THE POLITICS OF ‘POWER TO BLAME’ AT OPCW AND PAKISTAN’S POLICY PURSUITS

Abstract

Purpose of the study: The aim of this study is to reevaluate the efficacy of OPCW to deal with the threats of chemical weapons. What influenced the so-called changes in OPCW that promulgated the notion of ‘power to blame’ is at the core to investigate the dilemma haunting the very stability of global security system. The post-2018 changes in the power structure of OPCW have negatively influenced the very consensus of great powers over the issue of chemical weapons. Pakistan being member of the organization was pushed to exercise ‘abstain’ in voting and maintained that ‘Islamabad is against any kind of politicization in OPCW’. Therefore, the study has put forward the investigation to understand security dilemma of Pakistan and what lessons it shall learn from the evolving politics within the power ranks of OPCW.
Methodology: The research is deductive in nature and utilizes secondary data to unfold ongoing phenomenon that is descriptive and qualitatively subjective.
Main Findings: The study has contested the chemical weapons usage in Syria and Col. Sergei Skripal incident in London that in result brought the British government at the forefront to submit a proposal in Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to enhance powers of the organization. As a result, an unprecedented historic voting took place in June 2018 during a special session of OPCW in Hague. The agenda of voting was to give the OPCW new rights and privileges to define the guilty side for chemical attacks. Subsequently, in November 2018 a special session of OPCW conference took place in Hague to implement the previously taken decision. The conference ended in favor of Britain led western consensus over enhancing the powers of the OPCW. This study as a result of objective investigation has emphasized that the post-2018 changes in the OPCW with that of inclusion of ‘power to blame’ has brought imbalance in the global security system.
Applications of the study: This paper makes the point that the enhanced mandate of OPCW has destabilized the international consensus over the issue of chemical weapons. Based on the global security architecture there is United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the one and only authorized organization to ‘blame a country’ for violations and impose punitive countermeasures. Russia along with China strongly supports the idea of UNSC as the most respected and qualified authority in the World to invoke ‘blame’ against the state-level cases. Only UNSC has the right to initiate investigative procedures and impose sanctions. In negation to likeminded alliance, the study generates the idea how international system can help address the challenges impacting global peace.
Novelty/ Originality of this study: This study has taken posture of international politics into consideration while contesting the very configuration of OPCW that had been resting over global security architecture. The study has highlighted the evolving dilemma of global division within OPCW extended powers that has given impetus to the idea of wrestling between the East and the West (East vs. West).