United States Preparedness Against Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats

United States Preparedness against Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institutional Affiliations
Course Name and Number
Due Date
United States Preparedness against Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats
Introduction
The United States and the rest of the world remain under constant threat of Chemical, Biological, Radiation, and Nuclear (CBRN) use by terrorists as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Tin et al. (2023) highlight chemical agent attacks as one of the leading issues of concern in the United States because of the ease of acquiring chemicals for formulating and implementing attacks. The author reveals that among the various CBRN weapons, chemicals represent the most used ones, with statistics confirming that they constitute up to 434 of the 565 reported CBRN attacks. Gupta (2020) acknowledges that the threat can arise from state or other non-state actors, making preparedness for such an eventuality fundamental for the U.S. as part of its homeland security. The recognition by international bodies of the adverse consequences of attacks prompted the formulation of legal agreements prohibiting chemical weapons globally. Gupta (2020) underlines the Geneva Protocol of 1925 as one of these documents that seeks to address and deter the use of chemical weapons. Its existence has been a notable deterrent approach that has compelled many nations, including the U.S., to initiate the process of eradicating its stockpiles of such weapons. Despite these efforts, the threat of chemical weapons persists due to the presence of non-state actors globally, requiring adequate WMD planning and preparedness.
The exploitation of chemicals as WMD is an age-old practice. Documentation by diverse studies reveals that this approach dates back to 2000 BCE when the Chinese used toxic smoke to attack their enemies (Gupta, 2020). As a result, using poisonous chemicals has existed since the rise of warfare between warring parties. DeLuca et al. (2020) agree that attackers prefer this approach because of its invasive aspect with far-reaching and instant consequences. The continued use of chemicals reveals that as civilizations continued to benefit from chemistry and science advancements, warring parties also found a way to win their battles easily. For instance, early incidences marked the use of sulfur-containing smoke by Sparta and Athens in the 4th Century, while Romans employed toxic smoke in Spain. However, state actors questioned the ethical basis for such methods, leading to their minimal use in the following centuries. For instance, the British refrained from using cyanide-based shells to quash Russians in the Crimean War. The southern and northern fronts in the United States also opposed such means against their enemies despite chemical artilleries (Gupta, 2020). Despite the cautionary measures, chemical weapons regained popularity during World War I and II, leaving far-reaching ramifications on affected populations. Ciottone (2018) indicates that attacks have remained isolated but persistent since then, with non-state actors being the primary perpetrators. The most recent cases include the Syria attacks using sarin and the assassinations of individuals such as Sergei Skripal and Kim Jong-Nam in the UK and Malaysia, respectively. These incidents confirm that chemical weapon threats remain a significant issue for homeland security to consider.
The lingering threat of chemical weapons and the likelihood of their use by terrorists as a WMD in the U.S. confirms the need for security agencies to plan effectively in combatting this menace. Exploring this topic is fundamental because it advances the course’s focus since it considers CBRN a unique homeland security phenomenon. As a result, creating a comprehensive understanding of the nature, severity, and extent of the problem is fundamental in informing planning and decision-making by respective agencies in deterring chemical attacks from international or domestic agents. Thus, it leads to the research question; is the United States adequately prepared against unforeseen chemical attacks?
Purpose Statement
Chemical weapons are an increasing threat to national security due to the ease of access to chemicals by terrorists. Tin et al. (2023) warn that they are the most probable approach non-state actors can use as a WMD because deadly chemicals remain readily available globally. For instance, the authors indicate that many industries have minimal restrictions for fatal chemicals, including remifentanil, fentanyl, and halothane, making it easy for ill-minded individuals to stock such materials. Besides the access, the authors confirm that the educational and expertise threshold for formulating less complex chemical weapons is relatively low compared to other CBRN attacks (Tin et al., 2023). Such an aspect underlines why they have remained the most prevalent forms of attack. Even Gupta (2020) notes that their wide application during and after the world wars emerged from the minimal need for complex technology and advanced education. As a result, chemical weapons’ ease of use remains a looming threat to homeland security, requiring comprehensive awareness of the nature of the chemical attacks and many other associated dynamics.
Investigating chemical WMD threats is fundamental for improving homeland security’s preparedness through appropriate planning. Ciottone (2018) reveals that security agencies need to understand the specific agents of concern to devise the proper mechanism for counteracting them in the event of an attack. This research will investigate the chemical agents that threaten homeland security. It will also explore the unique deployment systems in contemporary times that security agencies must remain alert about, the severity and nature of the chemical weapons in populations, including recent incidences, and different response tactics that homeland security can employ to counteract such attacks. Investigating these aspects of chemicals as WMD will be critical in improving the awareness of the threat and initiating comprehensive planning against such attacks in the nation.
Literature Review
Different Agents Used by Terrorists in Chemical WMD
Terrorists have broad exposure to readily available chemical weapons that vary in symptomatology, mechanism of action, and toxicity. Aroniadou-Anderjaska et al. (2020) confirm that this aspect makes it challenging for homeland security to plan and prepare against such agents. Despite the agreement such as Geneva Protocol highlighted by Gupta (2020) and the Chemical Weapons Convention discussed by Kloske and Witkiewicz (2019) enforcing regulations for preventing chemical-related attacks, the accessibility of dangerous industrial chemicals sustains such risks. For instance, Ciottone (2018) reveals that terrorists seek chemicals that can act fast, demonstrate high volatility, and trigger lethal consequences. The concern is that the current market has a constant supply of chemicals that individuals with minimal education in chemistry can easily combine to achieve such results. As a result, they can leverage many products and execute chemical attacks with far-reaching consequences on populations.
The most commonly used lethal chemical agents in WMD comprise nerve agents. Kloske and Witkiewicz (2019) indicate that their preference arises from the fact that they can penetrate diverse surfaces, including the gastrointestinal tract, the respiratory areas, and the skin. Another unique aspect is that they are odourless, making them challenging to detect through routine processes. Aroniadou-Anderjaska et al. (2020) indicate that these properties facilitated nerve agents such as sarin, tabun, and cyclosarin in diverse instances during the second world war. Since then, many other similar agents have emerged, including novichok, formulated by the Soviet Union. Although the current Russian government has continued to deny the existence of such chemicals with instant lethal consequences, leaked information by spies reveals that it exists. Aroniadou-Anderjaska et al. (2020) report that they are cholinesterase inhibitors with significantly higher toxicity than other chemicals such as soman and VX. Records of their use include the killing of Sergei Skripal in the UK in 2018. Such chemical incidents illustrate the varieties in existence.
State and non-state actors have used other less lethal chemical agents for decades. For instance, Gupta (2020) highlights using vesicants and other agents...