Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:18:26.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remote Monitoring of Dual-Capable Biological Facilities in Iraq

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Jonathan B. Tucker
Jonathan B. Tucker*
Affiliation:
U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, USA
Get access

Extract

Under the ongoing monitoring and verification (OMV) program mandated by Security Council Resolution 715, the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) has installed more than a hundred remote-controlled video cameras at Iraqi “dual-capable” facilities—that is, facilities that have legitimate commercial applications but that could also be misused to produce nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons and long-range ballistic missiles. Since January 1995, these cameras have collected optical data for analysis at UNSCOM's Baghdad Monitoring and Verification Center, located on the third floor of the former Canal Hotel (Smith, 1994).

Type
Symposium: Biological Weapons Inspection
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , August 1995 , pp. 247 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Associated Press (1995). “Iraq Holds Tour of Plant to Quell Germ Warfare Fears.” Boston Globe, April 23.Google Scholar
Beal, C.(1995). “An Invisible Enemy.” International Defense Review 28 (March):36–41.Google Scholar
Holloway, L.(1995). “2 Who Robbed Jeweler at Hotel Room Eluded Security Cameras.” New York Times (May 14):32.Google Scholar
Jansen, K.(1992). “Biological Weapons Proliferation.” In Mataija, S. and Beier, J.M.(eds.), Multilateral Verification and the Post-Gulf Environment: Learning from the UNSCOM Experience. Toronto, Canada: York University Centre for International and Strategic Studies (December):111–15.Google Scholar
Kadner, S.(1995). Executive Vice President, Aquila Technologies Group, Albuquerque, NM. Telephone interview, April 19.Google Scholar
Kay, D.A.(1994). “Denial and Deception Practices of WMD Proliferators: Iraq and Beyond.” Washington Quarterly 18:85–105.Google Scholar
Kessler, J.C.(1995). Deputy Director, Office of Regional Non-Proliferation, U.S. Department of State. Author interview, April 18.Google Scholar
Kyriakopoulos, N. and Mikulak, R.(1988). “Instrumented Monitoring of the Chemical Industry Under a Chemical Weapons Ban.” In Lundin, S.J.(ed.), Non-Production by Industry of Chemical-Warfare Agents: Technical Verification Under a Chemical Weapons Convention. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.Google Scholar
Meselson, M. et al.(1994). “The Sverdlovsk Anthrax Outbreak of 1979.” Science 266 (November 18):1202–8.Google Scholar
Smith, R.J.(1994). “Secretive Iraq Parries U.N. Arms Inspections.” Washington Post (November 4):A1.Google Scholar
Smith, R.J.(1995). “Iraq Had Program for Germ Warfare.” Washington Post (July 6):A1.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.B.(1993). “Lessons of Iraq's Biological Weapons Programme.” Arms Control/Contemporary Security Policy 14 (December):229–71.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.B.(1995). “Strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention.” Arms Control Today 25 (April):9–12.Google Scholar
UN Secretary-General (1995). “Report of the Secretary-General on the Status of the Implementation of the Plan for the Ongoing Monitoring and Verification of Iraq's Compliance with the Relevant Parts of Section C of Security Council Resolution 687 (1991).” Mimeo, April:59–87.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress OTA [Office of Technology Assessment] (1993). Technologies Underlying Weapons of Mass Destruction. OTA-BP-ISC-115. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, December:108–9.Google Scholar