User:Emars7901/Nuclear terrorism

In the United States, one of the main nuclear attack concerns would be if a terrorist group was able to get their hands on the weapons (Litwak, 2017). There have been scares before when terrorist groups have claimed to have possession of these weapons and intent to use them (Litwak, 2017). The main ways that a terrorist group could acquire weapons to use in an attack is via buying, building, or stealing them (Litwak, 2017). The groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS would likely receive these weapons or the materials needed to create them from their ruling state, whether intentionally or unintentionally. This could happen if a governing state does not have efficient protection protocols for their materials and weapons causing it to be easier to steal these weapons (Litwak, 2017). Another way a terrorist group could receive weapons is by buying them from a different nation, for example, North Korea selling to terrorist groups in Iraq. It seems unlikely that terrorist groups would be able to utilize the technology needed to make effective weapons if they acquired materials, but it is possible. In places like Iraq and Syria, the terrorist group ISIS has control over much of the land. In situations like that, it is possible for them to acquire the information and technology from local universities run by the state (Litwak, 2017)

There are ways to deter the likelihood of nuclear terrorism. Unlike state-level use of nuclear weapons, retaliation is not likely to deter terrorist groups from the use of nuclear weapons (Litwak, 2017). This means that it is imperative to find a different way to deter terrorist groups from utilizing these weapons. The first route to take is deterrence by denial (Litwak, 2017). Deterrence by denial is simply making it very difficult or impossible for groups to take possession of nuclear weapons or the materials needed to create them. One of the ways a nation can do this is by creating strict import and export laws, therefore, limiting the chance that these items could be smuggled into or out of the country (Litwak, 2017). In addition, adding security to the sites that store these items is important in order to lessen the likelihood of theft (Litwak, 2017). One example of deterrence by denial is the Cooperative Threat Reduction spearheaded by the Obama administration in April 2016 at the Nuclear Security Summits which not only decreased the number of nations that had possession of weapons-grade nuclear materials, it also lessened the amount of highly-enriched uranium by 3,000 kilograms (Litwak, 2017)

Another route of action outlined by Litwak is deterrence by punishment. Deterrence by punishment is simply making it known that if a country were to use, sell, or give away nuclear weapons or materials that it would be responded to with repercussions (Litwak, 2017). Basically, the state will be held responsible if they allow a terrorist group from inside or outside of the state to receive and utilize nuclear weapons. One example of this is when President Bush threatened North Korea with consequences if they were to participate in that behavior (Routledge, 2012).