The absurdity of the ban on the use of chemical weapons and the freedom to produce and use nuclear weapons

Following the alleged use of chemical weapons by Syria against its people last week the west is calling for punitive sanctions in the form of military strikes against Syria. The west is justifying this call for action against Syria on the basis that the use of chemical weapons has been outlawed by the international community. Therefore, any state that uses such weapons violates international law. Aside from the fact that this ban on the use of chemical weapons does not provide sanctions for the violation, there are other weapons which are more destructive than chemical weapons but are not prohibited by any known international law.

Chemical weapons are less destructive than nuclear weapons but the former are outlawed while the latter are not. When released chemical weapons can kill only living creatures such as humans and animals around the affected vicinity but will not affect inanimate objects such as buildings and road networks. In contrast, when released nuclear weapons can destroy everything on their path including animate and inanimate objects. If it is correct that chemical weapons are less destructive than nuclear weapons, why the international community banned chemical weapons but allow the use of nuclear weapons?

The simple reason that chemical weapons are banned but nuclear weapons are not is that all the major world powers produce and stockpile nuclear weapons. United States, Russia, Great Britain, France and China all have nuclear weapons in their military arsenal which they claim are for defensive purposes against enemy states. These are also the only permanent members of the United Nations Security Council consisting of fifteen member states who have power to veto any of the council’s resolutions that goes against their national interest. Thus, they have selfishly used this power to ban the use of chemical weapons and allow the use of nuclear weapons.

The advisory opinion of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the use of nuclear weapons in 1996 has also shown support to the production and use of nuclear weapons. When it was asked whether the use of the weapons was permissible under international law, the ICC reasoned that the use of nuclear weapons could be permissible under certain circumstances such as in self-defence. It can also be argued on this basis that the use of chemical weapons should be allowed for self defence purposes.

This insanity in the ban on the production and use of chemical weapons can be addressed by doing one of two things. The international community should either ban the use of both chemical and nuclear weapons for the fact that they are both harmful to humans or permit the production and use of both weapons regardless of any potential harm that they can cause to victims and the environment.