Читать книгу Prospect of Biological and Nuclear Terrorism in Central Asia and Russia - Musa Khan Jalalzai - Страница 7

Chapter 1

The Threat of Nuclear Jihad in Central Asiaand Russia

For more than two decades, the threat of nuclear and biological terrorism in Central Asia and Russia has been at the forefront of the international security agenda. Nuclear experts have often warned that terrorists and extremist organisations operating in Central Asia can anytime use the dirty bomb and nuclear explosive. These groups must be prevented from gaining access to weapons of mass-destruction and from perpetrating atrocious acts of bioterrorism. Russia and some Central Asian States have applied professional measures to protect their nuclear weapons sites, but nuclear proliferation still poses a grave threat to the national security of all states. Military experts and policymakers have also expressed deep concerns that if the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Chechen extremist groups, Katibat Imam Bukhari and other groups operating in the region gain access to nuclear explosives, it might cause huge destruction and fatalities.

The threat of nuclear terrorism has intensified as drones and unmanned aerial vehicles are now playing crucial role in delivering nuclear weapons to military commands across the world. This is a new and important development in the future of nuclear war between states and armies. Experts have warned that intentions of the US army are dangerous as it has planned to adorn terrorist groups like ISIS, and Central Asia extremist with nuclear explosive and biological weapons to make Central Asia and Caucasus the war zone. Analyst Andrew Salmon (Asia Times, 13 April 2020) has noted some aspects of this weapon and argued that this weapon can identify signals and objects, deciphering massive sets of data faster than humans can, and make related predictions:

“Unmanned aerial vehicles, unmanned underwater vehicles and space planes are likely to be “the AI-enabled weapons of choice for future nuclear delivery,” a leading military think tank revealed during a recent seminar in Seoul. AI, or artificial intelligence, enables faster decision-making than humans and can replace humans in the decision matrix at a time when leadership reacts too slowly – or is dead. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, or SIPRI, released its report The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Strategic Stability and Nuclear Risk Volume II; East Asian Perspectives in a forum hosted by the Swedish Embassy in Seoul. The question is whether weaponized AI, through its deterrent or defensive purposes, is a risk ameliorator or whether by either bringing new or enhanced capabilities to new theaters of combat, and by obviating existing systems and weapons, it generates yet steeper risks. Lora Saalman, the report’s editor, noted that AI is “a suite of technologies, not a technology.” In terms of early-warning systems, Saalman noted, AI can identify signals and objects, deciphering massive sets of data faster than humans can, and make related predictions. In command and control, it can recognize patterns and enhance protection against cyber-attack. In cyber warfare, automation already exists, and some sub-systems already operate autonomously. AI offers information warriors new tools to manipulate (human) nuclear decision-makers – for example, it can generate faux orders or audio-visuals to trick operators, Saalman said. In terms of “hard” capabilities, it increases the onboard intelligence of airborne or waterborne drones, allowing them to better penetrate enemy defenses, making nuclear delivery both more maneuverable – and more autonomous”.

This weapon will be working on different fronts. The navies of multiple countries, including the US, UK, France, Russia, and China are currently creating unmanned vehicles to be used in oceanic warfare to discover and terminate underwater mines. For instance, the REMUS is a three-foot long robot used to clear mines in one square mile within 16 hours. In recent years, China has overtaken the U.S. in numbers, with more than 500 ships, including 75 submarines and three aircraft carriers. To get to that point significant challenges must still be overcome, including vehicle manoeuvrability, power restrictions, autonomous system integration and cooperation between underwater systems. Organisations, including the US Office for Naval Research, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and NATO have been working alongside commercial and non-commercial parties to address these issues. Analyst Andrew Salmon (Asia Times, 13 April 2020) highlighted Russian and American weapons development in the twenty-first century:

“In the offensive front, strategic bombers and missile-armed submarines may be replaced by robots. Platforms such as unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and spaceplanes “… provide resiliency and survivability,” SIPRI noted. “These two aims indicate why such vehicles are likely to be the AI-enabled platforms of choice for future nuclear delivery.” One such asset is a Russian nuclear-powered, nuclear-capable underwater drone “Poseidon.” Torpedo-shaped, 25-meters long, with a modular nuclear reactor, it can move at more than 100km/h at a depth of 1000 meters and is armed with cobalt weapons. Though not yet in service, in 2019 the Russian Navy ordered 30. “Poseidon is a fantastic machine, but its consequences could be catastrophic,” said South Korean Hwang Il-soon, a nuclear engineer at the School of Mechanical Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering. “It is a kind of dirty bomb – it creates very strong alpha radiation.” He was dismayed by the weapon as Russia is one of the world’s leaders in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, particularly in reprocessing spent fuel. Saalman noted that there are indications that Poseidon may be deployed to loiter off US coasts. “Weapons like Poseidon should be banned not just for their environmental impact but for their negative impact on strategic stability,” said Michiru Nishida, Special Assistant for Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Policy at Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “But it is different for a country like Russia that sees it as a stabilizing factor.”

Nuclear terrorism is developing in changing shape as great powers are making dangerous weapons to use against each other. These fissile materials might be purchased from foreign sources on the black market or stolen from a nuclear facility. Heads of states have often stated at the nuclear security summits the reality of the threat, but their intentions are understandable from their resolve to become strongest nuclear powers. Most nuclear power reactors are openly vulnerable to attack from terrorist groups, as they are protected only by wire fences and local security personnel. Attacks in Europe and elsewhere sponsored and inspired by the Islamic State group demonstrate that its reach, and determination to cause damage and chaos as possible, even as it loses territory in Syria and Iraq.

The possibility of future terrorist activities using nuclear devices is a concern that all governments must confront. The growth in nuclear power is expected to be greatest among states that do not have a long or, in some cases, any history of nuclear power or limited or no experience in securing nuclear materials. The most analysed worst-case scenario concerning nuclear terrorism has primarily focused on terrorists detonating a nuclear bomb. The important fact is that there is a well-documented trade in dirtybomb material Black market. Moldova is an important node in the radiological and nuclear smuggling network.

In April 2020, the US government conducted military excercise to showcase that its forces would be ready for the coming nuclear war with Russia. Julian Borger (24 February 2020) reported: “The exercise comes just weeks after the US deployed a new low-yield submarine-launched warhead commissioned by Donald Trump, as a counter to Russian tactical weapons and intended to deter their use. According to a transcript of a background briefing by senior Pentagon officials, the defence secretary, Mark Esper, took part in what was described as a “mini-exercise” at US Strategic Command in Nebraska. Esper played himself in the simulated crisis, in which Russia launched an attack on a US target in Europe. “The scenario included a European contingency where you are conducting a war with Russia, and Russia decides to use a low-yield limited nuclear weapon against a site on NATO territory,” a senior official said. “And then you go through the conversation that you would have with the secretary of defense and then with the president, ultimately, to decide how to respond.”

The Federation of American Scientists revealed in late January 2020 that the U.S. Navy had deployed for the first time a submarine armed with a low-yield Trident nuclear warhead. The USS Tennessee deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia in late 2019. The W76-2 warhead, which is facing criticism at home and abroad, is estimated to have about a third of the explosive power of the atomic bomb the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima. As the nation focused on President Trump’s impeachment trial, a major story recently broke about a new development in U.S. nuclear weapons policy that received little attention.

However, in March 2020, Daryl G. Kimball argued that “the exercise perpetuates the dangerous illusion that a nuclear war can be fought and won. The new warhead, which packs a five-kiloton explosive yield, is large enough destroy a large city. It would be delivered on the same type of long-range ballistic missile launched from the same strategic submarine that carries missiles loaded with 100-kiloton strategic warheads. Russian military leaders would be hard pressed to know, in the heat of a crisis, whether the missile was part of a “limited” strike or the first wave of an all-out nuclear attack”.

China will soon have deployed a nuclear triad of strategic land, sea, and air-launched nuclear systems akin to America’s. The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency projects China’s nuclear warhead stockpile may double by 2030. However, Simon Tisdall (17 August 2019) argued that the US government increased spending on modernizing military technology: “Vladimir Putin unveiled the missile, known in Russia as the Storm Petrel and by Nato as Skyfall, in March last year, claiming its unlimited range and manoeuvrability would render it “invincible”. The Russian president’s boasts look less credible now. But Putin is undeterred.

Denying suggestions that the missile is unreliable, the Kremlin insisted Russia was winning the nuclear race. “Our president has repeatedly said that Russian engineering in this sector significantly outstrips … other countries,” a spokesman said. Now fast-forward to 16 August, and another threatening event: the test-firing by North Korea of potentially nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, the sixth round of launches since July. More than two years of vanity diplomacy by Donald Trump has not convinced Pyongyang it is safe to give up its nukes – proof, if it were needed, that unilateral counter-proliferation initiatives do not work”.

A qualitative global nuclear arms race is now underway. The world’s nine nuclear-armed actors are collectively squandering hundreds of billions of dollars to maintain and improve their arsenals. The use of nuclear weapons—even on a so-called “limited” scale— creates the potential for global catastrophe. On 24 April 2019, analysts Harry Cockburn wrote a detailed note on the possibilities of nuclear war that might cause huge fatalities. However, on 22 April 2020, Russian TV reported that as Covid-19 didn’t hasn’t united the world, nuclear war has become on the card: “The struggle for international dominance was sharply intensifying even before the pandemic began, Sergey Ryabkov believes, but “unfortunately, the coronavirus couldn’t defuse this process, on the contrary, it only amplified and accelerated it......Since the outbreak of the coronavirus in December in China’s Wuhan, the highly contagious disease has spread around the globe, causing more than 175,000 deaths, grinding the world’s major economies to a halt and wreaking havoc on the financial markets”. Nuclear scientists, have a special responsibility to raise the alarm. Their voices were heard in the several appeals, most clearly in the Russell-Einstein manifesto of 1955, which called for international meetings of scientists, with clear public recommendations.

There are several extremist and terrorist groups operating in Tajikistan where they are recruiting members of local religious groups, and civilians from all walks of life to prepare them for the fight against Russia. Analyst Leonid Gusev (01 February 2020) his recent paper noted activities of extremist groups in Tajikistan:

“As in the other countries of the region, the main recruiting platform used by ISIS (a terrorist organisation banned in Russia) in Tajikistan is the Internet. There are some 3 million Internet users in Tajikistan, 80 per cent of them accessing extremist content through social media either deliberately or accidentally. During their meeting in May 2018, President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko expressed their commitment to strengthening cooperation in the fight against terrorism, extremism, drug trafficking and the illegal arms trade. In October 2019, Tajikistan hosted a joint military exercise of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) member states, “Indestructible Brotherhood 2019.” One of the components of that exercise, according to Commander of the Central Military District of the Russian Federation, Colonel-General Alexander Lapin, consisted of antiterrorist operations. Tajikistan is a tension hotspot in Central Asia in terms of religious extremism and terrorism. A particular source of danger is neighbouring Afghanistan, where about 60 per cent of the lands along the frontier are engulfed in clashes between government forces and the Taliban and other radical Islamist groups. At the same time, there is almost no security along the Afghan-Tajik border, including the issue of drug trafficking. The local Tajik forces supporting border guards are scant, especially since the Kulob Regiment was relocated from the 201st Russian military base to Dushanbe. Yet the government has so far managed to control the situation.”¹

Recent events in Tajikistan and Russia have raised the prospect of extremist and jihadist groups using biological, radiological and chemical attacks against military installations and critical national infrastructure in both states. Russia is vulnerable to such attacks by these terrorist groups who received military training from the US army in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The greatest threat to the national security of Russia stems from the business of nuclear smuggling of the US sponsored terror groups operating in Central Asia. Increasingly sophisticated chemical and biological weapons are accessible to these organisations and the ISIS and their allies, which is a matter of great concern.

These groups can use more sophisticated conventional weapons as well as chemical and biological agents against Russia in the near future as the US Special Force is already in control of Pakistan’s nuclear and biological weapons. They can disperse chemical, biological and radiological material as well as industrial agents via water or land to target schools, colleges, civilian and military personnel. They were trained by US and NATO forces, and tested these weapons on innocent schools children in different provinces of Afghanistan. These groups also received training of dangerous weapons in different military units of Pakistan army.

As international media focuses on the looming threat of chemical and biological terrorism in Central Asia and Russia, the ISIS is seeking access to nuclear weapons to use it against Russia. The crisis is going to get worse as the exponential network of ISIS and its popularity in Afghanistan caused deep security challenges for Russian Federation. This group could use chemical and biological weapons once it strengthens its bases in Central Asia and Russia. The possibility of a nuclear technology transfer by irresponsible states like Pakistan and Iran to the ISIS command is still reverberating in international press. In an interview with a local television channel, Dr Abdul Qadir Khan categorically said that nuclear smuggling activities did take place from 1992 to 1998 while both Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto were in power.

Recent debates in the print and electronic media about the possible use of Chlorine Bombs or biological weapons in Central Asia and Russia have caused deep concerns in government and military circles that the radicalised jihadists returning from Syria and Iraq may use these weapons with the cooperation of local supporters and some states. Yet, experts have warned that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by the Islamic State (ISIS) poses a greater threat to the national security of regional states. The gravest danger arises from the access of extremist and terror groups to the state-owned nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The growing use of Chlorine Bombs is a matter of great concern. The first such incident occurred when the ISIS commanders gained access to the Iraqi nuclear weapons site in Mosul University.

However, recent cases of nuclear proliferation and attacks on nuclear installations across the globe have further exacerbated the concern about the threat of nuclear attacks in Caucasus regions, Russia and Tajikistan. The threat of chemical and biological jihad against Russia has raised serious questions about the security of its nuclear and biological weapons. Experts have warned that the Central Asia, Pakistan and Afghanistan based jihadists, and the Taliban pose a great security threat. Improvised explosive devices and chemical and biological weapons are easily available in Asian and European markets and can be transported to Moscow through human traffickers. The influx of trained terrorists and extremist groups from several Asian, African and European states has raised concerns that those who sought asylum through fake documents in Russia could pose a threat to the country. In a press conference in Australia, President Obama declared that if his government discovered that ISIS had come to possess a nuclear weapon, he would get it out of their hands. The fear of such attacks still exists in Russia because thousands of European nationals joined the ISIS’s military campaign in Syria and Iraq.

In 2013, chemical attacks in the outskirts of Damascus posed a direct threat to all Arab states, and forced UN Security Council to adopt a resolution on chemical weapons in Syria. The international operation of transporting the components of these weapons out of Syria was completed in the first half of 2014. In 2015, the ISIS tried to gain access to these weapons and used chlorine bombs for terrorist activities in Iraq and Syria. On 06 January, 2015, cases of ISIS using chemical weapons in Iraq and Syria emerged.² These chemical attacks illustrated that ISIS and the Syrian opposition chose to use chemical weapons preferentially in Iraq and Syria. In Russia and Central Asia, the ISIS is seeking these weapons to use them against the armed forces of the region. In one of its issues magazine (Dabiq), claimed that Islamic State sought to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan but experts viewed this claim as baseless.

Before the rise of ISIS, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) was the main Central Asian extremist organization in the field. Its base of operations is in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Central Asian fighters linked to ISIS headquarters in Syria also participated in acts of terrorism in other countries. The ISIS has previously restrained from getting involved in attacks in Central Asia as the group’s leadership emphasised that attacking this region was not the highest priority. In July 2018, five Tajik men killed four foreign cyclists in a car-ramming attack, accompanied by an on-foot gun and knife assault in the Khatlon province of Tajikistan. The presence of Daesh in Iraq and Afghanistan, and participation of Central Asian jihadists in it prompted consternation in the region. In Syria, the radical Islamic militants from Central Asia established terrorist organisations of their own. These terrorists have Salafi-Wahhabi inclinations and are among the backers of alQaeda, al-Nusra Front, and Daesh group. In his Diplomat analysis (20 September 2016), Uran Botobekov, documented videos and extrajudicial killing in Iraq and Syria:

“Recently, Central Asians saw on YouTube a terrible video of a teenager, Babur Israilov from Jalal-Abad in southern Kyrgyzstan, on his way to becoming a suicide bomber. In the video, Babur cries before being sent to his death in an armoured car laden with explosives in Fua, Syria. One of the fighters gathered around encourages him, saying in Uzbek that Satan intervenes at crucial moments to confuse a Muslim’s mind, so he should think only of Allah. Further in the video sentimental Arabic music plays, the armoured personnel carrier moves, and, at the fatal moment, the bomb explodes. According to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Babur Israilov was a member of an extremist group of Uzbeks– Imam Bukhari Jamaat–which fights alongside Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria. Just like the father of the British boy JoJo, resident of Suzak district in the Jalal-Abad region of Kyrgyzstan Tahir Rahitov saw his son Babur via video. According to Tahir, his wife died in 1995 and the boy was raised by his grandmother. In November 2013 Babur left for Russia in search of work. In March 2014 he arrived in Syria via Turkey, joined Imam Bukhari Jamaat, and fought alongside Jabhat al-Nusra against the government of Bashar al-Assad”.³

On 06 November 2019, Masked Daesh militants attacked a border post on the Tajik-Uzbek border overnight, triggering a gun battle that killed 15 of the militants, a guard and a policeman, Tajik authorities said.⁴ There was no immediate announcement from the militant group, which has claimed responsibility for a series of assaults in Tajikistan. Five of the gunmen were captured after the attack on the Tajik side of the border, 50 km (30 miles) southwest of the capital Dushanbe, Tajikistan’s National Security Committee said.

The investigation into the 03 April 2017 terrorist attack on the St. Petersburg metro station focused on a man of Central Asian origin with possible ties to Syrian rebel groups. The attack raises concerns about the threat posed both by Daesh and extremists within Russia’s sizeable Central Asian community. Investigators identified Akhbarzhon Dzhalilov as the prime suspect in the 03 April attack on the St. Petersburg metro that left 14 people dead and 49 injured. Dzhalilov is an ethnic Uzbek from the Southern Kyrgyzstani city of Osh who obtained Russian citizenship in 2011. Eight more people, mostly from Kyrgyzstan, were detained in St Petersburg and Moscow on suspicion of assisting Dzhalilov.⁵ While Tajikistan remains vulnerable to jihadist extremism due to its proximity to jihadist hotbeds, preexisting networks and difficult socio-economic conditions, it appears that the central radicalization issue is the diaspora abroad, led by Tajiks living in Russia.

Since the beginning of 2017, a string of jihadist terrorist attacks involved Central Asian citizens, mainly of Uzbek and Kirgiz origin. Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) detained near Moscow Abrar Azimov from former Soviet Central Asia, born in 1990. He was accused as one of the organizers of the attack, and the one who had trained Jalilov. However, Azimov refused to admit his guilt in court during the hearing. By the end of April, the FSB arrested 12 people of Central Asian descent in the Kaliningrad region suspected of involvement with the Jihad-Jamaat Mujahideen extremist group. The alleged leader of the cell was placed by Uzbekistan on a wanted list for extremist crimes.

The rise of ISIS in Afghanistan poses serious security concerns according to a September 2016 statement of Zamir Kabulov, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Director of the Second Asian Department in Afghanistan. Kabulov claimed that about 2,500 ISIS combatants are in Afghanistan and the organization is preparing to expand from Afghanistan into other Central Asian countries and Russia, giving Moscow reasons to worry. Nuclear terrorism in Central Asia and Russia has risen important questions about the US and NATO policy towards Russia that without using biological and nuclear weapons against the country, its dream of supreme power will vanish. Authors Christopher Mclntosh and Ian Storey (20 November 2019) in their well-writter analysis have elucidated the real motive of US and NATO hegemonic design:

“While terrorist organizations vary widely in their internal organization and structure, almost all are highly sensitive to benefits and costs, both external and internal. By examining these, it will become clear that terrorists might have more to lose than gain by proceeding directly to an attack. Doing so might alienate their supporters, cause dissent among the ranks, and give away a bargaining chip without getting anything in return. While there is any number of far more likely scenarios for nuclear terrorism broadly understood, we focus only on groups with a working nuclear device, not a radiological dispersal device or the ability to attack a nuclear reactor. The threat posed by an operational device is fundamentally different, not least because possession would radically change the nature of the organization as a strategic, warfighting group. A large body of work in terrorism studies teaches us that terrorist groups do behave strategically. Communications within Al Qaeda, Princeton Near Eastern Studies expert Michael Doran has written, have shown that the group behaves “almost exclusively according to the principle of realpolitik,” and is “virtually compel[led]” to do so by the “central doctrines of Islamic extremism” itself. While it may not appear so based on terrorist’s tactics, most groups have all the hallmarks of strategic decision-making, command and control, and sensitivity to costs. This is all the more true for the hypothetical that concerns us: Only a large, well-organized, and heavily funded group would be able to attain operational nuclear capability. Regardless of what one thinks about the debates regarding terrorist organizations and their ability to acquire these weapons—either by theft or gift— acquisition and maintenance is going to be resource-intensive and difficult”.⁶

If terrorist groups such as ISIS or Lashkar-e-Taiba determine to go nuclear, what will be the security preparations in Central Asia to intercept these groups? These and other Pakistan based groups can attempt to manufacture the fissile material needed to fuel a nuclear weapon—either highly enriched uranium or plutonium, and then use it. Moreover, there are possibilities that Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia based extremist and jihadist groups can purchase fissile material in the black market or steal it from a military or civilian facility and then use that material to construct an improvised nuclear device. Yet today, with Russia rising again as a military power, the grim logic of nuclear statecraft is returning. In his nuclear risk analysis, Simon Saradzhyan (Russia Matters, Simon Saradzhyan, (August 06, 2019) argued that there isa possibility of nuclear war between Russia and the United States:

“Is the risk of a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia now higher than at the height of the Cold War? Yes, it is, according to an article former U.S. Energy Secretary Ernie Moniz and former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn have penned for Foreign Affairs. “Not since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis has the risk of a U.S.-Russian confrontation involving the use of nuclear weapons been as high as it is today,” the co-chairs of the Nuclear Threat Initiative warned in their commentary published on Aug. 6, 2019. To back their claim, the two American statesmen describe an imaginary scenario in which Russian air defense systems shot down a NATO aircraft that has accidentally veered into Russian airspace during a wargame in Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave in 2020”.⁷ All but, 15 years ago, Graham Allison (September/October 2004) noted the possibility of nuclear terrorism in Russia by Chechen terrorists. Chechen have had a long-standing interest in acquiring nuclear weapons and material to use in their campaign against Russia. He is of the opinion that Chechen had access to nuclear materials, and their experts were able to make nuclear explosive devices:

“To date, the only confirmed case of attempted nuclear terrorism occurred in Russia on November 23, 1995, when Chechen separatists put a crude bomb containing 70 pounds of a mixture of cesium-137 and dynamite in Moscow’s Ismailovsky Park. The rebels decided not to detonate this “dirty bomb,” but instead informed a national television station to its location. This demonstration of the Chechen insurgents’ capability to commit ruthless terror underscored their long-standing interest in all things nuclear. As early as 1992, Chechnya’s first rebel president, Dzhokhar Dudayev, began planning for nuclear terrorism, including a specific initiative to hijack a Russian nuclear submarine from the Pacific Fleet in the Far East. The plan called for seven Slavic-looking Chechens to seize a submarine from the naval base near Vladivostok, attach explosive devices to the nuclear reactor section and to one of the nuclear-tipped missiles on board, and then demand withdrawal of Russian troops from Chechnya. After the plot was discovered, Russian authorities disparaged it, and yet it is ominous to note that the former chief of staff of the Chechen rebel army, Islam Khasukhanov, had once served as second-in-command of a Pacific Fleet nuclear submarine”.⁸

The Islamic State (ISIS) and Central Asian terrorist groups seek biological and nuclear weapons to use it against security forces in Russia and Central Asia. The modus operandi of ISIS or ISIS inspired individual is diverse and shows no moral restraints– as recent attacks in Brussels and Berlin demonstrate. The use of biological and chemical weapons by terrorists has prompted huge fatalities in Iraq and Syria. However, preventing dangerous materials from falling into the hands of ISIS, Pakistani terrorist groups, and Central Asia extremists is a complex challenge. Since 2013, there has been extensive use of chemical weapons in armed conflicts in Syria by US backed terrorist groups. The most deadly attacks were carried out with chemical agents by the ISIS terrorist group in Syria that needed significant knowledge and the specialized resources. In October 2017, Columb Strack in his paper revealed that the ISIS is the first terrorist group that developed chemical weapons:

“The Islamic State is the first non-state actor to have developed a banned chemical warfare agent and combined it with a projectile delivery system. However, it appears to have been forced to abandon its chemical weapons production after the loss of Mosul in June 2017. The absence of chemical attacks outside of Mosul after the city became cut-off from the rest of the ‘caliphate’ earlier this year indicates that the group has not established alternative production facilities. But U.S. intelligence believes that a new chemical weapons cell has been set up in the Euphrates River Valley. In late July 2015, the Islamic State fired several mortar bombs at Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) positions near the city of Hasakah in northeastern Syria. A statement released by the YPG after the attack described how the explosions had released “a yellow gas with a strong smell of onions,” and that “the ground immediately around the impact sites was stained with an olive-green liquid that turned to a golden yellow after exposure to sunshine”.⁹

The possible use of nuclear and biological weapons by the ISIS, Central Asia extremist groups, Chechens, Taliban and Pakistani sectarian terrorists in Central Asia and Russia would be a greater security challenge for the region and Russia that fights the ISIS in Syria. Pakistan has established its own extremist networks in Chechnya and Central Asia once more to lead the US fight against Russia in the region. The country’s army has been training and financing the ISIS, Chinese extremist groups and Mujahideen from Central Asia in various districts since 2001. Connor Dilleen (Asia Times-30 May 2019) in his recent article noted activities of Central Asia terrorists groups in Afghanistan:

“During a recent visit to Tajikistan, Russian Federal Security Service Director Alexander Bortnikov claimed that around 5,000 militants based in Afghanistan from a group known as Islamic State Khorasan, or IS-K, had been redeployed to the north of the country, near its border with the former Soviet states of Central Asia. Bortnikov’s statement has been treated with some scepticism, with Moscow accused of exaggerating the threat posed by IS-K to advance its own objectives in the region. But his comments make it timely to revisit the question of whether IS may emerge as a genuine threat not just to Afghanistan but also to the broader Central Asian region. To date, the states of Central Asia—Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan—have been relatively free of terrorist incidents involving Islamist groups. Between 2008 and mid-2018, 19 attacks categorised as terrorism occurred across the region, resulting in around 140 fatalities. Most of these attacks targeted law enforcement agencies, and regional governments have claimed that they disrupted another 61 attacks during 2016 alone. IS was involved in several of these events. In July 2018, a group claiming allegiance to IS killed four foreign tourists outside of the Tajik capital of Dushanbe, and in November, Tajik authorities claimed that they had detained 12 suspects with alleged ties to IS who were planning an attack against a Russian military base and school”.¹⁰

However, the return of these groups from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Syria will cause national security challenges. In Sialkot District of Punjab province Pakistan, the army train and support an ISIS women brigade for future war against Russia and China. Dr. Younis Khshi in his research paper has noted activities of these women in Pakistan where many women have impressed and convinced through brainwashing with the concept of Jihad-Bil-Nikah, got divorce from their Pakistani husbands and went to marry a Mujahid of ISIS for a certain period, came back gave birth to the child of Mujahid, and remarried their former husband. Some decide to continue that marriage for the rest of their lives. All of this is being done to obtain worldly wealth and later eternal life in Heaven because ISIS is paying something around RS/50,000 to 60,000 per month to every warrior.

However, Mr. Uran Botobekov (The Diplomat, January 10, 2017) has also reported the presence of Central Asian women in Syria and Iraq: “Based on 2014 and 2015 data, there were around 1,000 women from Central Asia in Iraq and Syria’s combat zones. According to Indira Dzholdubaeva, prosecutor-general of the Kyrgyz Republic, there are over 120 Kyrgyz women in Syria and Iraq. Chairman of the National Security Committee (KNB) of Kazakhstan, Nurtay Abykaev, has said there were 150 Kazakh women in ISIS ranks in Syria. The authorities of Uzbekistan, meanwhile, have said that up to 500 Uzbek women are in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan with various groups. The Ministry of the Interior of Tajikistan claims that over 200 Tajik women have gone to the war zones in Syria together with their husbands. However, the website of the Ministry of the Interior has published the names and photos of only five Tajik women who are wanted due to their membership in ISIS”.¹¹ Moreover, analyst and expert of current affairs, Nick Mucerino (November 5, 2018) has noted the threat to Russia from Islamic State returnees from Syria, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan:

“The threat posed by Russian speaking fighters who travelled to fight under the Islamic State in Syria presents a complicated problem for both Russia and its allies to address. Just like its Western counterparts, Russia is worried that these returnees will mount deadly attacks on the country’s soil. The danger presented by Russian speaking foreign fighters loyal to the Islamic State is not lost on the Kremlin. Since its emergence during Syria’s civil war in 2013, Russians and Russian speaking nationals from the former Soviet Union have been a prominent presence among the terror group’s fighters. In February 2017, President Vladimir Putin, citing security service figures, stated that approximately 4,000 Russian citizens and 5,000 from Central Asia followed the ISIS’ appeals for aid. Many took part in helping to establish its ‘caliphate’, or the proto-state it carved out of the lands ISIS seized from Iraq and Syria. This figure is the largest in Europe and even outnumbers the citizens from Arab states including Saudi Arabia and Tunisia, who travelled to join the Group. The large presence of Russian speakers is further reflected in the fact that it the second most common language among ISIS fighters and several of its top commanders belong to the former USSR. Independent security experts have estimated that about 400 of those fighters have already returned to Russia after fighting in Syria”.¹²

The US-Taliban deal encouraged extremist groups from Central Asia and China that now with the support of Pakistan and Taliban; they will exacerbate operational activities in Central Asia and Russia. They receive training of dangerous weapons and nuclear explosives in Pakistan and Afghanistan. A women military brigade (Dr. Yunis Khushi-June 26, 2017) of the ISIS and Taliban receives training of dangerous weapons under the supervision of Pakistan’s army in Sialkot district of Punjab province. In his (The Diplomat, 08 April 2020) article, Uran Botobekov noted the zeal and felicitations of these groups:

Al-Qaeda-backed Central Asian Salafi-Jihadi groups were highly encouraged by the US-Taliban agreement which was signed in February 2020, aiming to bring peace to Afghanistan. Some Uzbek groups such as Katibat Imam al-Bukhari (KIB), Katibat Tawhid wal Jihad (KTJ), the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), and Tajik militants of Jamaat Ansarullah (JA), and Uighur fighters of Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) from China’s Xinjiang region, have already expressed their clear opinion about this particular deal through their respective Telegram accounts. Some of the groups congratulated the agreement, while others dedicated emotional eulogies to the Taliban. The KIB which is formed primarily from Uzbek, Tajik and Kyrgyz militants from Central Asia’s Ferghana Valley, was one of the first organizations to congratulate the Taliban, denominating as a “the great victory of the Islamic Ummah”. On February 29, 2020, Abu Yusuf Muhajir, the leader of KIB’s Syrian wing, in his congratulatory letter said: “The US and NATO forces, who imagine themselves to be the rulers of the entire world and the divine judges of human destinies, and claim divinity on earth have stunned the world with their humiliation, disgrace, and failure of the crusade.” The KIB leader proceeds by saying that “the Americans were forced to sign an agreement with the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which they considered a helpless crowd and below their dignity, but they [the Taliban] survived all difficulties with the support of Allah and gained strength.”¹³

Nuclear terrorism remains a constant threat to global peace. Access of terrorist organizations to nuclear material is a bigger threat to civilian population. Terrorist groups can gain access to highly enriched uranium or plutonium, because they have the potential to create and detonate an improvised nuclear device. Since the ISIS has already received nuclear materials from Mosul city of Iraq, we can assert that terrorist groups like ISIS and Katibat Imam Bukhari, and Chechen extremist groups can make access to biological and nuclear weapons with the help of local experts. Nuclear facilities also often store large amounts of radioactive material, spent fuel, and other nuclear waste products that terrorists could use in a dirty bomb. Without access to such fissile materials, extremist and radicalized groups can turn their attention toward building a simple radiological device. The most difficult part of making a nuclear bomb is acquiring the nuclear material, but some Muslim and non-Muslim state might facilitate the ISIS, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Chechen extremist groups and Afghanistan and Pakistan based groups to attack nuclear installations in Russia and Central Asia.

Information on how to manipulate nuclear material to produce an explosive device—an improvised nuclear device, which would produce a nuclear explosion and a mushroom cloud, or a radiation-dispersal device, which would spread dangerous radioactive material over a substantial area—is now available widely. Daesh (ISIS) seized control of the Iraqi city of Mosul in 2014. Pakistan has also been heavily dependent on outside supply for many key direct- and dual-use goods for its nuclear programs. It maintains smuggling networks and entities willing to break supplier country laws to obtain these goods. Many of these illegal imports have been detected and stopped. These illegal procurements have led to investigations and prosecutions in the supplier states, leading to revelations of important details about Pakistan’s complex to make nuclear explosive materials and nuclear weapons. According to some reports that weapons-grade and weapons-usable nuclear materials have been stolen by terrorist groups from some states. Once a crude weapon is in a country, terrorists would transport it in a vehicle to city and then detonate it in a crowded area.

The ISIS magazine (Dabiq-May 2015) published article of British journalist John Cantlie, in which he warned that the ISIS terrorist group had gained capabilities to launch major terrorist attack: “Let me throw a hypothetical operation onto the table. The Islamic State has billions of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wilayah in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region. The weapon is then transported overland until it makes it to Libya, where the mujāhidīn move it south to Nigeria. Drug shipments from Columbia bound for Europe pass through West Africa, so moving other types of contraband from East to West is just as possible.

The nuke and accompanying mujāhidīn arrive on the shorelines of South America and are transported through the porous borders of Central America before arriving in Mexico and up to the border with the United States. From there it’s just a quick hop through a smuggling tunnel and hey presto, they’re mingling with another 12 million “illegal” aliens in America with a nuclear bomb in the trunk of their car”.

On 25 March 2016, Daily Telegraph reported militants plan to attack the Brussels nuclear plant: “In the wake of claims the Brussels attackers had planned to set off a radioactive ‘dirty bomb’, Yukiya Amano, the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency said: “Terrorism is spreading and the possibility of using nuclear material cannot be excluded. The material can be found in small quantities in universities, hospitals and other facilities. “Dirty bombs will be enough to (drive) any big city in the world into panic. And the psychological, economic and political implications would be enormous,” said Mr Amano. One security expert suggested that the terrorists could have been plotting to kidnap the nuclear researcher they had been filming with a view to coercing the scientist into helping them make a ‘dirty bomb’. The Newspaper reported. State sponsorship of nuclear terrorism in Central Asia is matter of great concern as some states support terrorist groups such as the ISIS, Taliban, Katibat Imam Bukhari, Chechen groups, and Lashkar-e-Taiba, and provide dangerous weapons. These states can sponsor terrorist groups to launch nuclear attack inside Russia or Central Asia.¹⁴

Citizens of five central states have joined the ISIS networks to take the war into the region and inflict fatalities on civilian population. Russia is a strong country in case of law enforcement and intelligence infrastructure, but newly established commando units of the ISIS have gained professional approach to traditional guerrilla war. As far as foreign fighters and the ISIS are concerned, prior to the start of Syria’s civil war in 2011, Central Asia had periodically seen trickles of citizens leaving to fight in Syria and Iraq. In domestic stability, states of Central Asia are better than Pakistan, Afghanistan and some states of the Gulf region, but the fear of chemical and biological war has vanished their dream. The threat of returned fighters moving underground and engaging in terrorist attacks is greater if there is no process to reintegrate and absorb them into a reasonably open society.

It is known that Katibat-i-Imam Bukhari group (KIB) has established two branches. The group’s main fighting force of more than 500 militants is led by leader Abu Yusuf Muhojir. The chechen fighters are also looking for material of dirty bomb and nuclear weapons to use it against Central Asian and Russian army, but didn’t retrieve so for. They are in contact with some states in South Asia and Middle East to receive funds from these regions, and purchase readymade dirty bomb. Afghan and foreign officials say as many as 7,000 Chechens and other foreign fighters could be operating in the country, loosely allied with the Taliban and other militant groups. According to recent reports, 6,000 militants from Central Asia and the Caucasus have already been enlisted in ISIS ranks. The largest radical group in Uzbekistan, Imam Bukhari Jamaat, has joined ISIS in Syria. Experts say there are over one thousand Uzbek and Tajik militants still fighting under the banner of ISIS.

There are speculations that some Russian technocrates and politicians are stressing the need for establishing a jihadi group like the ISIS to further the interests of Russia in Central Asia and Middle East and fight against the NATO and American forces in Afghanistan. Russia is now third among top countries from which ISIS receives its recruits. The majority of them come from the North Caucasus, but also increasingly from Central Asia. The most prominent North Caucasians among the ISIS ranks have been the Chechens. Shortly before Russia’s Syria intervention, the Russian government claimed that between 2,000 and 5,000 militants had joined ISIS; weeks after the entry of Russia into the conflict, however, that figure jumped to 7,000 out of a total of approximately 30,000 foreign fighters active within the ranks of the Islamic State.

If we look at the expertise of these groups, and their multifaceted military training, on their return to the region, they might target biological and chemical laboratories and nuclear installations in Central Asia and Russia. There are states they will provide weapons and training to make the region a hell. Newsweek’s Daily Beast blog provided another version of an overspill, already apparently happening in 2010. They quoted a “Taliban sub-commander in the northern Afghan province of Kunduz”: … jihadist allies from Central Asia have started heading home … encouraged by relentless American drone attacks against the fighters’ back bases in Pakistan’s tribal areas … they’re expanding their range across the unguarded northern Afghan border into Tajikistan to create new Taliban sanctuaries there, assist Islamist rebels in the region, and potentially imperil the Americans’ northern supply lines … [beginning] in late winter 2009.… In Kunduz they joined up with fighters from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). In his recent research paper, Leonid Gusev, an expert of Institute of International Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO) has noted some consternating cooperative measures and plannings of the extremist groups of Central Asia:

“Central Asian countries experience diverse intersecting influences: they feel changes in the situation in the Caucasus, in the Xinjiang autonomous territory of China, in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Militants from various terrorist groups in the region cooperate, many of them fighting in Syria and Iraq. But the biggest threat to Central Asia’s security is the situation in Afghanistan, where the Taliban provide organisational and logistics support to the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). Despite sustaining a significant blow, with its main groups squeezed out of the region, it still maintains a presence in the form of underground groups that could become active at any time, joining forces with the radical Tajik opposition and Uyghur separatists. Cells of the Islamic State (ISIS) (a terrorist organisation banned in Russia) also operate in the region.........Tajikistan is a tension hotspot in Central Asia in terms of religious extremism and terrorism. A particular source of danger is neighbouring Afghanistan, where about 60 per cent of the lands along the frontier are engulfed in clashes between government forces and the Taliban and other radical Islamist groups. At the same time, there is almost no security along the Afghan-Tajik border, including the issue of drug trafficking”.¹⁵

Nuclear trafficking in South Asia and Europe was a key concern while the nuclear black marketing networks were uncovered in Libya to Syria, Malaysia and Afghanistan. Recent media reports identified Moldovan criminal groups that attempted to smuggle radioactive materials to Daesh (also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS) in 2015. Cases of nuclear smuggling in Central Asia were made recent cases. Muhammad Wajeeh, a Research Associate at Department of Development Studies, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Abbottabad Pakistan in his research paper (Nuclear Terrorism: A Potential Threat to World’s Peace and Security- JSSA Vol II, No. 2) has reviewed a consternating threat of nuclear terrorism in South and Central Asia:

“ISIS is believed to have about 90 pounds of low grade uranium (which was seized from Mosul University in Iraq are the invasion of the city in 2014) that can be used in the Dirty Bomb’s to create serious panic among the public. In 2015 and 2016, ISIS became the leading high profile jihadist group in Iraq and Syria. Moreover, ISIS carried out attacks in Paris on November 13, 2015, killing 130 civilians and injuring more than 100 people. The ISIS carried out a series of three coordinated suicide. Bombings in Belgium: one at Maalbeek Metro Station, Brussels and two at Brussels Airport in Zaventem, killing about 32 civilians and injuring 300 people. During the attacks, a G4S guard working on the Belgian nuclear research center was also murdered and it le the world believing that the ISIS has a potential plot to attack the nuclear facility either to steal the radioactive material for dirty bomb or to release the radioactive material and waste into the atmosphere. These attacks also raised the issue of nuclear security are a discovery made by the Belgian authorities that the ISIS has kept an eye on the local nuclear scientists and their families. Moreover, two Belgian nuclear power plant workers at Deol having knowledge of the nuclear sites joined ISIS and could provide assistance to exploit them for terrorist purposes. On March 30, al‐Furat, the media wing of ISIS, threatened attacks on Germany and Britain on the eve of Washington Nuclear Security Summit 2016”.¹⁶