Suchergebnisse

Yes ; In the discussions that have taken place over the past six years since the establishment by the Third Review Conference1 in 1991 of the Ad Hoc Group of Governmental Experts,known as VEREX, to identify and examine potential verification measures from a scientific and technical viewpoint, there has been an increasing debate about the role of non-challenge visits in a regime for a strengthened Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC). The arguments as to why on-site investigations are an essential and central element to such a strengthened regime were addressed in the Briefing Paper issued2 in July 1997. In this Briefing Paper, the necessity for non-challenge visits is addressed drawing upon the previous VEREX, Ad Hoc Group (AHG), Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) experience. The advantages and disadvantages of a regime containing non-challenge visits are considered and the conclusion is reached that the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages and that non-challenge visits are an important element which could contribute significantly to the effectiveness of a future legally binding instrument to strengthen the BTWC.

The Article in the August, 1992 issue of Politics and the Life Sciences by Erhard Geissler proposing the establishment of an international Vaccines for Peace (VFP) program to undertake research on and production of vaccines against pathogens (and possible toxins) that pose natural health threats is warmly welcomed. VFP is designed to contribute to health care in developing countries and to enhance international cooperation in biotechnology; it would be administered by the World Health Organization (WHO). Such a program would bring real and tangible benefits to developing countries and encourage participation by such countries in the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention signed in 1972.