Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
There is no record of an order cancelling antianimal activities in the
UK. It is possible that such activities spanned the entire period of BW de-
velopment.
The Tripartite Alliance
The BW programs of the US, UK, and Canada were linked through the
TriPartite process (see Chapter 4). This arrangement provided a conduit
for information sharing and provided each of these countries (and later
Australia) with access to secret documents and capabilities relating
to BW.
Within this arrangement, the UK was responsible for basic research,
Canada was responsible for testing that could not be carried out in either
the US or the UK, and the US was responsible for production. Thus, Can-
ada performed a crucial role in facilitating the field testing of antianimal
agents.
The Canadians possessed a number of facilities involved in BW-related
activities, including one on Grosse Isle, Québec. This facility conducted
offensive and defensive rinderpest research for the US, UK, and Can-
ada.
13
Antianimal biowarfare activities ceased to fall under the remit of the
Tripartite process in 1953. In September of that year a reorganization
transferred jurisdiction over US animal facilities (including Plum Island)
from the US Army to the USDA. It is unclear whether the USDA also as-
sumed responsibility for antianimal BW work. This reshuffle meant that
activities carried out at these sites fell outside of military jurisdiction and
therefore of the TriPartite process. During the final TriPartite meeting to
discuss antianimal issues, a decision was taken not to abandon such re-
search but to adopt “a purely informal approach.” This informal approach
resulted in a scarcity of documentation relating to later developments.
14
1975 to the Present
Although Russia has admitted that the former Soviet Union pursued BW
development after the entry into force of the BWC (see Chapter 5), de-
tails about any antianimal components of this program have remained
Search WWH ::
Custom Search