 |
|
Bioterror focus may obscure greater risk
History shows bullets, bombs are terrorists' weapons of choice
10/30/2001
WASHINGTON – Anthrax. Biological terrorism. Weapons of mass destruction. These terms have elbowed their way into everyday conversation since a nation
badly shaken by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was further rattled by the
appearance of anthrax-tainted letters in the U.S. mail. The public and policy-makers alike are right to pay heed to anthrax and
threats posed by biological agents such as smallpox, the Ebola virus and the
plague, terrorism experts say. Some caution, however, that the emphasis on the
"new terrorism" – biological, chemical, nuclear, or cyber attack – should not
overshadow the fact that most terrorist acts are carried out by conventional
means. "Bugs, bytes and gas are never going to take the place of bullets and bombs
as the terrorist weapon of choice," said Frank Cilluffo, a terrorism expert with
the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.
Yet in Washington, where every day brings a new anthrax scare, much of the
focus is on terrorism by biological means. Congress raced to convene hearings on the threat of bioterrorism. The federal
government is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to improve bioterrorism
preparedness, purchase antibiotics to treat anthrax and stockpile smallpox
vaccine. The U.S. Postal Service will spend millions on new security measures
and technologies to sanitize mail. But before billions of dollars more are spent, the Bush administration should
undertake a comprehensive assessment of the nation's vulnerabilities and
greatest threats, counterterrorism expert Jeff Beatty said. "We have limited resources that need to be matched to our greatest
vulnerabilities," said the former Delta Force operative who is president of
Atlanta-based Total Security Services Inc. Roll call of attacks
The roll call of deadly attacks on U.S. assets at home and abroad
in recent years suggests that conventional weapons constitute a greater threat
than biological agents. Chief among them:
• The 1993 World Trade Center attack. Six died and 1,000 were injured after
an explosives-laden van was detonated in an underground parking garage. • Timothy McVeigh's assault in 1995 on the federal building in Oklahoma City.
The 7,000-pound fertilizer-and-fuel bomb killed 168 and wounded more than 500.
• The nail-and-screw-packed pipe bomb that killed one and injured more than
100 at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. • The attack in 1996 on a U.S. Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia,
when a tanker truck carrying plastic explosives blew up Khobar Towers. Nineteen
died and 372 were wounded. • The 1998 truck bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which
killed 224 and injured more than 4,500. • Last year's bombing in Yemen of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and wounded
39. The ship was nearly sunk after a boat bearing explosives rammed its hull.
Despite that bloody roster, deadly germs are the focus of America's
attention. "We fear threats we cannot see, hear or feel," John Parachini, a terrorism
expert with the Rand think tank, told a House subcommittee investigating
biological terrorism. "However, in these uncertain times, it is important to maintain some
perspective of the relative dangers. The 20th century history of warfare,
terrorism and crime involving biological agents is much less deadly than that of
the history with conventional explosives." Mr. Parachini voiced concern that federal resources may be misdirected to
lower-probability dangers in the rush to deal with the immediate anthrax threat,
which has claimed three lives. "We've got to get the scope and the magnitude of the danger right," he said
in an interview. "There is not a long record of disease used to terrorize and to
murder people." Tool of panic
The anthrax attacks have been far more successful as a tool of
panic than a tool of death, said Dr. Harvey Kushner, a Long Island University
professor who has studied terrorism for decades.
He said it's the truck bomb or the suicide bomber in a crowded public space
that worry him. "Terrorists have killed many people with conventional weaponry –
not some James Bond-type device." Lt. Ted Padgett, who heads a hazardous material response unit for the Dallas
Fire-Rescue department, said, "Everyday household stuff can do as much, if not
more damage" than biological weapons. Lt. Padgett said that during a recent drive through downtown Dallas, he
observed a vulnerability that could "wipe out 500,000 people" if properly
carried out. "There's lots of ways to harm people," he said. "I could scare you
all day long." Bush administration officials say they are paying attention to
vulnerabilities across the board. "Where we find cracks in the system, we will work to repair them," President
Bush's new director of homeland security, Tom Ridge, said last week at the U.S.
Conference of Mayors. "Where we find strengths in the system, we will work to
make them even stronger." The administration and Congress have cast a wider net in recent weeks. A $40
billion emergency bill approved shortly after Sept. 11 will fund new homeland
security measures, improved intelligence and military initiatives, aviation
security and increased law enforcement. Separately, lawmakers are haggling over an aviation security bill. Mr. Bush
signed an anti-terrorism bill on Friday that grants to federal law enforcement
new powers in wire-tapping, tracing illegal funds and intelligence-gathering.
And federal, state and local agencies are reviewing their ability to respond to
terrorist attacks, with the Federal Emergency Management Agency prepared to dole
out $500 million to close security gaps. "Our government will continue to do everything we can to make our nation
safe, stronger, and more prepared," Mr. Ridge said. Infrastructure at risk
Congress also has examined the security of critical infrastructure
– telecommunications, water supply, power and energy systems, banking,
transportation, government and emergency services.
Those infrastructures "have long provided popular terrorist targets," Mr.
Cilluffo said during a congressional appearance. Referring to the Sept. 11
attacks, he said: "The comparatively low-tech means employed by the terrorists
raises the possibility of a well-placed bomb, a cyberstrike, or worse yet, a
more inclusive, more sophisticated assault combining both physical and virtual
means on one, or several, critical infrastructures." Sen. Bill Frist, the surgeon-turned-politician who has emerged as Capitol
Hill's point man on anthrax, said there appears to be a targeted attack on U.S.
infrastructure. "What bothers me is that these terrorists are trying to take down our
infrastructure one by one," the Tennessee Republican said last week on NBC's
Today show. "First it was the World Trade Center and airplanes, where our transportation
system was paralyzed for a while. Secondly they're using biological weapons now
to try to take down our postal system." The food supply could be next, Dr. Frist said. "Only about 1 percent of our
imports today are actually inspected," he said. The government is taking steps to safeguard the nation's vital
infrastructures, Mr. Ridge said, adding that officials have "mobilized to
protect our waterways, pipelines, energy infrastructure, harbors and borders."
"Every day we are looking for more ways to improve our deterrence and rapid
response efforts."