Spreading diseases such as anthrax through the mail or flying jetliners into office buildings may seem an odd way to wage a war.
But experts in intelligence and national security have often argued that these “asymmetric” attacks are the most likely type of attack to confront the United States and the developed world in coming years.
That’s why farmers should realize agriculture is a real target in any war with terrorism: cattle are easier to attack than aircraft carriers.
“We are the only superpower left now,” said U.S. biological warfare expert and Kansas State University veterinarian Jerry Jaax in an interview.
Read Also
China’s grain imports have slumped big-time
China purchased just over 20 million tonnes of wheat, corn, barley and sorghum last year, that is well below the 60 million tonnes purchased in 2021-22.
“There’s nobody in the world that is going to line up with us toe to toe, with conventional forces, and duke it out with our military.”
When the world was dominated by the Soviet Union and the U.S., wars were expected to be waged using soldiers, tanks, aircraft and ships, with nuclear missiles thrown in if things went badly for one side. Terrorism was mainly restricted to disputes such as those in Northern Ireland, Israel or in western Europe.
But when the Soviet Union collapsed, there was no military force left capable of opposing the American military. Any enemy would more likely rely on other types of attacks than on a direct armed assault.
Kevin O’Brien and Joseph Nusbaum in Jane’s Security Digest, a military intelligence publication, in October 2000 wrote that these other forms of attack might mean conventional guerrilla warfare in large cities or launching a ballistic missile with a chemical, biological or nuclear warhead.
It could also include computer sabotage, assassinating financiers, or other socially disruptive acts.
One of the topics discussed at a recent Washington, D.C. security conference organized by Jane’s was “would our food chain survive a chemical or biological attack?”
Jane’s expert, Peter Chalk, said targeting agriculture fits well with an asymmetric campaign because animal pathogens are easier to “weaponize” than human pathogens.
Also, livestock are becoming more disease prone because of heavy antibiotic use and the closer quarters they are held in, and because there is low security around most farms and processing plants.
In studies released in 1999 and 2000, the U.S. government’s Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities For Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction determined that agriculture was in danger if a prolonged terrorist attack was launched.
“A concerted biological attack against an agricultural target offers terrorists a virtually risk-free form of assault, which has a high probability of success and which also has the prospect of obtaining political objectives, such as undermining confidence in the ability of government or giving the terrorists an improved bargaining position,” said the report.
“The U.S. agricultural sector continues to be vulnerable to agroterrorism, given the vertical integration of livestock breeding, transportation and marketing, and the high degree of genetic homogeneity and concentration found in the nation’s main crop growing regions.”
Chalk said about one-sixth of the U.S. gross domestic product is generated by agriculture and food processing, so it is a tempting target for economic warfare.
