Biological terrorism is now a greater menace than ever, yet the world remains woefully unprepared to protect itself. Public health systems must stockpile vaccines and develop response strategies -- but they risk losing legitimacy if governments continue to rely on the military and the police for defense against bioterrorism. It is time to seriously rethink the U.S. approach to this deadly threat.
Laurie Garrett is a Pulitzer Prize-winning science and medical writer for Newsday. This article is adapted from her new book, Betrayal of Trust: The Collapse of Global Public Health. Copyright (c) 2000 by Laurie Garrett. Published by Hyperion.
We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.
Related
The United States may be an uncontested military superpower, but it remains defenseless against a new mode of attack: information warfare. As the military, the private sector, and Washington grow increasingly dependent on computers and information networks, they also grow more vulnerable to cyber-attack. Cyberspace is becoming the new front line of warfare, and private citizens are the new prime target. U.S. policymakers and technology entrepreneurs must wake up to this threat and build a wall of defense -- now.
The risk of a catastrophic exchange of nuclear missiles has receded. Yet the chances of some use of weapons of mass destruction have risen. Chemical weapons are a lesser threat, but more likely. A vial of anthrax dispersed over Washington could kill as many as three million. Traditional deterrence will not stop a disgruntled group with no identifiable address from striking out at America. The United States must pull back from excessive foreign involvements and begin a program of civil defense to reduce casualties in the event the unthinkable happens.
As Washington was fretting about ballistic missiles, 19 hijackers used commercial airliners to kill more Americans than had died in any previous attack in the country's history. And there could be worse to come. The United States is the target of a few hostile nations and well-organized terrorist groups, some of them state-sponsored. They understand that nuclear or biological weapons could do the job even better. To meet these new threats, Washington must pursue three simultaneous strategies: prevention, deterrence, and defense. Missile defense is not the whole answer -- and it could even become part of the problem.
