On Saturday, June 19 at 7 p.m., and Tuesday, June 22 at 6 p.m., the National Geographic Channel will replay a special episode about electromagnetic pulse, titled “Electronic Armageddon.” See the video introduction below:
The DVD of the special can be purchased from National Geographic here.
In March, the Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano and Jena McNeill of the Heritage Foundation wrote an article about electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and recommended that Congress establish March 23 as Electromagnetic Pulse Recognition Day, given the catastrophic effects of a nuclear weapon explosion in our atmosphere. This explosion would interact with the planet’s magnetic fields, creating a pulse, which in turn would cause widespread damage, devastate the economy, and result in millions of deaths.
Subsequently, TIME magazine published a story about EMP and quoted Carafano’s and McNeill’s article.
Today we found out that the National Geographic channel will air a show about EMP titled, “Electronic Armageddon,” which premieres on June 15 at 10 p.m. EDT. See the four-minute video below:
Last week we pointed you to an article written by James Carafano and Jena McNeill of the Heritage Foundation. They recommended that Congress establish March 23 as Electromagnetic Pulse Recognition Day, given the catastrophic effects of a nuclear weapon explosion in our atmosphere.
This explosion would interact with the planet’s magnetic fields, creating a pulse, which in turn would cause widespread damage, devastate the economy, and result in millions of deaths.
TIME magazine published a story on EMP and quoted Carafano’s and McNeill’s article. An excerpt:
“Maybe it’s America’s frontier heritage; moving west and constantly facing new bands of Indians, this nation has always seemed to have an exaggerated awareness of potential threats. The Cold War gave us warnings of missile and bomber gaps, later found to be largely mirages, that were supposedly leaving U.S. citizens vulnerable to Soviet attack. Fear of the supposed Soviet missile advantage spurred President Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars initiative and the $100 billion Washington has spent preparing to counter incoming enemy missiles even as the Soviet Union disappeared. Then, 9/11 put us in the crosshairs of Islamic terrorists, calling into being a mushrooming homeland-security industrial complex. All very well, warn the sentinels at the Heritage Foundation, but what about the EMP threat?”
Note the magazine’s barely-contained sarcasm. An EMP attack is not a mirage. The threat is real. Rogue states like Iran and North Korea are improving ballistic missile capabilities and developing nuclear weapons, and both countries know about EMP’s effects.
America has a duty to protect its citizens, and as long as EMP attacks are possible, Congress should alert the public of the danger and shore up our defenses against it, even if it sounds like science fiction.
From James Carafano and Jena McNeill at Heritage.org:
On March 23, 1983, President Ronald Reagan gave a famous speech where he outlined his plans for the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), aimed at protecting America from a nuclear missile attack using land- and sea-based missile defense systems. On the anniversary of this famous oratory, however, America faces another threat, one that requires Congress’s immediate attention: an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack.
An EMP attack can begin with the explosion of a nuclear weapon high in the atmosphere. This explosion interacts with the planet’s magnetic fields, creating a pulse, which in turn causes extensive damage to electronic systems. The EMP resulting from the blast would cause widespread damage, devastating the economy and resulting in the deaths of millions of Americans. Despite repeated warnings, Congress has taken virtually no action to prepare or protect against an EMP attack. In order to facilitate a national discussion regarding the EMP threat, Congress should establish March 23 as EMP Recognition Day.
Explored by America’s Adversaries
The likelihood of an EMP attack is disconcerting. Nearly 30 countries currently possess ballistic missile capabilities. Indeed, some have extensive knowledge of EMP and its effects. North Korea currently possesses a large arsenal of missiles and has been publicly testing its ballistic weapons. It has also been reported that Russian scientists have worked with North Korea on developing an EMP weapon. Countries and non-state actors are also exploring improvised or non-nuclear EMPs as a means of harnessing the destructive power of EMP without the need for missile capabilities. EMP has even been seen to occur naturally during a solar flare event (the last of which happened in the late 1800s).
Despite such concerns and repeated warnings from the congressionally mandated EMP Commission, the President’s budget does not place a great enough emphasis on missile defense, let alone the EMP threat. For instance, the President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 budget requested $9.9 billion for missile defense, a $600 million decrease from FY 2009 (although a $900 million increase over FY 2010). Neither Congress nor the White House has looked extensively at hardening critical infrastructure against EMP or revising recovery plans or disaster planning scenarios to be reflective of this unique threat.
Time for an EMP Recognition Day
Given the increased likelihood that the U.S. could suffer an EMP attack in the near future, the time has come for Congress to recognize the danger that EMP poses and act to address this threat. If, just for one day, Congress simulated even a fraction of the impact such an attack would have, the scope of the danger would be clear. To do so, Congress should establish an EMP Recognition Day.
———————————————————–
Read the full web memo at Heritage.org.
In 2004, the congressionally mandated Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack released an unclassified executive report on its broader study of the U.S.’s vulnerability to EMP weapons strikes.[1] In 2008, the commission released a follow-up report that detailed the vulnerabilities of the critical infrastructures of the U.S. to EMP strikes.[2] Taken together, these two reports make it clear that an EMP attack could inflict severe damage on the U.S. As the initial report stated, “EMP is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences.”
Congress should not let the Obama Administration ignore the commission’s findings. Instead, it should mandate an updated assessment of which countries may be pursuing EMP weapons and associated delivery systems and platforms. Further, Congress should demand that the Administration develop, test, and ultimately field defenses against EMP attacks, including improved ballistic missile defenses capable of countering short-range ballistic missiles that can carry EMP warheads.
What Is EMP?
EMP is triggered by the detonation of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude over the earth. As a result of this detonation, an electromagnetic field radiates down to the earth, creating electrical currents.
These fields cause widespread damage to electrical systems–the lifeblood of a modern society like the U.S. In turn, the damaged electronic systems can cause a cascade of failures throughout the broader infrastructure, including banking systems, energy systems, transportation systems, food production and delivery systems, water systems, emergency services, and–perhaps most damaging–cyberspace.
Effectively, the U.S. would be thrown back to the pre-industrial age following a widespread EMP attack.
What Congress Should Do
The lack of public awareness regarding the disturbing implications of an EMP attack may prompt the Obama Administration to set aside proposals for addressing this problem. Congress should not let this happen. Specifically, Congress should take the following three steps:
Step No. 1: Require the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to Produce a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Describing Which Countries Are Capable of Launching an EMP Strike. The NIE should review not only the weapons systems themselves but the delivery systems and platforms capable of carrying the weapons. Additionally, Congress should obtain from the NIE the intelligence community’s assessment of how EMP-capable countries are incorporating those weapons into their broader military strategies.
The latter assessment would permit the President and his advisors to determine how the U.S. could respond to EMP threats as they arise. Such planning is an essential part of providing an effective defense against these threats.
***
Read the full web memo at Heritage.org.
The Obama Administration is finally doing something that is likely to lessen the threat posed by an aggressive Iran. It is following the lead of the George W. Bush Administration and looking to expand missile defense capabilities in the Persian Gulf.
This is according to a January 31, 2010 article in The New York Times. This step has many advantages for the United States and its friends and allies in the region regarding the Iranian threat. Reflective of a “protect and defend” strategy, it offers a defensive solution that serves to demonstrate the aggressive intent of Iran. The alternative is to give the Iranians a first strike option. It also does not require the global consensus that has been holding up the imposition of effective sanctions against Iran. This is not to say that this step should substitute for the diplomatic effort to impose sanctions on Iran, only augment it.
Third, it provides direct reassurance to U.S. friends and allies in the region and strengthens security ties there. Fourth, it will serve to lessen the pressure on the friends and allies there that do not have nuclear weapons to seek them in the future. Likewise, it will lessen the likelihood that the friends and allies that may have nuclear weapons will be put in a circumstance where they would compelled to use them. This last point is critical. Last fall, The Heritage Foundation ran a series of exercises based on an abstract of Middle East regional setting, where all the nation-equivalent players were presumed to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The exercises demonstrated that pursuing a defensive option resulted in fewer nuclear weapons. On the other hand, a nuclear conflict broke out when the player equivalent to the United States simultaneously relied on nuclear retaliatory options, pursued a policy of nuclear disarmament and chose not to pursue defensive options.
The Obama Administration, however, needs to close the circle on this productive step. The plan is to place the Patriot missile defense batteries in four Persian Gulf states and Standard Missile-3 missile defense interceptors on Navy ships in the Gulf. These steps will permit a defense against shorter-range missiles. The problem is that these current systems will not provide a defense to the United States or its friends against the longer-range missiles that Iran is seeking. This will permit Iran to focus on threatening the United States directly in order to drive a wedge between the United States and its friends and force the United States out of the region. It is an obvious window of vulnerability that the Obama Administration must close.
The Obama Administration can close this window of vulnerability by taking three steps. The first is to upgrade the sea-based missile defense system to make it capable of countering longer-range missiles. This sea-based system could also be used to protect the United States against an Iranian launch of a short-range missile off the coast that carries and electro-magnetic pulse nuclear warhead. Such an upgrade program should be put on the fast track. The second step is to restore the larger number of Ground-based Midcourse Defense interceptors that are designed to counter long-range missiles that were proposed by President Bush. The Bush Administration proposed placing 44 such interceptors in Alaska and California and ten in Poland. President Obama, last year, made the unwise decision to scale back the number to be place in Alaska and California to 30 and cancelled the agreement with Poland. The most powerful step the Obama Administration could take to close this window of vulnerability is to announce that it will revive a proposal of the Reagan Administration and the George H.W. Bush Administration to put missile defense interceptors in space. This is a missile defense program that will serve to put the Iranians on the defensive.
The Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano writes about electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks in his Washington Examiner column: “An EMP attack: Thinking the unthinkable.”
A nuclear weapon detonated high over the U.S. would produce something called the EMP effect, a blast of electromagnetic waves that would short-circuit electrical components such as power grids and circuits that allow you to start a car. Carafano further describes the effects:
“In addition to thermal, radiation, heat and concussive force, an atomic detonation throws off an incredible amount of electro-magnetic energy…Picture a massive tsunami, but with lightning instead of water. And, like the surge produced by lightning, electrical systems act like antennas sucking down a rush of electrons that fry circuits and burn out micro-chips.”
A nuclear weapon detonated 200 miles above the earth isn’t the scenario most people associate with such weapons. A deliberate EMP attack, says Carafano, would have a devastating impact on its target.
“Just keeping modern-day America fed would be virtually impossible without working transportation or communications systems,” he writes. “Water pumping and sewage treatment plants would be off-line. Modern medical care would be virtually non-existent. Even if the rest of the world mustered the largest humanitarian mission in human history, the suffering would be unprecedented.”
EMP attacks may sound like the stuff of science fiction, but they are not. Carafano warns that our Departments of Defense and Homeland Security must give the possibility of EMP attacks higher priority and plan for such a disaster. The Obama administration has proposed to cut the missile defense budget by 10 percent. This seems to indicates that an EMP disaster is not a high enough priority. History can and will repeat itself.
“The idea that someone would attack the U.S. with jet airliners once seemed unthinkable. An EMP attack may seem today just as remote. But it’s time to play it safe — and start figuring out how to deal with it.”
Writing for the American Spectator, Brett Joshpe explains the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks.
A blast of EMP waves would short-circuit electrical components such as the power grid and electronic circuits that allow you to start car. Joshpe said he attended two lectures on EMP and believes the topic should be discussed more. An excerpt:
“Unlike past blackouts, such as the one that occurred in the summer of 2003 and left much of the northeastern U.S. without electricity, the lights would not come back on for years potentially. The U.S. would be plunged into a primitive state in which people scrounged for food and water to survive. Money would be worthless, our economy would revert to bartering, and one’s most valuable assets would be guns and ammunition.
“So, how likely or plausible is this sort of attack? More so than we would like. In 2004, the Electromagnetic Pulse Commission, which Congress established, issued a Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. It concluded that ‘EMP is one of a small number of threats that has the potential to hold our society seriously at risk and might result in defeat of our military forces.’ The Commission issued another report in 2008 in which it concluded that ‘The electromagnetic pulse generated by a high altitude nuclear explosion is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences.’”
Joshpe notes that the Department of Homeland Security provides some information on its web site about EMP effects but misleads readers into believing EMP will harm only “pacemakers or other implanted electronic devices.” Read the full text of the article for more information.
A nuclear weapon detonated high over the U.S. would produce something called an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effect, a blast of electromagnetic waves that would short-circuit electrical components such as power grids and circuits that allow you to start a car. One minute we’re an advanced high-tech society; the next, we’re plunged back into the 18th century.
Military historian Bill Forstchen has a written a book titled, One Second After, a fictionalized account of what would happen in the aftermath of an EMP attack on the U.S.
Forstchen appeared on Pajamas Media TV to talk about his book. See Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.
What sounds like something straight out of a Stephen King novel is what the Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano describes could happen if a nuclear bomb, unseen and unheard, was detonated over North America.
Electrical systems and computers would shut down, and not just those in our home. Everything that requires electricity to work, from traffic signals to gas tanks, would cease to work. Chaos, everywhere. You don’t have to read fiction to imagine such a scenario. The reality is more probable than you think. Cafano writes:
“This scenario may sound like the plot of a science-fiction movie, but Bill Graham, former science adviser to President Reagan, says it’s a realistic portrayal of what would happen to the United States after a massive electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion.
“The former deputy administrator for NASA now chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. In July 2008, Graham testified before the House Armed Services Committee on the commission’s latest report. Only a handful of the committee’s 60 members showed up for the hearing.
“‘It’s obvious that there’s not very much interest,’ sighed Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., a committee member who pushed for the commission;s establishment. In a radio interview, another committee member actually derided the subject as ’science fiction.’ Such mockery and indifference could very well come back to haunt the commission.”
If you think electromagnetic pulse devastation is far-fetched, remain skeptical at your own peril. As Carafano notes, massive mutual destruction-type attacks are less of a concern to the U.S. these days. More troublesome are the schemes of rogue states like Iran and North Korea with ballistic missile capability and terrorist groups that like to blow up people. Read the full text of Carafano’s article for examples of credible nuclear threats.
What naysayers and skeptics need to understand is that countries like Iran and North Korea clearly believe long-range ballistic missiles are worth having, and they’re committed to investing in and developing them. While they may not be capable of mass destruction, they grow closer to it every day.
Our Congress has demonstrated a lack of concern over the nuclear threats we face. Carafano notes:
“That indifference carries over into budgeting. Congress spends as little as it talks about missile defense. In the last appropriation, Congress cut the missile-defense budget and allocated a paltry $5 million to study the problem – about as much as it dedicated to “wood-utilization research” in the past fiscal year.
“For years, the common argument against missile defense was simply that it’s infeasible. However, technology has advanced steadily. Dozens of tests have been conducted successfully in recent years. Gen. Trey Obering, commander of the Missile Defense Agency that oversees the Pentagon’s missile-defense programs, says, ‘They used to say that you can’t hit a bullet with a bullet. Well, now we can hit a spot on a bullet with a bullet.’
“Another frequent complaint was that missile defense would cost too much. ‘Missile defense comprises less than one-70th of what the nation is spending each year for defense,’ writes missile defense expert Robert Pfaltzgraff. ‘And defense spending represents only about 4 percent of our national wealth as an expression of GDP. By reasonable standards, missile defense is a modest national security investment.’ Pfaltzgraff adds that those calculating the costs of missile defense should also add up the cost of a devastating missile strike in America.”
Days after North Korea launched a long-range missile, the Obama administration proposed $1.4 billion in cuts to missile defense. A five-year-old could see how counterintuitive that is. Why can’t the leader of the free world? Read the rest of Carafano’s informative and well-researched article at Legion.org.
(Image by Metatech)