Dealing with flagrant violations is at least as important to the long-term viability of the regime as adding monitoring provisions, especially as violators, such as Iraq, have proven so astute at working around monitoring efforts. Although few in the arms control community would claim that arms control is a panacea, arms controllers must be particularly direct on this point when it comes to biological weapons. Arms control is essential to the global effort to rid the world of biological weapons, as an embodiment of the norm against this mode of warfare and as an institution to give that norm expression. But if arms control is to succeed, it must be as part of a strategy integrating various elements addressing the multifaceted components of the problem. The effective functioning of the other components of the arms control regime, particularly the CWC, the NPT, and the various regional mechanisms that have been agreed upon.
Synergistic effects are essential.
States must perceive benefits in these arms control initiatives, with success in one area spilling over into another. Such successes both build confidence in multilateral treaties and reduce security concerns. The AG must not be sacrificed in the endgame of the BWC negotiations to try to buy consensus on the monitoring protocol. Counterterrorism capabilities encompassing prevention, deterrence, and consequence management. Without these, it is possible that biological weapons could become a customary mode of violence for non-state actors.