The era of asymmetric threats: The need for a missile defense system is just the beginning
By Carol Devine-Molin
web
posted July 10, 2000
In this increasingly complicated and dangerous world, U.S. policymakers need to fully grasp the emerging threats facing our national security, which are like none other in history. The concept of conventional warfare as we know it, identifiable countries or factions engaging in symmetric warfare on the battlefield, is not so much being supplanted, but augmented by the phenomena of asymmetric strikes. Asymmetric strikes are often difficult to link to perpetrators, making retaliatory actions on the part of the U.S. difficult, if not impossible. Although the U.S. has been fortunate in that few serious incidents have occurred on our home soil, numerous asymmetric assaults have occurred overseas, targeting both our military personnel and civilian population alike, on air flights, on cruise ships, at embassies, and other venues. This increasing activity is being orchestrated by a number of players on the scene, including rogue nations and their surrogates involved in state sponsored terrorism, and by independent terrorist groups that apparently are in possession of adequate resources.
According to a 1999 report entitled "What are Asymmetric Strategies?" available through Rand's National Security and Defense Policy Center, a federally funded research and analysis institute, "U.S. conventional superiority has forced adversaries to consider asymmetric threats." Asymmetric strikes "attack vulnerabilities not appreciated by the United States and that capitalize on limited U.S. preparations." "Full–dimensional protection" is the goal of the U.S., but clearly it does not presently exist.
The U.S. requires a series of contingency plans to address the various types of asymmetric threats that this country might be subjected. Many policymakers believe that wide ranging preparations will have to be made, including stockpiling medicines and vaccines such as smallpox (no longer readily available, despite the fact that rogue nations have been attempting to splice it with other horrible viruses such as Ebola, AIDS, deadly flu, etc.), improving our intelligence information, creating better encryption and protections for our cyberspace, guarding our borders more effectively to deter entry of terrorists, creating an efficient missile defense system, and effectuating other protective actions too numerous to outline here.
Notably, our State Department must enact appropriate safeguards to ensure
that the technologies, which we are providing to other countries to aid
their commercial enterprises, do not have state-of-the-art military application
as well. The Clinton administration fiascos, involving U.S. transfer of
super-computers, and rocket launch technology to China, are cases in point.
By the Clinton administration moving oversight of these transfers from
the State Department to the Commerce Department, proper monitoring was
lost, and China was able to access technologies with dual commercial and
military application. Specifically, the super-computer has the capacity
to provide nuclear simulations and honing of this weaponry system. Likewise,
the rocket technology, ostensibly to be utilized for commercial satellite
launch, can also improve China's launch of nuclear missiles. Either by
design or incompetence, the Clinton administration has significantly undermined
our national security in this regard.
We, as a nation, are exceedingly vulnerable to asymmetric assaults, which
have the capacity to affect all major areas of our lives. These currently
include the well-known biological, chemical, information (telecommunication
and cyber) and economic spheres of asymmetric warfare. With the recent
completion of the Human Genome Project, which identified and mapped all
genes in human DNA, it is now theoretically possibly to create biological
warfare tailored to the genetic traits of a targeted ethnic group. However,
this specific threat is years away. Electromagnetic pulse (affecting electronic
devices) and laser (causing eye damage and blindness) technologies are
of immediate concern, given that these are presently being perfected by
our enemies. A notable incident cited in the Bill Gertz book, "Betrayal",
which details the "lasing" episode of a Canadian military surveillance
helicopter tracking a Russian vessel suspected of spying, demonstrates
the stark reality of our enemies' willingness to utilize this technology.
According to Gertz, "During the encounter, someone on the Russian
vessel fired a laser at the helicopter, permanently damaging the eyes
of the Canadian helicopter pilot and a U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer
working with the Canadians." Regarding the other cited emerging threat,
electromagnetic pulse technology, it has the capacity to disrupt and damage
all types of electronic equipment, which could have a broad effect upon
communications, weaponry, and even basic, everyday appliances.
Much press, as of late, has been accorded the U.S. efforts to establish
a National Missile Defense system, for the purpose of providing a shield
against a limited number of incoming nuclear missiles, the "onesy"
or "twosy", the most likely scenario to be perpetrated by a
rogue nation or terrorist faction. Given that nuclear proliferation is
rampant, with many countries in the development phases of both nuclear
technology and long-range delivery systems, it would be quite prudent
for the U.S. to develop an appropriate shield, which could stymie this
type of attack. Moreover, establishing the National Missile Defense system
would actually act as a deterrent to those considering a limited nuclear
assault on this nation. On weighing all factors, the National Missile
Defense system is an excellent idea whose time has come. The cost of such
a system, currently cited at 60-80 billion dollars, is not prohibitive,
and we are in the process of perfecting the needed technology, which is
undoubtedly within our reach.
I briefly had the privilege a few weeks ago, when in attendance at a
Women's Issues forum in upstate N.Y., to ask former U.N. Ambassador Jeane
Kirkpatrick a few questions related to national security. Ambassador Kirkpatrick
offered an emphatic response that deploying the National Missile Defense
system was vital at this juncture. When asked by me "What is the
primary national security issue that presidential candidate George W.
Bush should be addressing on the campaign stump?" again she stated,
"the need for the National Missile Defense system" to protect
this country. Moreover, when I queried whether the Clinton administration
has done a good job meeting this country's national security needs, she
replied, "The answer is no. You asked me a direct question, and I
need to give you a direct answer". Undoubtedly, the Ambassador is
a forthright woman who minces no words. In terms of the proposed National
Missile Defense system, many policy experts are of the view that a limited
nuclear attack on this country by rogue forces is imminent, probably no
more than 3-5 years out. Clearly, that is the reason for the Ambassador's
adamant posture on this subject. In response to critics of the National
Missile Defense system, who cite that it is a violation of our thirty
year old Anti-Ballistic Treaty with Russia, myself and others are of the
belief that it would be in the best strategic interest of the U.S., and
the safety of its citizens, to re-assess existing treaties, in view of
the new threats posed by the changing global landscape.
And it is indeed true that deployment of nuclear weapons is not limited
to long or medium range missile launch; That, in fact, a nuclear device
could be detonated in any number of ways including a delivery by ground
(even in a suitcase) or by sea (in a barge off N.Y.C., for example). To
reiterate, we must plan for a multitude of contingencies, and set in place
any and all protections that are needed under a comprehensive plan to
counter terrorists and varying kinds of asymmetric threats.
As we now know, some terrorist factions may well have benefited from
the chaotic circumstances associated with the disintegration of the former
Soviet Union, and the reported willingness of military personnel to sell
off weaponry including warheads from the Soviet nuclear arsenal. Rogue
nations, and "nations of concern" as the State Department are
now calling them, which include China and Russia, are sharing a variety
of nuclear and missile delivery technologies with countries such as North
Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan, which is cause for extreme consternation.
In other words, nuclear technology is out there, and our enemies indeed
have it. Moreover, many of our enemies would like nothing better than
to launch a nuclear first strike against us. And, some have hypothesized
that both Israel, and its primary supporter and protector, the United
States, would likely be targeted at the same time in a limited, but effective,
nuclear assault. 
Carol Devine-Molin is a Republican District Leader, a community activist, and the host of "On The Right Side", a local program sponsored by the Republicans, and seen throughout most of Westchester County, New York.