India Completes Chemical Weapons Disposal

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by nitesh, Apr 28, 2009.

  1. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    NTI: Global Security Newswire - India Completes Chemical Weapons Disposal; Iraq Declares Stockpile

    India Completes Chemical Weapons Disposal; Iraq Declares Stockpile
    Monday, April 27, 2009
    By Chris Schneidmiller
    Global Security Newswire

    WASHINGTON -- India has become the third nation to eliminate its known stockpile of chemical weapons, the organization that monitors adherence to the Chemical Weapons Convention announced last week (see GSN, Jan. 22, 2008).

    India on March 26 notified the Technical Secretariat to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons that it had completed operations, according to OPCW Director General Rogelio Pfirter.

    "I wish to sincerely, warmly, and emphatically congratulate India on this laudable achievement, which is the result of a consistent and unwavering commitment shown by India since entry into force of the convention," he told the agency's Executive Council. "This attainment further strengthens the convention as an effective instrument for promoting the objectives of peace and security."

    All member nations to the convention are prohibited from developing, producing, stockpiling, using or transferring chemical warfare materials such as mustard blister agent or sarin and VX nerve agents.

    Albania and another nation that remains officially anonymous but is widely accepted to be South Korea have already disposed of their chemical arsenals (see GSN, July 12, 2007, and Oct. 17, 2008).

    India joined the pact in 1996 and declared its stockpile of banned warfare materials the next year. It is believed to have held 1,000 tons of mustard agent, destroyed through incineration, according to the environmental organization Global Green USA.

    The other declared chemical weapons possessor states are Libya, Russia, the United States and, as of last month, Iraq.

    "Iraq submitted its initial declaration on 12 March 2009, and has declared two bunkers with filled and unfilled chemical weapons munitions, some precursors, as well as five former chemical weapons production facilities," Pfirter said last week.

    Iraq's history with chemical weapons is well known. The Hussein regime developed blister and nerve agents, and then used them against Iran and Iraqi Kurds in the 1980s. Tens of thousands of munitions and nearly 700 metric tons of warfare materials were destroyed in the years after the first Gulf War, but suspicions in Washington persisted that Baghdad had not fully dismantled its arsenal, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

    The U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq was justified partly on the threat posed by the regime's alleged WMD activities. No indications of existing unconventional weapons operations were found after the war (see GSN, March 20). Iraq joined the Chemical Weapons Convention earlier this year.

    The declaration contained no surprises, OPCW spokesman Michael Luhan indicated. The production facilities were "put out of commission" by airstrikes during the 1991 conflict, while U.N. personnel afterward secured the chemical munitions in the bunkers, he said.

    "These are legacy weapons, remnants," Luhan told Global Security Newswire today. He declined to discuss how many weapons were stored in the bunkers or what materials they contained. The weapons are not believed to be in a usable state.

    The bunkers were damaged during the 2003 campaign. The OPCW Technical Secretariat must now consider how to safely access the sites to verify Iraq's declaration, Luhan said. Eventually, all production facilities will have to be fully dismantled and the weapons destroyed.

    More than 43 percent of the declared global stocks of Category 1 chemical weapons, materials that have little if any peaceful application and pose a "high risk" to the convention, have been destroyed, along with nearly 52 percent of Category 2 materials, which create a "significant risk" but also have commercial uses, Pfirter said. All least-dangerous Category 3 weapons have been eliminated.

    By the end of March, Russia had destroyed 12,065 metric tons of chemical warfare materials, roughly 30 percent of the world's-largest stockpile that once stood at 40,000 tons. The United States had eliminated roughly 16,466 metric tons, nearly 60 percent of its original arsenal of more than 28,500 tons.

    Both nations have until April 2012 to complete operations. The United States has acknowledged that it will miss that deadline by a number of years, while some observers are skeptical about Russia's claims that it will meet its obligation (see GSN, Dec. 4, 2008).

    Libya continues to prepare its destruction facility for elimination of an estimated 23 metric tons of banned material, Luhan said.

    Work also continues to recover tens of thousands of munitions abandoned by the Japanese military in China at the end of World War II.

    "The current work on the draft detailed plan for verification and facility arrangement for mobile destruction facilities is progressing. It is our hope to have these documents near completion by the end of this year, in time for the anticipated beginning of destruction operations scheduled for the second half of 2010," Pfirter said.

    A total of 188 nations have joined the convention, leaving just seven on the outside -- Angola, Egypt, Israel, Myanmar, North Korea, Somalia and Syria. Angola is likely to be the next nation to join, Luhan said (see GSN, April 24).

    He acknowledged that the others are likely to prove harder cases, with membership in the pact tied to regional and global concerns and other nonproliferation and disarmament issues. At least two of the nations, North Korea and Syria, are widely suspected of maintaining chemical weapons arsenals.

    "The closer we get to [treaty universality] ... the steeper it gets," Luhan said. "The rest are going to be difficult."

    However, the organization will continue to focus on the matter. The revived push for global nuclear disarmament could also provide momentum for worldwide elimination of chemical weapons, Luhan said (see GSN, April 24).
     
  2.  
  3. EnlightenedMonk

    EnlightenedMonk Member of The Month JULY 2009 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    3,831
    Likes Received:
    23
    Thanks Nitesh, I frankly never knew we had any sort of Chemical Weapons at all...
     
  4. shiv

    shiv Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    actually em we are one of the biggest producers of chemicals in the world and are in the top slot in their R&D and innovation too.
     
  5. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    India may have destroyed the stockpile, but since we have a very advanced chemical industry it would not take too long for us to come up with a warhead to mount on a missile should that come to pass in a war scenario.
     
  6. EnlightenedMonk

    EnlightenedMonk Member of The Month JULY 2009 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    3,831
    Likes Received:
    23
    I knew we were one of the top producers of chemicals, but I never knew that we'd converted them into bombs or other weapons... this comes as a shock and a surprise to me...
     
  7. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Whats the bid deal to make it as a bomb? Get some chemicals and put some explosives on it and send it on a missile. The explosion will release the chemicals in the air, and the airflow will take care of spreading it over the whole city/area.
     
  8. EnlightenedMonk

    EnlightenedMonk Member of The Month JULY 2009 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    3,831
    Likes Received:
    23
    Yusuf, you have me wrong dude, I never doubted our technical capability of making such a warhead, but I never knew we had the intention of making this warhead... that's what I'm talking about...
     
  9. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    228
    The most dangerous stockpile is the Small pox strain. The vaccines cant be mass produced.
     
  10. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Sorry if you got me wrong. I was just saying its no big deal for anyone to make a chemical weapon. Thats why we are afraid of the terrorists laying their hands on CBW. They can even carry it and put it in a river. That can take out a large chunk of population. CBW is right now a bigger threat than a nuclear bomb as you can carry easily improvise any chemcial or virus to create a WMD.
     
  11. Su-47

    Su-47 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    18

    Many nations developed chemical and biological weapons as a means to defend themselves from nuclear armed neighbors. Remember, china developed a nuke in 1964, whereas we only made a small one in 1974, and even then our nuclear program was in its infancy. we must have developed chemical weapons to counter the Chinese nuclear threat.

    Many nations, especially ones with nuclear ambitions, have chemical and/or biological weapons stockpiles. They use it as a deterrent in the period leading up to the development of nuclear weapons. That's why west gets its panties in a twist everytime Iran or North Korea tests a long range missile. they know that if a war breaks out, those missiles can carry chemical/biological weapons to many cities.
     
  12. zraver

    zraver Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    25
    The US may miss its deadline, but not for lack of trying. They ship everything to the Pinebluff Arsenal which I have to drive past every couple of weeks. There a $4 billion incinerator destroys it. The TV stations are always playing the (Chemical Stockpile Emergency Plan(CSEP) warning commercials
     
    rubyjackass likes this.
  13. shiv

    shiv Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    5
    alright we got rid of the chemical weapons or we say we did,what about the biological weapons we claim the agni can take(agni can take upto 24 different types of warheads) to long distances.

    i think biological weapons are much more potent at exterminating a population then nukes,no radiation no harm to infrastructure,strains can be designed to destroy them selves after sometime so that new population can habitat the same place.

    ex-Anthrax strain,smallpox strain,especially the latter.
     
  14. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,563
    we can always produce more chemical weapons with our huge pharmaceutical industry base as we need too,biologicals take more to develop and are harder to control in a weaponized form.
     
  15. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,630
    Likes Received:
    11,706
    Leave aside GOI, even reliance Industries can produce large number of chemicals to be used a weapons......... of couse chemicals and their use as weapons are two different things.

    Why cant DRDO invest in sleeping gas for anti terrorist operations ??? we need that kind of stuff......... we need those pigs alive so that all the information is extracted from them and then they should be eliminated by due processes.
     
  16. EnlightenedMonk

    EnlightenedMonk Member of The Month JULY 2009 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    3,831
    Likes Received:
    23
    Yes, like the Moscow Theater Siege...
     
  17. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,630
    Likes Received:
    11,706
    yeah EM we need those types of gases so that terrorist should fear/ be terrorised...... they should be kept guessing all the time, these are non lethal gases i dont think they are part of Chemical weapons treaty, i know tear gas is not part of treaty.
     
  18. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    slightly OT but generally relevant to chemical warfare:

    I didnt knew that india was so good in chemical weapons. good find. good thread.
    but my doubt is: why didnt we use some sort of chemical or biological poison or disease on those terrorists we released at the time of IC-814 hijack in kandahar? some sort of biological or chemical poison or disease that would spread to even those that come in contact with them. then those terrorists who hijacked our flight would also have known wat it means to challenge india. atleast, we could have given a slow poison that would kill those 3 released terrorists once our passengers are safe. why didnt we do it?
     
  19. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,563
    it might have killed the passengers like when Russia used chemical weapons against chechniyans more Russians hostages were dead than the terrorists.
     
  20. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    ^^wat about slow poison then? atleast, those 3 terrorists would have been dead.
     
  21. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    The terrorists in the company of our foreign ministers were in contact all the time with the other terrorists who laid the red carpet. Im sure the first question they would have asked those three is if they have been drugged or given anything. If they were injected with anything, the deal would have been off.
     

Share This Page