directfiesta

Before answering, take 5 minutes ( yes, I know it is long ...) to read the article published in the US!

========================
January/February 2003, Volume 59, No. 1, pp. 40-46




Back to bioweapons?
By Mark Wheelis & Malcolm Dando


The United States may have rejected the bioweapons protocol because it is committed to continuing and expanding its secret programs.


In the summer of 2001, the United States shocked its peers when it rejected the protocol to the bioweapons treaty. Intended to strengthen compliance with the vital but weak Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), the protocol was dead in the water without U.S. support, and the world was left wondering what prompted the surprise move.

Some suggest the rejection was due to changing U.S. perceptions of sovereignty and self-reliance. Others thought that perhaps its own recently revealed covert biological programs were too sensitive for the United States to willingly reveal more. But this explanation falls short because, had it wished, the United States could have both supported the protocol and avoided disclosing its secret operations simply by terminating them before the protocol entered into force.

A more ominous explanation is that perhaps the United States rejected the protocol not just because it is conducting secret, offensively oriented ?biodefense? programs, but because it is committed to continuing and expanding them.

=============================

http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/20...03wheelis.html