Dynamics of norm contestation in the Chemical Weapons Convention: The case of ‘non-lethal agents’
| Author | Michal Smetana,Hana Martínková |
| DOI | 10.1177/0263395720904605 |
| Published date | 01 November 2020 |
| Date | 01 November 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395720904605
Politics
2020, Vol. 40(4) 428 –443
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0263395720904605
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
Dynamics of norm contestation
in the Chemical Weapons
Convention: The case of
‘non-lethal agents’
Hana Martínková and Michal Smetana
Charles University, Czech Republic
Abstract
In this article, we use an adapted version of Wayne Sandholtz’s cycle of normative change to
examine the dynamics of contestation of norms against incapacitating chemical agents and riot
control agents, often imprecisely grouped together under the term ‘non-lethal chemical weapons’.
We draw on a concept-driven analysis of statements and in-depth interviews with individual
stakeholders to track the gradual development of the issue towards norm change within the
Chemical Weapons Convention. Our findings highlight several key factors conducive to normative
change, particularly the role of the Dubrovka incident as the ‘deviant event’, discursive decoupling
of the two classes of chemicals, and new framing and ‘rebranding’ of incapacitating chemical agents
as ‘CNS-acting chemicals’. At the same time, we also examine factors that significantly slowed
down attempts by norm entrepreneurs to attract attention to the issue, such as the saliency of
the use of chemical weapons in Syria, which effectively sidelined the problem of ‘non-lethal’ agents
in the overall debate.
Keywords
chemical weapons, contestation, framing, non-lethal agents, norms
Received: 20th August 2019; Revised version received: 26th November 2019; Accepted: 16th December
2019
In 2013, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the annual Peace Prize to the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the implementing body
of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the associated international regime.
Since its establishment in 1997, the OPCW has been largely successful in dismantling
much of the world’s arsenal of harmful chemicals intended for warfare. The organization
has been regularly monitoring the peaceful applications of chemistry, verifying the state
Corresponding author:
Michal Smetana, Peace Research Center Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University, Smetanovo
nabrezi 6, 110 00 Prague, Czech Republic.
Email: smetana@fsv.cuni.cz
904605POL0010.1177/0263395720904605PoliticsMartínková and Smetana
research-article2020
Article
Martínková and Smetana 429
parties’ compliance with the CWC regime norms, and providing expertise in individual
cases of rule violations.
The normative structure of the CWC regime is mainly built on the fundamental norms
prohibiting chemical weapons warfare (Bentley, 2014; Price, 1997). However, the more
specific anti-chemical norms and rules have not remained completely static since the
regime’s inception. The partial flexibility of the Convention allows it to continuously
adapt to new advancements in science and technology, as well as to intra-regime norma-
tive developments (cf. Kelle, 2004; Müller et al., 2013).
In this article, we examine the patterns of contestation of the CWC norms against
incapacitating chemical agents (ICAs) and riot control agents (RCAs), often imprecisely
grouped together under the term ‘non-lethal agents’. In contrast to chemicals intended for
warfare, ‘non-lethal agents’ have been mostly considered to belong to the domain of law
enforcement unregulated by the CWC. However, tragic events such as the 2002 Dubrovka
hostage incident, where the use of such ‘non-lethal’ agents led to over one hundred civil-
ian fatalities, have contributed to a growing sentiment among certain state parties and
non-governmental organizations alike that these chemicals pose ‘real and growing dan-
gers to human security’ (Crowley, 2016: 2) and that the CWC norms should change to
regulate their possession and use by the regime members.
Although international relations (IR) scholars have not shied away from studying the
role of chemical weapons in world politics, the problem of ‘non-lethal chemical weapons’
has so far received only scant attention in the field. The existing literature has been pri-
marily concerned with the fundamental norm against chemical weapons use, the so-called
‘chemical weapons taboo’ (Bentley, 2014, 2015; Jefferson, 2014; Price, 1995, 1997; Price
and Tannenwald, 1996), with recent focus on the repeated violations of this norm in the
Syrian civil war (Bentley, 2016; Geis and Schlag, 2017). Studies of contemporary norma-
tive dynamics within the CWC mostly sideline the ‘non-lethal agents’ issue and rather
focus on more resonant intra-regime conflicts concerning verification and disarmament
(Enia and Fields, 2014; Müller et al., 2013). Occasionally, the IR norm literature briefly
mentions the issue of ‘non-lethal agents’ in the context of bio-chemical weapons develop-
ment and the status of these weapons under the chemical and biological conventions
(Rosert et al., 2013: 117; see also Dando, 2011; Fidler, 2005; Pearson et al., 2007).
Our approach to ‘non-lethal agents’ in the CWC is theoretically grounded in discursive
institutionalism (Schmidt, 2008, 2010) and the recent IR literature on norm contestation
and change (Krook and True, 2012; Müller and Wunderlich, 2018; Smetana and Onderco,
2018; Wiener, 2004, 2009). In particular, we approach the problem of ‘non-lethal agents’
from the perspective of normative change theory, introduced by Sandholtz (2008) and
further elaborated by O’Mahoney (2013). Using their conceptual toolkit, we examine the
discursive shifts and patterns of gradual norm change concerning ‘non-lethal agents’ in
the CWC between 2000 and 2017. To this end, we primarily draw on a concept-driven
analysis of individual statements and documents produced within the OPCW and in-
depth interviews with OPCW representatives and diplomats.
Beyond the original empirical contribution in a largely uncharted area of international
politics, this article also provides some interesting theoretical observations of the IR lit-
erature on norm contestation and change. In particular, our study of the discursive process
highlights the importance of discursive framing that can dramatically impact the contesta-
tion dynamics. In the CWC case, our findings demonstrate that the ability of actors to
re-frame and narrow the scope of the ‘non-lethal agents’ debate by decoupling the
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
