AI, Drones and Synthetic Biology: The New WMD Threat

Editorial disclosure: this article is based primarily on "A Weapons of Mass Destruction Strategy for the 21st Century" by Al Mauroni, Zachary Kallenborn, W. Seth Carus, and retired Colonel Ron Fizer, published by War on the Rocks and officially republished by the National Defense University. The opening customs scene is illustrative — it is not a report of a specific discovered plot. This article does not claim that AI, synthetic biology, 3D printing, or commercial drones automatically constitute weapons of mass destruction, or that a specific technology-enabled attack is imminent. Al Mauroni, Zachary Kallenborn, W. Seth Carus, Ron Fizer, War on the Rocks, the National Defense University, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the OPCW are not affiliated with CBRNMASKS.COM and have not endorsed the company or its products. Analysis, preparedness conclusions, and product recommendations are by David Magen alone.

"The weapon may still be physical. The capability that makes it possible may cross the world without entering a shipping container."

At 2:17 in the morning, a customs officer opens a shipment of small commercial drones. The airframes are legal. The batteries are ordinary. The spray nozzles are sold for agriculture. Nothing in the box resembles a weapon of mass destruction. The dangerous component crossed the border three days earlier as a file — containing modified control software, a three-dimensional printer design for a restricted part, and an artificial-intelligence model trained to adjust release height and direction according to wind. The chemical or biological material is not in the shipment. It will be added later, closer to the target. The officer can seize the drones. He cannot inspect every line of code that has already arrived.

That is the strategic problem Al Mauroni, Zachary Kallenborn, W. Seth Carus, and retired Colonel Ron Fizer placed before the national-security community. The twentieth-century system was built to find factories, stockpiles, missiles, and specialized machinery. The twenty-first-century threat can be assembled from legitimate technologies that become dangerous only when they converge.

This analysis is best read alongside AI, drug discovery and bioweapon risk and chemical-biological drone-swarm threats. Together, they connect the threat picture with its operational and civilian-preparedness implications.

Four Experts, One Obsolete Map

Al Mauroni has spent roughly four decades working on U.S. military chemical and biological defense and counter-WMD policy, directing the U.S. Air Force Center for Strategic Deterrence Studies. Zachary Kallenborn researches global catastrophic risk, drone warfare, and weapons of mass destruction at King's College London — the U.S. Army has formally described him as a "Mad Scientist" for challenging conventional military assumptions. Dr. W. Seth Carus is an emeritus distinguished professor at the National Defense University's Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction, previously serving in the White House as senior adviser to the Vice President for biodefense. Retired Colonel Ron Fizer brought thirty years of experience across the U.S. Army, Joint Staff, and Office of the Secretary of Defense. Together, they were not arguing that every new technology should be called a weapon of mass destruction — they were asking whether an old label was preventing governments from seeing how catastrophic capabilities were changing.

A Name Created for the Age of the Atomic Bomb

The United Nations defined weapons of mass destruction in 1948 around atomic explosives, radioactive-material weapons, and lethal chemical and biological weapons. That image — a large weapon, produced by a state, held in a stockpile, delivered by a military system — still describes many genuine threats. It does not describe all of them. A cyber weapon can spread globally without an explosion. A drone swarm may distribute destructive power across hundreds of cheap aircraft. A synthetic-biological system may begin as data rather than a vial. A chemical assassination can have enormous political effect while killing only one person. The important word may no longer be mass — it may be effect.

When the Warhead Becomes Software

Traditional nonproliferation focuses on physical bottlenecks. Nuclear programs require specialized materials and infrastructure. Chemical-weapons programs require precursors, production systems, and munitions. Biological programs require organisms, equipment, and trained personnel. Governments try to control these pathways through export rules, inspections, intelligence, and interdiction. Digital technologies weaken some of those bottlenecks. A three-dimensional printer file can reproduce a component that would once have required a controlled supplier. Drone-control software can be copied indefinitely. Artificial intelligence can help search chemical or biological possibilities faster than a small human team. Cyber espionage can steal knowledge that took another country years to develop. The physical product still matters — but the point at which intervention is possible can move closer to the moment of use.

The Drone Does Not Need to Carry Much

Chemical and biological weapons have always faced a delivery problem — an agent must reach the target in the correct form, concentration, and environmental conditions. Drones can change that calculation. When combined with sensors and automated navigation, small aircraft can approach from several directions, adjust to conditions, and release much closer to the intended target. The authors warned that greater precision could make smaller quantities of agent operationally useful — and that a system marketed as more precise may tempt users to believe they can employ toxic agents while controlling escalation. In 2025, the OPCW reported finding the riot-control agent CS in grenade and environmental samples from Ukraine, with a very low level also detected on a wipe from a recovered FPV drone. By 2026, the OPCW Secretariat was formally monitoring developments in unmanned aerial systems for their implications under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Biology Can Now Begin in a Data Center

Synthetic biology allows scientists to design and modify biological systems with increasing precision. Gene editing, automated laboratories, and AI-assisted protein design can accelerate beneficial work in medicine, agriculture, and industry. The same progress creates dual-use risk. A biological-weapons program once depended heavily on locating and cultivating a known organism. Future misuse may include altering known agents, searching for unfamiliar biological functions, or designing proteins that no existing watchlist would identify. The 2022 Nature Machine Intelligence experiment — in which a drug-discovery AI was redirected toward toxicity and generated approximately 40,000 candidate toxic molecules in under six hours — demonstrated how quickly a legitimate tool can illuminate dangerous chemical space.

Who Owns the System No Longer Defines Who Controls the Risk

The authors' deepest concern was not about one specific technology. It was about convergence. A group that cannot design a weapon from scratch may assemble the necessary components from multiple legitimate markets: biology from an academic paper, chemistry from a public database, a drone from a commercial supplier, delivery software from a code repository, and manufacturing from a contract facility. No single component attracts attention. The capability emerges only when they are combined. Export controls designed around individual precursors, individual organisms, or individual machinery have limited ability to prevent this kind of assembly — especially when much of the knowledge travels as data.

The Threat Demands a Response Faster Than Regulation

The 2023 U.S. Department of Defense Strategy for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction describes the evolution of the threat landscape toward more accessible technology. The DoD Chemical and Biological Defense Program Enterprise Strategy addresses the need to maintain capabilities against a threat environment that is changing faster than arms-control regimes designed for state programs. Neither document claims the problem is solved. Both describe a requirement for adaptability that traditional WMD strategies were not designed to provide.

What Families Can Control

The technology convergence Mauroni, Kallenborn, Carus, and Fizer described is a problem for governments, intelligence agencies, and arms-control institutions. For families, the practical implication is simpler: the variety of possible hazards is expanding, the delivery systems available to potential attackers are becoming smaller and cheaper, and protective equipment that must be purchased, assembled, and understood after the emergency begins may arrive too late or perform worse than expected. Preparing before uncertainty arrives is not paranoia — it is a reasonable response to a threat environment that expert consensus says is genuinely changing.

Building a Practical Family Respiratory-Protection Kit

Adults: the Israeli 4A1 Black Diamond Simplex — genuine Israeli full-face civil-defense mask with panoramic visor, hydration tube, and standard 40mm filter connection. For bearded users: the Israeli Sapphire PAPR hood.

Children, ages 2–8: the MAMTAK / Quartz child PAPR hood — powered transparent hood for younger children who cannot reliably use a conventional tight-fitting mask.

Infants and toddlers, ages 0–2: the Multipro infant protection system.

Children, ages 8–14: the Israeli 10A1 child gas mask with 40mm filter connection and hydration tube.

Filters: Israeli PA-12 and M80 Type 80 40mm CBRN/NBC filters — factory-sealed, available individually and in multi-filter configurations. Product suitability depends on the complete documented configuration, hazard, concentration, wearer, and task.

Explore the Israeli CBRN Family Bundle or the complete range at CBRNMASKS.COM.

Protect Your Family

4A1 for adults, Sapphire for beards, MAMTAK / Quartz for ages 2–8, Multipro for infants. Sealed 40mm filters for every mask. Israeli CBRN Family Bundle for the complete household. CBRNMASKS.COM — Israeli civil-defense equipment, in service since 2009.

Primary Sources

Analysis and preparedness conclusions by David Magen — former Combat Investigation Officer, Doctrine and Training Division, IDF Operations Directorate; former Staff Officer, National Emergency Authority, continuity planning for local authorities, Haifa region. Founder of CBRNMASKS.COM since 2009. Al Mauroni, Zachary Kallenborn, W. Seth Carus, Ron Fizer, War on the Rocks, the National Defense University, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the OPCW are not affiliated with CBRNMASKS.COM and have not endorsed the company or its products.

Back to blog