40th Agenda 

40th Session Issues

Chemical Weapons

 

DEFINITION

Chemical Weapons (CW) are fast becoming the "poor man's atom bomb" - the latest threat in attack warfare. Chemical Weapons not only hinder army capabilities, they kill and maim hundreds of thousands of civilians. Their simplicity of creation, storage and use is cause for grave concern.

HISTORY

Since 429 BC when Spartans utilized pots of sulpher, pitch and burning charcoal, man has used chemicals to "limit" the abilities of his enemies during war. Industrial production of asphyxiating gases began in the latter half of the 19th century. The most destructive use came during World War I when both factions were forced to find medical care for the treatment of mustard gas burns. During World War II, Adolph Hitler had advanced chemical weapons technology, but feared a massive retaliatory attack and therefore declined to use it. This fear prevails today.

The earliest known declaration to limit the use of asphyxiating gases is the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868. This declaration argued against the use of "incendiary or fulminating" substances. The Hague Declaration of 1899 forbade the use of "poisonous gases." The 1925 Geneva Convention called for the cessation of the use of CWs, but not their creation, stockpile or transference. This conference is often the basis for which all agreements are made, as well as the one most countries refer to when defending the right to possess CWs.

The most recent reported use of CWs came from the Soviet Union's involvement in Kampuchea and Afghanistan, and from the Iran-Iraq war. Reports were made by the refugees of the Soviet-invaded regions of Asia and Aghanistan of chemical bombs and booby traps. The Soviet Union repeatedly denied these allegations. In both Iran and Iraq reports of chemical attacks with mustard gas have been reported. Both factions deny using chemical weapons themselves.

Biological Weapons (BW) were first created by the United States in 1941. The largest biological research was implemented by the Chemical Warfare Service, an already advanced organization. Often termed "germ warfare" or "bacteriological weapons", biological weapons are not as proliferate as chemical agents. However, by mutating germs and bacteria, deadly strains of anthrax, a disease which affects livestock, and botulism could be released into an area, killing virtually all living things. No cure exists for these mutant diseases. In addition, known bacteria are stored. Although the bacteria may cause diseases that are treatable, they may be used to create plague like conditions and tie up public facilities for an indefinite period.

CURRENT

One of the greatest misconceptions about chemical and biological warfare is that it is strictly an 'East-West' issue, such as nuclear arms. But this new "poor man's atom bomb" is proliferating among the developing nations, South East Asia and Middle Eastern nations who have neither the funds nor facilities to produce nuclear arms. Biological weapons are less prominent in these regions, again due to lack of funding for research and development. It has been alleged however, that Israel and Syria have biological capabilities, and that Iraq is quickly developing its own.

Although few nations willingly give figures on the number of CWs they stockpile, China, the United States and the Soviet Union openly acknowledge production and stockpiling of CWs. It is standard procedure for the Israeli Defense Forces to teach defensive maneuvers against chemical attack, as it is for China, the US, the USSR, Iran, Iraq and many NATO countries. Protective clothing is standard issue in the eye of a foreign threat. Each nation that stockpiles CWs maintains that it is done solely for defensive purposes. A "bigger stick" mentality is quickly developing, as it has with nuclear weapons, and each nation intends to develop the most powerful and deadly weapon available.

Recently, the United States accused Libya of developing a chemical weapons plant. Although many nations have failed to find similar evidence (the U.S. refuses to reveal its sources), it is entirely plausible that Libya, among many nations, possesses a chemical plant capable of producing chemical weapons. Chemical facilities are extremely difficult to detect since many chemicals can be stored in small, unidentifiable containers. Transportation to a launch facility is also relatively easy, as compounds can be transfered separately becoming deadly only when mixed in the nose of a binary missile. (CSM) This leads to one

of the most difficult problems associated with developing, producing, stockpiling, using and monitoring CWs. Many of the compounds used in production are harmless alone, indeed, many are medically or otherwise useful, but become virtual clouds of death when combined. This allows easy storage, transference (they can be disguised as medical supplies and may actually be medical supplies) and low cost since materials are often innocuous, useful chemicals.

Chemical weapons have become an essential deterent weapon. A strike with chemicals would effectively reduce the capabilities of any army by at least one third, more so if basic protective clothing is unavailable. Soldiers would be confined to vehicles and sealed buildings, or forced to fight in cumbersome protective clothing that introduces new stresses into an already stressful combat environment. Extreme heat, inability to correctly understand commands, mental isolation, and the responsibility to fight and effectively manipulate manual armaments, all increase the likelihood of losing a war.

Thus, possessors of CWs defend the need for chemical possession as a retaliatory measure to ensure their advantage. Almost all nations that admit to producing CWs pledge usage only as a retaliatory means.

In any chemical strike, the greatest number of casualties would be civilians who lack protective clothing. Even if a strike were made only against a military target, prevailing winds, which are strategically utilized, would spread the destructive gases hundreds of miles from the point of introduction. This would cripple a major city, rendering helpless unprotected people and immobilizing social services.

COMMON WEAPONS

Current chemical weapons include VX, which affects the nervous system; Sarin, a shorter-life liquid about 1/10 as potent as VX; standard ammonia, which affects breathing and can cause suffocation; and chlorine based mustard gas, which burns. These are the most commonly used agents, along with binary systems of each, that produce a variety of effects. These include:

  • Tear Gas: Used for riot control, different versions can render battlefield victims helpless.
  • Vomit Gas: "Super tear gas" is used to clear enemy troops from buildings and caves.
  • Mustard Gas: This new version blisters skin, burns lungs, causes patches of skin to fall away and kills victims slowly or leaves them with permanent pulmonary disorders.
  • Choking Gas: Also known as phosogene, it is a bit outdated.
  • Blood Gas: Ideal for surprise attacks, this is fatal by blocking absorption of oxygen by blood in the lungs.
  • Nerve Gas: Possibly the most widely stockpiled chemical agent, this interferes with nervous systems.
  • Biological weapons are currently being developed, and may become the weapon of choice for some armies. Genetic engineering, bacteria, viruses and toxins kill and disable in a myriad of ways. Among the latest are:
  • Dengue Fever: A debilitating tropical virus that may be spread by aerosol.
  • Plague: This ancient killer can be replicated in bubonic and pneumonic forms.
  • Anthrax: A usually fatal bacteria that occurs naturally in animals. It can easily be proliferated.
  • Tularemia: "Rabbit Fever" is not usually fatal to humans, but causes pains and chills.
  • Q-fever: Similar to typhus, it is spread by ticks but rarely kills.

Technological advances in delivery systems for CWs are relatively limited. Out dated shell casings are often used. The most advanced delivery system in recent years has been the binary system. In this system, two harmless chemicals are stored in the nose of a missile. The chemicals mix upon launch, forming deadly agents.

UNITED NATIONS INVOLVEMENT

The 1925 Geneva Protocol was the result of the horrors of chemical weapons during World War I. It banned all chemical weapons and biological warfare, but still allowed possession. Few negotiations between nations were held to limit possession until 1972 when the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament discussed a comprehensive ban on chemical weaponry. Lasting until 1979, the committee proposed a step-by-step approach to reduction of these arms: national and international verification measures; production, stockpiling, destruction of stockpiles, along with other provisions. Separate negotiations took place between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both conferences and negotiations were in accordance with General Assembly resolutions 2827A/XXVI, 2933/XXVII, 3077/XXVIII, 3256/XXIX, 3465/XXX, 31/65 and S-10/2.

One of the most recent statements regarding the horrors of chemical and biological warfare came from the Secretary-General in January, 1989. In a publicized statement, he called for all nations to limit their use and production of chemical weapons. He also called for adherence to the Geneva Protocol and for all nations to intensify their efforts to prohibit the use of chemical weapons.

While these efforts are ongoing, there is little that can be done to enforce the various agreements, protocols and declarations restricting or forbidding the use of chemical and biological weapons. During the Forty-third Session, the First Committee proposed separate resolutions limiting the use of CWs and BWs. These resolutions called for restrictions and condemnations similar to those in past declarations, and are comprised of resolutions A/C.1/43/L.52, A/C.1/43/L.59 and A/C.1/43/L.67.

The Secretary-General has encouraged the eventual elimination of all asphyxiating and poisonous gases by stating, "Not only would it be a resounding success for multilateral negotiations if the chemical threat was eliminated, but such a victory would also constitute a remarkable achievement in the cause of multilateral disarmament and of international peace and security, in full conformity with the objectives of the Charter of the United Nations." As he pointed out, "...Roman jurists used to enunciate the following principle, "armis bella non venenis geri" (war is conducted with weapons, not poison.)

Members of the Conference on Disarmament: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Canada, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, Ethiopia, German Democratic Republic, Federal Republic of Germany, France, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Romania, Sri Lanka, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States, USSR, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, Zaire.

OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTION

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) convened an international symposium on chemical weapons in Stockholm in 1979. Attended by 30 experts from 14 countries, the result was a compilation of material on chemical warfare. Extensive negotiations have been concluded between nations. In 1984, the United States presented a draft text of a chemical weapons treaty to the 40 nation Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.

In 1986, the Conference on Disarmament concluded with report A/21/27 stating the need for a "complete and effective prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of chemical weapons and their destruction." The United States, the United Kingdom, Norway, Finland, and Japan all made specific recommendations regarding chemical and biological weapons.12 In the fall of 1988, the United States called for a conference on chemical weapons to be held in Geneva.

Notes

1. Worldmark Encyclopedia of the United Nations, p. 145
2. Worldmark, p. 145.
3. Barton J. Bernstein, "The Birth of the U.S. Biological Warfare Program," Scientific American, July 1987 pp. 116-121.
4. Robin Wright, et al, "U.S. Finds Iraq has Germ Warfare Plant," Los Angeles Times, Jan. 18, 1989.
5. Gwynne Dyer, War, Dorsey Press, 1985, pp. 194-196.
6. Gary Thatcher, "Poison on the Wind," Christian Science
Monitor, Dec. 14, 1988.
7. Economist, May 3, 1986.
8. "The Winds of Death," Newsweek, Jan. 15, 1989.
9. UN Press Release, 6 January 1989.
10. UN Press Release, 6 January 1989.
11. Worldmark, p. 145.
12. UN Chronicle.
13. Suzanne P. Ogden, "Chemical Weapons: Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle, World Politics, 88/89, 10th ed., p. 199.
14. Ogden, p. 199.

SOURCES

Bernstein, Barton J., "The Birth of the U.S. Biological-Warfare Program," Scientific American, July 1987.
Dyer, Gwynne, War, Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1985.
Ogden, Suzanne P. "Chemical Weapons: Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle, World Politics, 88/89, 10th ed., Annual Editions, 1989.
Thatcher, Gary. "Poison on the Wind," Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 14,1988.
Wright, Robin, & Rempel, William C. "U.S. Finds Iraq has Germ Warfare Plant," Los Angeles Times, Jan. 18, 1987.
The Economist, May 3, 1986.
UN Chronicle.
"Winds of Death," Newsweek, Jan. 18, 1989.
Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations: United Nations, New York: Worldmark Press, 1988.