Saturday, September 5, 2009

Is Neuro-War More Dangerous Than Normal War?

Slain black widows pictured by Russian television after the crisis (AFP)

Should We Fear Neuro-War More Than Normal War? -- Foreign Policy Blog

A new opinion piece in Nature (ungated version via a somewhat dubious Website) takes biologists to task for allowing the militarization of their work for the development of neuro-weapons -- chemical agents that are weaponized in spray or gas form to induce altered mental states.

The Russian military's use of fentanyl to incapacitate Chechen terrorists -- and kill 120 hostages in the process -- during the 2002 Nord-Ost siege was something of a wakeup call in this area. It's no secret that the U.S. and other militaries are interested in these potential weapons (I wrote about a 2008 DoD-commisioned study on cognitive enhancement and mind control last November.) According to the Nature story, some companies are now marketing oxytocin based on studies showing that in spray form, it can increase feelings of trust in humans, an application discussed in the 2008 study.

Read more ....

My Comment: What is missing in the debate is the answer to the question .... do these chemical agents contravene international laws that prohibit the use of certain chemical agents.

After the Nord-Ost siege in Moscow, many Western Governments were demanding answers on what was used to incapacitate the Chechen terrorists, and did these agents contravene international law. The Russians refused to answer .... and/or gave disinformation. One can also ask the same question about today's neuro-agents .... and are they permissible under international law.

My reading of the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty is that it does not.

No comments: