The Relationship Between Scientists, Industry and US Chemical and Biological Weapons Policy, 1965-2006.

My study examines the effects that scientific communities and domestic industry have had on US chemical and biological weapons policy in the period of 1965 to 2006, and in particular the successful ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 1997, and the US rejection of the proposed verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) in 2001. My paper contends that although scientists once exerted considerable influence over US chemical weapons policy, since the 1980s that influence has diminished. It also concludes that even though the microbiology community had a significant impact on US biological weapons policy in the 1960s, the biotech revolution split the microbiology community into two competing factions, and decreased the influence of scientists who continued to lobby for arms control. Furthermore, this study finds that although the pharmaceutical and biotech industry is frequently blamed for the failure of the BWC verification protocol, in reality it played a minor role in this decision. However, concerted efforts in support of chemical disarmament on the part of the US chemical industry made a tremendous contribution towards the success of the CWC. Several of this study?s findings have implications for International Relations theories that examine how and why arms control regimes emerge, in particular the epistemic communities and Military-Industrial Complex literatures. Consistent with Matthew Evangelista?s analysis of the effects of international epistemic communities on Soviet nuclear policy, my study demonstrates that scientists are most influential when they develop personal relationships with high-ranking policymakers or the President. Perhaps this study?s most important finding is that although corporations are invariably assumed to be motivated solely by their own financial interests, on rare occasions industry can pursue more enlightened ends. Thus, my study opens a door for scholars to think of corporate interests as politically interesting in ways not reducible to assumptions of profit maximization. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]