Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

Aum Shinrikyo's Biological Weapons Program

Why Did it Fail

Datos Bibliográficos

ID12408121
AutoresWilliam Rosenau (autor de correspondencia)
Año2001
Volumen24
Número4
Páginas289-301
Fecha de publicación2001-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaStudies in Conflict and Terrorism (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1057-610X • E-ISSN: 1521-0731
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10576100120887
OpenAlexW2078613390
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas6

During the six years since the Aum Shinrikyo cult's nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway system, the United States has undertaken a major effort to prevent and respond to terrorist acts involving nuclear, radiological, biological and chemical weapons. Given this high level of official activity, it is remarkable that Aum's protracted and costly, but ultimately unsuccessful, attempts to acquire and use mass-casualty biological agents has received scant analytical attention. Specifically, there has been relatively little focus on one critical question: Why did this apparently sophisticated and lavishly funded program ultimately fail? Aum's failure suggests that it may, in fact, be far more difficult to carry out a deadly bioterrorism attack than has sometimes been portrayed by government officials and the press. Despite its significant financial resources, dedicated personnel, motivation, and freedom from the scrutiny of the Japanese authorities, Aum was unable to achieve its objectives. The Aum case illustrates how acquiring virulent strains of biological agents can be a major hurdle for prospective bioterrorists. Cult-like terrorist organizations, the ones that appear to have the greatest interest in mass-casualty biological weapons, may be least suited to meet the complex demands associated with a bioweapon program. As the Aum example illustrates, a paranoid, fantasy-prone and sometimes violent atmosphere is not conducive to the sound scientific judgement needed to produce mass-casualty biological weapons

Biological warfare · Chemical warfare · Computer security · Criminology · Government (linguistics · Political science · Public relations · Scrutiny · Terrorism · Bacillus and Francisella bacterial research · Computer Science · Engineering · Law · Psychology

  • Managing Emerging Health Security Threats Since 9/11

    Patrick F Walsh•International Journal of…•2016

  • Long-term cost-effectiveness of interventions for loss of electricity/industry compared to artificial general intelligence safety

    Open Access•David Denkenberger, A Sandberg et al.•European Journal of Futures…•2021

  • The Threat of Domestic Bioterrorism

    Open Access•Stacy Langston•Journal of Strategic Security•2013

  • Aum Shinrikyo’s Nuclear and Chemical Weapons Development Efforts

    Open Access•ABS Consulting, Andrea Nehorayoff et al.•Journal of Strategic Security•2016

  • Dreaded Risks and the Control of Biological Weapons

    Jessica A Stern, Jessica Stern•International Security•2003

  • Bioterrorism, Fear, and Public Health Reform

    Open Access•George Avery•Public Administration Review•2004

Obras citantes distintas6
Citas por año0,26
Intervalo de citas2003 - 2021 (19)
Velocidad de citaciónhistorical
Altamente citadoNo
Tipos de citaNeutras: 6
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae