Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T07:36:13.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

North vs. South: Politics and the Biological Weapons Convention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Barbara Hatch Rosenberg*
Affiliation:
State University of New York—Purchase, USA
Get access

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

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

Barss, P. (1992). “Epidemic Field Investigation As Applied to Allegations of Chemical, Biological, or Toxin Warfare” [with commentaries and response]. Politics and the Life Sciences 11:534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevrier, M. (1992). “The Biological Weapons Convention: The Third Review Conference.” Politics and the Life Sciences 11:8692.Google Scholar
Ekeus, R. (1991). Interview in Disarmament Times, November 25.Google Scholar
Errera, G. (1991). Statement at the BWC Third Review Conference, September 12.Google Scholar
Federation of American Scientists (1990). “Proposals for the Third Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention.” Later published in Arms Control 12:240–54 (1991).Google Scholar
Federation of American Scientists (1991). “Implementation of the Proposals for a Verification Protocol to the BWC.” Later published in Arms Control 12:255–78 (1991).Google Scholar
Geissler, E., ed. (1986). Biological and Toxin Weapons Today. SIPRI. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Geissler, E., ed. (1990) Strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention by Confidence-Building Measures. SIPRI Chemical and Biological Warfare Studies, No. 10. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Geissler, E., ed. (1992). “Vaccines for Peace: An International Program of Development and Use of Vaccines Against ‘Dual-Threat’ Agents.” Politics and the Life Sciences 11:231–43.Google Scholar
Glenn, J. (1990). “Proliferation Watch on Iraq.” Proliferation Watch 1(4):12.Google Scholar
The Guardian (1991). “Eleven Countries Defying Ban on Germ Weapons.” September 5.Google Scholar
Lehman, R. (1991). Statement at the BWC Third Review Conference, September 10.Google Scholar
Mason, P. (1991). Statement at the BWC Third Review Conference, September 10.Google Scholar
Morse, S. (1992). “Epidemiologic Surveillance for Investigating Chemical or Biological Warfare and for Improving Human Health,” Politics and the Life Sciences 11:2829.Google Scholar
New York Times (1992). “Russia and West Reach Accord on Monitoring Germ-Weapon Ban.” September 15.Google Scholar
Nixon, R. (1969). Remarks of the President on Announcing the Chemical and Biological Defense Policies and Programs. Office of the White House Press Secretary, November 25.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, P. (1991). Statement at the BWC Third Review Conference, September 12.Google Scholar
Piller, C. and Yamamoto, K. (1988). Gene Wars: Military Control Over the New Genetic Technologies. New York: Beech Tree Books, William Morrow and Company.Google Scholar
Ter Haar, B. (1991). The Future of Biological Weapons. The Washington Papers no. 151, Center for Strategic and International Studies. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Tomic, R. (1991). Statement at the BWC Third Review Conference, September 11.Google Scholar
UNIDIR (1991). “The Third Review of the BWC: Issues and Proposals.” United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, Geneva, Research Paper No. 9, byGoldblat, J. and Bernauer, T.. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
United Kingdom (1990). Verification of the Chemical Weapons Convention: Practice Challenge Inspections of Government Facilities: Analysis of Results (CD 1012, CD/CW/WP. 304, 11 July).Google Scholar
United Nations (1980). “Final Declaration.” First Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. UN Document BWC/CONF.I/10,GE,80-60937.Google Scholar
United Nations (1986). “Final Declaration.” Second Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. UN Document BWC/CONF.II/13/2.Google Scholar
United Nations (1987). “Report of the Ad Hoc Meeting of Scientific and Technical Experts from States Parties to the BWC.” UN Document BWC/Conf. II/Ex/2.Google Scholar
United Nations (1991a). “Draft Final Declaration.” Third Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. UN Document BWC/CONF.III/22/Add.2.Google Scholar
United Nations (1991b). “Final Document.” Third Review Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. UN Document BWC/CONF.III/23.Google Scholar
United Nations (1991c). “UN Inspection Team Reports on Iraq's BW Capacity.” Press Release. August 14 (IK/46).Google Scholar
Washington Post (1992). “Russia Fails to Detail Germ Arms.” August 31.Google Scholar
Washington Times (1992). “Defecting Russian Scientist Revealed Biological Arms Efforts.” July 4.Google Scholar
Wheelis, M. (1992). “Strengthening Biological Weapons Control through Global Epidemiological Surveillance” [with commentaries and response]. Politics and the Life Sciences 11:179–97.Google Scholar
Wright, S., ed. (1990). Preventing a Biological Arms Race. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar