Memorandum

Main Page

Confidential, only for circulation within PENTFWC

Date: March 1 2005

To: PENTF Working Groups, Carl Landesberger, Michelle Ondonne

From: Cindy Reese, Home Office

Subject: Handling of nova incidents

The problem of handling erupting, deranged or malign novas is not confined to external novas but also novas within the ENA infrastructure. Future nova task forces must be organised to reflect this.

The stated goal of ENA is to help the Community to handle the impact of novas. One part of the active handling of novas consists of counter-terrorism efforts. The other part is a currently ill-defined effort to discover erupting novas, train them and if necessary neutralise them. At present there are various ongoing discussions about the proper format of this part of ENA activity within the PENTF working groups. One proposal is the formation of a pan-European nova task force handling all nova issues, another that there should exist two or three task forces with specific duties such as handling / educating eruptees and anti-terrorism.

The London incident demonstrates a problem with this approach. While it might achieve the best possible security from new novas, nova terrorism etc. it does not per se guarantee that the already existing novas remain safe. In fact, given the psychological strain documented among novas (see e.g. the Nice 2004 report on NNS and NPS) it seems reasonable to assume that not only would the task forces have serious sick leave issues but also be major foci of mental aberration. While keeping novas close to each other might reduce response times, there is also strong potential for folie á deux. Also, the loyalties created by working together may interfere with apprehending or even recognising misbehaviour. Oversight becomes complex – qui custodiet custodies? It is hence likely that the large nova teams suggested by the PENTF working groups would be counterproductive.

An alternative proposal would be to divide the task forces, surrounding each nova with a moderator team that can both complement their abilities and supply necessary skills, legal powers and monitoring. This appears to be the approach under development in the US. The benefits include early warning of psychological instability, prevention of unnecessary collusion, less concentrated power and the possibility of either pan-European or regional teams.

It is my suggestion that the PENTF consider this alternative structure before settling on a nova-centralised structure by default. Apparently ad hoc nova teams already exist; it is my opinion that such teams are very risky and should under no circumstances be allowed to turn into professional teams.