Question

How would the global risk calculus of individuals, organizations, and governments shift if a weapon of mass destruction were detonated in a heavily populated city? The likelihood of such an event is high according to experts around the globe.

Would such an event promote closer cooperation between countries in fighting the spread of WMDs or would it drive countries further apart and back within their sovereign borders?

Answer 1

• Tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people would be killed in one single incident if there were to be a detonation of a WMD. The possession of these weapons can be destabilizing by upsetting local balances of power, creating the potential for intimidation and coercion and raising the stakes of local crises.
• This may cause chain reactions to say the United States, allies and friends. The likelihood of terrorists being capable of producing or obtaining weapons of mass destruction may grow due to looser controls of stored stockpiles. The affects from a WMD and especially a nuclear weapon would be devastating for the nation, surrounding nations and most likely the whole The radioactive contamination last for many years and would destroy ecosystems.
• The detonation of a weapon of mass destruction can produce high uncertainty and shift a country’s focus. Take for example the nuclear attack on Japan that ended World War II. Japan’s focus shifted once these bombs were detonated and surrendered to end the war. According to a publication from the World Economic Forum, the global risks that dominated 2015 included cyberattacks, extreme weather events, unemployment and interstate conflict.
• In this publication it was also expected for these risks to shift in ten years to different sectors. These included mainly resource challenges and misuse of technologies. However, if a weapon of mass destruction was to be detonated in a highly populated city, these risks would shift to other sectors. The detonation of a weapon of mass destructions involves a great deal of logistics in order for a city and government to recuperate from an attack.
• The evacuation of an extreme large number of people that have to flee the blast zone would cause the first shift in global risk focus which would be Failure of urban planning. Unfortunately, a large number of people in transit to other cities could compromise nearby cities’ infrastructure.
• Second, the large concentration of people who have to find shelter when in transit from the blast zone could cause the second shift of focus which would be spread of infectious diseases. Regrettably, large concentrations of people in shelters as often led to the spread of infectious diseases which would be a major player in the attempt of recuperating from such an attack.
• Due to time limit,remaining questions can be asked as another question,they will be answered,thankyou for your cooperation