X hits on this document





34 / 95

phases. A conventional force requires large industry, troop barracks, motorpools,

logistics, transportation, and associated training grounds. These assets can be externally

monitored by a number of national collection assets developed during the cold war and

subsequently perfected by enhanced technological innovation. Existing conventional

forces of our potential adversaries are often observed closely for indicators of future

operations and intentions. On the other hand, NBC weapons (and biological weapons in

particular) require less infrastructure and support to achieve the same number of

casualties. Iraq, as an example, during the 1991 Gulf War possessed a sizable

conventional military force. It was comparatively easy for coalition intelligence

gatherers to identify its major troop positions, military assets, and conventional

capabilities. However, it was not as easy to identify Iraq’s WMD assets and capabilities.

In fact, the post Gulf War United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), established

under paragraph 9(b) of UN Resolution 687, spent nine years from 1991 to 1999

attempting to determine the full nature of Iraq’s WMD programs.12 In the end, it was not

able to fully accomplish its mission of monitoring the destruction of Iraq’s WMD

capabilities and was subsequently replaced by the United Nations Monitoring,

Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC).13

3. A third reason America’s adversaries are more likely now than ever to develop

and use WMD is the overwhelming US superiority in its conventional forces. The

demonstrated success of conventional forces in US uses of force, such as Panama, Iraq,

and Yugoslavia, highlights the idea that US military and allied conventional strength is

unmatched. Newly appointed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in referring to the

Gulf War argues that it, “taught people that contesting Western armies, navies and air


Document info
Document views358
Page views360
Page last viewedMon Jan 23 13:02:24 UTC 2017