The First Years in Force: 1975–8

  • Nicholas A. Sims

Abstract

In this chapter we trace several aspects of the consolidation of biological disarmament as a treaty régime, which followed the entry into force of the Convention on 26 March 1975. Its legislative aspects are considered in a separate chapter (5), and patterns of adherence shown on pages 336–9.

Keywords

Toxicity Syringe Bacillus Assure Microbe 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 7.
    Dr Rex Watson, Director of CDE Porton Down, in an interview on 21 July 1981: Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman, A Higher Form of Killing: The Secret Story of Gas and Germ Warfare (London: Chatto & Windus, 1982) p. 222.Google Scholar
  2. 26.
    Johan Lundin, ‘The Scope and Control of Chemical Disarmament Treaties particularly with regard to Binary Chemical Weapons’, Cooperation and Conflict: Nordic Journal of International Politics, 8: 146–53 (1973);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Julian Perry Robinson, The United States Binary Nerve Gas Programme: National and International Implications (Brighton: Institute for the Study of International Organisation, University of Sussex, 1975);Google Scholar
  4. SIPRI, Chemical Disarmament: New Weapons for Old (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1975).Google Scholar
  5. 27.
    Nicholas Sims, ‘The Diplomacy of Chemical Disarmament’, New Scientist, 54: 603 (15 June 1972).Google Scholar
  6. 29.
    For a brief account of this sequence of events, see Nicholas A. Sims, ‘Britain, Chemical Weapons and Disarmament’, ADIU Report, vol. 2, no. 3 (July–August 1980) 1–4.Google Scholar
  7. 30.
    For a broad, if brief, conspectus of the problem of chemical disarmament in historical perspective, drawn from earlier SIPRI publications, see SIPRI, Armaments and Disarmament in the Nuclear Age: A Handbook (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell; London: The MIT Press, 1976) Part III, ‘Chemical and Bacteriological Warfare’, pp. 108–33.Google Scholar
  8. Of the literature subsequent to this period, a good analysis of negotiations in the later 1970s is: J. P. Perry Robinson, ‘The Negotiations on Chemical-Warfare Arms Control’, Arms Control, vol. 1, no. 1 (May 1980) 30–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 32.
    On developments in these negotiations since 1979–80, see Charles C. Flowerree, ‘The Politics of Arms Control Treaties: A Case Study’, Journal of International Affairs, vol. 37, no. 2 (Winter 1984) 269–82;Google Scholar
  10. David Summerhayes, ‘Chemical Weapons: Postures, Plans and Prospects for Control’, ADIU Report, vol. 5, no. 6 (November–December 1983) 1–3;Google Scholar
  11. Nicholas A. Sims, Chemical Weapons: Control or Chaos? (London: The Council for Arms Control, 1984).Google Scholar
  12. 33.
    J. P. Perry Robinson, Chemical and Biological Warfare: Analysis of Recent Reports Concerning the Soviet Union and Vietnam, ADIU Occasional Paper no. 1 (Brighton: University of Sussex, Armament and Disarmament Information Unit, 1980).Google Scholar
  13. 44.
    United States Senate, 94th Congress, Hearings before the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities (Church Committee), 16–18 September 1975, Volume 1: Unauthorized Storage of Toxic Agents (Washington, D.C.: USGPO, 1976) p. 207.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Nicholas A. Sims 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas A. Sims
    • 1
  1. 1.The London School of Economics and Political ScienceUniversity of LondonUK

Personalised recommendations