This paper examines the growing threat of non-conventional terrorism, with particular focus on Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). It surveys the major categories of non-conventional weapons — including chemical, biological, and nuclear devices — and explains why WMDs are the most technically challenging yet potentially most dangerous tools available to terrorist groups. The paper also presents two competing theoretical assumptions about whether terrorists would actually deploy such weapons: the rational-actor assumption that discourages their use, and the ideological-extremist assumption that supports the possibility of a future WMD attack. The United States is identified as a particularly vulnerable target given geopolitical and technological trends.
The proliferation of non-conventional weapons has contributed to the increasing threat of non-conventional terror in recent years. This development has coincided with intensified global efforts in the war on terrorism, which remains a major security concern worldwide. Terrorists have turned to non-conventional options in part because of their expanded access to materials that enable the development of chemical, biological, or nuclear devices. These devices are used to plan and carry out attacks aimed at killing thousands or even millions of people.
There are various types of non-conventional terrorism, including Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), biotoxins, anthrax, germ warfare installations, chemical weapons, and gas attacks. The most difficult form of non-conventional terrorism to plan and execute is the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction. While WMDs have been used by various groups, warriors, and states over many years, the likelihood of terrorists using them cannot be easily evaluated (Combs, 2012, p. 332). This is primarily because there is no established history of WMD use by groups engaged in intense ideological struggles. The difficulty in planning and executing this type of attack stems from the fact that all forms of WMDs are not only challenging to obtain but also difficult to deploy successfully. Even though WMDs offer terrorists the psychological impact they seek, the high probability of operational failure makes them a less attractive tool.
Despite the technological challenges associated with WMDs, they would be the most likely non-conventional weapons to be used if such an attack were to occur in the foreseeable future. According to Lowther (2008), the greatest security danger facing the United States is the possibility of a WMD attack (p. 95). The United States is increasingly vulnerable to the prospect of a nuclear weapon being detonated in one of its major cities. Such an attack would likely be politically motivated and driven by the growing development of WMDs by terrorist organizations and certain countries in Asia. The probability of a WMD terror attack on the United States in the near future is further heightened by rapid technological advancements that enable terrorists to develop sophisticated tools and methods for carrying out their activities.
"Two competing theories on terrorist WMD behavior"
The proliferation of non-conventional weapons and the evolving motivations of terrorist groups make the threat of a WMD attack a serious and ongoing concern for global security, particularly for the United States. Understanding both the operational challenges of deploying such weapons and the theoretical frameworks that shape terrorist decision-making is essential for developing effective counterterrorism strategies.
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.