Follow us on social

Original

The role of the national security apparatus in combating COVID-19

The United States’ expensive national security apparatus has been conspicuously useless in efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

Analysis | Washington Politics

As noted by Andrew Bacevich and others, the United States’ expensive national security apparatus has been conspicuously useless in efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, the most serious national and global security challenge of our time.

Hobbled by secrecy and timidity, the U.S. intelligence community’s silence today represents a departure from the straightforward approach of then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats a year ago. He offered a clear public warning of the risk of a pandemic at the annual threat hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee in January 2019:

"We assess that the United States and the world will remain vulnerable to the next flu pandemic or large-scale outbreak of a contagious disease that could lead to massive rates of death and disability, severely affect the world economy, strain international resources, and increase calls on the United States for support.”

This year, for the first time in recent memory, the annual threat hearing was canceled, reportedly to avoid conflict between intelligence testimony and White House messaging, and the 2020 worldwide threat statement remains classified.

The U.S. intelligence community evidently has nothing useful to say about the origins of the pandemic, its current spread or anticipated development, its likely impact on other security challenges, its effect on regional conflicts, or its long-term implications for global health. All of these topics are perfectly suited to open source intelligence collection and analysis. But the intelligence community disabled its open source portal last year. And the general public was barred even from that. The intelligence community has been reduced under the Trump Administration to recirculating reminders from the Centers for Disease Control to wash your hands and practice social distancing.

It didn't -- and doesn't -- have to be that way. In 1993, my organization, the Federation of American Scientists created an international email network called ProMED -- Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases -- which was intended to help discover and provide early warning about new infectious diseases.

Run on a shoestring budget, the project was based on the notion that physicians, scientists, researchers, and other members of the public — not just governments — have a need for current threat assessments that can be readily shared, consumed and analyzed. The initiative quickly proved its worth, as notices on ProMED first alerted the world to the 2003 SARS outbreak. Now managed by the International Society for Infectious Diseases, ProMED was also first to bring news of the novel coronavirus in China to the West -- in a posting on Dec. 30, 2019 about chatter on the Chinese social network Weibo.

ProMED is unclassified, free, and open to subscription by anyone.

 

Based on the epic fail of the intelligence community to spot and alert the government and public to this pandemic, a greater focus on public intelligence should surely be one of the post COVID reforms this country undertakes as it reconfigures U.S. intelligence apparatus.

Is the military doing any better?

So what about the public’s $700 billion investment in the Department of Defense. How is it being used to fight this very real threat?

There is a bewildering amount of official guidance on the role of the military in circumstances such as the current pandemic. But the practical impact of that guidance, whatever it may be, is unclear. Like the proverbial war plan that cannot survive first contact with the enemy, Pentagon doctrine on infectious disease seems to have been overtaken by events.

"The mission of DOD in a pandemic is to preserve U.S. combat capabilities and readiness and to support U.S. government efforts to save lives, reduce human suffering, and slow the spread of infection," according to a 2019 Army manual.

To help accomplish that, another military manual offered a "prioritized and tiered [list of] infectious diseases [to] assist the military research community in focusing on the development of vaccine, prophylactic drugs, diagnostic capabilities, and surveillance efforts."

Pandemic influenza was among the highest priority diseases, posing a "high operational risk," but unfortunately the intended military research response appears to have lagged.

Who is in charge? Well, "USNORTHCOM [U.S. Northern Command] exercises coordinating authority for planning of DOD efforts in support of the USG response to pandemic influenza and infectious disease," says a Pentagon publication (JP 3-40) on Joint Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction.

What is NORTHCOM doing? "DoD has nearly 11,000 personnel dedicated to COVID-19 operations nation-wide, with nearly 2,500 in the New York City area," according to an April 10 news release. "DOD is providing expeditionary medical care in several states across the country."

According to military researcher William M. Arkin, "NORTHCOM is out there working furiously to carry out its many missions, implementing at least five different operations plans simultaneously.” But "Implementing might be too strong of a word," he wrote, "because even though these plans run in the hundreds of pages, most are thrown out the window almost as soon as they are taken off the shelf, useful in laying out how things should be organized but otherwise too rigid -- or fanciful -- to apply to the real world."

In a new piece, Arkin surveyed 19 operational military plans that in theory govern NORTHCOM activities. Most of them are not publicly available, and some are classified. "Is there any reason you can imagine that the pandemic response plan shouldn't be public? Or the plan for Defense Support of Civil Authorities?” asks Arkin.

One of the plans he turned up, a 2017 NORTHCOM draft on Pandemic Influenza and Infectious Disease Response, identified what it termed "critical vulnerabilities" including:

"Lack of communication and synchronization among partners and stakeholders, inability or unwillingness to share information / biosurveillance data, limited detection capabilities, and limited laboratory confirmatory testing."

Sounds about right.

Unfortunately, that particular plan from 2017 "seemingly never went beyond the draft stage," said Arkin.

The Pentagon’s vaunted deep bench for planning is just that. A deep bench. Not nearly adequate in this critical case.

This article is based on two posts from the “Secrecy News” blog of the Federation of American Scientists, and has been republished here with permission.

U.S. Northern Command personnel move medical supplies for distribution at New York's Javits Medical Station as part of the U.S. military's COVID-19 response (U.S. Army Photo by Pvt. 1st Class Nathaniel Gayle)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Diplomacy Watch: Ukraine risks losing the war — and the peace

Diplomacy Watch: Ukraine risks losing the war — and the peace

QiOSK

This week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky offered his starkest warning yet about the need for new military aid from the United States.

“It’s important to specifically address the Congress,” Zelensky said. “If the Congress doesn’t help Ukraine, Ukraine will lose the war.”

keep readingShow less
Biden should not follow Netanyahu into war with Iran
photo : U.S. President Joe Biden attends a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as he visits Israel amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Tel Aviv, Israel, October 18, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

Biden should not follow Netanyahu into war with Iran

Middle East

The U.S. and Israel have been raising the alarm of a possible Iranian retaliatory strike in response to last week’s Israeli attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility in Damascus. The president once again pledged “ironclad” U.S. support for Israel in the event of an Iranian response, and the head of Central Command, Gen. Erik Kurilla, was reportedly headed to Israel Thursday to coordinate with Israeli leaders ahead of the expected strike. The administration is moving in the wrong direction. The U.S. ought to be distancing itself from Israel’s illegal attack, but instead the Biden administration is moving to shield Israel from the consequences of its own actions.

Israeli forces have routinely struck Iranian and other targets in Syria for more than a decade, but the attack on the consulate in Damascus was a major escalation both in terms of the location and the rank of the Iranian officers that were killed. The Israeli government appears to want to goad Iran into a military response to divert attention from the slaughter and famine in Gaza and to trap the U.S. into joining the fight. The president has made it that much easier for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by volunteering to walk into the trap.

keep readingShow less
Shutterstock_1761729383-scaled
House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Adam Smith (Photo: VDB Photos / Shutterstock.com)
House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Adam Smith (Photo: VDB Photos / Shutterstock.com)

Top House Dem blasts 'nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine' approach

QiOSK

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) offered a rare Democratic rebuke of the Biden administration’s rhetoric on the war in Ukraine during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday.

Smith, the ranking member on the committee, was following up on questions from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla) to Celeste Wallander, assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, on whether the administration considered the repatriation of Crimea and the Donbas as necessary for a Ukrainian victory.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest