Civil defense: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Shorepine change image + citation |
imported>InternetArchiveBot Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5 |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Protection of citizens from | {{Short description|Protection of citizens from disasters and military attack}} | ||
{{For|the | {{For|the Russian rock band|Grazhdanskaya Oborona}} | ||
{{For|the ''Star Trek'' episode|Civil Defense (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)}} | |||
{{Use British English|date=August 2021}} | {{Use British English|date=August 2021}} | ||
| Line 40: | Line 41: | ||
[[File:JerusalemFW1940.jpg|thumb|Jewish Civil Defense group in [[Jerusalem]] in 1942. The group served as ARP Fire Wardens, equipped with water hoses and buckets, some wearing FW (Fire Watcher) [[Brodie helmet]]s. Men are in uniform while women wear plain clothes. Composer [[Josef Tal]] stands next to the woman with a black sweater.]] | [[File:JerusalemFW1940.jpg|thumb|Jewish Civil Defense group in [[Jerusalem]] in 1942. The group served as ARP Fire Wardens, equipped with water hoses and buckets, some wearing FW (Fire Watcher) [[Brodie helmet]]s. Men are in uniform while women wear plain clothes. Composer [[Josef Tal]] stands next to the woman with a black sweater.]] | ||
As the war progressed, the military effectiveness of Germany's aerial bombardment was very limited. Thanks to the Luftwaffe's shifting aims, the strength of British air defenses, the use of early warning radar in combination with the [[Royal Observer Corps]], and the life-saving actions of local civil defense units, the aerial "Blitz" during the [[Battle of Britain]] failed to break the morale of the British people, destroy the [[Royal Air Force]] or significantly hinder British industrial production.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Britain-European-history-1940|title=Battle of Britain {{!}} European history [1940]|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica|access-date=2018-10-07|language=en}}</ref> Despite a significant investment in civil and military defense, British civilian losses during the Blitz were higher than in most strategic bombing campaigns throughout the war. For example, there were 14, | As the war progressed, the military effectiveness of Germany's aerial bombardment was very limited. Thanks to the Luftwaffe's shifting aims, the strength of British air defenses, the use of early warning radar in combination with the [[Royal Observer Corps]], and the life-saving actions of local civil defense units, the aerial "Blitz" during the [[Battle of Britain]] failed to break the morale of the British people, destroy the [[Royal Air Force]] or significantly hinder British industrial production.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Britain-European-history-1940|title=Battle of Britain {{!}} European history [1940]|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica|access-date=2018-10-07|language=en}}</ref> Despite a significant investment in civil and military defense, British civilian losses during the Blitz were higher than in most strategic bombing campaigns throughout the war. For example, there were 14,000–20,000 UK civilian fatalities during the Battle of Britain,<ref>{{Cite book|title=Warfare and armed conflicts : a statistical encyclopedia of casualty and other figures, 1492–2015|last=Clodfelter|first=Micheal|isbn=978-0-7864-7470-7|edition= Fourth|location=Jefferson, North Carolina|oclc=959922692|date = 2017-05-09}}</ref> a relatively high number considering that the [[Luftwaffe]] dropped only an estimated 30,000 tons of ordinance during the battle.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-33861431|title=How dangerous are unexploded bombs?|last=Leatherdale|first=Duncan|date=2015-08-11|work=BBC News|access-date=2018-10-07|language=en-GB}}</ref> Granted, this resulting 0.47–0.67 civilian fatalities per ton of bombs dropped was lower than the earlier 121 casualties per ton prediction. However, in comparison, Allied [[Strategic bombing during World War II|strategic bombing of Germany]] during the war proved slightly less lethal than what was observed in the UK,{{dubious|date=April 2024}} with an estimated 400,000–600,000 German civilian fatalities for approximately 1.35 million tons of bombs dropped on Germany,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/seventy-years-world-war-two-thousands-tons-unexploded-bombs-germany-180957680/|title=There Are Still Thousands of Tons of Unexploded Bombs in Germany, Left Over From World War II|last=Higginbotham|first=Adam|work=Smithsonian|access-date=2018-10-07|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/history/research/centres/warstateandsociety/projects/bombing/germany/|title=University of Exeter|last=Robinson|first=Debbie|website=humanities.exeter.ac.uk|language=en|access-date=2018-10-07|archive-date=2018-10-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181007183642/https://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/history/research/centres/warstateandsociety/projects/bombing/germany/|url-status=dead}}</ref> an estimated resulting rate therefore of 0.30–0.44 civilian fatalities per ton of bombs dropped. | ||
==== United States ==== | ==== United States ==== | ||
{{Main|United States civil defense}} | {{Main|United States civil defense}} | ||
In the [[United States]], the [[Office of Civilian Defense]] was established in May 1941 to coordinate civilian defense efforts. It coordinated with the [[Department of the Army]] and established similar groups to the British ARP. One of these groups that still exists today is the [[Civil Air Patrol]], which was originally created as a civilian auxiliary to the [[US Army|Army]]. The CAP was created on December 1, 1941, with the main civil defense mission of search and rescue. The CAP also sank two Axis submarines and provided aerial reconnaissance for Allied and neutral merchant ships.<ref>{{ | In the [[United States]], the [[Office of Civilian Defense]] was established in May 1941 to coordinate civilian defense efforts. It coordinated with the [[Department of the Army]] and established similar groups to the British ARP. One of these groups that still exists today is the [[Civil Air Patrol]], which was originally created as a civilian auxiliary to the [[US Army|Army]]. The CAP was created on December 1, 1941, with the main civil defense mission of search and rescue. The CAP also sank two Axis submarines and provided aerial reconnaissance for Allied and neutral merchant ships.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/about|title=Who We Are | Civil Air Patrol National Headquarters}}</ref> In 1946, the Civil Air Patrol was barred from combat by [[Public Law 79-476]]. The CAP then received its current mission: search and rescue for downed aircraft. When the [[United States Air Force|Air Force]] was created, in 1947, the Civil Air Patrol became the auxiliary of the [[United States Air Force|Air Force]].<ref>Texas Wing Civil Air Patrol 2014 Summer Encampment Standard Operating Instructions (SOI)</ref> | ||
The [[Coast Guard Auxiliary]] performs a similar role in support of the [[United States Coast Guard|U.S. Coast Guard]].<ref>{{cite web |date=2016-05-14 |title=About the Coast Guard Auxiliary and District 11 Southern Region |url= http://www.d11s.org/modules/narrative.mod.php?story=ABOUT |work=United States Coast Guard Auxiliary -District 11 Southern Region |access-date= 2016-08-19}}</ref> Like the Civil Air Patrol, the Coast Guard Auxiliary was established in the run up to World War II. Auxiliarists were sometimes armed during the war, and extensively participated in port security operations. After the war, the Auxiliary shifted its focus to promoting boating safety and assisting the Coast Guard in performing search and rescue and marine safety and environmental protection. | The [[Coast Guard Auxiliary]] performs a similar role in support of the [[United States Coast Guard|U.S. Coast Guard]].<ref>{{cite web |date=2016-05-14 |title=About the Coast Guard Auxiliary and District 11 Southern Region |url= http://www.d11s.org/modules/narrative.mod.php?story=ABOUT |work=United States Coast Guard Auxiliary -District 11 Southern Region |access-date= 2016-08-19}}</ref> Like the Civil Air Patrol, the Coast Guard Auxiliary was established in the run up to World War II. Auxiliarists were sometimes armed during the war, and extensively participated in port security operations. After the war, the Auxiliary shifted its focus to promoting boating safety and assisting the Coast Guard in performing search and rescue and marine safety and environmental protection. | ||
| Line 53: | Line 54: | ||
{{See also|Leon Gouré}} | {{See also|Leon Gouré}} | ||
[[File:falloutprotection.jpg|thumb | [[File:falloutprotection.jpg|thumb|Civil Defense literature, such as ''Fallout Protection'', was common during the [[Cold War]] era.]] | ||
In most of the states of the [[North Atlantic Treaty Organization]], such as the [[United States]], the [[United Kingdom]] and [[West Germany]], as well as the [[Soviet Bloc]], and especially in the neutral countries, such as [[Switzerland]] and in [[Sweden]] during the 1950s and 1960s, many civil defense practices took place to prepare for the aftermath of a [[Nuclear warfare|nuclear war]], which seemed quite likely at that time.<ref>{{cite journal |last=McReynolds |first=David |title=Ralph DiGia, 1914–2008 |journal=The Catholic Worker |year=2008 |volume=LXXV |issue=March–April |pages=6}}</ref> | In most of the states of the [[North Atlantic Treaty Organization]], such as the [[United States]], the [[United Kingdom]] and [[West Germany]], as well as the [[Soviet Bloc]], and especially in the neutral countries, such as [[Switzerland]] and in [[Sweden]] during the 1950s and 1960s, many civil defense practices took place to prepare for the aftermath of a [[Nuclear warfare|nuclear war]], which seemed quite likely at that time.<ref>{{cite journal |last=McReynolds |first=David |title=Ralph DiGia, 1914–2008 |journal=The Catholic Worker |year=2008 |volume=LXXV |issue=March–April |pages=6}}</ref> | ||
| Line 60: | Line 61: | ||
Each division was divided into several sections, including the Headquarters, Intelligence and Operations, Scientific and Reconnaissance, Warden & Rescue, Ambulance and First Aid and Welfare. | Each division was divided into several sections, including the Headquarters, Intelligence and Operations, Scientific and Reconnaissance, Warden & Rescue, Ambulance and First Aid and Welfare. | ||
In 1954 [[Coventry City Council]] caused international controversy when it announced plans to disband its Civil Defence committee because the councillors had decided that hydrogen bombs meant that there could be no recovery from a nuclear attack. The British government opposed such a move and held a provocative Civil Defence exercise on the streets of Coventry which Labour council members protested against.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Barnett |first=Nicholas |date=2015-07-03 |title='No protection against the H-bomb': press and popular reactions to the Coventry civil defence controversy, 1954 |journal=Cold War History |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=277–300 |doi=10.1080/14682745.2014.968558 |hdl=10026.1/9392 |s2cid=154550156 |issn=1468-2745|url= | In 1954 [[Coventry City Council]] caused international controversy when it announced plans to disband its Civil Defence committee because the councillors had decided that hydrogen bombs meant that there could be no recovery from a nuclear attack. The British government opposed such a move and held a provocative Civil Defence exercise on the streets of Coventry which Labour council members protested against.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Barnett |first=Nicholas |date=2015-07-03 |title='No protection against the H-bomb': press and popular reactions to the Coventry civil defence controversy, 1954 |journal=Cold War History |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=277–300 |doi=10.1080/14682745.2014.968558 |hdl=10026.1/9392 |s2cid=154550156 |issn=1468-2745|url=https://salford-repository.worktribe.com/output/1368263/no-protection-against-the-h-bomb-press-and-popular-reactions-to-the-coventry-civil-defence-controversy-1954 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200306090815/https://salford-repository.worktribe.com/output/1368263/no-protection-against-the-h-bomb-press-and-popular-reactions-to-the-coventry-civil-defence-controversy-1954 |archive-date=2020-03-06 |url-status=live}}</ref> The government also decided to implement its own committee at the city's cost until the council reinstituted its committee. | ||
In the '''United States''', the sheer power of [[nuclear weapon]]s and the perceived likelihood of such an attack precipitated a greater response than had yet been required of civil defense. Civil defense, previously considered an important and commonsense step, became divisive and controversial in the charged atmosphere of the [[Cold War]]. In 1950, the [[National Security Resources Board]] created a 162-page document outlining a model civil defense structure for the U.S. | In the '''United States''', the sheer power of [[nuclear weapon]]s and the perceived likelihood of such an attack precipitated a greater response than had yet been required of civil defense. Civil defense, previously considered an important and commonsense step, became divisive and controversial in the charged atmosphere of the [[Cold War]]. In 1950, the [[National Security Resources Board]] created a 162-page document outlining a model civil defense structure for the U.S. Called the "Blue Book" by civil defense professionals in reference to its solid blue cover, it was the template for legislation and organization for the next 40 years.<ref>National Security Resources Board. United States Civil Defense. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 1950. LCCN 51060552.</ref> | ||
[[File:SurvivalUnderAtomicAttack.jpg|thumb|left | [[File:SurvivalUnderAtomicAttack.jpg|thumb|left|Civil Defense literature, such as [[Survival Under Atomic Attack]], was common during the Cold War Era.]] | ||
Perhaps the most memorable aspect of the Cold War civil defense effort was the educational effort made or promoted by the government.<ref>{{cite book|editor1-last=Scheibach|editor1-first=Michael|title="In Case Atom Bombs Fall": An Anthology of Governmental Explanations, Instructions and Warnings from the 1940s to the 1960s|date=2009|publisher=McFarland & Company|location=Jefferson, NC|isbn=978-0-7864-4541-7}}</ref> | Perhaps the most memorable aspect of the Cold War civil defense effort was the educational effort made or promoted by the government.<ref>{{cite book|editor1-last=Scheibach|editor1-first=Michael|title="In Case Atom Bombs Fall": An Anthology of Governmental Explanations, Instructions and Warnings from the 1940s to the 1960s|date=2009|publisher=McFarland & Company|location=Jefferson, NC|isbn=978-0-7864-4541-7}}</ref> In ''[[Duck and Cover (film)|Duck and Cover]]'', [[Bert the Turtle]] advocated that children "[[duck and cover]]" when they "see the [[nuclear fireball|flash]]." Booklets such as ''[[Survival Under Atomic Attack]]'', ''[[Fallout Protection]]'' and ''[[Nuclear War Survival Skills]]'' were also commonplace. The transcribed radio program [[Stars for Defense]] combined hit music with civil defense advice. Government institutes created [[public service announcements]] including children's songs and distributed them to radio stations to educate the public in case of nuclear attack. | ||
[[File:US and USSR nuclear stockpiles.svg|thumb|The United States and [[Soviet Union]]/Russia nuclear stockpiles, in [[Historical nuclear weapons stockpiles and nuclear tests by country|total number of nuclear bombs/warheads in existence]] throughout the [[Cold War]] and post-Cold War era. However, total ''deployed'' US & "Russian" strategic weapons (ready for use) were far less than this, reaching a maximum of about 10,000 apiece in the 1980s.<ref>[http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/3524/worth-the-wait Hans M. Kristensen 2012, "Estimated US-Russian Nuclear Warhead Inventories 1977–2018.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150112224012/http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/3524/worth-the-wait |date=2015-01-12 }}"</ref>]] | [[File:US and USSR nuclear stockpiles.svg|thumb|The United States and [[Soviet Union]]/Russia nuclear stockpiles, in [[Historical nuclear weapons stockpiles and nuclear tests by country|total number of nuclear bombs/warheads in existence]] throughout the [[Cold War]] and post-Cold War era. However, total ''deployed'' US & "Russian" strategic weapons (ready for use) were far less than this, reaching a maximum of about 10,000 apiece in the 1980s.<ref>[http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/3524/worth-the-wait Hans M. Kristensen 2012, "Estimated US-Russian Nuclear Warhead Inventories 1977–2018.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150112224012/http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/3524/worth-the-wait |date=2015-01-12 }}"</ref>]] | ||
The US [[President Kennedy]] ( | The US [[President Kennedy]] (1961–1963) launched an ambitious effort to install fallout shelters throughout the United States. These shelters would not protect against the blast and heat effects of nuclear weapons, but would provide some protection against the radiation effects that would last for weeks and even affect areas distant from a nuclear explosion. In order for most of these preparations to be effective, there had to be some degree of warning. In 1951, [[CONELRAD]] (Control of Electromagnetic Radiation) was established. Under the system, a few primary stations would be alerted of an emergency and would broadcast an alert. All broadcast stations throughout the country would be constantly listening to an upstream station and repeat the message, thus passing it from station to station. | ||
In a once classified US [[Military simulation|war game]] analysis, looking at varying levels of war escalation, warning and pre-emptive attacks in the late 1950s early 1960s, it was estimated that approximately 27 million US citizens would have been saved with civil defense education.<ref name="nsarchive.gwu.edu">{{cite web| url = http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb480/docs/doc%2010A%201963.pdf| title = Net Evaluation Subcommittee. page 27}}</ref> At the time, however, the cost of a full-scale civil defense program was regarded as less effective in [[cost-benefit analysis]] than a [[ballistic missile defense]] ([[Nike Zeus]]) system, and as the Soviet adversary was increasing their [[nuclear stockpile]], the [[efficacy]] of both would follow a [[diminishing returns]] trend.<ref name="nsarchive.gwu.edu" /> | In a once classified US [[Military simulation|war game]] analysis, looking at varying levels of war escalation, warning and pre-emptive attacks in the late 1950s early 1960s, it was estimated that approximately 27 million US citizens would have been saved with civil defense education.<ref name="nsarchive.gwu.edu">{{cite web |url=http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb480/docs/doc%2010A%201963.pdf |title=Net Evaluation Subcommittee. page 27}}</ref> At the time, however, the cost of a full-scale civil defense program was regarded as less effective in [[cost-benefit analysis]] than a [[ballistic missile defense]] ([[Nike Zeus]]) system, and as the Soviet adversary was increasing their [[nuclear stockpile]], the [[efficacy]] of both would follow a [[diminishing returns]] trend.<ref name="nsarchive.gwu.edu" /> | ||
Contrary to the largely noncommittal approach taken in [[NATO]], with its stops and starts in civil defense depending on the whims of each newly elected government, the military strategy in the comparatively more ideologically consistent [[USSR]] held that, amongst other things, a winnable nuclear war was possible.<ref name=Pipes>{{cite web |url=http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |title=Why the Soviet Union Thinks It Could Fight and Win a Nuclear War |author=Richard Pipes |publisher=Commentary [[Reed College]] |year=1977 |access-date=September 4, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131214024826/http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |archive-date=December 14, 2013 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/63015546/Why-Russia-Thinks-It-Could-Fight-and-Win-a-Nuclear-War |title=Why the Soviet Union thinks it can fight and win a Nuclear War |author=Richard Pipes |magazine=Commentary |year=1977 |access-date=April 21, 2013 | Contrary to the largely noncommittal approach taken in [[NATO]], with its stops and starts in civil defense depending on the whims of each newly elected government, the military strategy in the comparatively more ideologically consistent [[USSR]] held that, amongst other things, a winnable nuclear war was possible.<ref name=Pipes>{{cite web |url=http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |title=Why the Soviet Union Thinks It Could Fight and Win a Nuclear War |author=Richard Pipes |publisher=Commentary [[Reed College]] |year=1977 |access-date=September 4, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131214024826/http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |archive-date=December 14, 2013 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/63015546/Why-Russia-Thinks-It-Could-Fight-and-Win-a-Nuclear-War |title=Why the Soviet Union thinks it can fight and win a Nuclear War |author=Richard Pipes |magazine=Commentary |year=1977 |access-date=April 21, 2013 |archive-date=May 10, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130510102637/http://www.scribd.com/doc/63015546/Why-Russia-Thinks-It-Could-Fight-and-Win-a-Nuclear-War |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="gwu.edu">{{cite web|url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv//nukevault/ebb285 |title=Previously Classified Interviews with Former Soviet Officials Reveal U.S. Strategic Intelligence Failure Over Decades |editor1-last=Burr |editor1-first=William |editor2-last=Savranskaya |editor2-first=Svetlana |date=September 11, 2009 |location=[[Washington, D.C.]] |access-date=April 21, 2013}}</ref> To this effect the [[Soviet]]s planned to minimize, as far as possible, the effects of nuclear weapon strikes on its territory, and therefore spent considerably more thought on civil defense preparations than in U.S., with defense plans that have been assessed to be far more effective than those in the U.S.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1977/mar-apr/dorough.html |title=Soviet Civil Defense U.S.S.R. preparations for industrial-base war survival. |author=Captain John W. Dorough Jr. |publisher=Air University Review, March–April 1977 |access-date=September 4, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131217102003/http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1977/mar-apr/dorough.html |archive-date=December 17, 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/30948/john-c-campbell/war-survival-in-soviet-strategy-ussr-civil-defense |title=War Survival in Soviet Strategy: USSR Civil Defense |magazine=[[Foreign Affairs]] |author=Leon Gouré Reviewed by John C. Campbell |year=1977}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |title=Why the Soviet Union Thinks It Could Fight and Win a Nuclear War |author=Richard Pipes |publisher=Commentary[[Reed College]] |year=1977 |access-date=September 4, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131214024826/http://people.reed.edu/~ahm/Courses/Reed-POL-422-2012-S1_NP/Syllabus/EReadings/05.2/05.2.Pipes1977Why-the-Soviet-Union.pdf |archive-date=December 14, 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>[Was There a Real "Mineshaft Gap"? Bomb Shelters in the USSR, 1945–1962 Edward Geist doi.org/10.1162/JCWS_a_00219]</ref> | ||
Soviet Civil Defense Troops played the main role in the massive disaster relief operation following the [[Chernobyl accident|1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident]]. Defense Troop [[reservists]] were officially [[mobilization|mobilized]] (as in a case of war) from throughout the USSR to join the Chernobyl task force and formed on the basis of the [[Kyiv]] Civil Defense Brigade. The task force performed some high-risk tasks including, with the failure of their robotic machinery, the manual removal of highly-[[radioactivity|radioactive]] debris. Many of their personnel were later [[Liquidator (Chernobyl)|decorated with medals for their work at containing the release of radiation into the environment]], with a number{{quantify|date=August 2015}} of [[Deaths due to the Chernobyl disaster|the 56 deaths from the accident]] being Civil defense troops.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://www.history.com/topics/1980s/chernobyl| title = Chernobyl: Disaster, Response & Fallout | Soviet Civil Defense Troops played the main role in the massive disaster relief operation following the [[Chernobyl accident|1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident]]. Defense Troop [[reservists]] were officially [[mobilization|mobilized]] (as in a case of war) from throughout the USSR to join the Chernobyl task force and formed on the basis of the [[Kyiv]] Civil Defense Brigade. The task force performed some high-risk tasks including, with the failure of their robotic machinery, the manual removal of highly-[[radioactivity|radioactive]] debris. Many of their personnel were later [[Liquidator (Chernobyl)|decorated with medals for their work at containing the release of radiation into the environment]], with a number{{quantify|date=August 2015}} of [[Deaths due to the Chernobyl disaster|the 56 deaths from the accident]] being Civil defense troops.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.history.com/topics/1980s/chernobyl |title=Chernobyl: Disaster, Response & Fallout – HISTORY |date=23 April 2021}}</ref> | ||
[[File:Swiss Civil Defense Bunker (15710856390).jpg|thumb|The reinforced door of a [[fallout shelter]] of the civil protection in [[Switzerland]]. As of 2006, there were about 300,000 shelters in private and public buildings for a total of 8.6 million places, a level of coverage corresponding to 114% of the Swiss population.<ref name=SWI>{{in lang|fr}} Daniele Mariani, [http://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/a-chacun-son-bunker/7485678 "À chacun son bunker"], [[Swissinfo]], 23 October 2009 (page visited on 5 August 2015).</ref>]] | [[File:Swiss Civil Defense Bunker (15710856390).jpg|thumb|The reinforced door of a [[fallout shelter]] of the civil protection in [[Switzerland]]. As of 2006, there were about 300,000 shelters in private and public buildings for a total of 8.6 million places, a level of coverage corresponding to 114% of the Swiss population.<ref name=SWI>{{in lang|fr}} Daniele Mariani, [http://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/a-chacun-son-bunker/7485678 "À chacun son bunker"], [[Swissinfo]], 23 October 2009 (page visited on 5 August 2015).</ref>]] | ||
| Line 99: | Line 100: | ||
In the United States, the federal civil defense program was authorized by statute and ran from 1951 to 1994. Originally authorized by Public Law 920 of the 81st Congress, it was repealed by Public Law 93–337 in 1994. Small portions of that statutory scheme were incorporated into the [[Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act|Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act]] (Public Law 100–707) which partly superseded in part, partly amended, and partly supplemented the [[Disaster Relief Act of 1974]] (Public Law 93-288). In the portions of the civil defense statute incorporated into the Stafford Act, the primary modification was to use the term "Emergency Preparedness" wherever the term "Civil Defence" had previously appeared in the statutory language. | In the United States, the federal civil defense program was authorized by statute and ran from 1951 to 1994. Originally authorized by Public Law 920 of the 81st Congress, it was repealed by Public Law 93–337 in 1994. Small portions of that statutory scheme were incorporated into the [[Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act|Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act]] (Public Law 100–707) which partly superseded in part, partly amended, and partly supplemented the [[Disaster Relief Act of 1974]] (Public Law 93-288). In the portions of the civil defense statute incorporated into the Stafford Act, the primary modification was to use the term "Emergency Preparedness" wherever the term "Civil Defence" had previously appeared in the statutory language. | ||
An important concept initiated by President [[Jimmy Carter]] was the so-called "Crisis Relocation Program" administered as part of the federal civil defense program. That effort largely lapsed under President Ronald Reagan, who discontinued the Carter initiative because of opposition from areas potentially hosting the relocated population.<ref>See [http://www.fas.or/irp/offdocs/prm/prm32.pdf Presidential Review Memorandum/NSC-32]{{Dead link|date=July 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} (September 30, 1977) and [https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pd/pd41.pdf Presidential Decision Memorandum 42]</ref> | An important concept initiated by President [[Jimmy Carter]] was the so-called "Crisis Relocation Program" administered as part of the federal civil defense program. That effort largely lapsed under President Ronald Reagan, who discontinued the Carter initiative because of opposition from areas potentially hosting the relocated population.<ref>See [http://www.fas.or/irp/offdocs/prm/prm32.pdf Presidential Review Memorandum/NSC-32]{{Dead link|date=July 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} (September 30, 1977) and [https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pd/pd41.pdf Presidential Decision Memorandum 42] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303211446/http://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pd/pd41.pdf |date=2016-03-03 }}</ref> | ||
== Threat assessment == | == Threat assessment == | ||
| Line 106: | Line 107: | ||
;Conventional: Refers to conventional explosives. A [[blast shelter]] designed to protect only from radiation and fallout would be much more vulnerable to conventional explosives. See also [[fallout shelter]]. | ;Conventional: Refers to conventional explosives. A [[blast shelter]] designed to protect only from radiation and fallout would be much more vulnerable to conventional explosives. See also [[fallout shelter]]. | ||
;Nuclear: Shelter intended to protect against nuclear blast effects would include thick concrete and other sturdy elements which are resistant to conventional explosives. The biggest threats from a nuclear attack are effects from the blast, fires and radiation. One of the most prepared countries for a nuclear attack is [[Switzerland]]. Almost every building in Switzerland has an ''abri'' (shelter) against the initial nuclear bomb and explosion followed by the fall-out.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304231204576405700994655570?mod=WSJEUROPE_hpp_sections_world | work=The Wall Street Journal | first=Deborah | last=Ball | title=Swiss Renew Push for Bomb Shelters | date=2011-06-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url= | ;Nuclear: Shelter intended to protect against nuclear blast effects would include thick concrete and other sturdy elements which are resistant to conventional explosives. The biggest threats from a nuclear attack are effects from the blast, fires and radiation. One of the most prepared countries for a nuclear attack is [[Switzerland]]. Almost every building in Switzerland has an ''abri'' (shelter) against the initial nuclear bomb and explosion followed by the fall-out.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304231204576405700994655570?mod=WSJEUROPE_hpp_sections_world | work=The Wall Street Journal | first=Deborah | last=Ball | title=Swiss Renew Push for Bomb Shelters | date=2011-06-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6347519.stm | work=BBC News | first=Imogen | last=Foulkes | title=Swiss still braced for nuclear war | date=2007-02-10}}</ref> Because of this, many people use it as a safe to protect valuables, photos, financial information and so on. Switzerland also has air-raid and nuclear-raid sirens in every village. | ||
;Dirty bomb: A "radiologically enhanced weapon", or "[[dirty bomb]]", uses an explosive to spread radioactive material. This is a theoretical risk, and such weapons have not been used by terrorists. Depending on the quantity of the radioactive material, the dangers may be mainly psychological. Toxic effects can be managed by standard [[dangerous goods|hazmat]] techniques. | ;Dirty bomb: A "radiologically enhanced weapon", or "[[dirty bomb]]", uses an explosive to spread radioactive material. This is a theoretical risk, and such weapons have not been used by terrorists. Depending on the quantity of the radioactive material, the dangers may be mainly psychological. Toxic effects can be managed by standard [[dangerous goods|hazmat]] techniques. | ||
;Biological: The threat here is primarily from disease-causing microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses. | ;Biological: The threat here is primarily from disease-causing microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses. | ||
| Line 115: | Line 116: | ||
=== Mitigation === | === Mitigation === | ||
[[File:T38.jpg|thumb|right|Civil defense logo on an Air raid [[siren (alarm)|siren]] control box in [[Kansas]], US]] | [[File:T38.jpg|thumb|right|Civil defense logo on an Air raid [[siren (alarm)|siren]] control box in [[Kansas]], US]] | ||
[[File:Civil Defense Logo.JPG|thumb | [[File:Civil Defense Logo.JPG|thumb|Civil Defense logo on a [[Thunderbolt siren|Thunderbolt 1003]] siren]] | ||
Mitigation is the process of actively preventing war or the release of [[nuclear weapon]]s. It includes policy analysis, diplomacy, political measures, [[nuclear disarmament]] and more military responses such as a [[National Missile Defense]] and [[air defense artillery]]. In the case of counter-terrorism, mitigation would include diplomacy, [[intelligence (information gathering)|intelligence]] gathering and direct action against terrorist groups. Mitigation may also be reflected in long-term planning such as the design of the [[interstate highway]] system and the placement of military bases further away from populated areas. | Mitigation is the process of actively preventing war or the release of [[nuclear weapon]]s. It includes policy analysis, diplomacy, political measures, [[nuclear disarmament]] and more military responses such as a [[National Missile Defense]] and [[air defense artillery]]. In the case of counter-terrorism, mitigation would include diplomacy, [[intelligence (information gathering)|intelligence]] gathering and direct action against terrorist groups. Mitigation may also be reflected in long-term planning such as the design of the [[interstate highway]] system and the placement of military bases further away from populated areas. | ||
| Line 141: | Line 142: | ||
Response consists first of warning civilians so they can enter [[fallout shelter]]s and protect assets. | Response consists first of warning civilians so they can enter [[fallout shelter]]s and protect assets. | ||
Staffing a response is always full of problems in a civil defense emergency. After an attack, conventional full-time emergency services are dramatically overloaded, with conventional fire fighting response times often exceeding several days. Some capability is maintained by local and state agencies, and an emergency reserve is provided by specialized military units, especially [[ | Staffing a response is always full of problems in a civil defense emergency. After an attack, conventional full-time emergency services are dramatically overloaded, with conventional fire fighting response times often exceeding several days. Some capability is maintained by local and state agencies, and an emergency reserve is provided by specialized military units, especially [[civil affairs]], [[military police]], [[judge advocate]]s and [[combat engineer]]s. | ||
However, the traditional response to massed attack on civilian population centers is to maintain a mass-trained force of volunteer emergency workers. Studies in [[World War II]] showed that lightly trained (40 hours or less) civilians in organised teams can perform up to 95% of emergency activities when trained, liaised and supported by local government. In this plan, the populace rescues itself from most situations, and provides information to a central office to prioritize professional emergency services. | However, the traditional response to massed attack on civilian population centers is to maintain a mass-trained force of volunteer emergency workers. Studies in [[World War II]] showed that lightly trained (40 hours or less) civilians in organised teams can perform up to 95% of emergency activities when trained, liaised and supported by local government. In this plan, the populace rescues itself from most situations, and provides information to a central office to prioritize professional emergency services. | ||
In the 1990s, this concept was revived by the [[Los Angeles Fire Department]] to cope with civil emergencies such as [[earthquake]]s. The program was widely adopted, providing standard terms for organization. In the U.S., this is now official federal policy, and it is implemented by [[community emergency response team]]s, under the Department of Homeland Security, which certifies training programs by local governments, and registers "certified disaster service workers" who complete such training. | In the 1990s, this concept was revived by the [[Los Angeles Fire Department]] to cope with civil emergencies such as [[earthquake]]s. The program was widely adopted, providing standard terms for organization. In the U.S., this is now official federal policy, and it is implemented by [[community emergency response team]]s, under the Department of Homeland Security, which certifies training programs by local governments, and registers "certified disaster service workers" who complete such training. | ||
=== Recovery === | === Recovery === | ||
| Line 173: | Line 173: | ||
{{cmn| | {{cmn| | ||
* [[The American Civil Defense Association]] | * [[The American Civil Defense Association]] | ||
* [[Blast shelter]] | * [[Blast shelter]] | ||
* [[Civil Defense geiger counters|Civil-defense Geiger counters]] | * [[Civil Defense geiger counters|Civil-defense Geiger counters]] | ||
| Line 183: | Line 182: | ||
* [[Emergency management]] | * [[Emergency management]] | ||
* [[Fallout shelter]] | * [[Fallout shelter]] | ||
* [[French Civil Protection]] | |||
* [[International Civil Defence Organization]] | * [[International Civil Defence Organization]] | ||
* [[List of civil defense ranks]] | |||
* [[Mass fatality incident]] | * [[Mass fatality incident]] | ||
* [[State Council of Civil Defense]] | * [[State Council of Civil Defense]] | ||
}} | }} | ||
=== General === | |||
* [[Human security]] | * [[Human security]] | ||
* [[Industrial antiterrorism]] | * [[Industrial antiterrorism]] | ||
* [[Infrastructure security]] | * [[Infrastructure security]] | ||
* [[Nuclear holocaust]] | |||
* [[Nuclear terrorism]] | |||
* [[Nuclear warfare]] | |||
* [[Survivalism]] | * [[Survivalism]] | ||
* [[Weapon of mass destruction]] | * [[Weapon of mass destruction]] | ||
| Line 231: | Line 231: | ||
* [http://www.thw.de/EN/Homepage/homepage_node.html German Federal Agency for Technical Relief] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140511014238/http://www.thw.de/EN/Homepage/homepage_node.html |date=2014-05-11 }} – THW Technisches Hilfswerk | * [http://www.thw.de/EN/Homepage/homepage_node.html German Federal Agency for Technical Relief] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140511014238/http://www.thw.de/EN/Homepage/homepage_node.html |date=2014-05-11 }} – THW Technisches Hilfswerk | ||
{{Civil defence}} | |||
{{Subterranea}} | |||
{{Authority control}} | {{Authority control}} | ||
[[Category:Civil defense| ]] | [[Category:Civil defense| ]] | ||