WMD Threat al-Qaeda Poses to the U.S. - Part 3 of 3

Deterring a WMD Attack

Six Objectives.  The United States of America’s comprehensive approach to addressing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) terrorism hinges on six objectives as follows (Anonymous, 2006):

1. Determine terrorists’ intentions, capabilities, and plans to develop or acquire WMDs
2. Deny terrorists access to the materials, expertise, and other enabling capabilities required to develop WMDs
3. Deter terrorists from employing WMDs
4. Detect and disrupt terrorists’ attempted movement of WMD-related materials, weapons, and personnel
5. Prevent and respond to a WMD-related terrorist attack
6. Define the nature and source of a terrorist-employed WMD device

Control Model.  Renate Mayntz (2006) proposed a simple control model to control terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.  She differentiates this model into the following four analytically distinctive components:

1. Information collection and threat perception
2. Priority setting and allocation of attention
3. Mobilization and choice of measures
4. Action

Analysts must understand that these components do not represent separate phases in a stepwise causal process.  Instead, these components overlap in time and link to feedback loops.  Thus, threat perception affects information collection as well as vice versa.  The results of action reflect back upon the choice of measures.  Additionally, de facto mobilization (i.e., established in fact but not officially) affects the allocation of attention.

Use of C&R over B&N Weapons.  Al-Qaeda’s and its affiliates’ interest in employing WMDs (which causes thousands-to-millions of civilian casualties instead of tens-to-hundreds of casualties) is a major characteristic of contemporary terrorism (unsymmetrical or unconventional warfare).  This makes WMDs a more lethal threat than in any other previous terrorist conflict that used only conventional weapons.  This characteristic represents a marked transition from conventional to unconventional terrorism.  When considering chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons and devices, Dr. Boaz Ganor, the International Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT) executive director and deputy dean at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) in Herzliya, Israel, believes that al-Qaeda and its affiliates are more likely to seek and use chemical and radiological (C&R) material versus biological and nuclear (B&N) weapons and devices (Sinai, 2007).  Ganor arrived at this conclusion from the values obtained in applying the threat potential formula as discussed in the next paragraph.

Threat Potential.  According to Dr. Ganor, his C&R vs. B&N reasoning stems from a terrorism formula relating motivation (M) and operational capability (C).  To Dr. Ganor, determining a terrorist group’s threat potential (TP) is the combined effect of their motivation and their operational capability.  To this formula, one can add that a terrorist group’s threat potential is the product of its motivation and its ability to acquire the elements necessary in order to reach operational capability, or TP = M x C.  This formula focuses on lowering motivation or lowering capability.  Lowering one option is sufficient for success.  The ultimate solution is to lower both options (i.e., M and C) simultaneously and continuously.  The emphasis should be on lowering a terrorist group’s offensive capability despite the chance that this may raise their motivation to retaliate.  Dr. Ganor refers to this phenomenon as the boomerang effect of terrorism, i.e., when one parameter decreases, the other parameter increases and vice versa (Sinai, 2007).

Al-Qaeda Bomb Maker.  A dangerous al-Qaeda bomb-maker, whom the Pakistan military reported was killed two years ago, is in fact alive and well and working to develop chemical, biological, and radiological weapons—and perhaps nuclear weapons as well.  That’s the chilling word from Beirut-based Ed Blanche, who writes in The Middle East magazine that Egyptian-born chemical engineer Midhat Mursi al Sayyid Umar—known as Osama bin Laden’s “sorcerer”—is working in secret laboratories in Pakistan’s northwestern tribal area (Anonymous, 2008).

The Pakistani military claimed that in January 2006, Mursi was one of several senior al-Qaeda figures killed by missiles fired from a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Predator.  At the time, he was at a clandestine gathering in a village near the Afghan border.  United States intelligence officials were skeptical.  Now, even the Pakistani intelligence chiefs admit that he’s still alive—with a $5 million U.S. bounty on his head (Anonymous, 2008).

United States officials have also learned that Mursi is working to manufacture cyanide, chlorine, and other lethal poisons.  He has helped revive the al-Qaeda chemical and biological weapons (CBW) program that was disrupted by the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.  Former CIA analyst Chris Quillen stated earlier in 2008 that Mursi and his associates may have made progress in their hideouts in Pakistan’s tribal region.  American officials have warned that al-Qaeda is seeking to produce botulism toxin, smallpox, plague, or Ebola (Anonymous, 2008).

Preparing for a WMD Attack

DHS Planning Response.  A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) goal is to keep nuclear weapons from entering the country.  Former Secretary Michael Chertoff said they are also focusing on how the DHS would respond should a nuclear device get through and explode—particularly how to identify and track the nuclear materials.  Chertoff also said the department is establishing new screening regulations that would require providing information on flight crews and passengers before a private aircraft departs from overseas bound for the United States (Anonymous, 2007).  The U.S. Army has identified and tracked the overseas movement of nuclear materials for years, which suggests that the DHS is either unaware of the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) capabilities in these areas or the fall of the Soviet Union has resulted in a chaotic nuclear security state where controls on nuclear weapons and/or materials have been lost.  Apparently, stovepiping continues to be an information transfer problem among our governmental agencies.

On Being Prepared.  When the al-Qaeda terrorists hit seven or more of our major cities simultaneously in the near future, panic will break loose.  Panic will prevail until local authorities restore order.  These local authorities include civilian law enforcement (police departments), fire departments, emergency medical services, and other first responders.  Federal, state, and county government agencies will assist as required.  The DHS, FBI, DoD, National Guard, Coast Guard, Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and other cognizant federal agencies will have a huge role in assisting the re-establishment of law and order through the media and in its role as responsible agent for strategic communications.  Additionally, we must prepare for these attacks before they occur.  When we are prepared, we need not fear.

Prepare for CBRN Decontamination.  The DHS ensures the readiness of our first responders to work safely in an area where terrorists use CBRN weapons.  The DHS requires annual certification of first responder preparedness to handle and decontaminate any hazard.  This certification process also verifies the ability of state and local first responders to work effectively with related federal support assets (Anonymous, 2002).

Emergency Response.  As related to the threat of al-Qaeda attacks, the initial priorities of all three emergency responders (i.e., police, fire, and medical services) are identical.  In other words, they will collectively help to achieve their main priorities, which are to save the lives of civilians and responders during and after a terrorist attack.  Emergency responders must regularly test recovery procedures in multi-agency exercises.  Responders do this to ensure that good liaison exists among the services and that commanders know their counterparts in other agencies.  Agencies can identify areas to improve and develop through these exercises and joint training.  Hence, it is vital that they conduct these joint multi-agency exercises and thoroughly train everyone on the lessons learned (Dowle, 2007).

First Response/Mitigation.  The United States faces an increasing threat from a radiological terrorist attack involving either a radiological or nuclear device.  Recently, the Federal Government worked collectively with various state and local governments to exercise their response to this sort of attack.  In addition to training events, it is apparent that leaders at all levels need to study and plan for the mitigation of radiological effects in case the Nation is faced with a radiological event in the homeland.  These forms of attack pose a significant challenge, not only because of their destructive power but also because of the inevitable psychological impact they would cause.  Understanding and anticipating the challenges of these effects are first steps to mitigating the unacceptable levels of risk posed by this sort of attack.  While prevention remains the first priority, it is important to be prepared to respond if that fails.  First responders must be trained, equipped, and exercised.  Collaboration, communication, and engagement are the fundamental cornerstones for every aspect of response operations (Brown, Coble, & Chase, 2008).

Is the World Safer Now?  Slovakian Ambassador Peter Burian said that “one thing which we do not know is how far the terrorists have gone in acquiring access to WMDs and related technologies.”  Additionally, “we do not know how much we have come to a situation that we are able to cope with this threat through the implementation of [UN Security Council Resolution] 1540.  So this is something which is very difficult to evaluate.  I would say that, without Resolution 1540, I am almost sure that based on the experience and based on concrete observations and revelations, like the Abdul Qadeer Khan illicit nuclear black market, that terrorists would already possess WMDs at least in those areas which are quite easy to access and build, such as a dirty bomb or chemical weapons, which were left in some countries unprotected, or biological substances” (Pomper & Crail, 2007).

Ambassador Burian went further to say that “this is something of which we are reminded almost every day.  As it was the case of involvement of a group of doctors in the United Kingdom in plotting terrorist attacks.  It is a worrying phenomenon, since it is very easy to imagine that this group of doctors might use their knowledge for acquiring and misusing the substances which might cause diseases for launching biological attacks on civilians.  So really, I would say, without any exaggeration, that the threat of terrorists achieving the capability of producing and using WMDs is real, and the international community should be very serious in addressing this threat and doing it on a timely basis” (Pomper & Crail, 2007).

Conclusion

The next major attack on the United States may occur in the next year or so.  Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network is behind this threat.  The major targets of opportunity will be multiple, metropolitan population centers, and al-Qaeda will probably use CBRN…with chemical or radiological weapons as the weapons of choice.  Sleeper agents throughout the United States are poised to detonate the CBRN weapons already hidden within the continental United States (CONUS).  This attack will no doubt create panic and fear throughout the U.S. population.  Our first responders are prepared to deal with the threat and aftermath of the expected attack to return life back to normalcy.  Our military forces are prepared and poised for a counterattack on those who perpetrate these attacks including attacking those nations that harbor these international killers.

References

Anonymous (2002, July). National Strategy for Homeland Security, pp 86.

Anonymous (2006, September). National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, pp 26.

Anonymous (2007, September 10). Chertoff: We’re preparing for nuclear attack. NewsMax.com. Retrieved from http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/chertoff_nuclear/2007/09/10/31560.html?s=al&promo_code=39CB-1.

Anonymous (2008, May 25). Al-Qaeda bomb-maker revives WMD program. Newsmax.com. Retrieved from http://news.newsmax.com/?Z6OD.ZdVAp2FmyHW-TtemhQZzXlztfR1Z.

Brown, J. B., Coble, R. E., & Chase, E. J. (2008, 1st Quarter). Radiological events in the homeland. Joint Force Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i48/17.pdf.

Dowle, J. (2007, February). The CBRN scenario. Law & Order, 55(2), pp 19-21.

Mayntz, R. (2006). Control of a terrorist network: Lessons from the 9/11 Commission Report. International Public Management Journal, 9(3), pp. 295-311.

Pomper, M. A., & Crail, P. (2007, November). Keeping WMD from terrorists: An interview with 1540 committee chairman Ambassador Peter Burian. Arms Control Today. Arms Control Association. Retrieved from http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2007_11/Burian.asp?print.

Sinai, J. (2007, Fall). Al Qaida’s warfare against the West: An Israeli threat briefing. The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security International, 13(3), pp 6-11.

###