Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 20:11:29 -0500 (EST)
From: rosaphil <rugosa-AT-interport.net>
Subject: Agro-terrorism text (fwd)


well, someone is making some success!


+********** Snail me yer rosehips if you liked this post! ************
*Better Living Thru Better Living!* http://www.interport.net/~rugosa *

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 17:31:21 +0100
From: Peter B Martin <pbmarti-AT-ibm.net>
To: CLOAKS-AND-DAGGERS-AT-MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject: Agro-terrorism text

M.S.A.
MARTIN
SECURITY
ANALYSIS
e-mail:pbmarti-AT-ibm.net


CONTENDING  WITH   AVENGERS


There is no doubt about it, the United States is now under siege from an Islamic terrorist organization and the nation is highly vulnerable to such aggression. There is no specific remedy in anyone=92s range of vision against further terrorist attacks, and the recent blusterous and largely futile US missile strikes against the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and against Khartoum=92s pharmaceutical factory will probably prompt the terrorists to retaliate in kind. Before examing the possible scenarios and the ways to mount a more adroit counteroffensive, a bit of background might help towards understanding possible resolutions.
 
Contemporary history documents the US and the Saudi Arabian governments=92 symbiotic reliance on each other to ensure the stability of the Saudi regime and the Gulf region in general. While the posting of US troops in Saudi Arabia was not the cause of the present hostility it could have been the catalyst that generated the current Islamic terrorist conflict. There is no doubt that the US presence in this Islamic holy land has created a lot of antagonism with puritanical Islamist factions, who wish to establish a true Islamic state according to Sharia law (God=92s law as disclosed to the Prophet Mohammed in 610 AD). US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia are considered by the absolutist Islamic communities to be allies of the Saudi regime, thus enemies of the opposition  fundamentalists=92 cause, and consequently the attestation of Western =91occupation=92 of their holy land. They are determined to see these infidels out of their holy land, one way or another. 

Terrorist bombings, such as those that took place in Riyadh in November 1995 and the Khobor Towers bombing in June 1996 are testimony that these militant factions mean business. Confrontation continues today with the recent Nairobi and Dar es Salaam bombings, in all probability part and parcel to the fatwas (religious instructions) from such a person as the militant Islamic leader Osama bin Laden, the apostate Saudi millionaire now under the protection of the Taleban in Afghanistan.

Earlier this year, reputedly in Khartoum, the Egyptian Al-Jihad Movement, the Egyptian Armed Islamic Group, the Al-Ansar Movement in Kashmir, the Association of Pakistani Religious Scholars, the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh, the Afghan military wing of the Advice and Reform Organization headed by Osama bin Laden, got together and united to form the Islamic Front. The chairman of this new league is none other than Osama bin Laden, and such a union means better logistical strength and a better capacity to coordinate terrorist operations like the recent ones in East Africa. More sophisticated offensives are presumably in the offing.

Many experts in biological and chemical weapons concede that there is real justification for concern that terrorist groups could use these weapons of mass destruction in their future offensives. Such a prospect has rung counter-terrorism alarms in the intelligence community. The 1995 Tokyo nerve gas attack that left 11 dead and 5000 injured could be a harbinger of what is to come. (In fact there was an even earlier incident of a bio-terrorist attack, that was kept secret for a long time, which occurred in 1984. Lunatic cult members put Salmonella into the salad of 10 restaurants in Oregon and over 750 people were taken ill.) Countries that are known to be presently active in making chemical and bio-weapons include Sudan, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Israel, North Korea, Syria and Russia.

Bio-weapons are a potent weapon if used effectively, are fear-inspiring and relatively cheap to fabricate. These strategic weapons are very lethal and can kill enormous numbers of people if deployed efficiently. Bio-weapons can be put in two categories, those that are contagious and those that are not. Smallpox and Marburg virus, for example, are contagious, spreading from one patient to another, while Anthrax is not contagious. Bio-weapons are usually dispersed as minute particles invisible to the naked eye and are designed to be breathed in and infect the subject via the lungs. The victim=92s senses can not pick up exposure to a bio-weapon, and they usually don=92t realize they have been infected until too late. Bio-weapons have their drawbacks, they can be vulnerable to changes in humidity, sunlight, exposure to oxygen and abrupt temperature changes. On the other hand, they are easily concocted, easy to conceal, and are fairly readily available.
For instance, Russia has hundreds of tons of stockpiled smallpox, anthrax and plague agents which could fall, or have already fallen, into the hands of terrorists. Their BW laboratory, Biopreparat, continues to develop new strains of antibiotic-resistant and genetically altered viruses and bacteria and even experiments in techniques for cultivating new strains of such nasty diseases as Machupo and Marburg virus (Variant U). Accidents have already happened out there, one very serious one occurred in the not so distant past. 

Chemical weapons are chiefly useful as a tactical weapon, for they can not be dispersed in sufficient concentration to kill anything like as many people as bio-weapons, but their effect is more immediate and they can be just as deadly and terrorizing. CW can be classed into six general categories: 1. V-series nerve toxins like VX, VE, VG, VM and VS. 2. G-series nerve toxins like Sarin, tabun and soman. 3. Blood toxins like cyanogen chloride, hydrogen cyanide and Zyklon B. 4. Blister toxins such as the mustard gases and derivatives like lewisite and sequimustard. 5. Choking toxins like chlorine gas and phosgene. 6. Non-lethal toxins such as tear gas and pepper gas.

Tactical nuclear weapons are a distinct threat that can not be neglected. They are portable and have less sophisticated safety features than the more powerful Intercontinental Nuclear Ballistic  Missiles. According to a report from the French Defense Ministry, security is very lax in Russian nuclear facilities and they doubt Russia knows how many are about, are dismantled and where they are stockpiled.  The US Department of Energy has also found weapon-grade uranium inadequately secured. Alexander Lebed has publicly warned that the Russian military had lost track of more than 100 suitcase-sized nuclear bombs that can be activated by one man and can kill up to 100,000 people. There are several yet unsubstantiated reports that some nuclear materials have already been smuggled out of Russia and Chechnya, and even some tactical nuclear weapons might have fallen into the wrong hands.

The modern Islamic terrorists, known as mujaheddin (fighter), are of many different nationalities and are chameleon-like, blending in with their surroundings. They have infinite patience and can strike when and where least expected. They have no clearly defined agenda, only their hate towards the US because of its =91occupation=92 of their holy land to motivate them, plus their intent to inflict maximum destruction on their sworn enemy. The questions are where are they likely to strike next and what can we do about it? 

The chances are they will strike where we least expect it. After the African embassy bombings there are not going to be many US embassy =93soft targets=94 around, as embassies are on high alert and efforts are already underway to up-grade security or evacuate sites that are particularly vulnerable. The terrorists are probably now going to look for a new target, one we don=92t expect, and they will most likely employ more sophisticated tactics than a car bomb. Arteries of traffic could be a possible target, major bridges, train and car tunnels in the US should be secured. Sport stadiums also offer a tempting target. And if the enemy can not get close enough to their target with a car or truck bomb in the future, then a stand-off weapon, such as a surface to surface missile, would achieve much the same results. 

Another possible target could be one of our ships in the Gulf, particularly when you consider that these ships are the quintessence of our Middle East power projection, to which the recent Tomahawk missiles=92 counterstrikes lay illustration. Aspiring to such an objective, there is no reason to believe they wouldn=92t even go so far as to try to neutralize an aircraft carrier. While it might sound far-fetched, it isn=92t incredible. To challenge such a massive target all they have to do is to up-grade their arsenal from car and truck bombs to surface-to-surface guided missiles such as the Exocet. Such weapons are not hard to find on the arms market. Similar modern anti-ship missiles today have significant stand-off range, sea-skimming subsonic flight and can target a specific ship even within congested waters or a ship positioned near shore or islands. Their warhead lethality is their only shortcoming. Smaller ships than an aircraft carrier have been known to take multiple hits from such missiles and still remain operative. However, if the terrorists introduced a CW agent like VX into the warhead and added some flexibility in the fusing options, such as proximity airburst detonation or delayed penetrator detonation, the weapon could be much more lethal. VX or another V-series nerve agent have the distinct properties of being extremely toxic and produce lengthy contamination of the target area, which would effectively immobilize an aircraft carrier for a very long time, even if it was not sunk.

To make things more complex, today=92s terrorist has the convenience of being able to operate in a multidimensional world, where conflict and peace blur together, international laws are frequently incompatible, divergent and often ambiguous; his battleground is oftentimes his refuge. Developing an effective counterrorism operation in such a fluid field of battle is not an easy proposition. Without good intelligence it is a hopeless effort.

Intelligence has to be timely to be of much use. It is our front line of defense, our early warning system. It is essential to preemptive action. Today our threat analysis is in need of much improvement (as the Sudan pharmaceutical strike might attest.) Getting more applicable, timely intelligence will involve: 1. Improving the coordination of intelligence sharing with other countries. 2. Putting more men in the field to collect intelligence (HUMIT) to: a) monitor suspects; b) for covert actions against the enemy on their territory; c) for long-term psychological operations. 3. Simplifying, focusing and refining real-time analysis. 4. Ameliorating the monitoring of illegal substances purchased abroad that could be used in a terrorist attack. 5. Getting the information to the policy makers in the most expedient manner possible. 

To achieve these security improvements budget priorities will have to be shifted to the intelligence agencies; even though it might not seem politically rewarding today, it will be in the future.

While stand-off weapons might avoid US military casualties, stand-off diplomacy will not avoid anything. Bill Clinton=92s tantrum approach to retaliation and his questionable choice of targets was unproductive as well as detrimental towards a future dialogue with friendly Muslim nations. You don=92t defeat terrorists with conspicuous smart-bombs, you defeat them with smart covert tactics and the subtle power of diplomacy. An official government dialogue must be opened with moderate Islamic leaders from all nations to try and get them to open a dialogue with the enemy on our behalf. But that won=92t come about if the Clinton administration goes on disregarding the Israel-Palestine problem. Middle East peace talks have to be more balanced and disengaged from internal political bickering; a compromise has to be found that satisfies all parties, especially on the re-settlement issue. But overall the political and security forecast looks bleak. The probable scenario is the terrorist will strike back hard at the US. The Clinton administration will buckle under a wave of public dissent over the killing of innocent people, and to avoid further American bloodshed, will halt further retaliation against the terrorists, choosing negotiation instead. Negotiations will lead to a further weakening of American leadership and will hinder its ability to safeguard the Middle East. The terrorist expect this script and will do their best to provoke just such a response. God help us if we fall into their trap!

Peter B. Martin, August 1998