AAAS Panel Explores U.S. Readiness For Terrorist “Dirty Bomb” Attack

The scenario was ominous: A shadowy band of terrorists had smuggled a small amount of radioactive material into the U.K. and was racing to assemble a pair of “dirty bombs” for detonation in London. Meanwhile, acting on vague tips and uncertain intelligence, the British government was racing to stop them.

This was the central plot of the recent HBO film “Dirty War,” and after a showing at AAAS, a panel of experts said the threat laid out in the film could be credibly applied to the United States. Just as the British government as depicted in the film was unprepared, they said, so is the U.S. government.

“It’s all too real,” said panelist Charles D. Ferguson, a science and technology fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “[It] might be all but inevitable that someday we would see this kind of event in the United States.”

“One thing we’d all better get a grip on: People are going to die in this,” added Amy E. Smithson, a senior fellow in the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS). “We live in a society of almost infinite vulnerability.”

“Dirty War” was released in 2004 and has been shown on BBC, HBO and PBS. The principal themes have become broadly familiar since the terror attacks of 11 September 2001: Islamic terrorists, seeking to deliver a lethal strike against one of the capitals of the Western world, patiently plan and organize an attack using relatively crude conventional bombs that will spread radioactive dust over a large swath of London. And investigators, aided in part by colleagues of Islamic faith and a tipster from Middle Eastern community, work desperately to track them down.

But within that drama, the filmmakers pose troubling questions about our readiness for a terrorist “dirty bomb” strike. Are police and firefighters prepared and equipped for such an attack? Are local hospitals prepared to decontaminate and treat thousands of people who might need care immediately after such an attack? And are citizens generally prepared to endure such an attack?

The conclusion of the filmmakers is that we are not ready.

London firefighters go through preparation exercises, but they serve more to reassure the public than to actually prepare them for catastrophe. When the terrorists successfully detonate one of the bombs, confusion and panic reign. Firefighters are able to enter the scene only at great risk to their own lives. Police are overwhelmed trying to seal the contaminated scene and to keep victims from leaving it. The victims — injured, in shock and profoundly frightened — rebel against restrictions that keep them at scene and prevent most from getting immediate medical care. And in the aftermath, much of London is rendered uninhabitable for 30 years.

The 14 November showing of “Dirty War” was the latest in a recent series of lectures and press briefings on security issues organized by AAAS’s Center for Science, Technology and Security Policy.

“While our primary mission is to deliver objective scientific analyses of security problems to policy makers such as the Administration and Congress, we are also working to inform the public about these issues,” said center Director Norman Neureiter. “We believe that a well-informed public is better prepared to deal with these sorts of events if and when they occur, and is better able to interact with the government both before and during crisis situations.”

The center plans to have public programs in Washington every four to six weeks to assess present security challenges and how to deal with them, Neureiter said.

At the “Dirty War” panel discussion, both Smithson and Ferguson found points in “Dirty War” that seemed incredible or inaccurate. Yet both said that its depiction of the attack and aftermath was fundamentally sound.

Inevitably, they said, we must learn to live with risks. But that means preparing as effectively as possible for terrorism-related disasters. Both questioned whether the U.S. government and governments at local levels are ready.

Ferguson, discussing prevention of such attacks, said that of the millions of sources of radioactive material used globally, thousands could fuel potent dirty bombs. Such high-risk sources range from elements used in cancer treatment around the world, for example, to military-related “orphan sources” in the nations of the former Soviet Union.

While hundreds of these sources in the former Soviet Union have been secured, he said, hundreds more still need to be addressed. But he worries that federal efforts to do that collaborative work will be undermined as the U.S. Congress looks for funds to rebuild the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina.

Smithson, who has worked closely with firefighters and other first-responder groups, said the movie posed just a few of the thousands of possible attack scenarios that local communities might have to respond to. But they are strapped for funds and expertise, she said, and the federal government’s leadership on the issue has faltered.

As in the movie, realistic emergency response exercises are "few and
far between," she said. In the immediate aftermath of an attack, first-responders will be required to make some critical decisions on high-risk rescue efforts, quarantines and treatment for the injured.

“These will be excruciating circumstances for people who are trying to save your life,” she said.

According to Smithson, hospitals could be the Achilles’ heel in a dirty-bomb attack with mass casualties and broad exposure to radiation. Because privately owned hospitals compete within a community, and because many are financially struggling, they may be reluctant at present to invest in emergency response training and supplies and may not be prepared to coordinate their actions in the event of an attack.

“I think this film leaves us at the hardest part…. How do you clean up that central part of London?” Smithson asked. “I give you Katrina as exhibit A as to whether or not we’re prepared to do that.”

One lesson of Hurricane Katrina may be that much of the preparation for disaster — and response to it — will fall to local governments. And that, Smithson said, raises a sensitive question: “Are you prepared to have your taxes raised locally in order to improve your preparedness?”

Edward W. Lempinen

29 November 2005