Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:02:07.245Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tall Order: Crafting a Meaningful Verification Protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Amy E. Smithson
Amy E. Smithson*
Affiliation:
Henry L. Stimson Center, USA
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium: Biological Warfare
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 1999 , pp. 79 - 85
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

Ad Hoc Group (1997a). “Other Visits/Measures: Working Paper Submitted by the Friend of the Chair on Compliance Measures.” Document BWC/AD HOC GROUP/WP.138, March 13.Google Scholar
Ad Hoc Group (1997b). “Proposal Concerning the Establishment of an International Epidemiological Monitoring Network: Working Paper Submitted by France.” Document BWC/AD HOC GROUP/WP.134, March 10.Google Scholar
Carpenter, W. (1993). “The Perspective of the Western Chemical Industry.” In Morel, B. and Olson, K., (eds.), Shadows and Substance: The Chemical Weapons Convention. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, W. (1994). Testimony in U.S. Congress, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hearings on the Chemical Weapons Convention, 103d Cong., 2d sess., S.Hrg. 103–869. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, pp. 88–90.Google Scholar
Center for Counterproliferation Research (1996). The NBC Threat in 2025: Concepts and Strategies for Adversarial Use of Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons. Washington, DC: National Defense University, September.Google Scholar
Chevrier, M. et al. (1994). Beyond VEREX: A Legally Binding Compliance Regime for the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, Working Group on Biological and Toxin Weapons Verification. Washington, DC: Federation of American Scientists.Google Scholar
DePalma, A. (1997). “As U.S. Looks On, 122 Nations Agree to Land Mine Ban.” New York Times (December 4):A1.Google Scholar
“Fact Sheet: The Biological Weapons Convention” (1988). Office of the Press Secretary. Washington, DC: The White House, January 27.Google Scholar
Harahan, J.P. (1993). On-Site Inspections under the INF Treaty: A History of the On-Site Inspection Agency and INF Treaty Implementation, 1988–1991. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
“Joint US/UK/Russian Statement of Biological Weapons” (1992). Press Release, Office of Public Affairs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, September 14.Google Scholar
Kay, D.A. (1995). “Denial and Deception Practices of WMD Proliferators: Iraq and Beyond.” Washington Quarterly 18 (Winter):85–105.Google Scholar
Office of the Secretary of Defense (1997). Proliferation: Threat and Response. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, November.Google Scholar
Smith, R.J. (1997). “Iraq's Drive for a Biological Arsenal.” Washington Post (November 21):49.Google Scholar
Smithson, A.E. (1997). Separating Fact from Fiction: The Australia Group and the Chemical Weapons Convention. Occasional paper no. 34. Washington, DC: Henry L. Stimson Center, March.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.B., ed. (1997). The Utility of Sampling and Analysis for Compliance Monitoring of the Biological Weapons Convention. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.Google Scholar
United Nations (1993). Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction. United Nations 93-05070.Google Scholar
U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (1996). Annual Report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1993). Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction: Assessing the Risks, OTA-ISC-559. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, August.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1993). Technologies Underlying Weapons of Mass Destruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Wheelis, M.L. (1992). “Strengthening Biological Weapons Control Through Global Epidemiological Surveillance.” Politics and the Life Sciences 11:179–88.Google Scholar