Editor's Foreword
Outbreaks of deadly diseases, whether intentionally initiated during wartime or the result of natural causes, are not at all new phenomena. But the emerging biological threats that now confront humanity differ in many ways from those of the past. Today, the very science that enabled society to control or eradicate some diseases unfortunately also provides the tools to create more virulent pathogens that are capable of evading our most powerful medicines. For example, drug resistant strains of tuberculosis and genetically engineered versions of anthrax have made biological threats much more lethal. Globalization has also multiplied the speed with which diseases can spread, as air travel can take a pathogen across the world in a matter of days.
The manufacture of biological weapons has historically required state-level infrastructure, implying that their production could be traced to a specific government. Today, however, the sophistication of biological equipment and its commercial availability have enabled well-endowed groups or individuals to terrorize society if they so desire. The anthrax outbreak in the United States illustrates that this threat is becoming increasingly subversive and highly untraceable. Additionally, the means of dispersing biological agents have multiplied. Now letters, aerosol cans, or even missiles, can be used to attack civilian populations.
This issue of the Stanford Journal of International Relations surveys the nature of emerging biological threats and what society’s best defenses may be against them. Ambassador Donald Mahley explains the difficulties of enforcing the Biological Weapons Convention. Dr. Christopher Chyba of Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation examines domestic and international preparedness for a biological attack. Toyin Ajayi focuses on smallpox and how the United States should plan for an outbreak of the disease.æ Amanda Silverio discusses the ethical implications of clinical drug trials for the dire situation of AIDS in Africa.
Beyond the topic of emerging biological threats, former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto reviews Pakistan’s role in the post-September 11th world. Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia in the Clinton administration, stresses the importance of U.S. military relations with Central Asia before and during the war against terrorism. Tim Meyer relates the history of political Islam to recent geopolitical developments. Nicholas Urrutia shifts the emphasis to Latin America, where he provides an analysis of the negotiations to halt Colombia’s civil war. Finally, Stephen Doane argues that the United States and the international community must take action against the government of Sudan in order to help end the bitter conflict there.
The symposium topic for this issue of the Journal was chosen in the Spring of 2001 — before September 11th, before the ensuing anthrax attacks, and before America’s war on terrorism even began. Although the chilling specter of a biologicalæ attack on U.S. soilæ hasæ recently made these dangers appear imminent, most of even the “newest” biological threats have been very real for decades. But regardless of how overdue the U.S. and international responses are to emerging biological threats, the current initiatives are certainly welcome. If anything positive emerges from the recent attacks against America, it will be a greater awareness of the dangers that we face, and drastically expanded efforts to combat them.