Biological Warfare Warning

By Gaffney, Frank J., Jr. | The Washington Times (Washington, DC), April 28, 1998 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Biological Warfare Warning

Gaffney, Frank J., Jr., The Washington Times (Washington, DC)

Mr. President:

Sunday's New York Times reveals you have become personally seized with the nation's vulnerability to biological warfare. If that is the case, you have the potential to create a legacy that could be as profound and positive as any of your presidency. But to do so, you must take care to grasp the true magnitude of the problem and to avoid counterproductive actions.

According to the Times' report, your concerns about bioterrorism have been catalyzed by Richard Preston's novel "The Cobra Event" and by a recent, secret interagency exercise in which a bioterrorist attack was simulated. In both, terrorists use a genetically engineered viruses to inflict mass casualties and to sow mayhem on American society.

You evidently were particularly, and properly, alarmed by the conclusion of the civilian "war-game." As the New York Times put it: "The United States, despite huge investments of time, money and effort in recent years, is still unprepared to respond to biological terror weapons." The game showed state, local and federal government representatives were quickly overwhelmed and found themselves at odds over how to deal with the resulting catastrophe - and whose responsibility it was to do so.

As a result, you are now said to be preparing two Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs) aimed: (1) at putting the country on a better footing to prevent biological, chemical or computer attacks on its people or infrastructure and (2) if all else fails and they occur, to mitigate their effects. To maximize the benefit of these PDDs, I would respectfully urge that you consider two points:

First, the problem with which you are now grappling - namely, the United States' dangerous susceptibility to biological weapons attack - is, of course, just one manifestation of a much larger problem. This is what might be called our posture of "assured vulnerability."

Ever since 1972, when President Nixon signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union, it has been the policy of the U.S. government to leave its people deliberately exposed to destruction by missile-delivered nuclear weapons. Having done so in a world in which the Soviet Union had a virtual monopoly on such a threat, the idea gradually took hold that it made no sense to invest the vast sums required to protect Americans against Soviet bomber-delivered weapons, either. If there would be no defenses against these delivery systems, it seemed unnecessary (not to say virtually impossible) to mitigate the effects on the population of the weapons they carried. So civil defense went over the side, as well.

Thus, the vulnerability you are now concerned with, is a direct by-product of the inexorable, if bizarre, logic that says keeping America at risk of assured destruction is a good thing and defenses that might prevent, or at least mitigate, such destruction are bad things. If you are committed meaningfully to rectifying our present posture, you must also correct its intellectual underpinnings.

Unfortunately, until now, your administration has adamantly insisted it is committed to perpetuating the ABM Treaty. If this policy were to persist, you would be seriously compromising your new PDDs by addressing attacks with biological weapons if they are made possible by suitcase bombs, aerosol trucks or Cessna crop-dusters, but not if they come via ballistic missile.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Biological Warfare Warning


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?