Incapacitating chemicals, Chemical Weapons Convention

The risk to the Chemical Weapons Convention from incapacitating chemicals is addressed in Malcolm R. Dando, The Danger to the Chemical Weapons Convention from Incapacitating Chemicals, University of Bradford, Department of Peace Studies, First CWC Review Conference Paper No. 4, March 2003 (available at http //www.brad.ac.uk/acad/scwc). 

The term chemical warfare agents ideally would comprise all toxic chemicals that have been developed, produced, or used in a military context with the intention of utilizing its toxicity to man, animals or plants as its primary weapons characteristic. This definition excludes a considerable number of toxic chemicals used in a military environment, which serve other purposes a case in point is rocket fuel, which is highly toxic, but whose primary purpose is the propulsion of a missile. On the other hand, this definition goes beyond that used in the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) according to the CWC s Article II, para. 2 only those chemicals which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals (emphasis added)1 count as chemical warfare agents. 

See M. R. Dando, The Danger of the Chemical Weapons Convention from Incapacitating Chemicals. 

The problem of incapacitants, or incapacitating agents, is complex. The use of incapacitants in warfare is considered to be prohibited by the Chemical Weapons Convention even though only a single agent, BZ (3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate), and its immediate precursors are included as listed compounds (Schedule 2) in that Treaty. 

Toxic ammunition contains chemical agents which, through their adverse physiological effects, are in use by military or law enforcement organizations to kill, injure, or incapacitate humans. Less powerful agents are used by the public for self-defense. While the use of lethal chemical agents like mustard gas and nerve agents to kill or maim has been banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention (COTC), the use of toxic chemicals as suppressive methods to control or subdue crowds and riots is widespread. 

M. Crowley, Dangerous Ambiguities Regulation of Riot Control Agents and Incapacitants under the Chemical Weapons Convention, Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project, University of Bradford, Oct 2009. 

The general purpose criterion within the CWC in Article II. 1(a) states that chemical weapons include Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes . As chemical weapons, by their nature, involve toxic chemicals which cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals, there is clearly a parallel between chemicals which might be used as chemical weapons and existing or new chemicals which are highly toxic - and are the subject of the ongoing national, regional and international initiatives... 

One S T issue which received considerable attention in the run-up to the meeting and to which the above quote from the SAB report explicitly refers, was almost completely suppressed during the Conference the question of chemical incapacitants and so-called non-lethal chemical weapons, in which some CWC states parties recently have shown a renewed interest. Although two states parties -New Zealand and Switzerland - made explicit reference to non-lethal weapons during the General Debate, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), whose statement was focusing on chemical incapacitants, was not allowed to address the plenary. As a result, the only opportunity to discuss these matters publicly arose with the Open Forum on the Chemical Weapons Convention, hosted by the TS and supported by a number of NGOs. The Open Forum included a panel discussion on The Chemical Weapons Ban and the Use of Incapacitants in Warfare and Law Enforcement. 80... 

See R. F. Bellamy, Medical effects of conventional weapons, World Journal of Surgery, 16, 1992, 888-92, quoted in L. Klotz, M. Furmanski and M. Wheelis, Beware the Siren s Song Why Non-LethaV Incapacitating Chemical Agents Are Lethal, April 2003, available at the Federation of American Scientists website www.fas.org/bwc/papers/sirens song.pdf, last accessed 28 November 2003. 

It poses otherwise a risk to the object and purpose of this Convention because it possesses such lethal or incapacitating toxicity as well as other properties that might enable it to be used as a chemical weapon ... 

In the hospitals, the survivors were cut off from any communications with the outside and their relatives were not allowed to visit them. An incorrect list of hospitals for victims was released. The main problem was the lack of information about those dealing with the identification and characterization of the chemical used and the unavailability of known antidotes (e.g. naloxon) by medical staff treating the victims (Bajgar et al, 2007a). It appeared from this event that there were compounds not explicitly enumerated in the CWC and therefore not controlled by this Convention. Fentanyl can be considered as a nonlethal weapon (a group of so-called calmatives) and these chemicals can also be used to incapacitate animals of course, its use against humans is not excluded (Bajgar, 2006 Hess et al, 2005). 

---