THE FAILURE OF DISARMAMENT

Henceforth Britain could employ gas in her minor colonial campaigns, both non-lethal tear gases and mustard gas, to impede the movement and fighting power of unprotected tribesmen. As Lynden-Bell and Radcliffe concluded, 

Whatever adversary is contemplated, whether highly or semi-civilized, it would be unthinkable to commit our troops to the field without the best possible gas protection, no matter what undertakings had been given by the enemy. We must therefore continue the study and science of gas in all its forms, primarily with a view to protection, secondly with a view to retaliation.  

What further hampered research into chemical warfare were the ambivalent attitudes which it aroused within the scientific community and the military establishments. The scientific divisions were the less important. On the one hand. Sir Edward Thorpe undoubtedly spoke for many colleagues in describing the recourse to poison gas during the First World War as a degradation of science . In his presidential address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science on 7 September 1921, he affirmed that Civilization protests against a step 

February 1922. The Harding administration had several objectives in sponsoring the conference, principally naval disarmament, a disengagement of Britain from her pre-war alliance with Japan, and the resolution of outstanding Sino-Japanese disputes. Gas warfare was a comparatively minor issue, but the Harding administration still sought another international prohibition of poison gas to reaffirm international law, improve upon the Hague Declaration, and produce a statement which the American Senate could ratify (since it had failed to ratify the Treaty of Versailles). 

Deviating from its practice in respect of submarines, aircraft and the disposition of naval vessels, the American delegation set aside the findings of the technical subcommittee. Having aroused expectations about banning chenucal weapons, it would not douse them with a 

---

Can the model of the impact of citizens groups on the destruction of the US chemical stockpile be used for other international nonproliferation goals A cynic might retort that the main lesson is that failure to include citizens in disarmament plans leads to difficulties. A more optimistic observer might look to the impact of the public via the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. In the case of the Mine Ban treaty, the public was crucial to its creation and implementation. With the CWC, the public has made a role for itself in the execution of the treaty. No other security treaty has had a similar level of public involvement. If not in a proactive role, the pub he s effect on the execution of the treaty should serve as a lesson for future negotiations. 

That was the last time I saw him. Our paths diverged after that. Our aim was the same the prevention of a third world war, but our paths were different. I stayed in the Navy for four and a half more years to build up a new organization for high explosives research and development. Einstein s path was complete disarmament and the establishment of a world government, and he exerted all his effort, and all his influence to achieve those ideals. As we know, he failed. I believe that Einstein knew that his efforts were doomed to failure he was a prophet way ahead of his time. But the "conscience of the world," as Einstein was called, could not but fight to the end for what he believed, however hopeless the fight was. 

If evidence is uncovered by investigations or by inspection teams of treaty violations, and if the state concerned fails to meet the requests for compliance by the Executive Council, then support for the Convention will be put to the test. Even Thomas Bernauer, a staunch supporter of the CWC, conceded that the assistance and sanction provisions of the Convention are rather weak . By leaving the Convention without any automatic and mandatory recourse to sanctions and/or assistance, and by leaving the UN Security Council with responsibility for coping with major treaty violations, the Conference on Disarmament simply reflected international realities. Yet the great powers have repeatedly failed to act decisively over outbreaks of chemical warfare (other than occasionally to assist the victim by sending protective equipment, though often in quite inadequate amounts), and their failures have frequently fuelled... 

The proposed CW Convention may be imperfect in its failure to provide absolute guarantees of security, but no arms control or disarmament measure has ever been foolproof. All that can be done is to provide for the best combination of technical, political and diplomatic measures available, to prevent, detect, identify and deal with treaty violations. The CD s draft appears to achieve that objective. The next step is to underline to all states, particularly those thought to have an offensive CW capability, the advantages of a prohibition on chemical warfare. This task may be rendered more... 

---