UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement yesterday in honor of all victims of chemical warfare. April 29 is the anniversary of the entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a Day of Remembrance for all Victims of Chemical Warfare.

On April 22 Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) introduced Sen. Res. 525 – Recognizing the Progress Made by States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention on the Occasion of the Second Review Conference. The resolution was co-sponsored by Senator Lugar (R-IN) and referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Sen. Biden introduced the bill saying:

“Mr. President, 11 years ago this month, the Senate gave its advice and consent to U.S. ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention, or CWC. Those of us who were here then remember all too well how contentious and difficult a task that was.

Eleven years later, I have no doubt in my mind that the Senate did the right thing. The CWC clearly serves the national security interests of the U.S. It continues to enhance international peace and security.

Since the CWC entered into force, 183 States have signed on to the treaty’s commitment to forgo poison gas forever, and have subjected themselves to the treaty’s verification procedures. States Parties to the CWC have destroyed over 27,000 tons of chemical weapons—over a third of the world’s declared stockpiles—and 11 destruction facilities around the world are working to destroy even more. Sixty-five chemical weapons production facilities that, without a Chemical Weapons Convention, could have churned out still more poison gas are no longer carrying out that horrible work, and all but 4 of those former weapons production facilities have been verifiably destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes. Most importantly, there has been no use of chemical weapons by any country in the last 11 years, and no international support for the use of such weapons by terrorist groups.

Under the able leadership of its Director- General, Ambassador Rogelio Pfirter, the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons runs a tight ship. It works with all States Parties to improve national declarations, to mount effective inspections, and to secure the adoption of effective national laws, regulations and procedures that criminalize and guard against the production or stockpiling of chemical weapons.

The States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention are gathering over the next 2 weeks in The Netherlands for the Convention’s Second Review Conference. Senator Lugar and I have introduced this resolution during the Review Conference in order to reaffirm the Senate’s commitment to the goals of the CWC. We are proud of the progress that has been made so far, and we call upon all States Parties to continue to meet their commitments under the CWC and to do all they can to further the noble aims of the Convention.

I urge all my colleagues to support this resolution.”

Over the weekend there were a few news stories on the closing of the Second Review Conference.

• New 2012 deadline set to rid world of chemical weapons. AFP, April 19, 2008.

• World shifts chemical disarmament focus onto rogue attackers. AFP, April 20, 2008.

• Vietnam pledges efforts for chemical weapons-free world. VietNamNet Bridge, April 20, 2008.

• Global chemical weapons deadline set. Press TV, April 21, 2008.

On April 9 the German Bundestag passed a resolution on the CWC review conference. Both the governing Christian Democrat and Social Democrat parties, and the opposition Liberal Party voted for the resolution, while the Green Party abstained and the Socialists voted against it.

Here is a link to the original German resolution, as well as a rough English translation kindly provided by Oliver Meier of the Arms Control Association. According to Oliver there was also a short debate on the CWC where speakers which praised its progress in universality, weapons destruction and verification. They also highlighted the importance of German G8 contributions to speed up the weapons stockpile destruction process in Russia. A German transcript of the debate is available here or online. However Oliver also provided (in English) a list of his personal highlights from the debate:

“Karl-Theodor Freiherr zu Guttenberg, arms control spokesperson for the Conservatives highlighted the fact that some non-signatories such as Angola, Somalia and Egypt are among the top recipients of German development aid. Von Guttenberg called upon the German government, particularly in the cases of Egypt and Syria, to increase emphasis of the importance of joining the CWC. He said this might be helpful to reduce Israeli threat perception and convince Tel Aviv to ratify the CWC.”

“Uta Zapf, chair of the Bundestag’s subcommittee on disarmament, arms control and nonproliferation, warned that against the background of peace-keeping operations, insurgencies and counter-terrorism operations, the temptation to develop new incapacitants is great. She said that the review conference must address this “hot topic” and define the CWC prohibitions in terms of which agents may be used under what cirumstances. This was echoed by Elke Hoff, arms control spokesperson of the Liberal Party who also emphasized the importance of national implementation measures.”

“By contrast, Paul Schaefer, Social spokesperson for arms control, accused the German government of wanting to legitimise non-lethal weapons and called the resolution ambivalent. Winfried Nachtwei of the Green Party highlighted the fact that were the CWC approach applied to nuclear weapons, we would have a nuclear-weapons free world by 2020. Nachtwei also called on the German government to be more transparent about its own research on non-lethal weapons and urged the government to deal with the problem of old CW dumped in the Baltic Sea.”

It is interesting to note that the resolution specifically mentions the use of non-lethal or incapacitating agents under the CWC and Oliver’s highlights show that the debate included mention of this topic as well. It seems that the Second Review Conference will not deal explicitly with this issue, but hopefully will set procedures in motion that will allow for an in depth look at incapacitants so that their use under the CWC can be clarified.

Thanks for the information on this Oliver!