Investigating the Potential Strategic Implications of COVID-19 for Biological Weapons Pursuit: A New Expert Simulation.

To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the strategic decisionmaking of leaders with respect to biological weapons, this study employed a prospective simulation technique called Asynchronous Strategic Dynamics Red Teaming. Using an immersive, multimedia simulation conducted remotely and asynchronously, the effort engaged 240 carefully selected and curated expert participants in either biological weapons or the countries of interest (as well as 60 naïve participants). Across our sample of 30 countries, simulated interest in pursuing some type of biological weapons program (defensive or offensive) remained low to moderate. While such interest increased after the simulated onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was limited overall, with only a handful of states showing salient increases in offensive biological weapon interest. When directly referencing why their countries might have changed their post-COVID-19 interest in biological weapons, the most commonly cited reasons were: (1) COVID-19 demonstrated the power of biological weapons to disrupt societies and cause large-scale economic harm, and (2) the pandemic revealed either the state's own or its rivals' vulnerability to diseases like COVID-19, as well as an inability to efficiently respond and contain such diseases. In sum, despite a global pandemic with massive consequences, the simulation revealed that most states are not likely to dramatically change their strategic posture regarding pursuit of offensive biological weapons.

Shifting Peaks and Cumulative Consequences: Disqualifying Convictions in High-security Jobs.

OBJECTIVES: Disqualifying conviction lists (DCLs) bar applicants with certain convictions within specified timeframes from employment. Using proposed federal legislative changes in the aviation sector as a case study, we examine whether convictions under the existing policy are associated with subsequent arrest. Then we consider the implications of proposed expansions-arrests instead of convictions and a longer look-back window-on employment restrictions. METHODS: Since DCLs exclude ineligible applicants with conviction records, we use a large, single-state sample of diverse criminal histories. We compare subsequent arrest rates across offense types, consider variations in hazard patterns, and project exclusion estimates based on current and anticipated policy reforms. RESULTS: Only half of the disqualifying offenses have consistently higher recidivism rates than non-disqualifying offense types. Over 20 percent of the sample would be barred from employment, policy extensions double this estimate, and exclusions are age-graded, shifting a peak conviction age of 20 years old to a peak "consequence age" of 28. CONCLUSIONS: Including a narrower set of offenses would reduce those automatically disqualified in our study context by nearly 20 percent, or 39,000 individuals. Instead of expanding the DCL scope, successful criteria should be both effective in prediction and narrow in application.