Stockpiling Of Biological Weapons Research Articles

Scientific and Technological Advances as Current Challenges to the Biological Weapons Non-Proliferation Regime

The recent advances in biological sciences and biotechnology have resulted in new knowledge and capabilities that challenge existing understandings of biological threats and biological weapons (BW). The purpose of the article is to evaluate scientific and engineering decisions that pose potential challenges to the biological weapons non-proliferation regime and can reduce barriers to their development, production and use. Materials and methods. The scientific articles available through the PubMed, Google Scholar and Russian Electronic Library databases were used in the research. The method of analysis is the description. The results of the research. The success of biotechnology provides impetus for experimentation with biological weapons, particularly by non-state actors such as terrorist organizations and extremist groups. Transformative changes are occurring in areas not directly related to microbiology. However, the potential for their malicious use is no less of a concern than the development, production and stockpiling of biological weapons. The transformation of the concept of «biological threat» is traced. It becomes more complex and includes elements from other fields outside of biotechnology and the traditional understanding of biological weapons. In addition to biotechnology and synthetic biology, such technologies that are directly related to the BTWC issue, may include: additive manufacturing based on 3D printing technologies; big data analysis and artificial intelligence technologies; nanotechnology and materials science, as well as biological research automation and robotics. Conclusion. Many dual-use technologies have received close attention from the scientific community and international experts, but this does not always contribute to an accurate and balanced understanding of their potential in the context of BTWC issues. The convergence of new and emerging disciplines is creating new areas of scientific knowledge that address the problem of non-proliferation of biological weapons, which requires the expert community to make a balanced assessment from the point of view of both dual use and the risk of excessive prohibition and negative impact on further scientific and technological progress.

Problems of Biosafety in Current International Law

INTRODUCTION. The presented article is devoted to an extremely curious and, without exaggeration, urgent topic. The authors seek to understand the content and legal concept of biosafety in International Law. The researchers seek to list the biosafety issues in order to define concrete aspects related to responsibility of the States for using biological weapons. The authors analyze new legal trends on ensuring the international biosafety. The article is focused on legal issues by raising many questions about what should be considered a just war in the view of international humanitarian law, the issues of fundamental principles in current international law (the principle use of force, the right of States to self-defense in case of a bioattack, the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States, arms control, and responsibility). The writers give an overview of new types of sovereignty such as biosovereignty, cyber sovereignty, cyberbiosovereignty, and genomic sovereignty of States, the legal concept of international biocrimes (genomocide), the legal classification of bioterrorism, bioaggression, biopolitics, and bioeconomics. The authors consider the importance of facilitating the broad interpretation of the concept of biosafety.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research uses general scientific and special cognitive techniques wherein legal analysis and synthesis, systemic, formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal and dialectical methods are applied.RESEARCH RESULTS. The authors found out that despite the prohibition of biological weapon there are still other urgent issues such as an international control mechanism for monitoring the non-proliferation of biological weapons has not been established yet. The Protocol to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) has not been adopted yet. The study concludes with an idea that the problem of banning certain types of biomedical research has not been solved in some States and at the international level. The authors note such important problems as the lack of an international control mechanism for monitoring the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of bacteriological (biological) and toxin weapons, as well as the threat to the safety of genomic research and confidentiality of genetic data. In this paper, we interpret the concept of biosafety rather broadly, considering the issues typical of allied industries. Biosecurity and biosafety are directly related to ensuring environmental security, marine security, food security and outer space security. The researchers paid attention to the issue of legal regulation of ensuring environmental, biological, and food safety. Due to this fact, it is hard to do so with regard to the causal link between the acts (bioterrorism) of state agencies, the violation of the principles of international law, standards of human rights and the consequences that occurred. It is not clear from the text of the BTWC Convention which international organ/body can investigate such acts in international affairs and which norm of international law directly should be applied.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Following a review of the content, the authors raise possible problems, strategies, suggestions and guidelines for ensuring biosafety in international law. The authors conclude that near future new categories of weapons of mass destruction appear in the world, moreover, genetic weapons should be classified as weapons of mass destruction, along with chemical, biological, bacteriological, and nuclear weapons. Technological developments will trigger the issues of fundamental principles in current international law. The authors came to the conclusion about extension of the universal jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in case biological and genetic weapons are used. The authors encourage the complement to the international legal regulation the necessity to adopt a Protocol to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), establishing an international control mechanism for verifying prohibitions on the development, production, and stockpiling of biological weapons is obvious. The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction adopted in 1993, which contains a mechanism for verifying compliance with the prohibitions of the Convention, can be considered a precedent for the effective regulation of the circulation of hazardous substances all over the world.

DISEASE BEARING INSECT RESEARCH IN MALAYA BY JAPANESE SCIENTISTS DURING WORLD WAR II AND ITS POSITION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Japanese scientists commissioned by the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) were tasked at the Nettai Igaku Kenkyusho or Institute of Medical Research (IMR) in Kuala Lumpur and other locations in Malaya during World War II (WWII) to identify cures for malaria, dengue, and scrub typhus rampant among Japanese troops in Southeast Asia. Such research on insects could contribute to biological warfare. This study identifies the background and destiny of these few Japanese scientists in Malaya conducting research on malaria, dengue and scrub typhus while evaluating if their research could have been an offense under international law at that point of time. A qualitative historical approach relying on documentation, soft law, treaties, and secondary resources obtained from archives and national libraries online from different countries and the Fold3-Historical Military Records website were referred. These documentations were classified according to names of Japanese scientists to form a short biography and to provide background information of the IMR during WWII. The results reveal some Japanese scientists responsible for malaria research at the IMR in Kuala Lumpur and Penang, and dengue research in Malaya, Singapore and Java. Human experimentation associated with dengue was suspected in Singapore. One IMR Japanese director had links with Unit 731. Kiyoshi Hayakawa, part of Unit 9420 in Singapore, Japan’s subunit for its covert biological weapons programme conducted research on scrub typhus in Java and Malaya. These scientists continued as professors in Japan or were promoted to this position much later with one of them opening a medical company. Indeed, a gap existed in international law at the end of the 19th and early 20th century which failed to make experimentation illegal as a preparation stage rather than actual usage in warfare because of the omission to address the development, production and stockpiling of biological weapons.