wmd: proliferation & verification

Weapons of mass destruction are arguably the most serious threat to international security. For four months between 27 November 2002 and 20 March 2003, UN inspectors were again in Iraq to track down and destroy any arsenal and/or development capacity for weapons of mass destruction. They didn’t succeed in their mission as US war overtook UN work. What does this mean for international efforts to limit proliferation? The Non-proliferation Treaty, Chemical Weapons Convention and Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention - Is it now time to give up on them?
Wednesday 21st December

Dangerous and provocative - is this Iran or the US?

Michael Walker, 21 December 2011
Iran captured a CIA Sentinel drone - now the Republicans want Obama to "go get it".
Friday 16th December

Damping the powder-keg: Paul Ingram responds to 'Playing with fire in the Middle East'

Paul Ingram, 16 December 2011
In the context of worsening relations between Iran, Syria and the west, Saeed Rahnema gave a bleak assessment of the likelihood of impending conflict. Though serious, Paul Ingram argues there are reasons to remain optimistic.
Thursday 3rd September

Criminalise WMD

Marlies Glasius, 3 September 2009
The time is right to get the threat or use of weapons of mass destruction defined as a crime
Monday 10th August

Note to Moldova: beware the Kiev trap!

Louis O’Neill, 10 August 2009
Although Moldova's elections were largely fair, the country's politics now risk going the way of Ukraine's, warns Louis O'Neill.
Thursday 26th April

The evisceration of a disarmament body

Bob Rigg, 26 April 2007
The chemical-weapons convention came into force on 29 April 1997. But the political manipulation of its lead organisation makes it hard for Bob Rigg, a former insider, to celebrate.

The chemical-weapons ban: test of practice

Ron G Manley, 26 April 2007
The international convention on chemical weapons is an example of what international cooperation in the global interest can achieve, says Ron G Manley.
Wednesday 8th October

The Iraq weapons report: a review

Ron G Manley, 8 October 2003
The Iraq Survey Group has just published its interim report on the Saddam regime’s weapons programmes and capabilities. Ron Manley, a chemical weapons expert who oversaw the United Nations inspection operations in Iraq in the early 1990s, assesses it.
Wednesday 9th July

Iraq and chemical weapons: a view from the inside

Ron G Manley, 9 July 2003
In both the United States and Britain, there is passionate contest over the legitimacy and honesty of government attempts to justify war with Iraq – especially claims of the existence of active Iraqi chemical weapons programmes. In an interview of profound insight, the man responsible for chemical weapons destruction operations in Iraq from 1991-94 talks to Anthony Barnett and Caspar Henderson of openDemocracy about the true extent of Iraq’s capacity to produce, store and deliver weapons of mass destruction.
Sunday 6th April

Another casualty of war: proliferation controls and verification protocols

Michael Rebehn, 6 April 2003
International efforts to limit the proliferation of dangerous weapons have focused recently on questions of verification. But there may be a deeper problem in the way that the spread of destructive power across the world is fuelled by the subjection of science and technology to political ambition.
Thursday 20th March

A nuclear-free world: in reply to Achilles Skordas

Robert Green, 20 March 2003
Achilles Skordas recently argued in openDemocracy that legalising nuclear weapons could help ensure they are never used. Now, a former Naval Commander makes the opposite case: not only must the use of nuclear weapons remain illegal, but the dangerous current crisis offers an opportunity to push for their complete abolition.
Friday 14th March

Don't panic: taking the terror out of terrorism

Red Thomas, 14 March 2003
What is the best means of defence against attack by nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons? A former member of the US military offers a practical, purposeful guide for his fellow-citizens. The ingredients of survival: calmness, common sense - and canned food.
Friday 7th February

The Long History of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Michael Rebehn, 7 February 2003
Recorded use of weapons of mass destruction goes back to the Middle Ages. Whenever the rules of war fell into disregard, the target moved from the enemy’s soldiers to his people. The weapon of choice against a civilian enemy became biological, then chemical and nuclear, as soon as scientific advancement and technological development made them available. This timeline aims to give a broad overview, in time as well as space, of the development of WMDs as a lengthy prelude to recent events in Iraq.
Tuesday 4th February

A right to use nuclear weapons?

Achilles Skordas, 4 February 2003
The use of nuclear weapons, the ultimate nightmare of contemporary warfare, has never been properly judged as lawful or not in international law. This ‘gap’ is the starting point for a subtle, provocative and challenging argument: could a right to use nuclear weapons in law be the best defence against their use in practice?
Monday 3rd February

Hard proof or soft evidence: the case of biological weapons

Trevor Findlay, 3 February 2003
Of all weapons of mass destruction biological weapons are the hardest to detect. Only a miniscule amount of agent is required to have the same deadly large-scale effect as chemical or nuclear weapons. None the less, at this point in time UNMOVIC is looking for them in Iraq. The political and scientific framework of their mission is outlined here.
Thursday 9th January

International law or US hegemony: from chemical weapons to Iraq

Bob Rigg, 9 January 2003
A former official at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons describes how an effective international system to reduce the threat from weapons of mass destruction was sabotaged by the US government. Can the resulting ‘Darwinisation’ of international relations be halted?
Monday 18th November

Hard facts and soft law: what's the evidence?

Sheila Jasanoff and David Winickoff, 18 November 2002
Before taking action in Iraq, the United States is writing a new chapter in the law of nations, by recognising the need for evidence. But the factual cornerstone for Bush’s policy remains contested.
Syndicate content