A panel of experts debated bio-terrorism's threat to the United States during a public discussion at the Thayer School of Engineering last Friday evening, raising scientific and political issues and reaching no firm conclusions.
According to George Baer, the panel's moderator and chairman of strategy and planning at the U.S. Naval War College, there is no clear answer to whether or not the American public is safe from biological terrorism.
In this unsure atmosphere, varying opinions regarding the threat of biological weapons exist, Ken Alibek -- the main speaker and former deputy director of the Soviet Union's biological warfare program -- told the audience.
As many countries have rapidly developed biological weapons, terrorist groups have grown increasingly interested in acquiring them. And at the same time, Alibek said some think that the threat of biotechnology in the hands of terrorists is inescapable.
Not only does the threat of an attack with biological weapons exist, according to Alibek, but he said a biological attack could go undetected for a time -- making causalities enormously high once the threat was detected.
Yet others contend that there is yet to be any successful, widespread military application of biological weapons. Such weapons are difficult to come by, dangerous to produce and hard to deploy.
Whether or not the United States needs to prepare for a possible biological weapons attack is also up for debate, according to Alibek.
Some argue that as the threat is real -- that our country is vulnerable to a biological weapons attack -- and that it would not be overly taxing on time and money to prepare for such an attack.
Others contend that the threat is unreal, preparation is impossible and other threats are greater. These voices claim that using taxpayers' money on preparation against biological weapon attacks is wasteful.
Were the United States to prepare, it would have to do so on multiple fronts -- from technical aspects such as detection and identification of biological weapons to medical preparation.
Alibek also described various biological weapons that currently exist, factors determining their effectiveness when deployed and possible governmental responses to such deployment.
He said the United States must rectify its understanding of biological weapons, develop a new concept of biological weapons defense and create new approaches for medical defense against biological weapons.
Other panelists included David Franz, vice president of the Chemical and Biological Defense Division of the Southern Research Institute, Milton Leitenberg, senior fellow at the Center for International and Security Studies in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Maryland and Raymond Zilinskas, senior scientist at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies.
Leitenberg discussed countries and terrorist groups the United States fears may be harboring biological weapons and the risk they pose to the United States.
So far terrorists have not hired those who could create biological weapons, but we cannot say what will happen in 20 years, Leitenberg said.
Audience members asked questions of the panelists and raised their concerns. Many voiced concern that the public is not well educated about this issue, and that no one government agency is clearly in charge of all efforts combating bio-terrorism.
The panel discussion was sponsored by Dartmouth's Institute for Security Technology Studies as part of a three-day conference on bio-terrorism.
