asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the decision of the United States to produce binary nerve gas weapons, and that members of the European community who are on the NATO Defence Review Committee, have approved such production; and the action he proposes to take to oppose the production of these chemical weapons.
Written Answers. - Chemical Weapons.
35.
The Deputy is referring to recent reports that the United States Government has declared its intention to resume the production of chemical weapons if a convention outlawing these weapons has not been concluded by the autumn of 1987. The Government has called on every appropriate occasion for the conclusion of a convention outlawing the stockpiling, development, production and use of chemical weapons for all time. The urgency of the conclusion of such an instrument has grown considerably in recent years, on the one hand because of the further development of their chemical weapons capabilities by the superpowers, including the recent decision by the United States to resume the production of chemical weapons, and on the other hand by the renewed use of these weapons by Iraq in the Gulf War.
The Government will continue to press for the conclusion of a Chemical Weapons Convention at the multilateral fora where it is represented and will continue to work with its partners in the Community towards that end.
36.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the production of Binary nerve gas weapons is contrary to Articles 35 and 36 of the Second Geneva Protocol, (1977); and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Articles 35 and 36 of Protocol I (1977) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts concern the methods and means of warfare. Article 35 of the protocol reads:
In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited.
It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.
It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.
Clearly, the use of chemical weapons in war would be contrary to the spirit of this Article. However, there is already in existence, in the Geneva Protocol of 1925, a prohibition on the use of chemical weapons in war, which is now a generally accepted principle in international law.
Article 36 of the 1977 Protocol reads:
In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.
This article makes it clear that the states which are parties to the protocol have a responsibility, when considering the development, production and stockpiling of a new weapon, to determine whether its use would be contrary to the Protocol and to any other international obligations which that state might have undertaken.