Search

Toxin weapon research, development, production and the ban on its uses is an integral part of international law, with particular attention paid to the protection against these weapons. In spite of this, hazards associated with toxins cannot be completely excluded. Some of these hazards are also pointed out in the present review. The article deals with the characteristics and properties of natural toxins and synthetic analogs potentially constituting the basis of toxin weapons. It briefly describes the history of military research and the use of toxins from distant history up to the present age. With respect to effective disarmament conventions, it mentions certain contemporary concepts of possible toxin applications for military purposes and the protection of public order (suppression of riots); it also briefly refers to the question of terrorism. In addition, it deals with certain traditional as well as modern technologies of the research, synthesis, and use of toxins, which can affect the continuing development of toxin weapons. These are, for example, cases of new toxins from natural sources, their chemical synthesis, production of synthetic analogs, the possibility of using methods of genetic engineering and modern biotechnologies or the possible applications of nanotechnology and certain pharmaceutical methods for the effective transfer of toxins into the organism. The authors evaluate the military importance of toxins based on their comparison with traditional chemical warfare agents. They appeal to the ethics of the scientific work as a principal condition for the prevention of toxin abuse in wars, military conflicts, as well as in non-military attacks.

Although amphetamine was thoroughly tested by leading scientists for its effects in boosting or maintaining physical and mental performance in fatigued subjects, the results never provided solid grounds for approving the drug's use, and, in any case, came too late to be decisive. The grounds on which amphetamine was actually adopted by both British and American militaries had less to do with the science of fatigue than with the drug's mood-altering effects, as judged by military men. It increased confidence and aggression, and elevated "morale."

As researchers discover more agents that alter mental states, the Chemical Weapons Convention needs modification to help ensure that the life sciences are not used for hostile purposes, says Malcolm Dando.

Literature on 'non-lethal' weapons (NLWs) frequently contains assertions that more robust NLW development and use are needed because of the changing nature of military operations. These assertions are in opposition to international legal analysis of NLWs, which show international law restricting NLW development and use. This article examines this tension by briefly analyzing the restrictive impact that international law has on NLWs and by elaborating three perspectives on what the relationship between NLWs and international law should be. The article outlines the moral foundations for existing international law on the use of force and armed conflict and then sketches international law's current impact on NLW development and use. Next, the article explores the compliance, selective and radical change perspectives that emerge from discourse about international law and NLWs. The compliance perspective insists that NLWs comply with existing rules of international law. The selective change perspective seeks limited changes in international law to allow more robust use of NLWs. The radical change perspective sees in NLWs the potential to reform radically international law on the use of force and armed conflict. Identifying the three perspectives helps clarify future choices NLWs may present in international law and suggests that the future relationship between NLWs and international law will be more complex, controversial and dangerous than people may realize.

Various technologies have been proposed for non-lethal weapons (NLW), some of them credible, or at least plausible, but strong claims were made for others without evidence or references. Five such technologies are examined. For the chemical and biological examples, detailed information is lacking but the diminishing number of such claims over time and general scientific knowledge suggest that fulfilment of the promises is improbable. For acoustic weapons, a detailed study found that many of the claims are plainly untrue. In this case, even wrong values for physiological thresholds were presented. Civil and military NLW programmes in the USA put their main emphasis on simple, short-term technologies rather than exotic ones. In order to avoid dangers arising from unrealistic promises, the concept of preventive arms control should be applied to NLW. Its first step is a scientific analysis, investigating the new weapons, the propagation of their effects and the effect on the targets. Such detailed studies are needed for each proposed NLW technology.

A confederate civilian physician shot and killed a white Union officer who was drilling Negro troops in Norfolk, Virginia. With no question as to guilt, President Abraham Lincoln decided to have a medical expert conduct a professional sanity/insanity examination. Documentation indicates that legal and political factors may have influenced Lincoln's decision. As a lawyer, Lincoln prosecuted a case where the insanity plea was used as a defense. Two influential Cabinet members, William H. Seward and Edwin M. Stanton, also had legal experience involving the insanity plea. Politically, Lincoln faced serious issues such as the draft riots, the military necessity to recruit slaves into the army, the impact of Union Negro soldiers upon the border states, the morale and discipline of the army and the upcoming presidential election. Upon Seward's recommendation, Lincoln chose a physician who had a reputation for finding the accused sane and who did so in this case. As the southern physician was hanged, Lincoln's means achieved the desired legal and political ends.

Halons have been used for decades by the Air Force for a variety of fire protection applications. Their unique combination of effectiveness, low toxicity, ease of use, cleanliness, and low manufacturing cost appear to make them ideal for many situations. Unfortunately, they also deplete the earth's protective ozone layer and, consequently, their production is being phased out globally under the Montreal Protocol. United States legislation implementing the terms of the Protocol required an end to production of ozone depleting chemicals (ODCs) by the year 2000. In November 1991, the Air Force issued a policy requiring an end to ODC purchases by the end of 1997. In February 1992, President Bush announced an even more accelerated phaseout to 1995. The Montreal Protocol is expected to be amended to reflect the more aggressive US phaseout date. This accelerated date increases the urgency of the Air Force's search for ODC alternatives, especially for mission critical uses for which no alternatives have yet been identified. The search is complicated by the fact that the requirements an alternative must meet are unique to their specific application. This paper will provide an overview of the most important Air Force halon uses and review Air Force strategies for ensuring mission continuity until alternatives can be developed.