Proliferation of WMD 1

Running Head: PROLIFERATION OF WMD FOR NATIONAL SECURITY

Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction for National Security

SGM Kenneth J. Kraus Jr.

Class 58

United States Army Sergeant’s Major Academy

Mr. Mike Artis

November 26, 2007

 Proliferation of WMD 2

Thesis: Our nation’s response to the use of Weapon’s of Mass Destruction creates a clear
objective to support the 2 Pillars of the National Security Strategy and defeat America’s enemies.

Outline

I. Abstract

II. Vulnerability

III. Nuclear

IV. Biological Aspects

V. Chemical Attacks

VI. Counterpoint

VII. Conclusion

VIII. References
 Proliferation of WMD 3

Abstract

Our nation’s response to the use of weapon’s of mass destruction has created a clear objective

that support the two pillars of the National Security Strategy in order defeat America’s enemies.

After the attacks on 9/11, the President’s second pillar of the National Security Strategy has had

to take a bold new direction to insure the safety of all Americans. Since weapons of mass

destruction (WMD) have been highly sought by many nation-states as well as terrorist

organizations, the President began many programs to augment the Global War on Terror

(GWOT). In order to accomplish this task, non-proliferation of WMD must occur. Through the

implementation of diplomatic, economic, military measures and the creation of the Department

of Homeland Security, it is designed to discourage our enemies from attacking us on our own

soil with weapons of mass terror. This paper will address how the National Security Strategy

aims to protect Americans and its interests abroad from nuclear, biological and chemical threats.
 Proliferation of WMD 4

Vulnerability

In the 2006 National Security Strategy, President Bush stated that America faces many

problems which include the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The WMD

threats fall into four basic categories: Nuclear, Biological, Chemical and Radiological. The

United States, as the globes sole superpower, has taken many steps to quell a group from

attacking them on their own soil. Without a doubt, an attack on the United States (US) using

WMD could weaken economic strength or political will. The days of the Cold War or over as so

is the assumption that the US will be bombarded with hundreds of ballistic missiles. The most

likely culprit will be from small bands of terrorist cells, either from abroad or a disgruntled US

citizen. The use of WMD is a tool for any state that opts on an asymmetric strategy or threatens

a more powerful opponent at heir weakest point, its population (Falkenrath, 1999).

Nuclear

Although the United Nations has place numerous sanctions on nations that posses are

attempting to posses nuclear technologies, like Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of

Korea (DPRK), these measures have proven difficult to enforce and simply not enough to

guarantee American safety. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) placed sanctions on

these nations intended to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect their

reactors to confirm there is no production of weapons grade nuclear material. As both nations

claim that their programs are for power production. Additionally, the sanctions limit what UN

members can sell or trade with these nations.

UN resolutions and other sanctions placed on DPRK and Iran creates a poor national

economy which could lead them to sell nuclear material or technology to rogue states or terrorist

organizations. This is proven by Iran being granted a loan by the World Bank for $100 billion
 Proliferation of WMD 5

and DPRK returning to talks with South Korea to seek peace and humanitarian aid. In a report

by John Wolfstahl, it is noted that terrorist organizations like Al-Queada, through the black

market or a nation-state sponsor, could acquire a nuclear weapon or the materials to develop one

(Tully, 2007).

Since 1993, Osama bin Laden offered nearly $2 million for a nuclear device, to no known

avail. When asked of he had nuclear of chemical weapons he stated “Acquiring weapons for the

defense of Muslims is a religious duty. If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank

God for enabling me to do so”. This is especially alarming when it is taken into consideration

that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, approximately 40 suitcase nuclear devices are

unaccounted for. Each of these devices could yield a blast from .1 kiloton to 1kiloton

detonations. In an urban environment, this blast could incur hundreds of thousand deaths.

(Larssen, 2007).

Considering all threats to the United States, programs like the Global Threat Reduction

Initiative (GTRI) help to ensure that nuclear materials remain out of the wrong hands. GRTIs

mission evolves the removal and/or securing of nuclear and radiological materials and equipment

around the globe that poses a threat to the United States and its interests abroad. This program

evaluates the risks and vulnerabilities of nuclear and radiological sites, materials and equipment

in an expedient manner. This program has two main points which are to secure nuclear fuel and

converting old reactors for non-nuclear use. The program allows nuclear powers to keep their

current weapons but attempts to minimize and ensure the physical security of highly enriched

uranium (HEU). Using HEU is the simplest way to make a nuclear weapon. In total, nearly 506

pounds of HEU have been recovered since the GTRI began. This initiative aims to transfer over

3900 pounds of HEU back to Russia from countries like Serbia, Bulgaria, Libya, Poland, Latvia
 Proliferation of WMD 6

and the Czech Republic. GTRI also has programs to secure radiological material that could be

used in a dirty bomb. In a press release by the National Nuclear Security Administration

(NNSA) reported that GTRI has recovered enough radioactive material that could have built

6074 dirty bombs from nearly 500 locations world wide, to include 74 sites from within the

United States. The GTRI program in conjunction with other counter-proliferation measures has

succeeded in ensuring these fissile materials do not fall into the wrong hands (Hundman, 2006).

Additionally, in support of the second pillar of the US National Strategy, the President created

a program called the New Triad. This program transformed the old triad of US strategic nuclear

forces; intercontinental ballistic missiles, heavy bombers and submarine launched nuclear

missiles into the New Triad. The New Triad composed of offensive and defensive convention

and nuclear systems, active and passive defensives and a revamped research and development

and industrial infrastructure for developing and maintaining the new systems. The New Triad is

designed to give the President and other military leadership, a wide range of possible options and

contingencies. Through this program, the US nuclear arsenal will be reduced from nearly 6000

warheads to less than 2200 by the year 2012. This reduced force will be more reliable and will

provide a comparable strike capability. Under the New Triad, U.S. strategic forces will be able

to meet the challenges of the foreseeable future (DATSD, 2007).

Biological Aspects

A biological weapon or infectious disease attack against the United States would cause a mass

panic. Organizations such as the Biological Incident Index, a part of the governments National

Response Program (NRP), and Project Bioshield were created in response to this threat. The

NRP has the ability to identify common traits between natural occurring viruses and toxins with

deliberate outbreaks. In conjunction with the Center for Disease Control and Project Bioshield,
 Proliferation of WMD 7

vaccinations or other treatments should be stockpiled, in the event of an attack or outbreak.

Properly identifying an agent’s origin is critical and must be executed swiftly in order to provide

adequate care and determine if the outbreak was a deliberate attack or occurs naturally.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Health and Human

Services have prominent roles in protecting Americans from a biological attack. The National

Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC), an office within the DHS, assess

threats and determines countermeasures. The NBACC also conducts forensic analysis to

determine it the outbreak was an act of terrorism and possibly where it came from (Gottron,

2007).

To combat the threat of a biological attack on the people of the U.S., the President created

Project Bioshield. Project Bioshield, located at Fort Detrick, Maryland, has a mission on applied

research on biological threats and providing medical solutions to protect and inoculate. This

program costs nearly $141 million and will be the Department of Homeland Security’s first

laboratory specifically designed for bio-defense. Working together, along with other national

laboratories and universities, they will help thwart any foreseeable biological attack

(Shea, 2007).

Because of its ease of production, biological agents are considered a “poor mans nuclear

bomb”. Since biological agents were used in the past on American soil, albeit unsuccessfully,

which only helps to solidify the importance of keeping biodefense programs properly funded.

Although banned by many treaties and conventions over the past century, there are more that 20

nation-states that possess or are suspected of possessing biological weapons.

 Proliferation of WMD 8

Chemical Attacks

Chemical agent weapons, like biological agents, are relatively easy to produce. Literally

thousands of chemicals have the capability for placement into a weapon or other dispersal

means. The use of a chemical weapon on American soil, like biological agents, would produce

psychological as well as physical effects perhaps killing thousands. Unlike biological agents,

chemical agents have immediate effects and may not be confined to a specific area. Weather

effects have the final determination in where an agent will travel.

Many nation-states have signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, while nearly 15 have not.

This poses a threat to the United States. The US’ only defense of a chemical attack relies upon

early detection and immediate population evacuation from the vapor hazard area,

decontamination and a measured response. In a January 2007 report from the General

Accounting Office (GAO), where 12 of 15 scenarios involving WMD issued by the DHS found

Army Reserve and National Guard Chemical units that concurrently perform both their original

war fighting chemical and biological defense mission and their homeland defense mission is

doubtful (Augostino, 2007).

Although developed in 1998 by President Clinton, Civil Defense Teams (CST) have a

primary mission to protect Americans from WMD terrorism. CSTs are manned by 22 highly

trained, full time National Guard members. Currently, there are over 50 CSTs trained and

certified in every state and Guam. CSTs are able to rapidly deploy to assist local first responders

by providing technical advice, medical care and enhanced identification means in order to

mitigate causalities.
 Proliferation of WMD 9

Counterpoint

Most Americans assume that an attack using WMD would never happen. Because of this, it’s

difficult to justify spending billions of dollars on a threat that may never come. The nation’s

inability to completely close our borders has given potential terrorists to enter our country with

ease with the intent to start or complete a terror cell. These terror cells live in our

neighborhoods, finding opportunities to inflict causalities to our population and our

infrastructure.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, nearly 40 suitcase nuclear devices are unaccounted for. It

can be assumed that they have found their way onto the black market waiting for the highest

bidder to obtain them. This is particularly troubling as a rouge state or terrorist, who have

proven to have large sums of money, may obtain a WMD device. This fact is mortifying as the

small size of these devices could easily be smuggled into our porous country’s borders and reek

havoc. GAO Report 07-147 stated that if a WMD attack occurred within our borders that our

military assets, chemical companies, are not prepared to handle this emergency. Indeed, there

are numerous first responders integrated with our firefighters, they simply cannot handle an

attack of this magnitude.

The president’s national security strategy does not do enough to combat the issues of

terrorists’ infiltrating our borders or detecting home grown terrorist already established. This

was proven on September 11, 2001.

Conclusion

Weapons of Mass Destruction continue to threaten the United States and its global interests.

The threat from terrorists is expected to rise in the near future. There is significant intelligence

that indicates that the most likely domestic threat over the next few years will be the lone actor.
 Proliferation of WMD 10

This complicates things as this type of terrorist act usually has no “return address” to launch a

counter attack. Terrorist cells are likely to utilize criminal organizations in obtaining WMD or

the materials to make it themselves. To meet this threat, the United States needs to continue to

exploit intelligence sources, keep funding to programs already established and to use military

action only when absolutely necessary. Advances in technology can allow terrorists to elude law

enforcement agencies and could easily allow small groups to acquire these weapons of terror.
 Proliferation of WMD 11

References

Agostino, D. M. (2007). General Accounting Office, GAO Report 07-143. Retrieved on October

30, 2007, from http:// www.gao.gov/new.items/d07143.pdf

Grotton, F. (2007). Project Bioshield: Appropriations, Acquisitions and Policy Implementation.

CRS Report for Congress, 8 March 2007.

Hundman, E (2006). The Global Threat Reduction Initiative’s First Two Years. Center for

Defense Information. Retrieved October 22, 2007, from

http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=3650

Ignatius, D. (2007). Protents of Nuclear Al-Quaeda.. Retrieved October 29 2007, from

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2007/10/17/AR2007101702114.html?SUB=NEW

Ralkenrath, R.A. (1999) America’s Achilles’ Heel (Second Printing), Cambridge: The Belfer

Center for Science and International Affairs

Shea, D.A. (2007). The National Biodefense Analysis and Counter Measure Center. CRS

Report for Congress, 15 February 2007.

Office of the Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters. Retrieved

October 21, 2007, from http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/nuclearstockpile.html