{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

02.28 - PCS 119 02.28.08 Possible Response to Threat...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: PCS 119: 02.28.08 Possible Response to Threat: Unilateral (transparency, confidence- building measures, national regulatory commissions [Schwartz paper]) Multilateral (ex: WHO and OIE [ Office International des Epizooties] and their biosecurity guidelines (5); Australia Group) • Guidelines = nonbinding so how efficient can it be? o OIE: international organization for animal health o Australia group- an informal agreement of 40 nations that have bio capabilities and they harmonize under the Australia Group-export control group Developing nations say there is a restriction on trade and therefore development—its is a power issue o Gentlemen agreements: Exclusive multilateralism: Australia Group (bio + chemical weapons), Nuclear Supplier group (nuclear materials), Waasenaar Arrangement (missile technology) Nonbinding o Treaties: goal for universal aspiration/membership it binds everyone However there is a challenge with universal targeting tool too many viewpoints and not enough time/ scope of participation is a real challenge (esp for nations that want nice and neat formats like the US) INCLUSIVE MULITALTERALISM: NPT, BWC, CWC Legal (treaties, SC Res 1540 [crim inalization]) o SC Res 1540 : called upon all countries to crim inalize WMD activities undertaken by nonstate actors ie so called terrorists o Q: if you are an attorney for state dept and you are asked to justify the Livermore bio defense how would you argue? (sample m idterm question) State supported therefore do not go against the SC 1540 Milit ary (interdiction, bio-defense) o Interdiction : military intervention you intervene for instance stopping boats, searching and seizing military materials (PSI proliferation security initiative—interdiction effort to force interdiction o But on international waters it is illegal you are not supposed to stop the ships sailing under the flag of another nation on the high sea...
View Full Document

  • Spring '08
  • Cipolat
  • Nuclear weapon, Chemical warfare, Biological warfare, chemical weapons, Proliferation Security Initiative, Australia Group

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 7

02.28 - PCS 119 02.28.08 Possible Response to Threat...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online