The seminar began with introductory comments by ACM Mehra who emphasized the fact that in an atmosphere dominated by concerns regarding nuclear weapons, the threat from Chemical and Biological weapons had not been appreciated. This thinking needs change. Following the Wotld Trade Centre (WTC) attack in the United States and the anthrax scare, the world community has woken up to the possibility of a chemical and biological weapons attack by a terrorist group.

G Balachandran

The possibility of nuclear weapons being used as a terrorist weapon is not very high. The reason is that though nuclear weapons may be easy to assemble, the technology required to deliver and detonate it is very complex and requires a high degree of expertise and sophisticated infrastructure. However, the terrorists could use radiological weapons, that are much simpler to use and the material needed to make them is available as spent fuel in reactors and nuclear research centers around the world. The use of a radiological weapon may not cause mass destruction but will cause much panic and confusion, which is the prime objective of terrorists.

Biological and chemical weapons can be considered Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), but not when used by terrorists. Chemical weapons are easy to make but their use involves other requirements like stability and potency of the agents over a period of time. The manufacture of lethal WMD also requires them to possess weapons-grade chemicals that are for restricted use in most countries and not easily available. Further, storage of biological agents requires special containers which, again, are only available on a restricted basis.  Attempts to buy either the chemicals or their storage infrastructure in the open market would arouse suspicions. The dispersion of these weapons over a large area requires equipment like crop-dusters. Ground dispersal is easier to detect. Finally, heat, humidity, oxidation and climatic conditions change the behaviour of the agents, and users need to possess the expertise to factor these changes while making a weapon. Hence a crude device can be made by terrorists but it will not have the same impact as a WMD.

There is no protection against these weapons though vaccines are available for protection against bacteriological weapons. However, vaccines too have side effects and logistically speaking, entire populations cannot be vaccinated. The only way to guard against the use of chemical and biological weapons is to increase safeguards. Protocols should be strengthened and there should be stringent control over the manufacture and distribution of weapons-grade material. For chemical agents, markers like those used for plastic explosives to identify the country of manufacture, permit tracing the movement of these chemicals. Technological surveillance needs to be increased over the purchase of storage equipment and precursors. However, no amount of prevention will eliminate the threat of use of these weapons, but if they are used by terrorists, the fatalities could be minimized using preventive measures. 

PR Chari

The history of WMD is largely the history of nuclear weapons. The threats from chemical and biological weapons had receded into the background because no state can really deter these threats. It was believed that WMD were not terrorist weapons because of the technological hurdles involved in their manufacture, delivery and use. The earliest threats included an attack on a nuclear weapons facility to release radiation and creating terror in the surrounding areas or the theft of a nuclear weapon or getting hold of a fissile material and its subsequent use for making a nuclear weapon. Alternately, the terrorist could steal spent fuel from a nuclear facility and manufacture a radiological weapon. That, however, would not result in mass destruction but definitely succeed in creating terror and panic. 

After the break up of the Soviet Union, there was a tangible threat of loose nukes and fissile materials falling into the wrong hands.  Further there was a danger of terrorists utilising the expertise of the unemployed nuclear scientists and engineers from the new republics. There was a sanguine belief, however, that chemical and biological weapons would not be used and was hardly any interest in the academic and policy community. The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) has initiated a debate and research on the issue of biological and chemical weapons held seminars and published a recent book on the Verification Protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention. After the September 11 attacks on the WTC and the anthrax scare in the United States people are sensitized to the threat from biological and chemical weapons. In the US, the National Guard has been trained to handle attacks of this kind.

The possibility of chemical and biological weapons attacks by non-state actors needs to be debated. Though these weapons are easier to manufacture, their storage and use presents problems for their use as WMD. However, they are potent weapons and can be used to create panic. In fact, more hoaxes, like in the recent anthrax scare, are possible in the future. Hoaxes cannot be treated complacently and must be responded to, keeping the threat perception in mind.

Certain remedial measures can be suggested.  An effective public health system, the stockpiling of medicines and vaccines, better policing, intelligence gathering, physical protection of chem-bio facilities and psychological evaluation of the people who work in them along with international cooperation and education of the population are necessary steps in this regard. However, it also needs recognition that there can be no foolproof contingency plan to deal with a possible attack, because of the logistical problems involved in such an exercise.

Traditional counter-terrorism activities including political and diplomatic efforts to safeguard against these threats need to be strengthened.  For the last six years the world has been struggling to finalise the Verification Protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention. However, this effort was sabotaged in August this year by the US. The upcoming Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention may result in the Protocol being passed as it is being held against the background of the threat of anthrax in the US.

Discussion

·                     There are logistical problem in using nuclear weapons as WMD by terrorists.

·                      

·                     The sabotage angle in the Bhopal gas tragedy and the Surat plague cannot be ignored

·                      

·                     India’s response to a chem-bio attack by a hostile country needs to debated at the highest levels in government.

·                      

·                     There must be a concerted effort to educate the public for responding to and dealing with a chem-bio attack.

·                      

·                     The definition of WMD needs to be reexamined in the light of the use of aircraft as WMD in the WTC attacks.

·                      

·                     Links between terrorists and states providing them with logistical and technical assistance to manufacture or use WMD is a serious possibility and needs to be focused upon.

·                      

·                     Greater vigilance is required by states by adopting mechanisms like preparing lists of the institutions that store and use chemical and biological agents.