Intelligence & Counterterrorism, Term Paper Example

Intelligence and Counterterrorism: The Potential for Biological Warfare

The Department of State is responsible for contributing to countering terrorist efforts that impact the country as a whole (Bullock et al., 2012). In particular, they put forth their energy to eliminate weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and create other plans to help keep the country safe. In particular, the Department of State is highly concerned with diplomacy and other interactions that can contribute to building strong relationships with other nations or to help dissolve tensions with these individuals. It is therefore important to consider that national security and counterterrorism must be addressed on many fronts. While disarming WMDs was a major concern of the past, the government is becoming increasingly interested in determining how to diminish biological threats. In light of the recent Ebola disaster, it is apparent that the United States does not currently have appropriate intelligence and counterterrorist methods in place to prevent against a biological weapons attack. It is therefore important to gain an understanding of the current efforts that the government has put forth and what it could continue to do to address these national safety concerns.

Biological warfare is roughly defined as using toxins or other infectious agents to cause harm to a population. These entities are particularly dangerous because they have the ability to self-replicate in a given environment, contributing to a significant amount of damage. Under this definition, bacteria, viruses, and fungi could be used to cause damage to people and their use is a cause for concern because they are not considered to be weapons that are conventionally used. As a consequence, not much is known about the knowledge that enemy nations hold about such weapons or their capacity to use them. In spite of this uncertainty, it is important for countries to be prepared to diminish the harm of such attacks in case they are implemented.

Biological terrorism first became a national security concern following World War II. Under the leadership of then English Prime Minister Winston Churchill, a microbiologist named Paul Fildes became responsible for studying tularemia, anthrax, brucellosis, and botulism toxins and turning them into weapons. With the development of this technology came the increasing concern that people would be able to use their knowledge of science to create weapons that would be as equally devastating as nuclear weapons. Therefore, large research centers like the National Institute of Health and Centers for Disease Control began working on a series of cures that would help diminish the effects of such biological weapons on the population. While the use of biological weapons raises many ethical concerns, it is important for the United States to consider that it must be ready to defend itself. Therefore, considering the possibilities for existing technology is not an unethical act if this means that the country will be better prepared to defend itself in the event of a bioterrorism attack.

One of the first bioterrorism concerns that was established in the United States occurred in 2001. During this time, 10 confirmed cases of inhaled anthrax occurred. Individuals were targeted by sending spores of B. anthracis through the mail. When a target would open an envelope containing these spores, they would inhale it accidently, contributing to illness or death (Jernigan et al., 2001). A majority of targets during this time period were in New York, Washington D.C., and Florida. All envelopes are thought to have been meant to be delivered to political figures within the country, but in most cases, the envelopes were opened by a different individual. Symptoms of anthrax poisoning among members of this population were found to include fever and chills, sweats, fatigue, cough, and nausea or vomiting. Furthermore, 90% of patients demonstrated liver damage and 60% were unable to gain sufficient oxygen. Fortunately, patients were able to be treated with high dose antibiotics. However, this situation illustrates the potential dangers that the country faces with bioterrorist threats. As a consequence of the anthrax outbreak, new measures were temporarily put in place to monitor mail and warn people about opening letters from people they do not though. After time, the threat of anthrax poisoning as a terrorist attempt was lessened, but this situation marks one of the first times that America needed to be concerned with a bioterrorist threat.

To counter terrorist threats such as the one posed by anthrax in 2001, researchers have needed to determine which biological agents could be weaponized to determine if any potential methods could be implemented to prevent them from becoming problematic for the general population. To do so, intelligence needs to be collected in the same manner that information is gathered for physical threats. However, gathering intelligence is not just related to observing the moves of potentially threatening governments, it’s also necessary to improve our understanding of biological and environmental contaminants to be able to protect ourselves against such threats. One initiative of homeland security is therefore to study current trends in world politics in addition to understandings related to biology to analyze the percent likelihood that bioterrorism will occur, determine where these threats will occur, and who it will impact (Banks & Castillo-Chavez, 2003).

Since the Department of Homeland Security is unable to detect terrorist threats prior to their occurrence in all instances, it is important for scientists and other professionals to determine how to measure the likelihood that attacks will occur based on a variety of tools. As a result, statistics are regularly applied to generate predictions about such events. According to leaders in the field:

“Intelligence and security informatics (ISI) is an emerging field of study aimed at developing advanced information technologies, systems, algorithms, and databases for national- and homeland-security-related applications, through an integrated technological, organizational, and policy-based approach” (Chen et al., 2004)”.

Therefore, there are many topics that must be studied to predict and disarm bioterrorist attacks. A focus on developing technology is important because ensuring that the United States is more technologically capable than other nations helps ensure that the technology could be used to prevent biological crises from occurring or prevent them from causing harm to the population. Advanced systems and algorithms will better allow mathematicians and computer scientists to accurately predict the likelihood of a threat. Last, policy-based approaches will allow academics and politicians to understand which political moves would best reduce the threat of a terrorist attack.

To further these predictive understandings, it is helpful to reflect on the possible biological nature of terrorism. Prior to the 2001 anthrax attacks, a scientist reported that “Biological weapons have recently attracted the attention and the resources of the nation. Discerning the nature of the threat of bioweapons as well as appropriate responses to them requires greater attention to the biological characteristics of these instruments of war” (Henderson, 1999). Even though conventional weapons like nuclear bombs are highly threatening, they are easy to understand and predictable. The United States and other members of the United Nation are currently well aware of the countries that harbor nuclear weapons and have attempted to encourage these countries to disarm their weapons or pledge not to use them. On the other hand, biological weapons cannot be detected in this same manner. It is impossible to know about the innovations that are currently conducting in scientific laboratories across the world in addition to unreported innovations that have occurred in the past. Thus, the use of biological weapons is a concern for intelligence teams because it cannot be tracked in the same manner that conventional weapons have. As a consequence, their use is relatively unpredictable as well. Therefore, intelligence and counterterrorist forces are being pressured to rethink the ways they conduct research and develop understandings about national security. This flexibility is beneficial because it allows these professionals to be more prepared for uncertainty.

History has demonstrated that the intelligence and counterterrorism teams are better prepared immediately after disasters. In order to be more aware, homeland security teams are likely to implement better surveillance measures to ensure that further harms will not befall the population. Such a situation occurred during the September 11^th terrorist attacks:

“Immediately after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC), the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYCDOHMH) was concerned about the possibility of a secondary attack with a biologic agent. Because NYCDOHMH lost communications as a result of the attacks, concern arose that this disruption would affect the ability to recognize a bioterrorist event. To address this concern, NYCDOHMH quickly implemented a syndromic surveillance system in hospital emergency departments (EDs) to identify a large-scale bioterrorist event and other health conditions related to the WTC attacks” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2002).

This situations demonstrates that putting systems in place to ensure effective communication is beneficial to deter terrorist threats and to reduce the damage that they are able to cause. Even though the country was not attacked using a biological weapon following the September 11^th attacks, it was important for homeland security in addition to research professionals to be prepared to fight against the attack. Therefore, it is beneficial to have secondary communication systems in place to coordinate defense systems in case of such threats. Even though the NYCDOHMH losing communication was detrimental at the time, it is fortunate that this communication failure did not contribute to the loss of lives. Thus, there are many ways to prevent or reduce the harm of bioterrorism that is outside the scope of scientific knowledge.

To rectify these problems, cutting edge technology has been studied and implemented to prevent communication loss during disasters. Furthermore, specific technological requirements have been implemented in large public areas to prevent a security crisis. In addition chemical and biological sensors have been put in place to detect bioterrorist threats at their onset. In this manner, members of the public could be warned to evacuate a particular location before the contamination has the ability to threaten their health. Describing new cutting edge technology, researchers state “This new selective chemical-sensing approach was realized using an attractive ubiquitous platform of battery-free passive radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags adapted for chemical sensing” (Potyrailo et al., 2012). Therefore, these waves could be used to detect the presence of different chemicals that may be threatening to human health. Creating a specific profile for each toxic chemical and integrating them into the chemical-sensing mechanism is beneficial because it allows technology to both identify a threatening chemical or biological hazard and to warn the individuals within its proximity.

In addition to using state of the art communication technology and detection devices, the Department of Homeland Security has needed to partner with other government institutions in order to implement defense strategies and to gather intelligence. In particular, this groups has partnered with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because of terrorist threats that have been related to the biological contamination of food. A discussion of the fact that food could serve as a reasonable target for terrorist attacks is reported as follows:

“A day after Congress passed legislation to overhaul food safety laws and on the heels of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) disclosure that terrorism intelligence threat streams indicated Al Qaeda (AQ) has discussed an attack on US soil by contaminating “salad bars” and “buffets” with poisons, a Salmonella attack by Mother Nature sickened 89 people (23 percent of whom had to be hospitalized) in 15 states and the District of Columbia, reported the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)” (Kimery, 2010)

This series of events is of particular interest to individuals studying the security of food in the United States due to the ironic turn of events that had occurred. While Department of Homeland Security professionals were worried about food contamination by terrorists by poison, food in the United States really became contaminated by a bacterium called Salmonella. It is important to consider that this type of contamination regularly occurs in the country and is a result of farming practices. As such, even though the Department of Homeland Security was initially concerned with practices that would make the food inedible, they were faced with the reality that terrorists would be able to take advantage of food contaminations that have already been problematic within the country and to use these more common and unassuming methods to effective attack a large number of individuals. Since many different types of bacteria can replicate in approximately 20 minutes, it would not take much effort to force this type of contamination on a population without them becoming aware of this threat.

In such situations, the Department of Homeland Security and the FDA could work together in a manner that promotes solutions to potential contamination problems. One method that would prevent the harmful effects that bacterial infections could cause painful and potentially infections is the use of antibiotics in farming. While this technique is not generally recommended under normal conditions to protect the health of the population, reports of bacterial contamination of plants could be countered by its use. Furthermore, public service announcements could further minimize the threat. In situations in which these crops are being contaminated, it would be reasonable for the FDA to recommend that all foods are washed thoroughly and boiled before eating. Extreme temperatures has the potential to kill bacteria, so this would reduce the incidence of disease in this population.

Antibiotics are a primary defense that could be used against biological attacks caused by the spread of bacteria. Specialists are worried that more intense attacks using this type of microorganisms could be created using genetically modified organisms that may be resistant to existent antibiotics. Therefore, it is reasonable for hospitals to acquire additional antibiotics in advance of these threats. In addition, it is important for them to have combination antibiotics available to counteract against these resistant bacteria. Even the strongest bacteria could often be fought using this type of therapy, so it is important to have these drugs produced in advance of such bioterrorist threats in order to minimize the damage that could result. Having drugs prepared in bulk may incur an initial expense, but doing so would ultimately save the amount of public funds needed to protect human life in the case of such an emergency.

According to an analysis of the existing infrastructure in the United States, our current level of organization would not be sufficient to deal with a terrorist attack. Terrorist intelligence may detect that this is the case, which would put us at additional risk because it would enable them to cause the most damage. Specifically, individuals that would respond to a biological attack would include health care professionals and public health officials. “Unfortunately, in many scenarios, diagnosis of the problem may be delayed, because medical providers and labs are not equipped to recognize and deal with the disease agents of greatest concern” (Hamburg, 2002). A beneficial resolution to this problem may be to equip more police offices with laboratory equipment in addition to trained professionals ready to analyze samples in their location if needed. It is likely that advanced work would need to be conducted in highly specialized labs, but average police officers could be trained to follow certain protocols that would allow the scientists running these cases to gain a greater understanding of the situation at hand. Doing so will ensure that it will be easier to obtain more information about bioterrorist cases and allow conclusions to be drawn in a more time efficient manner.

Overall, it is important for the Department of Defense to make a wealth of considerations when deciding how to defend the country against bioterrorism. The process of gathering intelligence is not identical to the methods used to gain information on weapons. Spies and allies cannot simply report the existence of such weapons because they are produced and stored on a much larger scale. Instead, intelligence claims must be made based on previous observations of militant groups in addition to known knowledge of their capabilities, existing technology, and trade partners. Gaining this understanding is important because it allows government officials and scientists to gain a better understanding of the types of threats that may be pertinent. Conducting comprehensive research is the best way for the country to be prepared in case of an attack.

In addition, it is important for the government to fund infrastructure related to the laboratories that would be needed to quickly analyze the sources of bioterrorist threats and to develop a cure. While there are many laboratories already scattered throughout the country, they are not organized in a manner that would allow for the quick detection these processes would demand. Furthermore, training programs should be put in place that would allow law enforcement professionals to double as analysts during these crises. Allowing more people to become directly involved in the assessment of the terrorist conditions will allow the resolution to be detected more readily. In the case of a bioterrorist attack, this will minimize the amount of time that people display symptoms, therefore contributing to the likelihood that a high prevalence of mortality will be prevented. It is important for counterterrorism to be designed in a manner that focuses on the protection of lives. If the terrorist attack could be quickly made to be nonthreatening, then it is apparent that the United States will be victorious against the attackers.

In conclusion, it is important for the government to be in a constant state of preparedness to fight against terrorist attacks. In the case of bioterrorism, this preparedness is related to the need to conduct biological research, establish laboratory infrastructure, and have trained professionals available to analyze trends and biological data. It is important for the United States quickly adopt these strategies to ensure its own strategies to properly implement defense strategies. In light of modern technology, it is important to consider that biological weapons could be produced quickly and easily. Therefore, even though the most important bioterrorist attack has been the anthrax concern in 2001, there is high potential for biological weapons to become the new trend in warfare. Since there are many conflicts across the world today, it is important for the country to be ready to defend itself ahead of an attack to minimize the potential damage that could be caused.

References

Banks, H.T., & Castillo-Chavez, C. (2003). Bioterrorism: Mathematical Modelling Applications in Homeland Security. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.

Bullock, J.A., Haddow, G.D., Coppola, D.P. (2012). Introduction to Homeland Security, Fourth Edition: Principles of All-Hazards Risk Management. Butterworth-Heinemann.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2002). Syndromic surveillance for bioterrorism following the attacks on the World Trade Center–New York City, 2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep., 11(51).

Chen, H., Wang, F., Zeng, D. (2004). Intelligence and security informatics for homeland security: information, communication, and transportation. Intelligent Transportation Systems, IEEE Transactions, 5(4).

Hamburg, M.A. (2002). Preparing for and Preventing Bioterrorism. Issues in Science and Technology, 18(2).

Henderson, D.A. (1999). The Looming Threat of Bioterrorism. Science, 283(5406): 1279-1282.

Jernigan, J.A., Stephens, D.S., Ashford, D.A., Omenaca, C., Topiel, M.S., Galbraith, M., Tapper, M., Fisk, T.L., Zaki, S., Popovic, T., Meyer, R.F., Quinn, C.P., Harper, S.A., Fridkin, S.K., Sejvar, J.J., Shepard, C.W., McConnell, M., Guarner, J., Shieh, W.J., Malecki, J.M., Gerberding, J.L., Hughes, J.M., Perkins, B.A. (2001). Bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax: the first 10 cases reported in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis., 7(6): 933–944.

Kimery, A. (2010). The Threat Of Bioterrorism And The Ability To Detect It. Homeland Security Today. Retrieved from http://www.hstoday.us/columns/the-kimery-report/blog/the-threat-of-bioterrorism-and-the-ability-to-detect-it/bea57df4219d59980fcbd46429f7a918.html

Potyrailo, R.A., Nagraj, N., Surman, C., Boudries, H., Lai, H., Slocik, J.M., Kelley-Loughnane, N., Naik, R.R. (2012). Wireless sensors and sensor networks for homeland security applications.TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 40: 133–145.