Archive for the ‘Terrorism’ Category

National Security and the Threat of Climate Change

Monday, June 4th, 2007

– There are people of every flavor with strong opinions about Global Climate Change out there. Just Googling the subject will expose you to the full range of supporters and deniers of the idea that mankind’s activities are changing the global climate.

– Amid all this controversy, I’ve chosen to align my beliefs with what the majority of the world’s scientists believe. And that is that humanity’s activities are affecting global climate and the changes are likely to be ugly (see IPCC Reports ➡).

– But there are other ways to get at the truth through all the rhetoric and hand waving and that is to ask yourself who is it that has a deep and vested interest in discovering the truth rather than pandering to political or monetary forces. Well, the insurance industry is one and military think tanks are another. Neither of these entities can afford to be wrong because the bottom line of their very survival is directly linked to their ability to discern the future accurately.

– Here’s a report from the CNA Corporation, a military think tank based out of Alexandria, Virginia. This is not the first time I’ve seen assessments of the likely impact of global climate change on national security matters and it won’t be the last, I’m sure.

— — — — —

During our decades of experience in the U.S. military, we have addressed many national security challenges, from containment and deterrence of the Soviet nuclear threat during the Cold War to terrorism and extremism in recent years.

Global climate change presents a new and very different type of national
security challenge.

Over many months and meetings, we met with some of the world’s leading climate scientists, business leaders, and others studying climate change. We viewed their work through the lens of our military experience as warfighters, planners, and leaders. Our discussions have been lively, informative, and very sobering.

Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are greater now than at any time in the past 650,000 years, and average global temperature has continued a steady rise. This rise presents the prospect of significant climate change, and while uncertainty exists and debate continues regarding the science and future extent of projected climate changes, the trends are clear.

The nature and pace of climate changes being observed today and the consequences projected by the consensus scientific opinion are grave and pose equally grave implications for our national security. Moving beyond the arguments of cause and effect, it is important that the U.S. military begin planning to address these potentially devastating effects. The consequences of climate change can affect the organization, training, equipping, and planning of the military services. The U.S. military has a clear obligation to determine the potential impacts of climate change on its ability to execute its missions in support of national security objectives.

Climate change can act as a threat multiplier for instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world, and it presents significant national security challenges for the United States. Accordingly, it is appropriate to start now to help mitigate the severity of some of these emergent challenges. The decision to act should be made soon in order to plan prudently for the nation’s security. The increasing risks from climate change should be addressed now because they will almost certainly get worse if we delay.

To the full report:

To a number of news reports about this report:

, , , , ,

– All of these stories were drawn from the first page of a Google search for ‘National Security and the Threat of Climate Change‘. There’s a TON of stuff out there if you go looking.

– Thx to Michael D. for the lead to this story.

US generals urge climate action

Sunday, April 15th, 2007

Former US military leaders have called on the Bush administration to make major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

In a report, they say global warming poses a serious threat to national security, as the US could be drawn into wars over water and other conflicts.

They appear to criticise President George W Bush’s refusal to join an international treaty to cut emissions.

Among the 11 authors are ex-Army chief of staff Gordon Sullivan and Mr Bush’s ex-Mid-East peace envoy Anthony Zinni.

The report says the US “must become a more constructive partner” with other nations to fight global warming and deal with its consequences.

It warns that over the next 30 to 40 years, there will be conflicts over water resources, as well as increased instability resulting from rising sea levels and global warming-related refugees.

“The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism,” the 35-page report predicts.

More…

also

the report, itself, will be released here on April 16th.

Study Details Catastrophic Impact Of Nuclear Attack On US Cities

Thursday, March 22nd, 2007

– Sobering stuff:

“The hospital system has about 1,500 burn beds in the whole country, and of these maybe 80 or 90 percent are full at any given time,” Bell said. “There’s no way of treating the burn victims from a nuclear attack with the existing medical system.”

———————————

Science Daily A new study by researchers at the Center for Mass Destruction Defense (CMADD) at the University of Georgia details the catastrophic impact a nuclear attack would have on American cities.

The study, which the authors said was the most advanced and detailed simulation published in open scientific literature, highlights the inability of the nation’s current medical system to handle casualties from a nuclear attack. It also suggests what the authors said are much needed yet relatively simple interventions that could save tens of thousands of lives.

“The likelihood of a nuclear weapon attack in an American city is steadily increasing, and the consequences will be overwhelming” said Cham Dallas, CMADD director and professor in the UGA College of Pharmacy. “So we need to substantially increase our preparation.”

Dallas and co-author William Bell, CMADD senior research scientist and faculty member of the UGA College of Public Health, examined four high-profile American cities – New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C. and Atlanta – and modeled the effects of a 20 kiloton nuclear detonation and a 550 kiloton detonation. (For comparison, the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were in the 12 to 20 kiloton range). Bell explained that a 20 kiloton weapon could be manufactured by terrorists and fledgling nuclear countries such as North Korea and Iran, while a 550 kiloton device is commonly found in the arsenal of the former Soviet Union and therefore is the most likely to be stolen by terrorists.

More…

The Stuff Sam Nunn’s Nightmares Are Made Of

Sunday, February 25th, 2007

By now we can too readily imagine the horror of terrorists exploding a nuclear weapon in a major American city: the gutted skyscrapers, the melted cars, the charred bodies. For Sam Nunn, however, a new terror begins the day after. That’s when the world asks whether another bomb is out there. “If a nuclear bomb went off in Moscow or New York City or Jerusalem, any number of groups would claim they have another”, Nunn told me recently. These groups would make steep demands as intelligence officials scrambled to determine which claims were real. Panic would prevail. Even after the detonation of a small, crude weapon that inflicted less damage than the bomb at Hiroshima, Nunn suggested, “The psychological damage would be incalculable. It would be a slow, step-by-step process to regain confidence. And the question will be, Why didn’t we take steps to prevent this? We will have a whole list of things we wish we’d done.“

Nunn thinks of those things every time he picks up a newspaper. When, for instance, he reads about the arrest of a Russian man who, in a sting operation, tried to sell weapons-grade uranium – a reminder of a possible black market in nuclear materials and of the poor security at facilities in the former Soviet Union. Or when he sees news about Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear bomb, which could set off a wave of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and thus significantly raise the possibility that terrorists will someday acquire a bomb. And despite the apparent diplomatic breakthrough with North Korea earlier this month, in which the North Koreans agreed to begin dismantling their nuclear facilities in return for fuel and other aid, Nunn, who finds the deal encouraging, remains concerned since North Korea’s unpredictable, cash-starved dictatorship still retains perhaps half a dozen nuclear bombs, and the ingredients to make more.

More…

– This article is from the NY Times and they insist that folks have an ID and a PW in order to read their stuff. You can get these for free just by signing up. However, recently, a friend of mine suggested the website bugmenot.com :arrow: as an alternative to having to do these annoying sign ups. Check it out. Thx Bruce S. for the tip.

– Research thx to Tony B.

Iran ‘sets up atomic centrifuges’

Tuesday, February 6th, 2007

– Both the US and Israel have said that Iran will not be allowed to have nuclear weapons and Iran has said, essentially, that it will do as it pleases. Unless something significant changes in this equation, things are not going to turn out well.

—————————————

Iran has set up more than 300 centrifuges at two uranium enrichment sites at its underground Natanz complex, Western diplomats have said.

If confirmed, the centrifuges would be the first of 3,000 that Iran says it is planning to install at the site in the coming months.

The centrifuges could pave the way for work to create enough fissile material for a nuclear warhead.

Iran has repeatedly denied that it plans to develop nuclear weapons.

Two “cascades” of 164 centrifuges each have been installed at Natanz, the diplomats said on condition of anonymity.

Centrifuges spin uranium gas to enrich it to low levels for fuel and much higher levels for nuclear weapons.

Iran has said it eventually plans to install 54,000 centrifuges at Natanz.

Former UN nuclear inspector David Albright, whose Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security tracks Iran’s nuclear activities, said Iran should be able to reach its goal of 3,000 centrifuges by the end of the year.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies in London (IISS) has said that once Iran has 3,000 centrifuges operating smoothly, it could produce enough highly enriched uranium for one bomb in nine to 11 months.

More…

Russian smuggled nuclear-bomb uranium, officials say

Saturday, January 27th, 2007

– This was about 3.5 ounces of 90% enriched Uranium (bomb grade). Sources tell us that 33 to 40 pounds is enough for an atomic weapon. According to an IAEA database, there have been 16 previous confirmed cases that either highly enriched uranium or plutonium have been recovered by authorities since 1993. In most cases the recoveries have involved smaller quantities than the Tbilisi case. But in 1994, 6 pounds of highly enriched uranium intended for sale were seized by police in the Czech Republic.

—————————————————-

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republic of Georgia authorities, aided by the CIA, set up a sting operation last summer that led to the arrest of a Russian man who tried to sell a small amount of nuclear-bomb grade uranium in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket, U.S. and Georgian officials said.

The operation, which neither government has publicized, represents one of the most serious cases of smuggling of nuclear material in recent years, according to analysts and officials.

The arrest underscored concerns about the possibility of terrorists acquiring nuclear bomb-making material on the black market, although there was no suggestion that this particular case was terrorist-related.

“Given the serious consequences of the detonation of an improvised nuclear explosive device, even small numbers of incidents involving HEU (highly enriched uranium) or plutonium are of very high concern,” said Melissa Fleming of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

Details of the investigation, which also involved the FBI and Energy Department, were provided to The Associated Press by U.S. officials and Georgian Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili.

Authorities say they do not know how the man acquired the nuclear material or if his claims of access to much larger quantities were true. He and three Georgian accomplices are in Georgian custody and not cooperating with investigators.

Georgian attempts to trace the nuclear material since the arrest and confirm whether the man indeed had access to larger quantities have foundered from a lack of cooperation from Russia.

More… and

– This 2nd link is from the NY Times and they insist that folks have an ID and a PW in order to read their stuff. You can get these for free just by signing up. However, recently, a friend of mine suggested the website bugmenot.com :arrow: as an alternative to having to do these annoying sign ups. Check it out. Thx Bruce S. for the tip.

Israel has nuclear plans for Iran – report

Sunday, January 7th, 2007

– When I created this entry, I didn’t know if I should put it under ‘Politics – How not to do it‘ or not. Frankly, I’m not sure what should happen here. It appears to be a lose-lose in all directions to me. So, in the end, I put it under ‘The Perfect Storm‘ because which ever way it works out, it will contribute to the increasing instability in the world.

The logic: If Iran is allowed to press on and develop nuclear weapons, it will change the entire power structure of the Mid-East and they may well decide to obliterate Israel. On the other hand, if Israel or the US preemptively takes out Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Iran will probably loosen its controls on its nuclear materials and begin passing these materials out to al Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist groups who, up until now, have apparently not been able to gain access to significant quantities of these materials. Once the fundamentalists have these materials, it won’t be long before the long feared ‘Dirty Bombs‘ appear in places like London and Washington, D.C. and the havoc that will cause to the nations so attacked and their economies is hard to grasp. Imagine Manhattan radioactive and abandoned for years while the Feds try to work out how to decontaminate it – and you’ll get the picture.
————————————-

LONDON – Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, the Sunday Times said.

Citing what it said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear “bunker busters”.

Two other sites, a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said.

The UN Security Council voted unanimously last month to slap sanctions on Iran to try to stop uranium enrichment that Western powers fear could lead to making bombs. Tehran insists its plans are peaceful and says it will continue enrichment.

Israel has refused to rule out pre-emptive military action against Iran along the lines of its 1981 air strike against an atomic reactor in Iraq, although many analysts believe Iran’s nuclear facilities are too much for Israel to take on alone.

More…

Lloyd’s Releases Second ‘360 Report’ on Climate Change

Friday, November 3rd, 2006

– Well, people can argue back and forth and believe that each other’s opinions are just politically or ideologically motivated but when people like Lloyds of London, the world famous insurance folks, weigh in on the questions, it is worth sitting up and taking notice.

– These folks make their living by predicting the future and you can be sure that the last thing they want to do is to have the accuracy of their predictions (and thus the profitability of their predictions) marred by ideological biases of any kind. So, when they say there’s a coming problem with the climate, you can be pretty sure you are getting the ‘straight stuff’.

——————————

Lloyd’s has released the second installment of its “360 Climate Change” series, entitled “What next for climate change?” Last June it published the first installment, entitled “Climate Change, Adapt or Bust,” which warned insurers to face up to the growing threats involved or risk being “swept away.”

Lloyd’s is providing both technical knowledge and insights to help understand and contain the effects of global warming. In this installment its market experts “highlight the key projects insured in the market that will contribute towards a sustainable future, said the announcement. “This includes ‘waste to energy’ plants, which burn household and industrial waste to give off gas and generate electricity, and wind farms, which are proving a major source of renewable energy.”

The report notes that the Lloyd’s market provides about a third of the insurance for waste to energy plants, and covers about a quarter of the world’s wind farms. Lloyd’s is also setting up a new team of experts to help its insurers prepare for and manage the growing risk of climate change.

Trevor Maynard, Lloyd’s manager of emerging risks who will lead that team, commented: “Climate change is a very real threat. It would be unthinkable for us to ignore one of the biggest dangers we face in the coming decades. Among other things, this market recognizes the importance of developing new technology to create renewable energy.”

More…

Lloyd’s full ‘360 Climate Change’ report is here.

Ecology and Political Upheaval

Wednesday, June 28th, 2006

Jeffrey D. Sachs of the Earth Institute has written an article saying that small changes in climate can cause wars, topple governments and crush economies already strained by poverty. I agree with this and consider it part of the Perfect Storm of unfolding future events that I’m always talking about.

I’m not at all sure that he goes far enough, however. Civilization, in many ways, is like a house of cards we’ve been building. Year by year, we build it higher and year by year it balances and hangs together but ever more precariously.

I think that other factors, which are part of the Perfect Storm hypothesis, are also more than capable of creating the same disruptions. Consider desertification or the falling water tables around the world. Consider the ever growing national debt of the United States. Consider the growing disparity between the rich and the poor. Consider impending Peak Oil. And finally, consider the effects of Globalization.

Each of these has the ability to drive us through tipping points into the chaos beyond. All that is required is that something essential like food or water or the petroleum needed to produce our food should go into short supply.

Globalization is making the house-of-cards particularly fragile. Its been pasting wide-spread economies together and making them dependent on each other. Once chaos begins from any cause, these fragile links will break and the economies who’ve unwisely become dependent on them will stumble badly too as a result.

It’s all interconnected and finely balanced and the are multiple issues ticking down to tipping time. So, Sachs is right but I just don’t think he’s cast a wide enough net yet to catch the full scope of the futures waiting for us in the wings of the next decade or two.

Here’s the beginning of Sach’s article and a link to the rest:

—————–

Careful study of the long-term climate record has shown that even a minor shock to the system can cause an enormous change in outcome, a nonlinear response that has come to be called “abrupt climate change.” Less well recognized is that our social and economic systems are also highly sensitive to climate perturbations. Seemingly modest fluctuations in rainfall, temperature and other meteorological factors can create havoc in vulnerable societies.

Recent years have shown that shifts in rainfall can bring down governments and even set off wars. The African Sahel, just south of the Sahara, provides a dramatic and poignant demonstration. The deadly carnage in Darfur, Sudan, for example, which is almost always discussed in political and military terms, has roots in an ecological crisis directly arising from climate shocks. Darfur is an arid zone with overlapping, growing populations of impoverished pastoralists (tending goats, cattle and camels) and sedentary farmers. Both groups depend on rainfall for their livelihoods and lives. The average rainfall has probably declined in the past few decades but is in any case highly variable, leaving Darfur prone to drought. When the rains faltered in the 1980s, violence ensued. Communities fought to survive by raiding others and attempting to seize or protect scarce water and food supplies.

More…