Working Group 3

Initial Draft Report Outline, 20 Aug 10, V1.0

Threat/Risk Hypothesis.

1.  Terrorist are watching and listening. Where are the gaps? What can be exploited with a high probability of success? Where are the defenses strongest?

2.  Terrorists are working within our decision cycle

3.  It is easier to obtain the materials’ for the construction and employ a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) in lesser developed nations than in highly developed nations.

4.  Motivation is stronger to employ WMD devices against a less developed regional antagonist than against a highly developed nation.

PMP-MTA Roadmap.

1.  We understand traditional CBRN threats and the associated mitigation measures.

2.  It is important for us to understand terrorist asymmetrical research and evolving threats taking place worldwide.

  1. Unconventional agents.
  2. Impact of biological agents on humans.
  3. No universally accepted model to evaluate asymmetrical threat today.
  4. Unique innovative applications by terrorist.
  5. Multiple potential outcomes
  6. Lack of predictability of effects
  7. Impacts and may limit mitigation efforts

3.  Mitigation requires data, not scientific hypothesis and theoretical models to succeed in the real world.

4.  Terrorist are well educated, employing practical applications of rapidly evolving scientific capabilities in innovative ways to achieve their desired results.

Mitigation Gaps.

1.  Inter-disciplinary in nature (C, B, R, N).

2.  Need to resolve gaps within multi-disciplinary Ad Hoc groups.

3.  Ad Hoc groups must be allowed to think and work innovatively in lieu of conventional bureaucratic organization.

  1. Involved students and young persons.
  2. Involve “Science Fiction” writers for example.

PMP-MTA Organization for Success.

1.  Organization and composition of the multi-disciplinary Ad Hoc group.

2.  Requires multiple meetings per year to address the rapidly evolving terrorist threats.

3.  Meet in neutral venue to allow optimum participation.

4.  Supported by stand alone and evolving data repository, internet and VTC capability.

5.  Outreach to selected regional organizations such as NATO.

  1. Potential opportunity to act as scientific advisor to specific Agencies.
  2. “Science in diplomacy”: Science can provide advice to inform and support foreign policy objectives. “Diplomacy for science”: Diplomacy can facilitate international scientific cooperation. “Science for diplomacy”: Scientific cooperation can improve international relations. Ref: The Royal Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, New Frontiers in Science Diplomacy, January 2010.

Implementing Technologies.

1.  Technology is available today and is evolving quicker than governments are able or willing to implement the available capability.

2.  Political will to implement national and regional mitigation capability does not actively exist. Resulting in subjective public discussions to obtain political points.

3.  No national or regional communications architecture exists today, much less interconnectivity and interoperability.

  1. Applied technology.
  2. Based on defined requirements to meet specific national and regional situations (case-by-case).

4.  Communications is critical to retaining political control and mitigate the terrorist act.

5.  Linkage to NGO communications nets should be explored to provide multiple communication paths and reduce implementation costs.

6.  The impact of a potential simultaneous cyber attack to limit the mitigation measures must be considered and incorporated into the design of the communications architecture.

The Way Ahead.

1.  Build a stronger multi-disciplinary scientific environment to enhance mitigation capabilities and effectiveness within WFS, with out-reach to outside organizations.

2.  Define government and First Responder training requirements.

  1. Who should receive the training?
  2. Frequency of the training.
  3. Scenario and training validation against a defined and agreed standard.
  4. Periodic up-dating of the training POI.

3.  Communications.

  1. Architecture development
  2. Cyber security integration.
  3. Establish a PMP-MTA data repository
  4. Scientific-limited/controlled access.
  5. Public- Open access (for example: Wikipedia).
  6. Reach-back capability incorporated.
  7. Multi-language reports in Public data repository.
  8. Linkage between WFS and First Responders.
  9. How should this be accomplished?
  10. Communicate meaningful actionable data in non-scientific jargon.

4.  Leverage existing national expenditures across multiple WMD disciplines to obtain an enhanced overall return on investment.

Execution in the Near Term.

1.  Focus and development of meaningful measureable results

2.  Develop, exercise and expand scientific personnel inter-disciplinary network.

3.  Face-to Face meetings

  1. Approximately twice a year.
  2. Not at Erice – to preclude constrained/restricted attendance.
  3. Address rapidly evolving threat environment.

4.  Develop additional funding sources.

1