NATO & Terrorism

The rescue community must be willing to learn from international partners

Not long ago, I was asked to be one of the representatives from the United States rescue community to attend a NATO Science for Peace and Security Workshop held in Ericera, Portugal.

Contributing NATO member states included Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the Federation of Russia and Israel.

The primary focus was how first responders can prepare to confront and respond to global terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD), weapons of mass killing (WMK) and weapons of mass disruption (WMDi). The primary topics included preparing, planning, operations, equipment, training and applying existing technologies to counter and respond to terrorist attacks against cities and their infrastructure.

The commander of Israel’s rescue forces in Jerusalem spoke about lessons learned after suicide bombers destroyed public transportation buses full of civilians, and how they quickly deal with the incident response, crime scene forensics, clean-up and psychological debriefing of affected civilians.

The commander of the Russian rescue forces that stormed a school gymnasium full of terrorists and innocent students spoke about their tactics—literally under gunfire—during a catastrophic response in which terrorists were partially successful in blowing up the school building.

It was interesting, exciting and to some degree humbling to be in a room together to discuss such weighty issues and share our own personal experiences with one another.

What became very clear as we shared our respective experiences was how different, yet similar, our situations were based upon the threat of terrorism and its societal impacts. The Europeans clearly were the most cohesive, especially the United Kingdom, while Israel was the most experienced and organized, followed by the United States based upon our domestic experiences during the Oklahoma City bombing and catastrophic effects of 9/11.

What was evident for me as an American was how our NATO partners wanted to help each other but the United States still seemed to want to “go it alone” at times. I learned about the group’s recent contribution of meals ready to eat (MRE) after Hurricane Katrina and how those MREs had been destroyed due to a fear of mad cow disease, which was later found to be false, but the damage was done.

It was also clear that as the Iron Curtain had dropped over a decade ago in Europe, so had a civil preparedness and response level that was only now being re-discovered, re-defined and re-evaluated.

Though the Cold War between the super powers is over for now, the global war rages on against those who make innocent civilians and free societies their targets. 

The results of the workshop have been developed into a book, “NATO and Terrorism On Scene: New Challenges for First Responders and Civil Protection,” edited by Frances L. Edwards and Friedrich Steninhausler. It can be found at www.Springer.com.

As I flew back to the United States, I tried to put the experience into perspective. The lessons from 9/11 should not and cannot be forgotten; there’s still much more to be done. Although the federal government has improved its response efforts and focus after Hurricane Katrina, the next true test is coming. When that happens, we shouldn’t forget our NATO partners and the lessons we all can learn from each other to improve our collective response.

What’s clear is that our greatest enemies are apathy, ignorance and arrogance. The worldwide goal for all first responders in battling the potential for terrorism is to keep our eyes on the goal of prevention with a realist’s understanding that responding to a disaster should not become another disaster in itself.

Harold Schapelhouman is a 26-year veteran firefighter with the Menlo Park (Calif.) Fire Protection District. At the start of 2007, he became the first internally selected fire chief in 21 years for his organization. Previously, he was the division chief in charge of special operations, which includes all district specialized preparedness efforts, the local and state water rescue program, and the local, state and national Urban Search and Rescue Program (USAR).

Schapelhouman was the task force leader in charge of California Task Force 3, one of the eight California USAR teams and one of the 28 federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS/FEMA) teams.