The current crisis surrounding chemical weapons use is inextricably linked to the principles of international security and the rule of law. The documented breaches of the CWC by Russia in Ukraine, now exceeding 10,000 reported incidents since February 2022, constitute a grave violation of international norms and a direct assault on the very foundations of the treaty. Intelligence reports, corroborated by Dutch and German agencies, indicating a deliberate escalation in the deployment of chemical agents – including potential use against Ukrainian forces and civilians – represent a dangerous trend. As stated by Dr. David Crewdson, Senior Analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, “The sheer volume of alleged attacks, coupled with the demonstrated willingness to disregard international law, highlights a critical failure of deterrence.” This failure compels a more proactive and legally-backed approach.
The situation in Sudan is equally alarming. While details remain limited and verification efforts are ongoing, reports of potential chemical weapon use, specifically targeting civilian populations, necessitate a swift and coordinated response from the international community. The United States, through ongoing diplomatic engagement with the Republic of Sudan, is working to establish mechanisms for thorough investigation and accountability. However, the fragility of the Sudanese government and the lack of independent oversight present significant obstacles. According to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, “The Sudanese context – characterized by weak governance, armed conflict, and displacement – creates a highly permissive environment for illicit weapon proliferation and the potential for chemical weapons use.”
Syria represents a long-term and complex challenge. Despite ongoing efforts by the Syrian Arab Republic and the OPCW to eliminate the legacy of the Assad regime’s chemical weapons program, significant hurdles remain. The Secretariat’s repeated deployments to declared and undeclared sites, coupled with the recent discovery of a previously unknown nerve agent site, underscore the persistence of the threat. The United Kingdom’s commitment of £2.8 million since December 2023 demonstrates a tangible commitment to support this vital work, but sustained financial and in-kind support is crucial. As Professor Maria Cantoni, a specialist in Weapons of Mass Destruction at King’s College London, argues, “The destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons legacy is not simply a technical undertaking; it is a deeply political and logistical operation inextricably tied to the country’s broader transition.”
Looking ahead, the next six months will likely see continued escalation in allegations of chemical weapon use, particularly in Ukraine, driven by strategic considerations and, potentially, a deliberate effort to undermine Western resolve. Attribution efforts will remain complex and contested, exacerbating tensions between states. The passage of the revised Decision on Expedited Destruction in Syria, currently under discussion, is pivotal, but its effectiveness will depend on the sustained cooperation of all States Parties. Furthermore, a critical factor will be the strengthening of OPCW’s investigative capabilities, including access to information and the ability to conduct on-site inspections with greater speed and discretion.
Over the longer term, the trajectory of the CWC hinges on the broader geopolitical landscape. The rise of non-state actors, coupled with advancements in dual-use technologies, presents new avenues for chemical weapon development and proliferation. A critical ten-year projection suggests a continued increase in the risk of chemical weapon use, particularly if global security architecture remains fragmented and enforcement mechanisms remain weak. Addressing this requires a multi-faceted strategy: bolstering intelligence gathering, investing in forensic capabilities, strengthening international legal frameworks, and – crucially – fostering a renewed commitment to multilateralism.
The challenge facing the OPCW and the international community is not simply one of reacting to chemical weapon attacks; it is about preventing their use in the first place. A shift towards a more proactive and preventative approach – underpinned by strong deterrence, robust enforcement, and sustained investment – is essential. Ultimately, the future of the CWC, and indeed global security, depends on the collective willingness to confront this dangerous reality and uphold the principles of the treaty. The question remains: will the international community demonstrate the leadership and resolve required to safeguard humanity from the horrors of chemical warfare?