Ok, the weapons exist. But surely no one would be foolish enough to try to use them, right?
Most modern states are aware of the dangers of using bioweapons against their enemies. Should they happen to get caught – and outbreaks of smallpox would look extremely suspicious right from the start – there will be very unpleasant consequences. (I’ve heard that Saddam was warned in 1991 that any use of WMD would result in a nuclear response, although I have no source for it.) A state that risks using bioweapons against the West would be risking its total destruction.
Terrorists, however, and rogue states cannot be counted upon to behave rationally.
In many ways, both groups set out to create fear in the minds of their enemies. Fear corrodes, fear prevents people from making rational calculations. The periodical bursts of nuclear sabre-rattling from North Korea and Iran serve the purpose of concentrating minds on their fear – and not on the simple fact that neither state could survive a total war with America, let alone the rest of the world. Terrorists, having few state connections, can act with even more impunity. And they are often quite happy to compromise their host states for their own ends.
This was amply demonstrated by Al Qaida’s time in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Their attack on America on 9/11 brought Afghanistan into conflict with the United States, not something in the Taliban’s best interests. Indeed, AQ was so firmly wedged into the more radical parts of the Taliban’s power structure that more rational voices couldn't either speak out against the terrorists or dislodge them. The offer to try Bin Laden in front of an Islamic Court was, in some ways, an admission of helplessness. Having taken him into their homes and allowed him to gain influence, the rational part of the Taliban leadership couldn't stop him.
Bin Laden expressed interest in obtaining nuclear, chemical and biological WMD before and after 9/11. Did he succeed? The only sign that he didn’t succeed is that such weapons weren't used, although in the murky world of counter-terrorist operations such absence of evidence doesn’t always prove anything. In 2002, for example, there was a strong report that AQ had a nuke somewhere in America. Was the report actually genuine? If so, did the nuke fail to detonate, or was it quietly recovered and destroyed by the security forces? There is no way to know.
It is clear that Bin Laden and his successors, those who share his perverted version of Islam, would not object to deploying biological weapons, even though they would almost certainly spread into the Middle East and devastate the population. They were not only happy to send Muslims to commit suicide attacks (suicide is a mortal sin in Islam and there is certainly no redeeming factor in deliberately setting out to take others with you) but to kill other Muslims who didn't live up (down?) to their standards. The fact that diseases are no respecters of religion would not, I suspect, bother them. Their worldview includes the concept of a final war and a massive slaughter of all those in the wrong.
This is at least partly because of the devil’s bargain the House of Saud made with the religious leaders of Saudi Arabia. In exchange for supporting the regime the fundamentalist leaders were allowed to spread their creed throughout Saudi Arabia and beyond. Saudi oil money funds the spread of religious schools throughout Central Asia, Europe and even America, schools where pupils are taught intolerance and a harsh creed that allows no questioning. It should not be surprising that these pupils often become recruits for the Taliban or other fundamentalist groups.
In Saudi Arabia itself, the attempt to use religious leaders to bolster the monarchy’s position – by providing an excuse to crush democrats, feminists, etc – has badly undermined the government. Right now, there is a growing population of youngsters who are largely unemployable – and radical preachers who want to take power for themselves, rather than obey the monarchy. There is a tension in the region that will make slow reform extremely difficult, perhaps impossible. Is it impossible that a faction in Saudi Arabia will seek to trigger a war that might thrust them into power?
Why not? Bin Laden certainly tried.
And what would happen if these weapons were actually used?
Society is fragile. This may seem odd, but consider; the vast majority of people are honest, law-abiding and unwilling to act to undermine society. In the West, this is true because there is a tradition of good governance and plenty of other outlets for human expression. Fear, however, can corrode away basic decency, destroying trust in government and society alike. When that happens, the bonds of law and order can simply snap.
Humans are social creatures; we live in groups. When we are inside the group, we see ourselves as a collection of individuals; when we are outside the group, we see them as one vast hive mind. There is a certain tendency to condemn every member of a particular group for the crimes of one or two of them. This is relatively simple for hate-mongers to exploit, as branding all members of a particular group as ‘The Enemy’ is good for unity – and for their political power. Hitler was neither the first or last to designate a particular section of society as official scapegoats for everything that was wrong with the world.
Think about how many faultlines there are in society. All the ‘us vs. them’ problems there are that pop up whenever something happens and others seek to take advantage of it. If faith in society is crushed, and that will happen if there is a massive disease outbreak, those faultlines will explode. And then a serious problem will become much worse, threatening to overwhelm us all.
Your mileage may vary. I hope you’re right.
Christopher G. Nuttall
Kuala Lumpur, 2013
The Coward's Way of War Page 50
