DOWN THE SLIPPERY SLOPE? A STUDY OF CONTEMPORARY DUAL-USE CHEMICAL AND LIFE SCIENCE RESEARCH POTENTIALLY APPLICABLE TO INCAPACITATING CHEMICAL AGENT WEAPONS BIOCHEMICAL SECURITY 2030 POLICY PAPER SERIES NUMBER 8 BIOCHEMICAL SECURITY 2030 PROJECT BRADFORD NON-LETHAL WEAPONS RESEARCH PROJECT OCTOBER 2014 Dr Michael Crowley Project Coordinator of the Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project based at the Peace Studies Department, School of Social and International Studies, University of Bradford, United Kingdom. Email: [email protected] Professor Malcolm Dando School of Social and International Studies University of Bradford, Bradford Email: [email protected] ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors, as well as the Biochemical Security 2030 Project organisers, would like to thank those who have reviewed or commented upon drafts of this report. In particular this includes Professor Julian Perry Robinson and Dr Ralf Trapp as well as others, including those members of the Biochemical Security 2030 expert panel, who commented on this document. We are also grateful to those Government officials, named and unnamed, who have replied to our information requests and/or commented upon specific sections of this report. We are grateful to the Economic and Social Research Council as well as the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory Futures and Innovation Domain for funding the Biochemical Security 2030 Project. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust for their financial support for aspects of this research. The research findings and policy recommendations detailed in this publication have been developed under the auspices of the Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project (BNLWRP) and reflect the organisation's position on these issues. Dr Michael Crowley Prof. Malcolm Dando Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project Brett Edwards, Research Officer (Series Editor) Prof. David Galbreath, Principal Investigator Biochemical Security 2030 Project, Department of Politics, Languages and International Studies, University of Bath, United Kingdom. CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... I LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................................... VII LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................ VIII 1. INTRODUCTION: INCAPACITATING CHEMICAL AGENT WEAPONS .................................................................. 1 2. HISTORICAL ICA WEAPONS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES ................................................. 3 3. ADVANCES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND THEIR POTENTIAL APPLICATION IN ICA WEAPONS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT........................................................................................................................ 5 3.1. SELECTED POTENTIAL CANDIDATE ICAS WITH WEAPONS UTILITY............................................................................... 6 3.2. MEANS OF DELIVERY ........................................................................................................................................ 8 3.3. DUAL-USE CONSIDERATIONS AND MONITORING TECHNOLOGIES AND PROCESSES OF CONCERN ......................................10 4. SURVEY OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH POTENTIALLY APPLICABLE TO THE STUDY OR DEVELOPMENT OF ICAS AND ASSOCIATED MEANS OF DELIVERY .................................................................................................12 4.1. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................................12 4.2. COUNTRY CASE STUDIES...................................................................................................................................14 4.2.1. CHINA...................................................................................................................................................14 4.2.2. CZECH REPUBLIC.....................................................................................................................................20 4.2.3. INDIA....................................................................................................................................................29 4.2.4. IRAN.....................................................................................................................................................34 4.2.5. ISRAEL ..................................................................................................................................................38 4.2.6. RUSSIAN FEDERATION..............................................................................................................................42 4.2.7. SYRIA....................................................................................................................................................50 4.2.8. UNITED KINGDOM ..................................................................................................................................54 4.2.9. UNITED STATES ......................................................................................................................................60 5. APPLICATION OF THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION TO ICA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ...........73 6. SUMMARY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................77 7. RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................................82 7.1. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CWC STATES PARTIES ..........................................................................................................82 7.2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND THE TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT ...........................................................86 7.3. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY MEDICAL, SCIENTIFIC AND ACADEMIC COMMUNITIES ...................................................89 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Certain lines of contemporary research into a range of pharmaceutical chemicals could potentially be – rightly or wrongly - construed as being linked to the study or development of incapacitating chemical agents (ICAs) with weapons utility. This report highlights some specific areas where such concerns or mis-perceptions might arise. Further to this, the report also explores how States can ensure that such research is not utilised in chemical weapons development, or misinterpreted as being utilised for such purposes. The report incorporates case studies, based on a standardised methodology. These case studies draw upon information derived primarily from documents in English. The case studies describe a variety of different scenarios in which research, potentially applicable to ICA weapons has reportedly occurred, or where such weapons have reportedly been developed or used since the coming into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 19971. The following States are discussed as case studies: China: ICA weapons employing an unknown anaesthetic agent for use against individuals have been developed and marketed by Chinese companies at international arms fairs held in China, and in 2012 were reportedly held by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. China has provided no public information regarding its stockpiles of these weapons nor the specific purposes of their intended employment. To date, China has made no statement clarifying whether any Chinese entity has conducted or is conducting research activities related to the development of ICA weapons targeting groups of individuals. Czech Republic: From 2005-2007, Czech scientists published papers describing their investigations over several years relating to a range of pharmaceutical chemicals including various opioids, ketamine, medetomidine and midazolam, specifically highlighting their potential utility as, in their words, “pharmacological non-lethal weapons”. Research into such chemicals continued after 2007, but additional papers contained no explicit reference to their potential application as so-called “pharmacological non-lethal weapons”. The Czech Republic CWC National Authority has subsequently investigated Czech research activities and in 2014 stated that “There was no connection [between] the research [and] creation of 1 Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention), 1993, http://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/ (accessed 1st October 2014). ii any sort of weapons or devices which could be used for military or police purposes.” With regard to the Czech “pharmacological non-lethal weapons” papers, the National Authority stated “research programmes had justifiable medical goals, but their reporting in public media exceeded actual results of the research thus creating a false impression of possible development of some sort of chemical weapons.” India: Scientists at the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) have conducted work related to the synthesis, aersolisation and bio-efficacy of fentanyl and its analogues, as described