Transcript Biochemical threat spectrum

Utilising a holistic arms control
approach to address incapacitant
weapons
AHRC Meeting, 17th September 2012
Michael Crowley
Project coordinator
Bradford Nonlethal Weapon Research Project
.
(Bio)chemical threat spectrum
Biochemical threat spectrum chart adapted from: Pearson, G. (2002) Relevant Scientific And
Technological Developments For The First CWC Review Conference, University of Bradford.
Abstract
• The presentation will explore the potential roles that life
scientists can play in combating the proliferation and
misuse of weapons utilising incapacitating chemical
agents. The presentation will highlight the activities of
societal monitoring and verification; the development of
a “culture of responsibility” amongst the scientific and
medical communities and the role of independent
scientists in advocating mechanisms to strengthen
relevant control regimes and their implementation.
Defining incapacitating (bio)chemical agents
[incapacitants]
NATO Definition: Incapacitating agent / agent incapacitant
“A chemical agent which produces temporary disabling conditions
which (unlike those caused by riot control agents) can be physical or
mental and persist for hours or days after exposure to the agent has
ceased. Medical treatment, while not usually required, facilitates a
more rapid recovery.” ("NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions“ (AAP-6 (V),
Modified version 02, 7th August 2000)
Alternative working description:
Incapacitating chemical and biochemical agents (Incapacitants)
can be considered as: substances whose chemical action on specific
biochemical processes and physiological systems, especially those
affecting the higher regulatory activity of the central nervous system,
produce a disabling condition (e.g. can cause incapacitation or
disorientation, incoherence, hallucination, sedation, loss of
consciousness) or at higher concentrations, death. (Adapted from
Pearson, A., Chevrier, M. and Wheelis, M. (eds) (2007) Incapacitating Biochemical
Weapons, Lanham: Lexington Books).
Potential dangers from
development/use of incapacitants
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dose-response problem
Erosion of norm against weaponization of toxicity
Proliferation and legitimization by states
Proliferation to, and misuse by, non-state actors
Use as a lethal force multiplier
Facilitation of torture and other human rights violations
Militarisation of biology
Camouflage offensive chemical weapons programmes
Escalation to lethal chemical weapons
Use of an incapacitating weapon by Russian
Federation
State research
“The events in Moscow have opened up the potential for
this area of research (i.e. incapacitating/immobilizing
chemicals) to be explored in much greater depth. It would
not be surprising if a number of countries were conducting
more detailed and renewed research as a result.”
Stanley, T. Director of the Anaesthesiology Research Laboratories at the
University of Utah, 2004
“There is clearly an on-going attraction to “incapacitating
chemical agents” but it is not easy to determine the extent
to which this has moved along the spectrum from
academia and industrial circles into the law enforcement,
security and military apparatuses of States.”
International Committee of the Red Cross, Incapacitating chemical agents,
implications for international law, report of expert meeting, Montreux, 24th-26th
March 2010
Holistic arms control
•
•
•
Stage 1: Examination of the nature of weapon or weaponsrelated technology under review; current and potential future
scenarios of application, together with attendant human
security concerns; potential relevance of advances in science
and technology;
Stage 2: Exploration of the full range of potentially
applicable control mechanisms analysing strengths,
weaknesses and limitations;
Stage 3: Development of a comprehensive strategy to
improve existing mechanisms (and/or introduce additional
mechanisms) for effective regulation of the weapon or
weapons-related technology of concern.
Utilising holistic arms control
State led activities:
•
Adherence to comprehensive legal prohibitions against chemical and biological weapons (CBW)
enshrined in the Geneva Protocol, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) and
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC);
•
Adherence to international humanitarian law (notably the four Geneva Conventions and two
Additional Protocols) and international human rights law (including the Convention Against
Torture, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration on
Human Rights);
•
Adherence to other relevant international law and agreements including ;the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and the UN Convention on
Psychotropic Substances;
•
Effective monitoring, verification, investigation and enforcement of the above obligations;
•
Application of stringent export controls and interdiction measures;
Engagement by scientific and medical communities :
•
Conducting societal monitoring and verification
•
Development of a “culture of responsibility” amongst the scientific and medical communities built
upon strong normative and ethical standards
•
Developing and advocating mechanisms to strengthen relevant control regimes and their
implementation
Addressing weaknesses in BTWC and CWC
•
Biological Weapons Convention:
•
•
Article 1, prohibits states developing, producing, stockpiling or otherwise acquiring or retaining:
(1) Microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of
types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful
purposes;
(2) Weapons, equipment or means of delivery designed to use such agents or toxins for hostile
purposes or in armed conflict.
•
•
•
No definition of key terms e.g. “other peaceful purposes”, “hostile purposes”. Not
addressed by policy making organs.
No verification mechanism or international organisation to facilitate effective
implementation
•
Chemical Weapons Convention:
•
Article 1, prohibits the development, production, stockpiling, transfer and use of chemical
weapons.
Article II.1(a), states that chemical weapons include all ‘‘toxic chemicals and their precursors,
except where intended for purposes not prohibited, as long as the types and quantities are
consistent with such purposes.’’
Under‘‘purposes not prohibited.’’Article II.9(d) lists ‘‘law enforcement including domestic riot
control purposes,’’
•
•
•
No definition of key terms e.g. “law enforcement”, “method of warfare”, “temporary
incapacitation”. Not addressed by policy making organs.
Addressing weaknesses in BTWC and CWC
“Whatever else is needed, one crucial ingredient is clear:
people with scientific and medical expertise surely have a
special responsibility to alert policymakers in governments
around the world to the very real dangers of inaction in regard
to the BWC.” Dando. M, Pearson. G, Rozsa. L, Perry Robinson. J.P. &
Wheelis. M, Deadly Cultures, 2006.
“When it comes to arms control, all of us…need reminding
that treaties such as the CWC are engagements, not between
governments, but between States Parties. Governments may
represent States Parties in the [relevant regime fora]… but
organs of civil society are also elements of those same states,
no less responsible for proper implementation of the treaty.”
Perry Robinson, J.P. Scientists and chemical weapons policies, 2010.
Societal monitoring - Chinese Narcosis gun
Norinco sales brochure:
“The Model BBQ-901
Anaesthetic system is a
fine unlethal [sic] special
weapon system for SWAT
units and other special
usage…It can be used for
reconnaissance and
capture of criminals in a
concealed place. It is also
used as a riot control
weapon to subdue the
ruffians and maintain
public order.”
Poster for BBQ-901 Narcosis gun on display at China Police
2006
Societal monitoring – research into incap means of
delivery: Czech Republic
Hess, L. Schreiberová, J., Málek, J., Fusek, J. (2007) Drug-Induced Loss of
Aggressiveness in the Macaque Rhesus. Proceedings of the 4th European
Symposium on Non-Lethal Weapons, 21st-23rd May 2007.
“[T]he transdermal technique of administration could possibly be
used to induce long-term sedation with alpha2 agonists,
benzodiazepines, and a combination of them to pacify aggressive
individuals. Using the paint-ball gun principle, anaestheticcontaining balls could be used. Impact of the ball would be followed
by their destruction and absorption of garment with the anaesthetics
which will be quickly absorbed via the skin.”
Societal monitoring
Assessing future threats: agent development
•
“In addition to drugs causing calming or unconsciousness, compounds on
the horizon with potential as military agents include noradrenaline
antagonists such as propranolol to cause selective memory loss,
cholecystokinin B agonists to cause panic attacks, and substance P
agonists to induce depression. The question thus is not so much when
these capabilities will arise — because arise they certainly will — but what
purposes will those with such capabilities pursue.”
Wheelis, M. and Dando, M. Neurobiology: A case study of the imminent militarization of
biology. International Review of the Red Cross, September 2005.
•
“Using existing drugs as weapons means knowingly moving towards the top
of a ‘slippery slope’ at the bottom of which is the spectre of ‘militarization’ of
biology, this could include intentional manipulation of peoples’ emotions,
memories, immune responses or even fertility”
Drugs as weapons: British Medical Association, 2007.
Advances in science and technology:
agent development
• “The explosion of knowledge in neuroscience,
bioregulators, receptor research, systems biology
and related disciplines is likely to lead to the
discovery, amongst others, of new physiologicallyactive compounds that can selectively interfere with
certain regulatory functions in the brain or other
organs, and presumably even modulate human
behavior in a predictable manner. Some of these new
compounds (or selective delivery methods) may well
have a profile that could make them attractive as
novel candidate chemical warfare agents
•
Trapp, R. presentation at: International Committee of the Red Cross, Expert Meeting:
Incapacitating chemical agents, implications for international law, Montreux, Switzerland,
24-26 March 2010, p.65.
Advances in science and technology:
means of delivery
• “New nanotechnologies have allowed molecular conjugation or
encapsulation that may permit unprecedented access [of
drugs] to the brain”… Nanotechnologies can also exploit
existing transport mechanisms to transmit substances into the
brain in analogy with the Trojan horse”
•
Gas phase techniques/nanotechnologies: “pharmacological
agents are not used as weapons of mass effect, because their largescale deployment is impractical” as it is “currently impossible to get
an effective dose to a combatant.” However the report states that
“technologies that could be available in the next 20 years would
allow dispersal of agents in delivery vehicles that would be
analogous to a pharmacological cluster bomb or a land mine.”
National Research Council 2008, Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience
and Related Techniques
Building a “culture of responsibility” within
the life science community
• “If measures to prevent the hostile use of advances in
the life sciences are to work, a culture of responsibility is
necessary among individual life scientists. This applies
whether these scientists are working in industry,
academia, health, defence or in related fields such as
engineering and information technology. Such a culture
of responsibility is also needed within the institutions that
employ scientists and fund research in the life sciences.”
•
Preventing hostile use of the life sciences, International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) 2004
A Hippocratic oath for scientists
•
Joseph Rotblat: physicist, 1995
•
Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
“The time has come to formulate
guidelines for the ethical conduct of
scientists, perhaps in the form of a
voluntary Hippocratic Oath. This
would be particularly valuable for
young scientists when they embark
on a scientific career… “
• “At a time when science plays such a
powerful role in the life of society,
when the destiny of the whole of
mankind may hinge on the results of
scientific research, it is incumbent on
all scientists to be fully conscious of
that role, and conduct themselves
accordingly. I appeal to my fellow
scientists to remember their
responsibility to humanity.”
Pledge by Neuroscientists to Refuse to Participate in the
Application of Neuroscience to Violations of Basic Human
Rights or International Law. – Prof Curtis Bell, 2010.
• We are Neuroscientists who desire that our work be used to enhance human
life rather than to diminish it. We are concerned with the possible use of
Neuroscience for purposes that violate fundamental human rights and
international law. We seek to create a culture within the field of
Neuroscience in which contributions to such uses are unacceptable.
• Thus, we oppose the application of Neuroscience to torture and other forms
of coercive interrogation or manipulation that violate human rights and
personhood. Such applications could include drugs that cause excessive
pain, anxiety, or trust, and manipulations such as brain stimulation or
inactivation.
• Thus, we also oppose the application of Neuroscience to aggressive war…
•As Neuroscientists we therefore pledge:
• a) To make ourselves aware of the potential applications of our own
work and that of others to applications that violate basic human rights
or international law such as torture and aggressive war.
• b) To refuse to knowingly participate in the application of
Neuroscience to violations of basic human rights or international law.
Harvard Sussex Draft Convention
Protecting whistle-blowers
The AAAS Science and Human Rights
Program (SHRP) works with scientists to
"advance science and serve society"
through human rights. The Program carries
out its mission by:
•
engaging individual scientists and
scientific associations in human rights
efforts;
•
applying scientific tools and
technologies to enhance human rights
work;
•
bringing human rights standards to the
conduct of science;
•
promoting the human right to enjoy the
benefits of scientific progress.