English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The member states bound by the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) have committed to not produce, stock pile, or use biological weapons, but finding the line between what is a biological weapon and what is justified by “prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes” is difficult with the broad wording of the convention. In a world of quickly emerging technology, the gray area created by the broad exceptions to what constitutes a BWC biological weapon produces ever-changing security risks and public policy considerations. Despite the BWC’s attempt to strengthen prohibition on biological weapons of prior agreements, a large exception is carved out for the three justified uses, which hinges on the intent and purpose of the actor. The three permitted purposes are not defined, and there is no objective test for determining the intention of the actor.

The BWC Gray Area: Locating the Blurry Line of Defining Biological Weapons