Terrorism Asymmetric Warfare And Weapons Of Mass Destruction

There is a wide spectrum of potential threats to the U.S. homeland that do not involve overt attacks by states using long-range missiles or conventional military forces. Such threats include covert attacks by state actors, state use of proxies, independent terrorist and extremist attacks by foreign groups or individuals, and independent terrorist and extremist attacks by residents of the United States. These threats are currently limited in scope and frequency, but are emerging as potentially significant issues for future U.S. security. In this comprehensive work, Cordesman argues that new threats require new thinking, and offers a range of recommendations, from expanding the understanding of what constitutes a threat and bolstering Homeland defense measures, to bettering resource allocation and improving intelligence gathering and analysis. No pattern of actual attacks on U.S. territory has yet emerged that provides a clear basis for predicting how serious any given form of attack might be in the future, what means of attack might be used, or how lethal new forms of attack might be. As a result, there is a major ongoing debate over the seriousness of the threat and how the U.S. government should react. This work is an invaluable contribution to that debate.

This volume shows us that in order to deal with today’s Fourth Generation asymmetric warfare by terrorist groups using conventional arms and weapons of mass destruction, we need a new ‘global networked’ approach. The contributors examine the various attempts that have been made to counter the latest wave of terrorism, including the US strikes against Afghanistan and Iraq, President George W. Bush's declaration of a ‘war against terrorism’, the creation of the US Department of Homeland Security, and the 9/11 Commission. Drawing from our experience with ‘Terrorism Early Warning’ and the co-production of counter-terrorism intelligence, this book explains the need for such a network and shows how it could be formed. It compiles the opinions of experts from clinical medicine, public policy, law enforcement and the military. These expert contributors identify the nature of a global counter-terrorism network, show how it could be created, and provide clear guidelines for gauging its future effectiveness. This book will be of great interest to all students of terrorism studies, US national security, international relations, and political science in general.

This paper combines three separate threads of analysis on culture and violent nonstate actors as a launching pad to spur further research into this critical arena of culture and security. Jim Smith lays out a series of templates for guiding analysis of culture and violent nonstate actors. Mark Long applies cultural analysis of radical Islam and alQaida in discussing the influences involved in the core al Qaida group's WMD decisions. Tom Johnson, in examining a tribal insurgent psychological campaign in Afghanistan, demonstrates that behavioral influences can be manipulated for significant effect in countering our efforts to gain stability and legitimacy for the Afghan government. James M. Smith, PhD, is the Director, USAF Institute for National Security Studies and Professor, Military Strategic Studies at the US Air Force Academy.Jerry Mark Long, PhD, is Associate Professor and Director, Middle East Studies, Honors College, Baylor University. Thomas H. Johnson is Research Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School.

For several years U.S. policymakers, officials, and writers on defense have employed the terms "asymmetric" or "asymmetry" to characterize everything from the nature of the threats we face to the nature of war and beyond. The author challenges the utility of using those terms to characterize the threats we face, one element of the broader debate over the nature of war, U.S. strategy, and the threats confronting us. As a work of critique, it aims to make an important contribution to the threat debate. A correct assessment of the nature of the threat environment is essential to any sound defense doctrine for the U.S. Army and the military as a whole. That correct assessment can only be reached through a process of critique and debate.

There is a widely held belief in the imminent probability of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons of mass destruction being used by terrorists against civilian targets. This edited volume critically assesses the suggestion that one safeguard against this possibility would be to strengthen existing international prohibitions against state- level acquisition of such weapons. A glimpse of the possible potential of terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction has been seen through the actions of the Tokyo Aum group, and through the use of chlorine by insurgents in Iraq. However, the extent of the real threat posed is as yet unclear, and safeguarding against it in developing countries will not be easy. This book assembles specialists in each category of WMD in order to examine the potential of expanding the three ‘classical’ arms control treaties in order to combat the threat posed by smaller terrorist groups, and draws conclusions as to the strengths and weaknesses of this suggestion.

As bad as they are, why aren't terrorists worse? With biological, chemical and nuclear weapons at hand, they easily could be. Jessica Stern argues that the nuclear threat of the Cold War has been replaced by the more imminent threat of terrorist attacks with weapons of mass destruction.

"Biological weapons are widely feared, yet rarely used. Biological weapons were the first weapon prohibited by an international treaty, yet the proliferation of these weapons increased after they were banned in 1972. Biological weapons are frequently called 'the poor man's atomic bomb,' yet they cannot provide the same deterrent capability as nuclear weapons. One of my goals in this book is to explain the underlying principles of these apparent paradoxes."—from Living Weapons Biological weapons are the least well understood of the so-called weapons of mass destruction. Unlike nuclear and chemical weapons, biological weapons are composed of, or derived from, living organisms. In Living Weapons, Gregory D. Koblentz provides a comprehensive analysis of the unique challenges that biological weapons pose for international security. At a time when the United States enjoys overwhelming conventional military superiority, biological weapons have emerged as an attractive means for less powerful states and terrorist groups to wage asymmetric warfare. Koblentz also warns that advances in the life sciences have the potential to heighten the lethality and variety of biological weapons. The considerable overlap between the equipment, materials and knowledge required to develop biological weapons, conduct civilian biomedical research, and develop biological defenses creates a multiuse dilemma that limits the effectiveness of verification, hinders civilian oversight, and complicates threat assessments. Living Weapons draws on the American, Soviet, Russian, South African, and Iraqi biological weapons programs to enhance our understanding of the special challenges posed by these weapons for arms control, deterrence, civilian-military relations, and intelligence. Koblentz also examines the aspirations of terrorist groups to develop these weapons and the obstacles they have faced. Biological weapons, Koblentz argues, will continue to threaten international security until defenses against such weapons are improved, governments can reliably detect biological weapon activities, the proliferation of materials and expertise is limited, and international norms against the possession and use of biological weapons are strengthened.