|
America At War:
Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction
With H.K. Park
Senior Associate, The Cohen Group
Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2001; 3 p.m. EDT
H.K. Park, counter-terrorism expert was online Wednesday, Oct. 24 at 3 p.m. EDT, to answer questions about domestic terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.
Since September 11, Park has been giving lectures on domestic terrorism and weapons of mass destruction in Washington, D.C. at institutions such as Georgetown University, the Asian-Pacific Bar Association, and the law firm of
McDermott, Will, and Emery. He has been interviewed by the Washington Post, New York Times, Time Magazine, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and various Asian
publications.
Prior to joining The Cohen Group, Park was the Special Assistant to the Defense Department's Chief of Staff from 1999 to 2001 -- where he negotiated with congressional staff, White House staff, and special interest parties to resolve differences relating to defense contracts, program funding, military installations, personnel and other sensitive matters for the Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense. He also supported the launch of a Presidential initiative to improve the Nation's preparedness for domestic terrorist attacks involving nuclear, chemical, biological and radiological weapons.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
washingtonpost.com:
What is your view of the psychological fear we are seeing in reaction to letters containing anthrax spores distributed throughout the Postal system? Is this, in your opinion, a domestic terrorist attack and would anthrax spores be considered a weapon of mass destruction?
H.K. Park: By definition, terrorism relies upon fear and a sense of vulnerability to generate terror. If in fact the letters are coming from Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group for that matter, they have been successful in their goal of creating fear.
Sterling, Va.:
Mr. Park, I know we shouldn't rule out anybody when it comes to tracking down the anthrax culprit(s).
But I just checked out the letters posted on the FBI web site that were sent with anthrax in them. And to me, it seems unlikely that an Arab would write "Allah is Great" in English (not Arabic) and have such bad spelling (don't you think the culprit(s) would use a dictionary?). Don't you think it's probably a Red Herring of sorts, sent to mislead the FBI and law enforcement agencies?
The FBI Press Release URL for the letters is:
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/102301.htm
H.K. Park: You raise a good point, but I wouldn't rule out an effort to provide misinformation. Keep in mind, the Taliban are now showing on TV parts of an "American helicopter" that they allegedly shot down, which is not true. As Americans, we should not rush to judgement and single out Arabs. We should also keep in mind that there are many ethnicities that follow Islam. Indonesia, for example, is the largest Muslim nation in the world.
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.:
When I was in the Nuclear Navy in the early 1970s, we had NOFORN stamped on all of our documents and manuals. When did foreign nationals gain access to our most sensitive secret materials and how did this come about? Sharing secrets, methods, and materials with people who do not have a primary, hereditary allegiance to our native land, the U.S.A., is largely the reason why this nation is in the crisis it's in. Would sweeping the foreigners out of our sensitive government laboratories and university research posts go a long way to eliminating the threats from foreign hostiles? Thanks much.
H.K. Park: For many years, the U.S. has been sharing certain classified information with friends and Allies around the world. As you know, we have mutual security guarantees with 18 other NATO countries, S. Korea, Japan and Australia to name a few.
I don't think cooperating with friendly governments threatens our national security. Of course, no country has complete access to all of our secrets.
Keep in mind too, that the train runs in both directions. The U.S. benefits from intelligence shared by other countries.
Finally, I don't think sweeping foreigners out of the Govt. labs is necessarily productive because it presumes that all foreigners can't be trusted. In addition, the U.S. lacks a large cadre of young people who pursue the hard sciences, so we have a lot to gain from foreign scientific exchange. Let us not forget that the 1995 Oklahoma City attack was committed by a white, male American who served in the U.S. Army.
Herndon, Va.:
Mr. Park, would terrorists likely be deterred by the fact that highly contagious agents, such as smallpox, would almost certainly do as much destruction in their own country in addition to ours?
H.K. Park: You raise a good point about smallpox. Since it is very contagious and we live in a very mobile society where you can cross an ocean in hours, it is very possible that the use of smallpox would backfire. While there are certain apocalyptic groups that seek an end to humanity, smallpox is very difficult to obtain.
Stafford, Va.:
Define the term,"Weapons of Mass Destruction" provide examples and justify why the example qualifies as a "mass destructor."
H.K. Park: Weapons of Mass Destruction is a military term that has evolved over time. Today it means weapons that can create massive casualties and destruction. These include nuclear, biological, chemical, radiological and high-yield explosives like what Timothy McVeigh used in Oklahoma City. One attack using these agents can result in thousands and possibly millions of casualties.
Clifton, Va.:
What experience do you really have in counter-terrorism? Or are you just another talking head.
H.K. Park: You raise a good point about numerous "experts" appearing in the news. In this time of crisis, it's important for the government to have one person in charge and responsive to the public. President Bush for this reason appointed Gov. Ridge to his new Homeland Security Office post.
I understand your frustration though with conflicting information. As for me, I spent the past several years at the Pentagon planning for Weapons of Mass Destruction Terrorism in the U.S.
New York, N.Y.:
My biggest concern as a threat to our country is "low tech" terrorism. Clearly, using planes as weapons, or anthrax are such examples. My concern is that foreign maritime trade (95%) of trade is maritime. Containers coming in to U.S. ports everyday have thousands of uninspected "packages" on them. The problem is the packages are 20' and 40' long with massive payloads.
Who is to say that the foot and mouth breakouts in Great Britain weren't an act of bioterrorism?
What do you think about the maritime threat?
H.K. Park: You and others raise good points about the range of threats, whether from the sea, nuclear terrorism or LNG tankers. Quite frankly, there are many ways to attack a society like the U.S. which respects privacy and individual civil rights. We could all spend this hour coming up with numerous scenarios that may be quite plausible. The key is to pick the most possible ones and then prepare for them.
This is obviously very difficult, but something the government has been doing for a number of years, even though it hasn't been highly publicized.
Preventing terrorism is difficult because the U.S. government can never brag about its successes for fear of giving away its strengths and tactics, but its failures are obvious to everyone. In addition, if the government prepares its defenses against one threat, terrorists will seek another weak point.
Arlington, Va.:
What do you realistically think is the chance of some kind of nuclear attack by terrorists here in the U.S. in general and in D.C. specifically? Are we worried about this for naught? If there was such an attack, what is the most likely scenario (suitcase bomb, etc.) and what would we be likely to see happen?
H.K. Park: I think nuclear terrorism is among the least likely because it is very difficult to obtain a warhead and detonate it. However, dispersing radiation is easier given the number of nuclear power plants and other sources of radiation (i.e. in labs). The government has already improved security at domestic power plants and has been working with foreign countries to do the same.
If, as some people suggest, it were so easy to do, it would have probably been done. I would not want to hazard a guess as to the most likely scenario. The key here is to never be complacent in our predictive abilities and to constantly improve our preparedness, just as terrorists constantly improve their methods.
Washington (UK):
Would you consider terrorism to be, perhaps at "its best" when it involves the already scary things for example, possible combination of genetic modification with biological warfare microbes?
H.K. Park: I think terrorism is most effective when it terrorizes a large population that is unaffected. The U.S. survived 40 years of the Cold War subject to Soviet nuclear strike that would destroy the country. Yet day by day, many Americans did not let fear prevent them from living.
The media plays a large role in propagating fear and terror with exaggerated information, or even misinformation.
São Paulo, Brazil:
I heard it is difficult to handle smallpox as it is being done with Anthrax. But how about a crazy suicidal with smallpox walking inside a crowd in some big city? Is it a real possibility?
H.K. Park: I just returned from a business trip to Sao Paolo this morning. As I mentioned earlier, smallpox if very difficult to obtain. The disease was eradicated in 1972. The U.S. and Russia maintain small amounts in guarded labs for use in testing smallpox vaccines and antidotes. Smallpox is not something that individuals should worry about, but something that governments have a responsibility to worry about, just as governments worry about natural disasters.
The U.S. has 15 million doses of smallpox vaccine and is considering ways to develop a stockpile for the entire population.
Laurel, Md.:
What would be the results of smallpox spreading across the states? How contagious is anthrax? Can a person with the inhaled version pass on the disease? What is the U.S. doing about the anthrax mail letters? Are they only reacting to each case or is there something else they are doing?
H.K. Park: Smallpox would be devastating since it spreads very quickly and has a high lethality rate. Not only would it spread across the U.S., but also the world. But see my earlier point about difficulty in obtaining it.
Anthrax is not contagious and there are no known cases of Anthrax being spread from one person to another. The U.S. is now carefully investigating the source of the letters, the recipients and the post offices in between. Unlike smallpox, a person infected with anthrax has a good chance of living with treatment after exposure.
Keep in mind that a number of the letters have not contained anthrax. Every year, there are hundreds of anthrax letter hoaxes in the U.S. Most of the recipients are abortion clinics
Central, Ill.:
All the footage we've seen on TV and the Internet of Afghan terrorist training camps shows masked men running around, crawling in tunnels and exercising on monkey bars. I'm sure other activities go on at these camps, and if you know, tell us what actually happens at these camps, i.e., types of training, how long does a terrorist spend at terrorist boot camp, who teaches the classes, etc. I hope we're just putting U.S. troops in harms way for more than just jungle gyms.
H.K. Park: I'm not sure if I can describe better targets for you than what you described, and you highlight the difficulty of attacking an organization versus a modern state.
Keep in mind that much of what the coalition is doing cannot be shown dramatically on CNN like tomahawk cruise missile strikes. I'm referring to tracking the money flows, seeking intelligence cooperation from other countries and arresting people.
Herndon, Va.:
Mr. Park: With all of the talk about weapons of mass destruction, first response efforts, planning, etc., we haven't heard much about determining how vulnerable one's facility or building is to those threats. In fact, the literature is very thin on the "how to determine vulnerability" aspects of this issue. Do you know of such resources, protocols, etc.? And if so, can you cite those that come to mind?
H.K. Park: I think the federal, state and local governments intentionally don't discuss their vulnerabilities to the press or on the Internet for fear of publicizing their weak spots to terrorists.
Berkeley, Calif.:
I think it's safe to assume that Al Qaeda has obtained nuclear devices from the Russian Mafia. How can we be sure that these bombs are not already here in the U.S. ready to be deployed into city centers?
Washington, D.C.:
Since Russia and the Russian Mafia has been linked with supplying the terrorists with biological weapons, why hasn't there been any coverage or news as to why the White House isn't putting pressure on Russia to lockdown on the Russian Mafia and the trade of biological weapons?
H.K. Park: I can't confirm your allegations, but I will say that much of the U.S. response won't be in the newspapers. As I pointed out earlier, to be successful, much of the effort has to be secret.
Secrecy will ensure that the coalition can crack down on terrorists in multiple countries (before they warn each other) and allows the coalition to continue to crack down on them in the future.
Brooklyn, N.Y.:
Would it be any help if American Arab/Islamic leaders publicly announced that "the targeted killing of civilians for any reason (religious, political) is absolutely wrong and no excuse can in any way justify it"? Or would this complicate their stand on the Middle East?
H.K. Park: I think it would be very helpful, and I know they have already been voicing these views.
Alexandria, Va.:
How difficult is it to culture anthrax? What substrates would you need, and what kind of facilities? Do you think this was "shipped-in" in spore form or grown here in a clandestine building? Do you see a former Soviet thumbprint on this?
H.K. Park: Anthrax is a naturally occurring disease. Many people who work with farm animals are exposed annually, but few become infected, and no one has died in decades.
Not wanting to detail "how do you make anthrax" on the internet, let me just say the 3 hurdles are obtaining the agent; making a weaponized form (that can enter lungs easily); and dispersing it without the sun or wind mitigating its effects.
I'm not sure about the origin of the letters with the lethal anthrax, but its lethality is worrisome and demonstrates some sophistication.
Washington (UK):
How much would you balance extreme "panic" statements from the media against the actual threat from the threat of weapons of mass destruction?
H.K. Park: I would come out on the side of calm rather than panic. I know this is hard to do, particularly with many conflicting reports. As an individual, I would not be concerned about a full-scale use of a WMD resulting in thousands of casualties. In the U.S., we have a better chance of being killed by another American or in an alcohol-related car accident (15,000 last year). As a government however, it should be a high concern, just as natural disasters are.
Washington, D.C.:
Hello,
My initial reaction upon reading statements about the threat of anthrax contaminating personal mail being very very slim, is to think, well, the threat of 4 of our airplanes being used to kill 5,000 people two months ago would have been very, very slim. In short, I'm scared, and don't know what to do.
H.K. Park: You raise a good point. We should all be scared (and outraged) but not panicked to the point incapacity. The U.S. has enjoyed the luxury of geography, being bordered by 2 friendly nations and a two large oceans.
Terrorism and war in the continental U.S. is not as frequent as in other countries and the recent attack has been a real wake-up call.
As an individual, you can channel your fear and help the government by joining the fire department or public health service. Become an analyst at the CIA or the FBI.
Or contribute to imminent public debate about how much security is enough? And what rights of privacy are we willing to give up to have it?
Boston, Mass.:
I'd like your thoughts on the secrecy vs. preparedness trade-off. As you may be aware, there has been considerable controversy over government hazardous material web sites, a number of which have been pulled down. This has been done even though there are some pretty good sources still widely available with pretty good information that can get close to the same targeting information. In contrast to the haz mat as WMD issue, the FBI and the same anti-terrorism officials have seen fit to show the block letter, sloping handwriting of the anthrax letters and the poster of "suspicious" packages. Is the public better off by knowing more and being prepared than by hiding information that a terrorist probably has already or can duplicate?
H.K. Park: This is my last question.
It's a very difficult balance for any government, particularly an administration that is only 9 months old. One could look to the Israeli experience for comparison.
I will only add that it comes down to the public's trust of its government. In the U.S., there are certain groups who do not trust the IRS, FBI or other agencies. Some reporters make it a sport to second guess everything the government does.
In a time of crisis, this distrust makes it more difficult for people to believe that anthrax is not contagious, for example. Or to heed government warnings. I'm not saying that government is infallible, but I think we should try to give them the benefit of the doubt.
There are many dedicated (underpaid) public servants who wear uniforms as policemen, firefighters, EMS, the military and even civilians who are doing everything they can to serve the public.
Just as they support us in time in need, so should we support them.
washingtonpost.com:
That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the
discussion.
© Copyright 2001 The Washington Post Company | 
