Public Statements
on Potential Terrorist Use of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and
Nuclear (CBRN) Agents
since July 1997
DCI
George J. Tenet, speech at Langley High School Commencement (June 14, 2001)
The reality that
countries like North Korea, Iran, and Iraq are working on ballistic missiles.
And that terrorists who fly no national flag are trying
to acquire chemical and biological weapons.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet to the Town Hall of Los Angeles (Dec. 7, 2000)
But that is not all.
To individuals, groups, and countries, the vast information infrastructure
of the United States itself is a rich and tempting target. Our national
security and prosperity depend increasingly on the secure, unimpeded flow
of data. Any foreign adversary that develops the ability to interrupt
or halt that flow has the potential to weaken us dramatically with weapons
of mass disruption.
That kind of thinking
is at the heart of the many asymmetric threats we face today. The kind
of thinking that asks: How can I negate the overwhelming military force
of the United States? The kind of thinking that leads a terrorist
group to seek a chemical or biological weapon. The kind of thinking
that could lead a small nuclear power to blackmail us-not with the possibility
of defeat, but with the threatened destruction of one of our cities.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet before the SSCI on The Worldwide Threat in 2000 (Feb. 2, 2000)
[nearly identical remarks also delivered to Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, March 21, 2000.]
Mr. Chairman, we
remain concerned that terrorist groups worldwide continue to explore how
rapidly evolving and spreading technologies might enhance the lethality
of their operations. Although terrorists we've preempted still
appear to be relying on conventional weapons, we know that a number of
these groups are seeking chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear
(CBRN) agents. We are aware of several instances in which terrorists
have contemplated using these materials.
Among them
is Bin Ladin, who has shown a strong interest in chemical weapons. His
operatives have trained to conduct attacks with toxic chemicals or biological
toxins.
HAMAS
is also pursuing a capability to conduct attacks with toxic chemicals.
[full
text]
John C. Gannon, Chairman
of the National Intelligence Council, to the Smithsonian Associates "Campus
Mall" (Feb. 1, 2000)
So, what, in shorthand,
will the picture look like over the next fifteen years? My one sentence
encapsulation would say the following: "Globalization will provide
mankind with the unprecedented opportunity to improve the quality of human
life across the planet; but progress will be hampered by economic volatility,
by the political and security implications of sharpening inequalities
in income, and by the growing threat from multiple, relatively small-scale
programs of weapons of mass destruction." By contrast, with
the massive but arguably contained Soviet threat, we now face a serious
challenge from lesser developed-and less disciplined-states, well-financed
international terrorist groups, and powerful individuals with increasingly
easy access to conventional explosives and to biological, chemical, and
to a lesser extent, nuclear weapons, along with the missile systems to
deliver them. The bottom line is that these adversaries, who
are often motivated by ideological rage or ethnic hatred, will have fewer
and less powerful weapons than the Soviets, but are more likely to use
them!
-
- -
Nonstate
actors will pose a much greater threat to the US homeland than ever before.
Aided by technology, terrorist groups, criminal organizations, and narcotraffickers
are expanding their operations and sometimes forming "alliances"
of convenience.
We
are particularly concerned with the emergence of a new breed of
terrorist has emerged that is skilled in conventional explosives, interested
in weapons of mass destruction, and able to maintain international networks
-
- -
Terrorist
incidents are likely to continue, at least at current levels, and may
increase by 2015. Terrorists will be better armed with more sophisticated
weaponry. Some groups are already pursuing chemical and biological
weapons capabilities. In the future, terrorists will seek to cause more
casualties per incident, the vast bulk of whom will be civilians.
-
- -
What
if:
·
... Foreign terrorists foul our water
supplies in a major metropolitan area or pollute the air our forces abroad
breathe with toxic chemicals.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, Oscar Iden Lecture, Georgetown University (Oct. 18, 1999)
What
are the threats that keep me awake at night?
International
terrorism, both on its own and in conjunction with narcotics traffickers,
international criminals and those seeking weapons of mass destruction.
You need go no further than Usama Bin Ladin - the perpetrator of the East
Africa bombings. He has declared the acquisition of
weapons of a mass destruction a religious duty and identified every American as a legitimate target.
The
proliferation of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, along with ever-longer range missiles capable of delivering
them not just as far as our deployed forces in South Korea and the Persian
Gulf, but to the continental United States as well.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, to the Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce Annual Dinner (June 28, 1999)
I will turn now to
the issue of terrorism. This is one that keeps me awake at night. We
are seeing a whole new breed of terrorist - terrorists who don't need
to be tethered to state sponsors for financial or technical support.
Terrorists who have their own international networks - Usama Bin Ladin
exemplifies this new breed. He runs his own international web with operatives
in at least 60 countries. I want you to think about that. He's not above
blowing up our embassies with truck bombs, but he has also shown
an active interest in chemical weapons. In fact, he has called the acquisition
of weapons of mass destruction (quote) "a religious duty." Last
December, Bin Ladin declared that every American
taxpayer is a target.
Together with other
members of the Cabinet, I was at Andrews Air Force Base last August as
the flag-draped coffins came home from our embassies in Nairobi and Dar
Es Salaam. My colleagues and I vowed that their killers would be tracked
down and brought to justice. Hard work by US intelligence and the FBI-and
cooperation between us and our friends abroad-has led to the arrest of
a number of Bin Ladin's proteges. Through this work we have averted additional
bombings and saved lives. But make no mistake: Bin Ladin, his allies,
and his sympathizers retain the will and the capacity to strike at us
again. It is only a question of when, not if. He will hit us whenever
and wherever he thinks we are vulnerable. This will be a long, relentless
struggle. And all I can tell you is, we're doing everything in our power
to stop more attacks from happening.
[full
text]
Special
Assistant to the DCI for Nonproliferation John A. Lauder on the Worldwide
WMD Threat to the Commission to Assess the Organization of the Federal
Government to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
(April 29, 1999)
DCI George Tenet
has emphasized in his appearances before Congress that no issue better
illustrates the new challenges, complexities, and uncertainties that we
in the Intelligence Community face than the proliferation of WMD and their
delivery means. Over the past year, we have witnessed the nuclear tests
in South Asia, continued concerns about Iraq's WMD programs, broader availability
of technologies relevant to biological and chemical war-fare, and accelerated
missile development in Iran, North Korea, and most recently in Pakistan
and India. Particularly worrisome to the Intelligence Community is the
security of Russian WMD materials, increased cooperation among rogue states,
more effective efforts by proliferants to conceal illicit activities,
and growing interest by terrorists in acquiring WMD capabilities.
[full
text]
Special
Assistant to the DCI for Nonproliferation John A. Lauder to HPSCI (March 3, 1999)
First, the
preparation and effective use of BW by both potentially hostile states
and by nonstate actors, including terrorists, is harder than some popular
literature seems to suggest. That said, potential adversaries
are pursuing such programs, and the threat that the United States and
our allies face -is growing in breadth and sophistication.
Beyond state actors,
there are a number of terrorist groups seeking to develop or acquire BW
capabilities. This biological threat, to include some poisons,
is growing. Some such groups-like Usama Bin Ladin's- have international
networks, adding to uncertainty and the danger of a surprise attack.
There are fewer constraints
on nonstate actors than on state actors. Adding to the unpredictability
are the "lone militants," or the ad hoc groups here at home
and abroad who may try to conduct a BW attack.
-
- -
And,
we are enhancing cooperation within the Intelligence, Policy, Defense,
Law Enforcement, and Public Health Communities to counter nuclear, biological,
chemical, and even radiological terrorism.
-
- -
I
believe that the changes we have made or are implementing will enhance
the overall effectiveness of the Intelligence Community In managing and
expanding our efforts to support US national nonproliferation goals. Although
many steps have been taken to improve our understanding of the threat,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to anticipate or collect against
every military action or terrorist act involving BW. There is more that
needs to be done, and we will work with this Committee on the next steps.
Although the growing BW threat cannot be met by US Intelligence alone,
our work will be crucial to defending American interests and protecting
American lives.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, Testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee (Feb. 2, 1999)
One
of my greatest concerns is the serious prospect that Bin Ladin or another
terrorist might use chemical or biological weapons.
Bin Ladin's organization is just one of about a dozen terrorist groups
that have expressed an interest in or have sought chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) agents.
Bin
Ladin, for example, has called the acquisition of these weapons a "religious
duty" and noted that "how we use them is up to us." Earlier I referred to state sponsorship
of terrorism, so let me take this opportunity to say, with respect to
Iran, that we have yet to see any significant reduction in Iran's support
for terrorism. President Khatami took office in August 1997, but hardliners,
such as Supreme leader Khamenei, continue to view terrorism as a legitimate
tool of Iranian policy and they still control the institutions that can
implement it.
[full
text]
John
C. Gannon, Speech to the World Affairs Council (June 4, 1998)
[identical speech also delivered by Gannon on Oct. 8, 1998]
The scenarios of
the future world I have posited by and large are the most probable ones
as we see matters today. We are realistic enough to understand, however,
that in our business the only certainly is that there are no certainties.
The world may well be a far more benign place than I have portrayed it.
Economic growth may be more rapid, for example, or terrorism could wane
if despite the odds peace breaks out in the Mideast. Alternatively, however,
we could be in for a rockier ride than I have projected.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, SSCI Hearing on Current and Projected National Security Threat
(Jan. 28, 1998)
Moreover,
there has been a trend toward increasing lethality of attacks, especially
against civilian targets. The most
recent examples, of course, are the suicide bombings in Israel in 1996
and 1997 and the attacks on tourists in Luxor, Egypt last November. Perhaps
most worrisome, we have seen in the last year growing indications
of terrorist interest in acquiring chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
In
addition, a confluence of recent developments increases the risk that
individuals or groups will attack US interests. Terrorist passions have
probably been inflamed by events ranging from the US Government's designation
of 30 terrorist groups to the conviction and sentencing of Mir Almal Kasi
and Ramzi Ahmed Yosuf as well as the ongoing US standoff with Iraq and
frustration with the Middle East peace process.
Among specific countries,
Iran remains a major concern despite the election of a more moderate president.
Since President Khatami assumed office in August, Iran has continued to
engage in activities, such as support for Hizballah and its Palestinian
clients, that would not require his specific approval.
Iraq,
Sudan, and Libya also bear continued watching, both for their own activities
and for their support of terrorist organizations.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, "Does America Still Need the CIA?"- Gerald R. Ford Library
(Nov. 19, 1997)
As
I look at the world today, it is clear to me that the potential for dangerous
surprise is as great as ever.
That
is true whether I look at terrorist groups whose sole purpose is to harm
American interests, the biological weapons that Saddam Hussein is
still trying to build and to hide in Iraq, or the programs Iran has for
building intermediate range missiles and nuclear weapons.
[full
text]
John
Gannon, Speech to the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations
(Nov. 13, 1997)
Let me say a few
words about Israel's neighborhoods: a particularly dangerous neighborhood.
Iran also is at the center of our analytical efforts, particularly
its support for international terrorism, its efforts to develop a weapons
of mass destruction program, and its obstruction of the peace
process. We are carefully studying the moves of the new Iranian President
Khatami. His focus, we expect, will be on the domestic issues that were
at the heart of his campaign: less restrictive policies on social and
cultural issues important to his constituencies of youth and women. We
recognize that Khatami represents a change for the Iranians, but we
cannot lose sight of our key concerns about continuity in Iranian policy
abroad, particularly its backing of Hizballah and Islamic Jihad and its
WMD programs.
[full
text]
John
Gannon, Speech in Syracuse, NY (Oct. 13, 1997)
For our adversaries,
of course, technological inferiority will not mean acquiescence. Our
enemies will attempt to blunt our military superiority in other ways:
improving capabilities relative to their neighbors, and using unconventional
and often asymmetric means-ranging from the increased use of terrorism
to the possible use of weapons of mass destruction. Because of the high
cost in developing a nuclear capability, these countries will focus more
on chemical and biological weapons. Their aims will be to threaten
our allies, undermine our presence in their respective regions, and weaken
US public support for use of the US military abroad. In sum, our military
technological prowess will not be enough to guarantee that our interests
will be protected, and we may find what some would call a "doctrine
of massive technological superiority" as limited in the future as
the doctrine of massive retaliation was forty years earlier.
[full
text]
DCI
Tenet, Speech at The University of Oklahoma (Sept. 12, 1997)
Consider that: The
communications revolution is adding 15 new web sites every minute. We
live in an age where 10-year olds are creating web pages. Yet, just as
the Internet has helped us to reach out to anyone with a telephone and
a modem, new technology has also provided greater opportunities
for terrorists, international criminals - and even hostile governments.
Small wonder that these tools have been called "Weapons of Mass Disruption."
[full
text]
[Top of page]
