Chemical weaponsPreventing chemical weapons as sciences advance and converge

Published 16 November 2018

Revolutionary advances in science and technology are threatening the ability of the Chemical Weapons Convention to prevent the development, possession and potential use of chemical weapons. Scientists warn of this increased chemical weapons risk, which is the result of rapid scientific change. Alarming examples of the dangers from chemical weapons have been seen recently in the use of industrial chemicals and the nerve agent sarin against civilians in Syria, and in the targeted assassination operations using VX nerve agent in Malaysia and novichok nerve agent in the U.K.

Revolutionary advances in science and technology are threatening the ability of the Chemical Weapons Convention to prevent the development, possession and potential use of chemical weapons. Scientists warn of this increased chemical weapons risk, which is the result of rapid scientific change.

Alarming examples of the dangers from chemical weapons have been seen recently in the use of industrial chemicals and the nerve agent sarin against civilians in Syria, and in the targeted assassination operations using VX nerve agent in Malaysia and novichok nerve agent in the U.K.

The threat of future chemical attacks is exacerbated by the current unstable international system and also by the potential misuse of developments in science and technology. The States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention gathering in the Hague on 21st November for their 4th Review Conference must ensure the prohibition regime is fit to meet these challenges.

Bradford says that this argument is set out by three academics from the University of Bradford in a Policy Forum article titled “Preventing chemical weapons as sciences converge” in the present issue of Science. In the article Dr. Michael Crowley, Dr. Lijun Shang, and Professor Malcolm Dando address key scientific aspects of the issues that the Conference will have to address to prevent the re-emergence of chemical weapons during this period of very rapid scientific change.

Crowley said: “The unstable international security environment and the changing nature of armed conflict could fuel a desire by certain States to retain and use existing chemical weapons, as well as increase interest in creating new weapons. These groups may well seek to harness the revolutionary advances in the chemical and life sciences and associated disciplines such as nanoscience and neuroscience for their malign ends.  The international governmental and scientific communities must collectively review, update and strengthen the global measures in place to protect us all from chemical attack.”