Tendency of using chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons for terrorist purposes
Abstract
Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) terrorism is a serious problem, and its threat and use lead to a new era of terrorism: the epoch much more dangerous than any of the previous periods and the terrorism no one yet knows how to cope with. The disturbing fact is that terrorists can come into possession of weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, the goal of the paper is to analyze the probability of CBRN terrorist actions which have highlighted the growing concerns and increasing signs of convergence between terrorism and CBRN unconventional weapons for terrorist purposes. Terrorism today includes technologies available to anyone and anywhere and deployed through innovative solutions where it is also necessary to understand a complex interaction between the dynamic behavior of terrorist groups and the decisions regarding old and new technologies. The prospect of the use of CBRN terrorism has been confirmed by many countries as an acute security challenge that requires an efficient and quick response and reaction. The paper will also explain the importance of understanding the relationship between terrorist groups and non-conventional weapons, as well as difficulties in identifying factors that may cause the escalation. Since the end of 1990s and since the tragedy of September 11, 2001 in particular, government officials of many countries have pointed out the possibility that terrorist organizations eventually can come into the possession of unconventional materials and develop the possibilities of their use against some countries.
References
Baker, D., 2006. Fighting Terrorism: Biological, Nuclear, and Chemical Weapons. SIRS Discoverer.
Benjamin, D., 2008. Strategic Counterterrorism. Foreign policy at brookings. Police paper no. 7.
Bettis, R., 1998. The New Threat of Mass Destruction. Foreign Affairs, 77(1).
Bioterrorism, chemical weapons, and radiation terrorism, nd. Available at: http://nursece4less.com/tests/materials/n029cmaterials.pdf.
Mark, J.C., Taylor, T., Eyster, E., Maraman, W., Wechsler, J., 1987. Can terrorists build nuclear weapons? Lexington Books, United States.
Carus, S., 1999. Biohazard. The New Republic.
Cieslak, T.J. & Eitzen, E.M., 1999. Clinical and epidemiologic principles of anthrax. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5(4), pp.552-555. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia: National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Condesman, A., & Burke, A., 2001. Chair in Strategy Asymmetric and terrorist attacks with chemical weapons. CSIS Homeland Defense: Asymmetric Warfare & Terrorism.
Danzing, R., 2003. U. S. Catastrophic bioterrorism: What is to be done? Washington, DC: National Defense University - Center for Technology and National Security Policy - Department of Defense. August; U. S. Government Printing Office.
Davis, J., & Johnson-Winegar, A., 2000. The Anthrax Terror DOD's Number-One Biological Threat. Aerospace power journal, pp.15-28, winter.
Eland, I., 1998. Defending Other Nations: The Risk to America's Homeland. USA Today magazine, 127(2640).
Foer, F., 1998. Toxic Shock. The New Republic.
Ganor, B., 1998. Non-Conventional Terrorism: Chemical, Nuclear, and Biological. ICT Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT).
Gompert, D.C., 2000. Sharpen the Fear. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 56(1), pp.22-23.
Hall, S., 1998. Science-Fiction Policy. Technology Review (Cambridge, Mass.), 101(6), p.92.
Hamele, M., Bradley Poss, W., Sweney, J., 2014. Disaster preparedness, pediatric considerations in primary blast injury, chemical, and biological terrorism. World J Crit Care Med, 3(1), pp.15-23. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v3.i1.15.
Ivanova, K., & Sandler, T., 2007. CBRN Attack Perpetrators: An Empirical Study. Published Articles & Papers. Paper 65.
Jesse, C., 2012. Optimization of nuclear, radiological, biological, and chemical terrorism incidence models through the use of simulated annealing Monte Carlo and iterative methods. [Internet]. Available at: https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/43599/coyle_jesse_a_201205_mast.pdf. Accessed: 24 May 2016.
Kopp, C., 2008. Chemical and biological weapons. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Kurmnik, B., & Ribnikar, D., 2003. Asymmetric wars. Belgrade: Evro Gi-unti. London, A.J., 2003. Threats to the Common Good: Biochemical Weapons and Human Subjects Research. Department of Philosophy. Paper 404.
Lowe, K., & Carus, S., 1997. Chemical and Biological Terrorism: Threat and Response. Washington Institute. Policy 2016, printed with permission PolicyWatch 247.
Meyer, M., Spinella, P., & Cieslak, T., 2014. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. Chapter: Agents of Biological and Chemical Terrorism, pp.645-656. [e-book]. Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4471-6362-6_46. Accessed: 22 May 2016.
Mijalković, S., 2009. Nacionalna bezbednost. Zemun: Kriminalističko-policijska akademija.
O'Toole, T., 1999. Smallpox: An attack scenario. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5(4), pp.540-546. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia: National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
O'Neill, K., 1997. The Nuclear Terrorist Threat. Institute for Science and International Security.
Palmer, I., 2004. The psychological dimension of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) terrorism. J R Army Med Corps, 150(1), pp.3-9.
Parachini, J., 2001. Combating Terrorism: Assessing the Threat of Biological Terrorism. [Internet]. Available at: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/2005/CT183.pdf. Accessed: 22 May 2016.
Post, J.M., 2005. The Psychology of WMD Terrorism. International Studies Review, 7(1), pp.148-151. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1521-9488.2005.479_6.x.
Ruggiero, A., & Vos, M., 2015. Communication Challenges in CBRN Terrorism Crisis: Expert Perceptions. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23(3) pp.138-148. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12065.
Schwartz, R., 2013. Case Study - Syria's Chemical and Biological Weapons Program and the Use of These Weapons in the Syrian Civil War Today. [Internet]. Available at: https://www.ict.org.il/Article/694/Case%20Study-Syrias-Chemical-and-Biological-Weapons-Program. Accessed: 20 May 2016.
Shea, D.A., 2004. Terrorism: Background on Chemical, Biological, and Toxin Weapons and Options for Lessening. CRS Report for Congress. [Internet]. Available at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/testimony/65.pdf. Accessed: 21 May 2016.
Stern, Dz., 2004. Extreme terrorists. Belgrade: Alexandria pres.
Tucker, J., 2000. Toxic Terror: Assessing Terrorist Use of Chemical and Biological Weapons. The MIT Press. Book.
Tucker, D., 2001. What Is New About the New Terrorism and How Dangerous Is It. Terrorism and Political Violence, 13(Autumn,) pp.1-14.
U.S. Congress House, 2003. Committee on Energy and Commerce. Furthering public health security: project bioshield Subcommittee on Health; Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness and Response. 108 Congress, 1 Session. 27 March. Washington, p.117.
U.S. Congress Senate, 2001. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies. 107 Congress, 1 Session Bioterrorism, October-November, Washington, DC: U.S. Government, p.255.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000. Biological and chemical terrorism: Strategic plan for preparedness and response. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 21 April Atlanta, Georgia: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Whitelaw, K., Strobel, P., & Duffy, B., 1999. It Was a Direct Hit, but Was It the Right Target? U.S. News & World Report, 127(7).
Wolf, Y., & Frankel, O., 2007. Terrorism: Toward an overarched account and prevention with a special Reference to pendulum interplay between both parties. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(3), pp.259-279.
Zanders, P.J., Karlsson, E., Melin, L., Naslund, E., & Thani, L., 2006. Fighting Terrorism: Biological, Nuclear, and Chemical Weapons Appendix. In: Risk assessment of terrorism with chemical and biological weapons.
Proposed Creative Commons Copyright Notices
Proposed Policy for Military Technical Courier (Journals That Offer Open Access)
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).