Survey of Adjutants General Reveals States Unprepared for EMP, Missile Attack
March 7, 2007 :: Analysis
America's state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse (EMP), according to the Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country. Such an attack could disable most of the nation's electric power grid, telecommunications, automobiles, and computers with a single, high altitude, nuclear blast. An EMP attack is an increasingly likely possibility as ballistic missile and nuclear technology continue to proliferate.
A survey of state-based Adjutants General throughout the United States, entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States, was conducted jointly over the last year by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont, California.
The survey, entitled
Missile Defense and the Role of the States, was conducted jointly over the last year by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont, California. The survey's questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states, with more than half of the states' Adjutants General responding to the questionnaire.
Although 96% of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack, the majority had done little or no analysis of the impact of an overhead EMP attack to potential targets in their particular state. Likewise, most admitted little or no preparation in the areas of training, equipment/EMP hardening, and exercises/procedure.
This finding differs with a 2004 recommendation by the congressionally mandated Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from EMP Attack, which urged states to coordinate with the federal government to prepare an emergency response plan against EMP: "Working with state authorities and private-sector organizations, the Department of Homeland Security should develop draft protocols for implementation by emergency and other government responders following EMP attack, Red Team these extensively, and then institutionalize validated protocols through issuance of standards, training, and exercises."
An electromagnetic pulse is created by detonating a nuclear warhead between 40 and 400 kilometers above the earth's surface. The electromagnetic field created by the nuclear detonation at that altitude creates a "pulse" which can disrupt and disable electronic computers, electric power, telephone and information systems over a significant geographic area. Furthermore, a space-based nuclear blast could also disable satellites that would enable the U.S. to identify the source of and respond to such an attack.
The 2004 EMP report noted that, "...one or a few high-altitude nuclear detonations can produce EMP effects that can potentially disrupt or damage electronic and electrical systems over much of the United States, virtually simultaneously, at a time determined by an adversary." The executive summary of the EMP Commission report is viewable online at
www.missilethreat.com/empreport.
The Institute of the North/Claremont Institute survey indicates that National Guard leaders would like increased briefings on the missile threat in general and the EMP threat in particular. While 74% of Adjutants General had been briefed on the threat from Russian ballistic missiles, only 44% had received briefings on the threat posed by ship-borne or "stateless" missiles, and 41% indicated that they received no regular briefings regarding ballistic missile threats.
Survey results also highlight overwhelming agreement (93%) that the United States needs an effective missile defense system. A majority of survey respondents supported a "layered" missile defense, composed of ground-, sea-, air-, and space-based interceptors. Furthermore, 59% of participants stated that they envisioned their state's National Guard having a role in the development, testing, manning, and deployment of missile defense systems which could prevent an EMP attack overhead.
None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process on EMP attack. The survey authors suggest policy options urging states to direct contingency planning in which they create their own realistic scenarios that demonstrate the potential effects of cruise and ballistic missiles, weapons of mass destruction, and EMP attack, thus increasing state preparedness. States are also encouraged to coordinate defense efforts with the Department of Homeland Security.
"A question state policy makers may want to ask themselves is, ‘Does our state have an EMP contingency plan?,'" said Mead Treadwell of the Institute of the North: "If not, we should get on with it, as the EMP Commission recommends."
"The United States Congress has continued the EMP Commission's work since it issued its report in 2004," said Tom Karako of the Claremont Institute. "Their report was published the same day as the 9/11 Commission, but it has been too long ignored."
Survey results and a summary report were mailed to state governors and Adjutants General for their review. Based on the survey's findings, the Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute plan to follow-up by publishing a regular newsletter highlighting ways in which state military leaders and policy makers can raise awareness and increase involvement in their state. Both institutes have been working closely together for over ten years on policy issues related to the strategic defense of the United States. Their goal is to help state and local officials and citizens understand the issues related to ballistic missile defense.
The project was initiated by Mead Treadwell, senior fellow at the Institute of the North, and Tom Karako, editor of www.missilethreat.com, an online project of the Claremont Institute. Both are members of an independent working group which recently published the report,
Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, and the Twenty-First Century. (Link)
» Press Release for Missile Defense and the States project report
» Project Report: Missile Defense and the States, a project of the Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute
» More stories on: Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Weapons, Analysis, Policy
Helprin on the Chinese Nuclear Threat
Claremont Institute Senior Fellow Mark Helprin writes on the growing threat from Chinese ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, in the March 4 edition of the Washington Post. Helprin notes China's steady and disciplined rise in military power, and that despite recent friendly overtones, China's long term intentions may sharply differ from those of the United States. Helprin notes too the ability which China, along with ballistic missile and nuclear-armed nations, to threaten the United States with a debelitating Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack, which would target the immense and vulnerable power grid on which the United States economy is so wholly dependent. The congressionally-mandated commission to assess the EMP threat delivered its report in 2004, but since then almost no action has been taken. An excerpt:
Given China's appetites and our alliances and interests, a war is not inconceivable in Taiwan, or in Korea. To remove American nuclear escalation from the equation, China would need not parity but only a deterrent such as it has long possessed. The Chinese, however, whose nuclear thresholds are dissimilar to ours, would have other options.
They know that every facet of America's economy, military and society depends on individual and networked electronic devices. Were these to fail all at once and irreparably, the nation would seize up, perhaps for years.
Faced with victory, or with loss, they might choose to -- and who would venture to guarantee that they would not? -- detonate half a dozen high-megatonnage nuclear charges in the mesosphere, in an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) strike perhaps not even in American airspace, cooking almost every circuit and semiconductor, rendering the American government blind, deaf and dumber than it is already and the country unable to resist the inroads that would surely follow.
Though we would undoubtedly respond in kind, China is not as technically dependent as are we. Nor, given China's sufficiency for a counterstrike, could we deter an EMP attack with the prospect of massive retaliation, especially because an EMP strike, with no immediate casualties, would seem as peaceful as snow in still air.
The piece also appears in the forthcoming issue of the Claremont Review of Books. The full text: (More »»»)
» More stories on: Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Weapons, China
