The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) Database
Strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention
Briefing Paper No 13: Article III : Further Building Blocks
Executive Summary
Graham S Pearson
Series Editors, Graham S. Pearson and Malcolm R. Dando
Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford
Click here to see a full list of Briefing Papers
Please note: the page numbers given below are those which appear in the original text; these appear at the top of the relevant page. Click here to view the Disclaimer.
page 1
This Briefing Paper is complementary to Briefing Paper No 12 Article III: Some Building Blocks which set out the provisions for the strengthening of Article III in the current version of the draft Protocol for the strengthening of the BTWC being negotiated by the Ad Hoc Group in the light of some of the developments that have occurred nationally and regionally in respect of controls of hazardous materials. International developments in respect of such controls are considered in this Briefing Paper.
There are a number of international control regimes relating to transfers of hazardous or dual-use materials. Of particular relevance in considering global regimes for chemical and biological materials is the regime for "banned and severely" restricted chemicals which has seen the introduction initially of a voluntary system of Prior Informed Consent (PIC) which is currently being transformed into an international legally binding system following the Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held on 10-11 September 1998 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Another regime that is currently being negotiated as part of the Biosafety Protocol is a system of Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) for the transfer of living modified organisms. Finally, as part of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) Ongoing Monitoring and Verification (OMV) scheme for Iraq, there is a world-wide system of notification of exports to and imports into Iraq which includes a wide range of dual purpose goods.
These international initiatives, which are strengthening current national export controls and regulations for hazardous materials around the world, are seen as building blocks which might be considered from a point of view of strengthening the BTWC as well as contributing to the implementation of Article III. The challenging goal is to identify how these national, regional and international export control activities can be drawn upon to contribute to the strengthening of the BTWC.
PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT
The PIC Convention has functioned through a voluntary procedure involving 152 countries which has controlled the export and import of "restricted and severely banned chemicals". The procedures have been legally binding within the European Union since 1992 and are being transformed now into a legally binding Convention. The information required on, the transparency of and the control of the uses of chemicals provide a useful model which might be helpful in considering measures to improve the implementation of Article III of the BTWC.
page 2
ADVANCE INFORMED AGREEMENT
It is evident that a legally binding Biosafety Protocol to address transboundary transfers of living modified organisms is close to completion which in its Advanced Informed Agreement provisions is likely to have similar requirements for information exchange and decision prior to first import to those of the PIC Convention. The Biosafety Protocol again provides a further model which might be helpful in considering measures to improve the implementation of Article III of the BTWC.
IMPORT/EXPORT SYSTEM FOR IRAQ
The export/import mechanism that exists for imports of dual-use items to Iraq embraces a much broader range of dual-purpose items than those controlled by the UK, the European Union and the Australia Group export control regimes. As the Security Council Resolution 1051 (1996) called upon "all States to adopt as soon as possible such measures as may be necessary under their national procedures to implement the mechanism" , it would be reasonable to assume that a number of States have already taken steps to set up the necessary national infrastructure to implement this export/import mechanism. This would appear to be even more relevant to the strengthening of Article III of the BTWC than either the PIC Convention or the Advanced Informed Agreement mechanisms.
CONCLUSIONS
In considering both Briefing Paper No 12 and this Briefing Paper, it is evident that arrangements are already in place within countries such as the United Kingdom for the monitoring and control of exports of biological materials and equipment which enable the United Kingdom to meet its obligations under Article III of the BTWC. These control regimes have been harmonized within the European Union and also more widely through the Australia Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. In addition, there are also international export/import mechanisms that have been in operation on a voluntary basis for "banned and severely restricted chemicals" for a number of years and are now becoming the subject of a legally binding Convention, are being negotiated for living modified organisms and are in operation under UN Security Council Resolution 1051 (1996) for a wide range of biological materials and equipment of direct relevance to the BTWC. These various regimes and mechanisms provide a useful basis which could with advantage be drawn upon in devising appropriate measures to strengthen the implementation of Article III in the Protocol being negotiated by the AHG to strengthen the BTWC.
Click here to see the complete list of Briefing Papers
The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention Database forms part of the Project on Strengthening the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention and Preventing Biological Warfare, which is based in the Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, UK.
Updated 30 September 1998