biological weapons economic warfare

8/8/2019 Biological Weapons Economic Warfare

1/15

Document Created: September 1995

Chapter 10

Biological Weapons for Waging Economic

Warfare

Lt Col Robert P. Kadlec, U!"

[Table of Contents] [Chapter11]

The final decade of the twentieth century has positioned the world at thethreshold of tremendous opportunity. The collapse of the Soviet Union hasdissolved the bipolar world and created the opening to forge a new internationalsecurity environment. The preeminence of politico-military competition isslowly giving way to politico-economic competition. s Shintaro !shihara

predicts" #The twenty-first century will be a century of economic warfare.$1

%hile military power remains important" its conte&t and type are changing. Thefocus of many developing nations is to see' weapons of mass destruction

(%)*+,nuclear" biological" and chemical weapons,to meet regionalsecurity concerns. The parallel emergence of economic competition and itsli'ely accompanying conflicts with the proliferation of %)* raises the

possibility of a new form of warfare. This includes the development and use ofbiological warfare (%+ against economic targets.

Using % to attac' livestoc'" crops" or ecosystems offers an adversary themeans to wage a potentially subtle yet devastating form of warfare" one whichwould impact the political" social" and economic sectors of a society and

potentially of national survival itself.

!gric#lt#re

or both developed and developing nations" nonfuel commodities present animportant source of national security and prosperity. !n the United States alone"the agricultural sector is an /0 billion industry. esides providing for thenourishment of the US population and a significant portion of the world"
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/bftoc.htmlhttp://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp11.htmlhttp://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp11.htmlhttp://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/bftoc.html


2/15

agriculture generated appro&imately /23 billion in e&port revenues in 1441.This revenue represents appro&imately 15 percent of the total US e&ports forthat particular year.6 gricultural e&ports have been an important source forredressing the US trade deficit. )oreover" agriculture is now one of but ahandful of sectors that generates a trade surplus for the US. !n 1446 it createdan estimated /10-billion surplus.7

8esser developed and developing nations and other nations whose economiesare in transition have significant agricultural sectors that provide importantcontributions of food and revenue to their economies. This observation isespecially true of nonoil producing nations. 9et" even with productiveagricultural systems" most if not all nations in the world are food importers.

Trends in agricultural systems" particularly food production" indicate that fewernumbers of people and hectares are involved in agricultural production. !n

developed mar'et economies" the percentage of the economically activepopulation in agriculture declined by 71.6 percent from 140 to 1446.:similar" yet not as dramatic" decline was noted in developing countries" wherethe numbers of people involved in agriculture declined by 11.7 percent duringthe same period.5*espite that decline" the overall agricultural productivity in

both the developed and developing worlds increased by :5.7 percent and 65.6percent respectively.2

This increase in productivity has resulted from the spread of modern farmingtechnology" high-yield crop varieties" and potent fertili;ers and pesticides. Thegoal of many developing and developed nations is to become self-sufficient infood and other agricultural products.3Competition has become intense.


3/15

Bart of the economic revolution in the world today is the e&plosion ofbiotechnology. iotechnology has been a significant reason why agriculturalsystems are much more productive. s alluded to earlier" the development ofhigher-yield crops results partly from genetic recombinant engineering" which

ta'es genes coded for greater productivity and resistance to disease and droughtand inserts them into a particular species of crop.

esides enhancing the productivity and heartiness of food or cash crops"methods of biological control are increasingly relied upon to provide anenvironment-friendly means of controlling economically significant pests anddiseases. acillus thuringiensis (.t.+. is a well-'nown e&ample of a naturallyoccurring sporulated bacteria which effectively controls caterpillars"

particularly tomato worms.

variant of .t." called .t. israelensis or .t.i." has shown its effectiveness incontrolling malaria-bearing mosuitoes and blac'flies which carry the parasitethat causes river blindness.4


4/15

States to ussia" China" !ran" !ra" Syria" !srael" Forth Gorea" and Taiwan.1: Fo specificmention is made of any suspect nation see'ing development of anti-animalHanti-crop agents. Fote that the United States during its offensive program firstdeveloped and fielded an anti-crop bomb. The United States discontinued its

pursuit of several anti-agricultural agents in the mid-145s since they lac'edmilitary utility.

Biological Weapons* Cost+effecti)e W-

Compared to other mass destruction weapons" biological weapons are cheap. recent Iffice of Technology ssessment (IT+ report places the cost of a% large arsenal as low as /1 million.

This estimated cost stands in star' contrast to a low-end estimate of /6million for developing a single nuclear weapon. The high-end cost estimate fora nuclear weapons could be 1 to 5 times higher.15 Fot only is % more

affordable" but militarily significant uantities of % agents ('ilograms+ inlegitimate biological laboratories ma'e % production easy to accomplish andconceal. ny nation with a moderately sophisticated pharmaceutical industrycan do so.

%at#re at Wor* Whiteflies and Pla#sibilit$


5/15

iological economic warfare li'ely would involve the intentional dispersion ofa harmful agent or pest against a high-value cash crop or food source. The US*epartment of griculture recently identified 57 animal diseases which arenonindigenous or foreign" which" if introduced into this nation" wouldadversely impact the livestoc' industry.12 >ecent naturally occurring eventshighlight this potential.

The !mperial Dalley produces a large variety of food and produce. !n thesummer of 1441" an infestation by the sweet potato fly or whitefly destroyedmuch of the crops in this area and caused a /7-million loss. related butdifferent strain of whitefly caused /1 million in losses in southeasternCalifornia in 1401. The US agricultural system is a /0-billion industry. The!mperial Dalley infestation represents a natural event where a harmful agent(whitefly+ encountered a susceptible host (crops+ in a conducive environment(the !mperial Dalley+. The investigation of this natural outbrea'" however"reveals =ust how a deliberate act of % economic warfare could beengineered.13

The poinsettia strain of the whitefly is not found naturally in California. !n thecircumstance of this outbrea'" the whitefly could have accompanied a shipmentof poinsettia plants from lorida. %hile the e&act place the poinsettia strainoriginate remains a mystery" other similar strains originate in >ussia" mainlandsia" and frica.

!n its natural habitat" the whitefly has a certain homeostatic e&istence. alancedbetween natural conditions" competitors" pathogens" and predators" the impact ithas on the environment is usually limited. %hen this fly or any other pest is

placed in an environment where natural controls are missing" uncontrolledinsect breeding may cause subseuent crop destruction. !n the !mperial Dalleycircumstance" however" the culpable insect represented more than simply a pesttranslocated to new fertile fields. This particular type of whitefly was a distinctnew strain. !ts biological characteristics made it an effective agent ofdestruction. !ts appetite was voracious. Unli'e other 'nown strains ofwhiteflies" this one consumed many times its body weight in vegetation and

dined on a great variety of plants. Second" it had an unusual resistance tochemical and naturally occurring pesticides. *F analysis of the geneticma'eup showed a uniue strain of this particular insect. inally" besides itsdirect effects" the whitefly carried other harmful agents li'e fungus. Thus" italso inflicted disease on already wea'ened plants.

Faturally occurring genetic events of mutation and selection reasonably e&plainthis occurrence. !t is also possible that such insects could be bred for nefarious


6/15

purposes. !n the conte&t of a deliberate act of %" a nation could select fromseveral native occurring or endemic pests. Selective management and breedingcould develop a #super$ pest. The selection of this pest could be highly specificfor a particular crop that an economic competitor or regional adversary relieson for economic prosperity or national survival. To provide better cover for aclandestine or covert % attac'" pests endemic to the target nation could besimilarly obtained and could enhance its resistance through such laboratorymanipulation as nonindigenous pesticide e&posure. !nfiltrating anddisseminating perpetrator insects is then dependent on the mode oftransportation and the level of plausible denial desired.

United tates /#lnerabilities

The threat of this type of insect-borne % attac' on the United States remains

theoretical. recent IT report on the United States addressed the threat fromharmful nonindigenous species (F!S+. The report indicated that the intentional(noncriminal+ or unintentional importation of plants" animals" or microbes hasma=or current and future economic conseuences for US agriculture" forestry"fisheries" water use" utilities" and natural areas.

!mportation of harmful nonindigenous species costs the United States billionsof dollars annually.10 rom 142 to 1441" 34 F!S caused documented losses of/43 billion (Table 7+. This table detailed only a small percentage of the largenumber of economically and environmentally costly agents" so their true impact

is not 'nown.

&able Estimated C#m#lati)e Losses to the U fromelected%onndigeno#s pecies, 120341221

Categor$pecies !nal$5ed

6n#mber7

C#m#lati)e Losses

68 millions, 12217

pecies %ot

!nal$5ed

BlantsaJ 15 27 ,

TerrestrialDertebrates

2 665 K74

!nsects :7 46"250 K77

ish 7 :23 K7

uatic!nvertebrates

7 1"63 K75

Blant Bathogens 5 023 K::

Ither : 413

J


7/15

o#rce* ). Cochran" Fon-!ndigenous Species in the U.S. ussian wheat aphid (diurahis no&ia+"for e&ample" e&ceeded /2 million.14 The )editerranean fruit fly caused

/043 million in damage and lost revenue.


8/15

trying to 'eep the South merican leaf blight (microcyclus ulei+ from affectingits rubber tree industry. This fungus was first detected in ra;il at the turn ofthe century and infects the stems of young trees and leaves and significantlydecreases the output of sap.

Fo 'nown cure for microcyclus e&ists. This blight is the main reason a viablerubber industry no longer e&ists in South merica. The immediacy of airlinetravel" especially directly from ra;il to )alaysia" ma'es possible theunintentional entry of this fungus.


9/15

ll#strati)e cenarios

Thus" naturally occurring events where the agent" the susceptible host" and theenvironment converge can result in disease" economic loss" and national or

international repercussions. Fo evidence indicates that any nation or groupwillfully caused the events cited. Eowever" we may not be so luc'y in thetwenty-first century. !t is all too possible to construct a scenario which wouldoffer plausible denial and possible gain to a potential adversary.

cenario 9ne* Corn "#t#res

The US *epartment of griculture estimates that the 144: corn harvest wouldplunge 71.: percent from record summer rains and flooding. !t was e&pectedthe cost of a bushel of corn would soar to three dollars. The ebruary 144:

price of corn" the nation@s number one crop" was the highest in a decade.6:

Theresultant increase in cost increased operating e&penses of companies #thathandle[d] everything from corn-based ethanol fuel to livestoc'.$65

#%e are vulnerable in 144: . . . right on the edge"$ said Geith Collins" actingassistant agriculture secretary for economics. The fall 1447 harvest was toosmall to supply both domestic processors and e&porters. US stoc'piles aree&pected to be at their lowest levels since the food scare of the mid-143s. slight acceleration in food inflation was e&pected in 144:. ood inflation in144: was estimated at between 7.7 percent and 7.5 percent" up from 6.6 percent

in 1447 and 1.6 percent in 1446. This is the first time in about four yearswhereas food prices e&ceeded the general inflation rate.62

corn crop short of the 0.:-billion-bushel estimate would signal a : percentfood inflation rate in 1445.63 Some additional disasters such as a drought orloss of corn to blight" #would do considerable economic damage to world foodsupplies.$60 3.5-billion-bushel corn crop would push prices to four dollars a

bushel. Such a surge would push inhibited e&ports and ma'e hogs and cattle tooe&pensive for many farmers to feed" eventually driving up meat prices.64

Eow could someone use biological agents to conduct economic warfare byruining a competitor@s crop or productM Three more scenarios involving corn"wine" and cotton attac's can illustrate the potential % threat.

cenario &:o* Corn &errorism


10/15

second scenario might go as follows. China is the world@s second largest corne&porter.7>ecogni;ing the vulnerable situation of the United States" China

plans an act of agricultural terrorism. Selecting a corn seed blight" fusariumgraminearum" which grows well at cool temperatures and in wet soil" theyclandestinely spray this hearty spore over the US )idwest from commercialairliners flying the polar route to Chicago and Saint 8ouis. They disseminatethe spore in winter and early spring" and the blight is present in the soil whenspring planting occurs.

The United States" despite eliminating the corn set-aside reuirements andplanting more than 0 million acres of corn" suffers from a crop disaster. Thisune&pected Chinese-induced corn seed blight decimates the US corn crop. Thefall harvest is a full 7 percent below e&pected levels. The United States thenimports corn for the first time in its history to meet domestic needs. ood pricesrise sharply and cause higher-than- e&pected food prices and inflation. Chinagains significant corn mar'et share and tens of billions dollars of additional

profits from their crop.

cenario &hree* &hat;s a


11/15

Ba'istan is the world@s third-largest producer of cotton behind the United Statesand China. !n 1441 the Ba'istanis e&ported /:6.: million of raw cotton" some72 percent of its primary commodity e&ports (e&cluding fuels+ in 1441.76!fte&tiles" yarn" and other by-products are included" almost 2 percent ofBa'istan@s e&ports depend on cotton.77*ue to an attac' caused by an insect" the1447 harvest will fall 15 percent below e&pected levels.

This crop loss will affect the country@s overall economic performance. Ba'istanwill produce only 1 million or so bales of the 16 million bales targeted. !n1447" hmed )u'tar (the minister of state for commerce+ said" #This definitelywould be detrimental to our economy" because the surplus ... would have addedto our meager foreign e&change reserves.$7:The immediate economic impact ofthe crop loss" however" may have longer-lasting effects. Cotton farmers" fearfulof e&periencing a similar disaster ne&t year" are considering planting somethingelse. >ice" wheat" and sugarcane" which are significantly less profitable (cottonis :7 times more profitable than all other crops+" appear more attractive andsafer than cotton.75#>estoring the confidence of farmers" who doubt theirability to generate profits from cotton" could become one of Ba'istan@s toughestchallenges.$72

The open hostility between Ba'istan and !ndia is not hypothetical. They arecompeting against each other in an arms race involving nuclear andconventional weapons. The heavy reliance of Ba'istan on a single e&port cashcrop is not unusual in the developing world. The geographic pro&imity ofBa'istan to its principal adversary allows a fairly easy route of infiltration andintroduction of a pest against a high-value target li'e its cotton crop. The abilityto inflict economic loss on Ba'istan has repercussions that affect the private andcommercial sectors" the military" and the society.

mplications of Economic Biological Warfare

The current US focus on % limits consideration to the human effects of suchagents as anthra&" plague" and smallpo&. 8ittle or no effort seems to be devotedin assessing the vulnerabilities of the United States or any other nation@s

agricultural or ecological infrastructures to % attac'. !f the focus ofinternational and regional competition is transitioning to economic power" it is

prudent to assess the potential impact of this form of economic warfare"develop a comprehensive sur- veillance or monitoring system" and preparecountermeasures.


12/15

*eveloped countries with adeuate economic reserves" agricultural diversity"and the means to mitigate such occurrences would be relatively resistant tosuch attac'.


13/15

8ocal and federal agencies should investigate reports of nonhuman outbrea'swhich occur in defined high-value commodities" involve potential % ornonendemic agents" or inflict a certain threshold economic loss.

Similarly" some e&isting integrated governmental mechanism must be

mobili;ed uic'ly to contain and mitigate the impact of a % attac'. Theederal esponse Blan contains at least a theoretical structure to

begin to address this problem.

The real and hypothetical e&amples cited highlight the opportunity offered by% as a means to attac' the agricultural infrastructure of an adversary. Thee&istence of naturally occurring or endemic agricultural pests or diseases andoutbrea's as described permit an adversary to use % with plausible denial.

The impact of such events would go beyond simply affecting a nation@s

economy to potentially affecting its national security. The United States gaveup its antiagricultural biological weapons long before it unilaterally renouncedthe use and development of biological warfare in 1424.

The present concerns about the proliferation of weapons of mass destructionappropriately recogni;e the threat posed by % against our military andciti;enry. The uestion is whether our government is aware of" or prepared torespond to" acts of %M !s our intelligence community sensiti;ed or trac'ing

proliferant@s efforts to develop antiagriculture %M !s there a mechanismwhereby federal" state" and local agencies report and respond to acts affecting

valuable economic resources or involving suspicious or nonendemic agentsM

!n the post-cold war era and as we enter the twenty-first century" the economydetermines superpower status. The threat posed by biological weapons deserves

prudent consideration.

%otes

1. Shintaro !shihara cited in C. red ergsten" #Aapan and the United Statesin the Few %orld


14/15


15/15

biological weapons economic warfare

Documents