Gas, Biological, and Chemical Weapons Treaties

Gary D. Solis

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511757839.019

This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

17 - Gas, Biological, and Chemical Weapons Treaties

from LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: BATTLEFIELD ISSUES

Gary D. Solis

Show author details

Gary D. Solis: Affiliation:
United States Military Academy

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

At Strasbourg, in 1675, a Franco-German accord prohibited the use of poisoned bullets for the duration of the war between the two parties. Article 16 of Lieber's 1863 Code reads, “Military necessity…does not admit of the use of poison in any way…” In 1901, twenty-three of twenty-eight states attending the 1899 Hague Peace Conference ratified Declaration (IV, 2) Concerning Asphyxiating Gases. By 1907, four more states had either ratified or signed adhesions to the Declaration. (The United States was the sole nation to not sign.) “The contracting Powers,” the 1899 Declaration reads, “agree to abstain from the use of projectiles the sole object of which is the diffusion of asphyxiating or deleterious gases.” According to 1907 Hague Regulation IV, Article 23, “…[I]t is especially forbidden – (a) To employ poison or poisoned weapons.”

In late 1914, however, amid the futile slaughter of [World War I] trench warfare, the traditional legal and moral restraints on the use of poison gas began to erode under the pressure of military necessity…[T]he German High Command had interpreted the Hague gas-projectile declaration as banning only the release of lethal gases from shells specifically designed for that purpose….[Chemist Fritz Haber, winner of the 1918 Nobel Prize for chemistry] proposed instead that chlorine be released directly from pressurized gas cylinders, allowing the wind to carry the poisonous cloud over the enemy's trenches. This tactic offered a number of potential advantages: chlorine released directly from cylinders would blanket a far larger area than could be achieved with projectiles, and the gas would dissipate rapidly, allowing the affected areas to be occupied by friendly troops.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Law of Armed Conflict
International Humanitarian Law in War
, pp. 600 - 622

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511757839.019 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Tucker, Jonathan B., War of Nerves (New York: Pantheon, 2006), 11–12

Deimling, Berthold, Aus der alten in die neue Zeit (Berlin, 1930), 201

Vandiver, Frank E., Black Jack, vol. II (College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 1977), 885

Manchester, William, American Caesar (Boston: Little, Brown, 1978), 89

Kalshoven, Frits, Reflections on the Laws of War (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), 342

Dinstein, Yoram, The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of International Armed Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 74

Draper, Col. G.I.A.D., “The Development of International Humanitarian Law,” in Meyer, Michael A. and McCoubrey, Hilaire, eds., Reflections on Law and Armed Conflicts (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1998), 69, 75

Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Doswald-Beck, Louise, eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, Rules (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), Rule 72, at 251

,UK Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), para. 1.2.7., at 11

Cassese, Antonio, Gaeta, Paola, and Jones, John R.W.D., eds., The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 406

Roberts, Adam and Guelff, Richard, Documents on the Laws of War, 3d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 156

Oppenheim, Lassa, International Law, vol. II, Disputes, War and Neutrality, 7th ed., Lauterpacht, H., ed. (London: Longman, 1952), 344, fn. 1

Bernstein, Barton J., “Why We Didn't Use Poison Gas in World War II,” 36–5 American Heritage (Aug./Sept. 1985), 40, 42Google Scholar

Polmar, Norman and Allen, Thomas B., “The Most Deadly Plan,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (Jan. 1998), 79 Google Scholar

Eisenhower, Gen. Dwight D., Crusade in Europe (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1948), 204

Doolittle, Gen. James H., I Could Never Be So Lucky Again (New York: Bantam, 1991), 368–9

Atkinson, Rick, The Day of Battle (New York: Henry Holt, 2007), 272

Mauroni, Albert J., Chemical and Biological Warfare: A Reference Handbook, 2d ed. (Oxford: ABC-Clio, 2006), 102

Hiltermann, Joost R., A Poisonous Affair (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 34

,Dept. of Defense, Conduct of the Persian Gulf War (Washington: GPO, 1992), 15

, AP, “Two Sentenced to Death for 1995 Gas Attack on Tokyo Subways,” NY Times, July 18, 2000, A10 Google Scholar

Jelinek, Pauline, “Figures on Gulf War Gas Exposure Revised,” NY Times, Oct. 28, 2000, A4 Google Scholar

Beard, Jack M., “The Shortcomings of Indeterminacy in Armed Control Regimes: The Case of the Biological Weapons Convention,” 101–2 AJIL (April 2007), 271 Google Scholar

Davis, Col. (Dr.) Jim A., USAF, “The Looming Biological Warfare Storm,” Air & Space Power J. (Spring 2003), 57, 58Google Scholar

,United Nations, Chemical and Bacteriological (Biological) Weapons and the Effects of Their Possible Use (New York: UN, 1969)

,World Health Organization, Health Aspects of the Use of Chemical and Biological Weapons (Geneva: WHO, 1970)

Goldblat, Jozef, “The Biological Weapons Convention – An Overview,” 318 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (June 1997), 251 Google Scholar

,World Health Organization, Health Aspects of Chemical and Biological Weapons (Geneva: WHO, 1970)

Gettleman, Jeffrey, “Army Begins Burning Biological Weapons in Alabama Town,” NY Times, Aug. 10, 2003, A12 Google Scholar

Mayer, Lt. Col. Terry N., USAF, “The Biological Weapon: A Poor Nation's Weapon of Mass Destruction,” in Schneider, Berry R. and Grinter, Lawrence E., eds., Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues (Maxwell Air Force Base, AL: Air Warfare College, Sept. 1995)

Best, Geoffrey, War and Law Since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 308

Olson, Elizabeth, “Talks Inching Ahead on Monitoring '72 Germ Warfare Pact,” NY Times, May 14, 2001, A6 Google Scholar

Olson, Elizabeth, “U.S. Rejects New Accord Covering Germ Warfare,” NY Times, July 26, 2001, A5 Google Scholar

Gordon, Michael R., “Germ Warfare Talks Open in London; U.S. Is the Pariah,” NY Times, July 24, 2001, A7 Google Scholar

Miller, Judith, Engelberg, Stephen, and Broad, William J., “U.S. Germ Warfare Research Pushes Treaty Limits,” NY Times, Sept. 1, 2001, A1 Google Scholar

Miller, Judith, “When Is Bomb Not a Bomb? Germ Experts Confront U.S.,” NY Times, Sept. 5, 2001, A5 Google Scholar

Weiner, Tim, “Soviet Defector Warns of Biological Weapons,” NY Times, Feb. 25, 1998, A1 Google Scholar

Alibek, Ken, Biohazard (New York; Arrow Books, 2000), 70–86

Kervers, Onno, “Strengthening Compliance with the Biological Weapons Convention: The Protocol Negotiations,” 7–2 J. of Conflict & Security L. (Oct. 2002), 275 Google Scholar

Murphy, Sean D., ed., “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,” 95–4 AJIL (Oct. 2001), 873, 901

Shelton, Lt. Col. Raymond S., “No Democracy Can Feel Secure,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (Aug. 1998), 39, 44Google Scholar

Rose, Cmdr. Stephen, “The Coming Explosion of Silent Weapons,” 42 Naval War College Rev. (Summer 1989), 6 Google Scholar

Fidler, David P., “The Meaning of Moscow: ‘Non-lethal’ Weapons and International Law in the Early 21st Century,” 859 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (Sept. 2005), 525, 547Google Scholar

Crook, John R., ed., “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,” 100–3 AJIL (July 2006), 690, 720

Bobbitt, Philip, Terror and Consent (London: Penguin Books, 2009), 104

McCall, M.D. Sherman, “A Higher Form of Killing,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (Feb. 1995), 38, 43Google Scholar

Smithson, Amy E., “The Failing Inspector,” NY Times, April 8, 2002, A23 Google Scholar

Zanders, Jean Pascal, “International Norms Against Chemical and Biological Warfare: An Ambiguous Legacy,” 8–2 J. of Conflict & Security L. (Oct. 2003), 391, 397Google Scholar

Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Doswald-Beck, Louise, eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, Rules (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), Rule 74, at 259

Turns, David, “Weapons in the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law,” 11–2 J. of Conflict & Security L. (Summer 2006), 202, 225Google Scholar

Meselson, Matthew S., “Chemical and Biological Weapons,” 222–5 Scientific American (May 1970), 3 Google Scholar

Miller, Judith, “Libya Discloses Production of 23 Tons of Mustard Gas,” NY Times, March 6, 2004, A5 Google Scholar

,U.K. Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 103–4

Baker, Peter and Glasser, Susan B., “Rebels Hold Hundreds Hostage in Moscow,” Washington Post, Oct. 24, 2002, A1 Google Scholar

Wines, Michael, “Hostage Drama in Moscow: The Aftermath,” NY Times, Oct. 28, 2002, A1 Google Scholar

Fidler, David P., The Meaning of Moscow: ‘Non-lethal’ Weapons and International Law in the Early 21st Century,” 859 Int'l Rev. of the Red Cross (Sept. 2005), 525, 532–3Google Scholar

Miller, Judith and Broad, William J., “U.S. Suspects Opiate in Gas In Russia Raid,” NY Times, Oct. 29, 2002, A1 Google Scholar

Cecil, Clem, “Chechen Siege Hostages Still Dying of Gas Effects,” The Times (London), Oct. 27, 2002, 1

Wheelis, Mark, “Will the New Biology Lead to New Weapons,” Arms Control Today (July/Aug. 2004), 6, 8Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.