Introduction: The Threat Beyond War
Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) weapons are the most destructive technologies people have ever created. A single nuclear bomb can flatten a city. A small amount of a biological agent can trigger a global pandemic. Chemical weapons can cause slow, agonizing deaths.

Despite their destructive power, international law does not treat all NBC weapons equally. Some are clearly banned. Others remain in legal gray areas. This blog discusses how global law responds to these threats, where it succeeds, where it falls short, and how the legal system can better protect the world.

Understanding the Legal Structure

1. Chemical and Biological Weapons: Strong Legal Controls:
   1. Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), 1993
      • This treaty bans the use, improvement, and stockpiling of chemical weapons.
      • It created the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to monitor and investigate countries for compliance.
      Why it matters: This treaty has been very successful because nearly every country in the world has joined, and the rules are enforced through regular checks.
   2. Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), 1972
      • This treaty bans biological weapons, such as viruses and bacteria used to cause harm.
      • However, it lacks a verification system, meaning no inspections to ensure countries are obeying the rules.
      Why it matters: Although the BWC sets strong standards, its weakness is the lack of an enforcement mechanism, making it difficult to detect violations.
2. Nuclear Weapons: Partial and Problematic Rules
   1. Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), 1968
      • This treaty acknowledges five countries as nuclear-armed states (US, Russia, UK, France, China) and aims to prevent others from developing nuclear arms.
      • It requires these five states to work towards disarmament but does not set deadlines or punishments if they fail.
      Why it matters: The NPT allows some countries to keep nuclear weapons while expecting others not to get them, creating a sense of double standards in international law.
   2. Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), 2017
      • This treaty fully bans nuclear weapons: their use, production, stockpiling, and threats of use.
      • No nuclear-armed country has signed it, which limits its global power.
      Why it matters: TPNW reflects growing global demand for disarmament, but its influence is blocked by the refusal of major powers to participate.
3. What Did the International Court of Justice Say?
   1. In 1996, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its opinion on nuclear weapons. The Court said:
      • The use or threat of nuclear weapons would generally break international law.
      • But it also said a country might use them in extreme self-defense, such as when national survival is at risk.
      Why it matters: This opinion created uncertainty. It did not clearly declare nuclear weapons illegal, allowing states to justify keeping them as a defensive option.
4. What About Customary Law and Global Norms?
   1. Even if not all weapons are banned by treaties, other sources of international law apply:
      • Customary international law comes from consistent behavior of states, combined with belief that the behavior is legally required.
      • Jus cogens norms are basic, non-negotiable principles (e.g., right to life, protection of civilians).
      Why it matters: NBC weapons arguably break both customary rules and jus cogens norms. Many legal scholars believe these weapons are already illegal under unwritten but powerful international rules.
5. Do NBC Weapons Follow the Rules of War?
   1. No. NBC weapons clearly violate basic laws of armed conflict, called International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
      
      1. Distinction
         • Attacks must target only military forces, not civilians.
         • NBC weapons cannot control their effects and will almost always harm civilians and infrastructure.
      2. Proportionality
         • Even if a military target is valid, the attack must not cause excessive harm to civilians.
         • NBC weapons cause massive destruction, far beyond what is proportionate.
      3. Unnecessary Suffering
         • Weapons must not cause suffering beyond what is needed to achieve a military goal.
         • NBC weapons cause long-term health damage, radiation exposure, and painful deaths, violating this rule.
      Why it matters: All three core rules of conflict are broken by NBC weapons, which shows that they should be completely banned under existing law.
       

6. What If Terrorists Use NBC Weapons?

   One of the biggest modern threats is non-state actors, like terrorist groups, using NBC weapons. Unfortunately:
   • Most international laws apply only to countries, not terrorist groups.
   • There are some treaties, like the Nuclear Terrorism Convention (2005), but enforcement is difficult.
   Why it matters: Law must catch up with modern security threats, and clearly address how to stop NBC weapons from falling into the hands of non-state groups.
    

7. The Environment and Future Generations

   NBC weapons don't only kill people—they destroy the environment and harm future generations:
   • Nuclear tests have poisoned land and water.
   • Radiation can cause cancer, birth defects, and ecological destruction for decades.
   • These actions violate international environmental law and the rights of future generations.
   Why it matters: The damage from these weapons lasts longer than any war, and law should protect both the planet and unborn generations from such harm.
    

8. What Should Be Done? Legal Reforms Needed

   Strengthen Global Bans
   • Encourage more countries to join the TPNW.
   • Push nuclear powers to commit to real disarmament.
   Create Enforcement Mechanisms
   • Add inspections and penalties to the Biological Weapons Convention.
   • Let the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecute use of nuclear weapons as war crimes or crimes against humanity.
   Update War Laws
   • Rewrite war laws to cover terrorism and cyber warfare, where NBC threats may emerge.
   Why it matters: Law must be updated to match modern threats and technologies, and not remain stuck in Cold War-era thinking.
    

Final Thoughts: From Silence to Strength

NBC weapons are not just illegal—they are immoral, unsafe, and unnecessary. They offer no real security, only the illusion of power. If law is unclear or weak, humanity remains at risk.
  The world has banned slavery, chemical warfare, and genocide. It must now stand united against all NBC weapons. The law should be a shield, not a bystander. It's time for it to speak loudly before silence becomes our final mistake.
 

References:

• International Court of Justice. (1996). Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. Retrieved from https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/95/advisory-opinions
• Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. (1993). Chemical Weapons Convention. Retrieved from https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention
• United Nations. (1972). Biological Weapons Convention. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/disarmament/biological-weapons/
• United Nations. (2017). Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/tpnw/
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. (n.d.). Reports on Nuclear Disarmament and Environmental Protection. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/disarmament/
• United Nations. (2005). International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/ctitf/en/legal-instruments