Urgent Action Needed to Prevent Misuse of Biotechnology
By Isabelle Daoust, International Humanitarian Law Advisor, Canadian Red CrossThe Fifth Review Conference of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention ended in Geneva on November 15 with a plan containing modest commitments by States to meet at regular intervals over the next four years. While this agreement provides for a continuing diplomatic forum, the plan falls short of responding to current and potential threats posed by biological weapons.
Indeed, rapid advances in biotechnology will make the development of biological weapons easier, deadlier, cheaper, and more difficult to detect. Unless urgent action is taken to monitor and control dangerous agents, misuse of biotechnology could undermine ancient and modern norms outlawing the hostile use of poison and disease. For future combatants, germs could replace bullets as the weapon of choice.
In light of these developments, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has launched an appeal to governments, industry, and the scientific community, calling on them to ensure that new biotechnologies are never used to poison or deliberately spread disease.
This appeal is all the more urgent in light of the inability of States to agree - first in 2001 and again during the Fifth Review Conference of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention - on measures to strengthen and monitor compliance with the Biological Weapons Convention. This happens at a time when the anthrax attacks in the United States last year have made the dangers arising from the possible hostile use of biological agents clear to all. It is alarming that the sense of urgency created by these attacks did not result in measures to strengthen international law on biological weapons. If preventive measures are not made a priority, there is a high risk that the norms prohibiting biological weapons in warfare will erode.
The Appeal emphasizes the risks of misuse of current and future advances in biotechnology. The ongoing revolution in biotechnology offers enormous benefits for humanity. Among these are new vaccines and cures for disease, the prevention of certain genetic diseases, and increased food production. At the same time, our increasing knowledge presents a vast potential for abuse, the implications of which cannot yet be fully realized. History shows that important advances in science and technology are often turned to hostile uses. Examples include chemistry, electronics, and nuclear physics. The biotechnology revolution could inadvertently facilitate the development of biological weapons, which can be used in armed conflict or as a means of spreading terror.
Examples of this include the deliberate spread of disease such as anthrax and plague to cause death, disease and spread fear in a population. Existing biological warfare agents could be made more deadly, by making them resistant to antibiotics and environmental factors that would normally render them harmless. Common microbes that we live with every day could be engineered to cause illness and disease. The possibility of creating extremely dangerous viruses from synthetic materials is another emerging possibility. This already occurred earlier this year when scientists used a recipe from the Internet and segments of DNA ordered via mail to create a polio virus. The potential user of new types of biological weapons could also design a vaccine that would protect its own population or troops. This would diminish many of the existing deterrents for employing such weapons. The increased knowledge of the human genome and genetic engineering may make biological weapons designed to target one ethnic or racial group a possibility. The development of biological warfare agents that would affect the makeup of the human gene itself is also conceivable. This could affect people for generations to come.
Despite the fact that biological warfare methods have been known for centuries, they have only rarely been used. Ancient norms passed down for generations in diverse cultures have deterred the use of "plague and poison" as a weapon of war. This ban is now codified in international humanitarian law, which prohibits the use of poisoning and deliberate disease as a means of warfare in all conflicts. However, the current lack of progress in strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention underlines the urgent need for a renewed commitment by states to ensure effective control of biological agents. The newly launched Appeal calls for the existing rules to be reaffirmed implemented and reinforced.
There are many concrete steps that could be taken to deter the abuse of new biotechnological knowledge. Among others, the ICRC appeals to governments to support and strengthen existing relevant treaties, including the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, and make sure their relevance is maintained in the face of scientific developments. States must also make sure that anyone violating these rules is prosecuted. As a complement to these efforts, the Appeal urges States to adopt an international declaration, in which they reiterate their commitment to existing norms and pledge to undertake future preventive action. This includes increased cooperation and strengthening of controls on biological agents that can be put to hostile uses. In addition, the Appeal calls upon the scientific and medical communities, as well as industry, to ensure effective regulation of research and to adopt codes of conduct aimed at preventing the abuse of biological agents. It also encourages efforts to enhance national and international cooperation to prevent, monitor and respond to outbreaks of infectious disease.
The responsibility to ensure that biotechnology is used solely for the benefit of humanity lies not only with governments, but also with the military, scientific and medical professionals, and those in biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Ultimately, all of civil society has a role to play in preventing biotechnology from being put to hostile use. Although nobody can predict with certainty whether or not this will happen, it is clear to the Canadian Red Cross that prevention is the only sound strategy in the face of such risks.
