricity or communication points to damage and there would be a small but disrupting effect. If one casts their mind to any large transport, sports, leisure or shopping area it is easy to remember seeing points where an individual seeking to annoy and disrupt could cause problems.
The flip side of this consideration is that any low level disruption can be dealt with at a low level, quick repairs, contingency plans and fast responses are all tools in reacting to such disruptive tactics. Such a view however overlooks the main aim of such attacks; credibility and symbolism being damaged.
Consider for a moment the national and international grief, sympathy and response to a (highly unlikely) coordinated terrorist attack; similar sympathy would not be felt to repeated low level disruption that would hamper attendees, events and infrastructure. Such tactics would embarrass organisers, hack off spectators and further annoy Londoners who would be already combating congestion, crowds and delays.
I find the idea of a large terrorist attack highly unlikely to materialise and even less likely to succeed, yet the idea of groups undertaking disruptive acts are much more likely. These acts would probably only be defeated with quick responses and back up infrastructure. The efforts of those to annoy, hamper and disrupt may then highlight the only real 'gap' in Olympic security.
