Customer Reviews

Annihilation from Within: The Ultimate Threat to Nations

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The scenarios painted by Iklé are disturbing; they bear all too similar a resemblance to those from Vernor Vinge's science fiction novel, "Rainbows End", with the exception that current governments are not at all prepared to cope with a world in which small fringe groups can obtain WMD. It was even more of a surprise to realize that the scenario behind the graphic novel and movie "V" is precisely that described by Iklé: covert internal use of WMD by political extremists so that they can can power in the ensuing chaos. But Iklé's analysis is harder to discount than movies, comic books, or novels.

An unexpected gem from the "Annihilation" is Iklé's portrayer of Ronald Reagan, who had the reputation as a war monger, as someone who abhored the risks inherent in a policy of Mutual Assured Destruction.

My biggest complaint is that, despite its short length, the book is very repetitive.

This 100 page book is not a defeatist story of gloom and doom. Despite its unflinching analysis of ominous threats to the survival of our nation and our civilization, it offers an innovative list of five measures that the United States could to take to avert "annihilation from within" - a nuclear detonation or other super 9/11 designed by a new Lenin or Hitler aimed at seizing power in the US, or any nation. First, Iklé reveals that after a decade of efforts by Los Alamos, Livermore and the Pentagon's Science Board, mid-level officials have blocked the massive research scientists agree is needed to build nuclear weapons detectors. One idea from Lowell Wood is a gamma-ray color camera, but the needed R&D has not been funded due to complacency. Iklé reveals the FBI and Homeland Security have already done "thousands" of "false alarm" searches - yet Congress has not funded the new technology to detect stolen nuclear materials.

Second, Iklé shocks us when he describes how the US Congress has failed to pass legislation to determine in advance how Congress would be restored after a "super 9/11."

Third, the Congress has not yet clarified what emergency powers any future President would have [or be denied] after a "super 9/11."

Fourth, Iklé exposes an obscure UN protocol on asylum from 1967 that could require the US to accept asylum seekers, even if they have committed super terrorist acts - Taliban soldiers were admitted to the UK and Holland after 9/11 under this UN protocol.

Fifth, Iklé proposes that after a "super 9/11" incident, a coalition government like Churchill's welcoming Atlee in World War II [despite the error of Munich] and FDR-Truman worked with Republicans Vandenberg and Foster Dulles. Ikle implies a Woodrow Wilson- type of extreme partisan could not hold the nation together after a super 9/11. [Wilson famously scorned Senator Lodge and the Senate soon rejected the UN Charter of its day, which some historians claim began the path to World War II.]

Iklé is cautiously optimistic that Americans have the stamina and patriotism to prevail against an attempt to annihilate the US Government from within, but the chances will improve if his proposals are implemented. He says, "The United States would be the most difficult target for a any such nuclear power-grab, ... because of its inner political strength." And an important source of strength for Americans is their "common emotional bond with the past," based on the "extraordinary continuity of the American Constitution." An overarching historical account gives reasons to adopt Iklé's five proposals: his warning of our excessive optimism about technological progress that disregards the growing divergence between technology and the global political order. Iklé's concern about nuclear accidents at The Rand Corp. in the 1950s led to the safety controls (PALs) on nuclear weapons, so he knows as an insider how detailed proposals can be supported by broad, even sweeping reviews.

Ikle opens an entirely new vista with his succinct projection of two converging trends: advances in computer science and brain science. Unless this convergence can be stopped (and there is nothing in sight that would stop it) some nations will build decision centers that complement the strength of the latest computers with the unique capabilities of the human brain. China already initiated such a decision center for long term forecasting. If a truly effective brain-computer symbiosis can be achieved, Iklé warns, it may pose a fundamental challenge to all religions; indeed it could upend human civilization.

Ikle takes great pains to explain why this vista is not the same as the false claims of the Artificial Intelligence enthusiasts, who have predicted for fifty years that computers (without a living brain) will soon surpass the full panoply of human intelligence. Iklé's book, carefully read, will be an eye-opener for blinkered Artificial Intelligence experts.
Let's hope the new members of Congress will read this fascinating and short book.

This little book brings a lot of thought to the fore. There are basically three themes I'd like to mention:

Nuclear Terrorism - He sees this as a major threat. So do I. And for the first time the terrorists will have the opportunity to create real havoc. And if done say in Washington during a time when the President is addressing a joint session of congress it could effectively de-capitate the country. Or if done at a G8 summit. Or if it done so as to wipe out the present leadership of Saudi Arabia.

He sees the potential of a ruthless, perhaps messianic leader then stepping forward and taking over the country as Hitler did after the Reichstag fire. I don't see that happening here. We don't have a history of such actions in this country. On the other hand we do have a history of revolution and assassination. Fear of such a takeover was why the writers of the constitution put in the second ammendment. The Nazi's used gun registration records to remove guns from the people that didn't support them, i.e. the Jews.

But could someone, Osama bin Laden perhaps, use a nuclear device to wipe out the Saudi leadership and then take over Saudi Arabia. Possibly, and the removal of Saudi oil from the world market would be at risk. This would give us a big time depression, or an invasion of course.

Finally he sees the growth of super-human intelligence in computers as being a threat. I've been in the computer business for more than forty years. I don't see even a hint of this.

All in all, a very thought provoking book.

The anthrax incidents in the fall of 2001 are the kinds of terrorist (domestic or foreign) that form the model of attacks that Ikle addresses--incidents or attacks that have profound conquences but are difficult or impossible to trace to a country or to individuals. The capability to deliver such an attack will grow as technology develops to a point where a small group of terrorists can stage an event with effects that exceed those of 9/11. Several well presented recommendations for preparation at the national level are presented. A divergence to "intelligent computers taking over the world" seems to be overplayed a bit; otherwise it would get five stars from me.

Ikle takes on a subject that has rarely been looked at, by public figures at least. The main threat facing us in the Long war is not that we are going to be conquered by the pre-modern world. There is no likely scenario where the green flag of jihad will be flying over the White House. No, the real threat comes from *ourselves.*

Except for Newt Gingrich, I have not seen any other public official grappling with this fundamental truth. After the Enemy strikes the United States with one or more mass destruction attacks that kill millions of people (nuclear attack or, the more scary biological attack) the fundamental nature of the American society will change. We will achieve ourselves, what the Enemy could never do. We will become a less free, less open society, and thus - seal our own path into decline.

Ikle deals mainly with the fear of an intentional power grab by an unscrupulous American or European politician. Someone who would intentionally use such an event (manipulated by himself or otherwise) to seize power.

I myself am not so much frightened by such a "Palpatine Scenario." Rather, after an attack where an American city has been destroyed it will simply be impossible to retain the open nature of our society. The government will *have* to become much more intrusive and communications become much more scrutinized and circumscribed. To not do so would be criminally irresponsible.

Therefore, it is extremely important to remain on offense in the Long War. We have to continually bring the fight to the Enemy, or we risk losing the very thing that makes us great.

As Lincoln said in a different time: "All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all time, or die by suicide."

This book was interesting in the beginning but got harder to read towards the end. It starts out as fairly objective but then launches into right wing talking points. It appears as though the author just got lazy and decided to finish the book rather than sum up the logical argument. I wouldn't suggest it unless you are of that ilk. It will reaffirm what you already believe.

This powerful vital book raises a crucial issue about the national readiness and response to an unprecedented incident of insane annihilist terrorism that kills millions of people.

Ikle is right on target in terms of assessing the threat; it will happen. But his great weakness is his failure to recognize America has already survived such shocking attacks twice, on Dec. 7, 1941, and Sept. 11, 2001. Each time the nation responded with unity and courage. Americans don't crumble in panic when faced with disaster.

Competence? That great issue that is still open to debate. The story of the fate of the Eighth Air Force in World War II raises valid doubts about the competence of US leaders in responding to annihilist dangers. One verdict on the competence of current leaders came on Nov. 7, 2006; another "mid-term" test is due in November 2008.

Americans respond to disaster with magnificent courage and decency, even if the government is run by fools. Ikle, a servant of the Reagan and Bush administrations, seems afraid to cite the blunders of his bonehead bosses. But, occasionally wisdom does seep in; he realizes the Republican Congress did not have "a tiny drop of foresight and a flyspeck of courage . . . . ." This criticism would have been better had he added Bush/Cheney.

What is the solution? American courage is evident. Now we will see if Democrats have the wisdom and foresight to understand the problem and seek solutions. If not, people will keep changing their leaders until they get it right.

Ikle is right about the likelihood of annihilist terrorism. He is wrong in thinking the American people can't face it. Perhaps he's dealt with Bush league bureaucrats for too long. Americans don't panic, they fight back; they are much better than their leaders. Americans didn't flee in panic on 9/11/06; it was Bush and Cheney who scurried from pillar to post to underground bunker to find safety.

Americans don't break under pressure; from the courage of the Eigth Air Force to the courage of occupation troops now in Iraq, Americans do their duty regardless of the folly of their leaders. The question Ikle needs to address, which is overlooked in this book, is the tendency of recent leaders to panic and crumble under pressure.

This is vital reading for it's emphasis on annihilist terrorism. It will happen somewhere, someday, someplace, to some millions. If it happens in America, people will respond with steadfast courage. But what if it destroys Karachi? India and Pakistan have a long mutually hostile fear of each other, and both have nuclear weapons. It could trigger an annihilist war.

What then does America do?

The weakness is that Ikle ignores this issue, just as he underestimates the inherent courage of Americans in general. Does such an incident escalate into a worldwide nuclear disaster? Or do American leaders dampen the furies?

This book is vital reading as the start of a serious discussion about the full dangers of irrational annihilist terrorism. The issue is a Pandora's Box of profound questions that Ikle found open and otherwise ignored by American leaders. He's drawn attention to it; now we need a swarm of new answers to the swarm of new questions it generates.

Eventually, Americans will develop a rational respose. But what if some lesser nation doesn't?

The problem with Ikle is that he is a long time Neocon, one of those who pushed the administration into the Iraq war. What he and most Neocons don't want Americans to realize is that the "terrorist" threat is the consequence of US (and UK) neo-colonialism in the Muslim world. The US and the UK have a long history of using military and other means to interfere in the affairs of the Muslim Middle East, exercising a blatant colonialism based on regime overthrow as well as military invasion. "Terrorism" has been the Muslim reaction to this aggression. The best way to avoid "annihilation" by terror would be for the US and the UK, and their surrogates, to get out of the Middle East and leave the Muslim nations there alone. If we left them alone they would leave us alone and have no reason to attack us. But Ikle would prefer that we not understand this.