Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

When to Wield Weapons of Mass Destruction

Terrorists might not be any closer to acquiring CBRN weapons, but they sure would like to be.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

By MATTHEW BRODSKY, senior editor/Web editor

If you try to forecast the future of terrorism in the next seven years--as catastrophe modeler Risk Management Solutions Inc. does in its pieces in this issue--you might see that the likelihood that terrorists will carry out a plot to use weapons of mass destruction--chemical biological radioactive or nuclear, or CBRN, in today's parlance--is increasing "daily," according to noted terrorism expert and professor at Georgetown University Bruce Hoffman, who spoke at the annual terrorism risk seminar put on by RMS in New York City.

"I don't think the good news trumps the bad news," Hoffman said, regarding CBRN.

First, the good news. The best of it is that the capabilities for CRBN use don't appear to be there yet, even for sophisticated groups like al-Qaida. Nuclear weapons are even farther off--"day dreams" as Hoffman put it. Counterintelligence and terrorism experts have also detected less "chatter" about CBRN among terrorists and terrorist wannabes. What's more, terrorists see Afghanistan as the preferred battleground to attack the West and the United States.

The bad news? Jihadis are still attracted to CBRN weapons because they could act as a "force multiplier," meaning their use by one man could have the similar effect of an army's efforts. And jihadis have the religious justification to use such weapons, according to Hoffman, because of past edicts by radical imams. And as for that chatter, a majority of what there is of it is focused on chemical attacks, which would be the easiest to perpetrate. Think a "terrorist Bhopal," said Hoffman.

In the 2009 terrorism outlook from RMS, the modelers also have figured on an increased risk of CBRN attacks, with an eye on similar chemical attacks as the chlorine bombings that had occurred in Iraq in early 2007.

But if it makes you feel any better, terrorists also abide by a certain "econometric" trend whereby cheaper is better, according to Andrew Coburn, vice president of catastrophe research and director of terrorism research at RMS.

"They have learned to do much more with a one-ton bomb," he said, rather than using, say, using more and more "monster" truck bombs.

Another consolation to the property and workers' comp insurers and their policyholders in major American cities? RMS holds the position that the federal safety net that would kick in with cash for the insurance industry in the event of a major attack already includes CBRN. After all, it would take such a devastating attack just to trigger TRIPRA.

?By Matthew Brodsky

September 15, 2008

Copyright 2008© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.