Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Global Issues Series ((GLOISS))

Abstract

As the sciences of chemistry and biology developed in the twentieth century the international community, as noted in the first chapter, agreed a series of arms control and disarmament treaties aimed at restricting the use of such weapons. However, they made a far from easy or rapid progress and, as the recent use of nerve agent in Syria demonstrates, is not yet successfully concluded.1 Debate continues over why the US President called the use of such chemical weapons a ‘red line’ that should not be crossed. One reason is that such use opens up the possibility that these weapons, rather than being off limits, become an acceptable method of warfare. Then, all manner of novel weapons involving the misuse of the sciences of chemistry and biology could quickly be developed and used as the non-proliferation regime eroded.2 The 1925 Geneva Protocol may be a very simple document by modern standards but, as shown in the first chapter, it does clearly state this principle of non-use and has become widely accepted as a customary international law binding on all states.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Sample, I. and Borger, J. (2013) UK and France pass on evidence of sarin use in Syria. The Guardian (London), 5 June, p. 1

    Google Scholar 

  2. Perry Robinson, J. P. (2008) Difficulties facing the Chemical Weapons Convention. International Affairs, 84(2), 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dando, M. R. (1994) Biological Warfare in the 21st Century: Biotechnology and the Proliferation of Biological Weapons. London: Brassey’s. (pp. 65–85).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sims, N. A. (2001) The Evolution of Biological Disarmament. SIPRI Chemical and Biological Warfare Studies No. 19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dando, M. R. (2002) Preventing Biological Warfare: The Failure of American Leadership. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Littlewood, J. (2005) The Biological Weapons Convention: A Failed Revolution. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Canada, Czech Republic and Switzerland (2012) National Implementation of the BTWC: Compliance Assessment: Update. BWC/MSP/WP.6. United Nations, Geneva, 5 December.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Seventh Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Developm ent, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (2012) Final Declaration. BWC/CONRVII/7. United Nations, Geneva, 13 Januar

    Google Scholar 

  9. Reference 4, p. 120.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reference 4, pp. 151–170.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pearson, G. S., Sims, N. A. and Dando, M. R. (2011) Strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention: Key Points for the Seventh Review Conference. University of Bradford, September.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Reference 4, p. 181.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Seventh Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (2011) Background Paper: New Scientific and Technological Developments Relevant to the Convention. BWC/CONRVII/rNR3/Add.l. United Nations, Geneva, 23 November, (p. 31

    Google Scholar 

  14. Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (n.d) Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction. OPCW, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kelle, A., Nixdorff, K. and Dando, M. R. (2012) Preventing a Biochemical Arms Race. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Reference 14, p. 49.

    Google Scholar 

  17. ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  18. ibid, p. 50.

    Google Scholar 

  19. ibid, p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  20. International Committee of the Red Cross (2012) Toxic Chemicals as Weapons for Law Enforcement: A Threat to Life and International Law: i) Synthesis, ii) Summary. Geneva: ICRC.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Riches, J. R. et al. (2012) Analysis of clothing and urine from Moscow theatre siege casualties reveals Carfentanil and Remifentanil use. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 36, 647–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rappert, B. and McLeish, C. (Eds) (2007) A Web of Prevention: Biological Weapons, Life Sciences and the Governance of Research. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kelle, A., Nixdorff, K. and Dando, M. R. (2006) Controlling Biochemical Weapons: Adapting Multilateral Arms Control for the 21st Century. Basingstoke: Pal grave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Reference 3, pp. 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  25. See reference 2.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Meselson, M. (2000) Averting the hostile exploitation of biotechnology. The Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions Bulletin, 48, 16–19.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2015 Malcolm Dando

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dando, M. (2015). The CBW Non-Proliferation Regime. In: Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological Weapons. Global Issues Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137381828_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics