# data[].attributes.body
GROUP B

# data[].attributes.headline
PROBLEMS FACED BY ADVANCED WEAPONS<<<<<<<>>>>>>

# data[].attributes.subject
PROBLEMS FACED BY ADVANCED WEAPONS<<<<<<<>>>>>>

# data[].attributes.body
http://wmd.ilpi.org/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All good things come to an end. In December 2016, after five exciting years, the Arms and Disarmament Team at ILPI concluded the Weapons of Mass Destruction Project.

We very much appreciate having had the opportunity to contribute to the thinking and policy development in the field of WMDs over the past years, and are grateful to our partners in governments, international organisations, civil society and academia for their generous support and active participation in our meetings and research activities.

All publications produced over the past five years will continue to be available on the ILPI WMD project website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ILPI Weapons of Mass Destruction Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All good things come to an end. In December 2016, after five exciting years, the Arms and Disarmament Team at ILPI concluded the Weapons of Mass Destruction Project.

# data[].attributes.body
Some in the 9/11 truth movement have advanced the theory that directed energy weapons (DEW) were used to destroy World Trade Center 1 and 2. Before one entertains this theory, one must determine if this is technically feasible. For example, if I were to state that I will transport 1000 people, 3000 miles, in my BMW z3 Coupe, in one week, it would immediately be obvious that this is not technically feasible. Similarly, when one considers the possibility of directed energy weapons having been used to destroy World Trade Center 1 and 2, a little research (between 3:00 AM and 4:00 AM last night) shows that this too is not technically feasible. Directed-Energy Weapons, technology development strategies and operational planning. Integrating DE weapon capabilities as elements of a broader force package will require adjustments across the doctrinal, organizational, training, logistics, policy and other fronts. Taken together, they would put high-power microwave and high-energy laser systems in the service of identifiable war fighter needs. They could provide the early, tangible measures to “demystify” new DE weapon technologies.They would be consistent with the crawl-walk-run approach suggested by the National Academy and others. And they could go a long way toward bridging the legacy technologist/operator schism highlighted by the Defense Science Board and external analysts. More broadly, the continuing development and eventual deployment of more capable DE weapon systems may diminish operational risk, create improved war fighting options and ultimately enable new courses of action. Because of that, directed-energy technologies should factor into tabletop, command post and other Department of Defense exercises in relevant mission areas. This is the essence of a competitive and sustaining military advantage and fundamental to the offset strategy sought by Defense leadership.

# data[].attributes.body
Electromagnetic bombs are the Weapons of Electrical Mass Destruction with applications across a broad spectrum of targets, spanning both the strategic and tactical. As such their use offers a very high payoff in attacking the fundamental information processing and communication facilities of a target system. The massed application of these weapons will produce substantial paralysis in any target system, thus providing a decisive advantage in the conduct of Electronic Combat, Offensive Counter Air and Strategic Air Attack.

Radiological weapons are widely considered to be militarily useless for a state-sponsored army and are initially not hoped to be used by any military forces.Firstly, the use of such a weapon is of no use to an occupying force, as the target area becomes uninhabitable. Furthermore, area-denial weapons are generally of limited use to an attacking army, as it slows the rate of advance.

# data[].attributes.body
<<<<<DAMINI>>>>>

Devices designed to release energy in an explosive manner as a result of nuclear fission,nuclear fusion, or a combination of the two processes. Fission weapons are commonly referred to as atomic bombs. Fusion weapons are also referred to as thermonuclear bombs or, more commonly, hydrogen bombs; they are usually defined as nuclear weapons in which at least a portion of the energy is released by nuclear fusion.At last i would like to conclude by writing that nuclear bombs have great importance.

# data[].attributes.body
The management of the weapons and equipment is an important part of daily

management. Military weapons and equipment have utilized in large quantities, frequently in and out of storage, security management task being heavy in use and supervision, thereby increasing the level of information management of the weapons and equipment being imminent with the emergence of the Internet of things(IOT) technology which provide a means for weaponry visualization techniques and achieve identification and tracking of the weapons and equipment in management and transport, achieve dynamic information about the equipment accurately, comprehensively and timely, and finally achieve efficient management of the weapons and equipment.

IOT (The Internet of things) is an important part of the new information technology and is considered as the expansion of Internet applications. IOT[1] refers to through a variety of information sensing devices such as sensors, radio frequency identification (RFID) technology, Global Positioning System, infrared sensors, laser scanners, gas sensors and other various devices and techniques, acquire real-timely any the sound, light, heat, chemical, biological, location, and other desired information of any objects or processes need to be monitored, accessed, interactive, and form a huge network with the Internet. Its purpose is to achieve a connection between things and people, things and things, all objects and the Internet to facilitate the management, identification and control. The IOT was built based on the Internet and EPC system of radio frequency technology. Now international research on the structure of the IOT is mainly divided into two categories: the EPC system in Europe and America and the UID system in Japan.

# data[].attributes.body
In science, lasers are used in many ways, including: A wide variety of interferometric techniques Raman spectroscopy Laser induced breakdown spectroscopy Atmospheric remote sensing Investigating nonlinear optics phenomena Holographic techniques employing lasers also contribute to a number of measurement techniques. Laser based lidar (LIght raDAR) technology has application in geology, seismology, remote sensing and atmospheric physics. Lasers have been used aboard spacecraft such as in the Cassini-Huygens mission. In astronomy, lasers have been used to create artificial laser guide stars, used as reference objects for adaptive optics telescopes. Lasers may also be indirectly used in spectroscopy as a micro-sampling system, a technique termed Laser ablation (LA), which is typically applied to ICP-MS apparatus resulting in the powerful LA-ICP-MS. The principles of laser spectroscopy are discussed by Demtröder[1] and the use of tunable lasers in spectroscopy are described in Tunable Laser Applications. Application: Nuclear Weapons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Introduction

The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention, CWC) was submitted for signing in Paris on 13 January 1993, after complicated negotiations. The Convention came into effect on 29 April 1997, and up to the present time (31 March 2014), 190 countries have participated in the Convention. It has been signed, but it has not yet been ratified by two countries (Israel, Myanmar); and, four countries have not yet signed the Convention (Angola, Egypt, South Sudan, the Korean People's Democratic Republic). In accordance with Article I, each contractual country undertakes not to develop, produce, otherwise acquire, accumulate, keep and transfer chemical weapons in any situation. The contractual country is obliged not to use chemical weapons, not to perform any preparation for their military use and to destruct its own chemical weapons and the facilities for their production that are under its jurisdiction and control. It also undertakes the destruction of all the chemical weapons left in the territory of the other contractual country.

A total of about 71,000 tons of chemical weapons have been declared (chemical toxic substances and precursors). The largest stocks were declared by Russia (40,000 tons) and the United States (30,000 tons), the remaining proportion by Albania, India, Iraq, South Korea, Libya and, recently, also, Syria. In accordance with the original intention, the chemical weapons were supposed to be destroyed within ten years after the CWC came into force, i.e., by the end of April, 2007. This has not been the case, and thus, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in Haag adopted an extension of the term for the destruction of all of the declared stocks by a further five years. By 2012, more than 51,000 tons of chemical weapons had been destroyed, which is about 72% of the stocks declared. Thus, the destruction of chemical weapons is still under way. All of the stocks of Albania, India and South Korea have been destroyed. As a yet unresolved question, the ownership of chemical weapons is suspected for countries that have not yet become participants in the CWC. There is also an open question about the destruction of old and abandoned chemical weapons and about chemical weapons sunken in the sea or deposited under the ground.

Thus, it seems that the era of chemical weapons as one of the traditional technologies for weapons of mass destruction has been terminated. Some authors consider chemical weapons to be directly consigned to the scrap heap of history [ 1]. On the other hand, over the last twenty years, a number of serious arguments have been presented that offer a less optimistic view. The aim of the present work is to attempt to answer several basic questions: Is the existence of chemical weapons associated with a particular historical era? Are the reasons that resulted in adopting the CWC still persisting? What is the currently existing technical level of chemical weapons? Is there a scientific-technical potential for their further development?

2. Brief History of Chemical Weapons

2.1. Prehistory and Pre-Industrial Era

The use of toxic substances as weapons has a long history of several thousands of years. It is associated with traditional methods of hunting, including the use of poisoned weapons (arrows, spears), the poisoning of water (watering holes, fishing) or the fumigation of animals with toxic combustion products. All of these hunting forms using toxic substances, which also appeared in combat and which were later particularly developed for ancient wars, have persisted until present time. The Middle Ages saw the enrichment o military technology with the discovery of gunpowder (including its prototype, "Greek fire"), which made possible not only the development of new weapon systems, but also new methods for the transfer of toxic substances to warfare conditions [ 2]. This stepwise development continued from the first Chinese primitive chemical grenades, still launched by mechanical artillery, to chemical ammunition of an advanced type, which occurred as soon as at the beginning of the industrial era. For example, at the time of the Crimean War, in addition to a proposal for taking Sevastopol with the help of toxic sulfur dioxide obtained by the combustion of sulfur, there was also a design for artillery shells filled with cacodyl cyanide. In the American Civil War, there were also proposals of using artillery shells filled with chlorine, hydrogen cyanide (a binary system consisting of potassium cyanide and hydrochloric acid), compounds of arsenic or poisonous plant material (for example, Capsicum, Piper, Veratrum) [ 3].

2.2. Onset of Chemical Weapons in World War I

A decisive break in the history of chemical weapons was encountered in World War I, particularly after the German chlorine attack in Ypres on 22 April 1915. This fact can be explained by a combination of several basic conditions, such as the enormous extent of the war conflict, the high level of science and technology, the necessary capacities and the as yet experienced development of the chemical industry. The immediate stimulus for the mass development and use of chemical weapons was the attempt of field armies to solve the acute lack of conventional ammunition and to react to the reality of static (trench) warfare, which was developed on all of the main fronts. Chemical weapons were expected to break the defense of the enemy, to establish conditions for a conversion to mobile warfare and, thus, to contribute to the final victory. This strategy was definitely not fulfilled, but chemical weapons demonstrated their high efficacy and became an important operational-tactical factor. They were essentially used in any large combat, and their proportion of the total volume of the weapons used was dynamically increased. The main big powers (Germany, France, Britannia, Russia and the United States) produced more than 200,000 tons of chemical warfare agents (CWA), and out of this, the largest amounts were used by all the methods known at that time (gas cylinders, tube artillery, mortars, "gas projectors", hand grenades and rifle cartridges). So-called rapidly acting lethal substances had a precedence (chlorine, phosgene, diphosgene, chloropicrin, hydrogen cyanide); and, at the last stage, also vesicants (mustard gas). Most land operations were accompanied by the use of harassing agents (tear gases, irritating aerosols). Chemical weapons eliminated about one million soldiers from action, and about 10% of them died. This was also of a considerable economic and logistic importance. In addition, chemical weapons demonstrated high psychological effects, deepened the privations of military troops and enhanced the fighting effects of conventional weapons [ 4, 5, 6].

2.3. Continuing Development of Chemical Weapons

After World War I, public opinion definitely refused the use of chemical weapons, seeing them as inhumane, but chemical warfare had already become an integral part of military doctrines. So-called first generation chemical weapons were employed by both parties in the civil war in Russia, by the Spanish and French armies in Morocco and, later, also, by Italian troops in Abyssinia and by the Japanese army in Manchuria. The air force, equipped with chemical bombs and equipment for spraying, able to penetrate deep into the enemy background and to endanger large cities and industrial complexes, became a new element, disrupting the strategic equilibrium. Chemical arsenals were extended by further CWA. The most important group of vesicants still (mustard, lewisite) was supplemented by propylene mustard, O-mustard, sesquimustard, numerous variants of nitrogen mustard and different tactical mixtures. The development of chemical weapons in the interwar period achieved its maximum in the late 1930s. Chemists of the German IG Farben synthesized a series of new organophosphates within the framework of the research and development of pesticides, which are effective inhibitors of acetylcholine esterase (AChE) [ 7]. Nerve agents, named tabun and sarin, became the basis of chemical weapons of the so-called second generation.

2.4. Chemical Weapons in World War II

In the course of World War II, big powers exerted technical, as well as organizational readiness to use chemical weapons on a mass scale [ 8]. This is supported by the fact that they stored above 400,000 tons of CWA; out of this, 2/3 were vesicants (mustard, lewisite). However, until 1944, Germany also produced considerable stocks of chemical weapons of the second generation, i.e., more than 12,000 tons of tabun and a smaller amount of sarin. It is thus of interest that the expected total chemical warfare did not occur; only the Japanese army employed chemical weapons to a limited extent (even if with serious consequences) in China. There are several possible explanations. One reason could be the personal negative experiences of Adolf Hitler, who was, at the time of World War I, seriously affected by mustard gas. At the first stage of the successful blitzkrieg, Germany did not need chemical weapons. Later, when they lost the strategic initiative and started seriously considering the use of chemical weapons, the fear of retaliation attacks was prevalent. The Allies repeatedly discouraged Germany (but also Japan) with their chemical arsenal, and they probably would not have hesitated to use it if necessary. If chemical warfare began in Europe, the Allies would take advantage of the prevalence in the absolute volume of their chemical weapons. On Germany's part, there was the advantage of stocks of chemical weapons of the second generation, their existence being most likely unknown to the intelligence services of the Allies. A special chapter of World War II history is the use of carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) for the extermination of Jewish people and other nations in concentration camps or possibly chemical-toxicological experiments on humans.

2.5. Chemical Weapons in Nuclear Age

After World War II, there was a high precedence of the development of strategic arsenals based on nuclear technology, but there were also qualitative changes in the development of chemical weapons [ 9]. A characteristic feature of the first period of the Cold War was the introduction and mass manufacture of G nerve agents (sarin, soman) and the supplementation of chemical weapons of the second generation by even more effective V agents (VX, R-33). More modern tools for chemical attack also occurred, including tube, as well as rocket artillery, air force and ballistic missiles. At the dawn of the 1950s and 1960s, new concepts of conducting "non-lethal" (psychochemical) war was elaborated with the use of psychoactive substances, particularly hallucinogenic glycolates (BZ). In the arsenal of armies, as well as of police and security services, new highly effective irritants arose, which were also employed in military conflicts. The best known example is the mass use of the CS agent in the Vietnam War. American forces concurrently used herbicides on a large scale (particularly based on 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T), the primary purpose of this being the vertical and horizontal control of the vegetation on the battlefield. The mass application of herbicides exerted negative effects on the environment, agriculture and health conditions of the local population [ 10, 11]. In the peak period of the Cold War, the United States developed chemical weapons of the third generation, the principle of which was binary ammunition based on nerve agents (sarin, VX, IVA (intermediate volatility agents)). The Soviet Union reacted with an extensive program (code name FOLIANT, NOVICHOK) for the development of new, fourth generation chemical weapons, and the result was a technology for binary ammunition with nerve agents exerting enhanced toxicity. In the period of the Cold War, chemical weapons were also distributed into countries of the so-called Third World, which considered this technology to be a cheaper alternative to nuclear weapons. The largest advance in this direction was achieved by Iraq, where a chemical arsenal, including more than 3,800 tons of CWA (mustard, tabun, sarin), was accumulated with the help of foreign companies. A major proportion of these stocks were used in the war against Iran and against the local population of Kurds [ 12]. For an outline of the most important classic CWA and their classification into particular chemical weapons generations, see and .

Table 1

Table 2

3. Reasons for Adopting the CWC and Contemporary Risks of the Use of Chemical Weapons

3.1. Human Reasons for Adopting CWC

One of the targets of any disarmament action is establishing certain general humanity principles. This also concerns the prohibition of chemical weapons. As early as 1868, a special international military commission in St. Petersburg elaborated a declaration stating that the use of weapons, which bring useless enhancement of the suffering of people or unavoidable death, is against humanity rules. In 1874, a conference was held in Brussels declaring that the war right does not provide unlimited freedom in choosing tools for the destruction of the enemy. Based on this declaration, the conference refuses the use of poisons and poisoned weapons, projectiles and agents, which could cause useless suffering. Given these humanity principles, the Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land was elaborated in Haag from 1899 to 1907, prohibiting the use of poisons or poisoned weapons and also weapons, projectiles or agents that are able to cause useless suffering. There was an analogous prohibition of the use of projectiles having as their only target the propagation of choking or harmful agents. In the course of World War I, no declarations or rules were able to prevent the mass use of chemical weapons. Due to this, based on a resolution of the UN General Assembly, a disarmament conference was arranged in Geneva, which elaborated an agreement of the prohibition of using choking, poisonous or similar gases, liquids, agents or similar means in war and also the prohibition of the use of bacteriological methods in conducting war. This Geneva Protocol, submitted for signing in 1925, has still been an important part of international law, and the CWC also refers to it in its preamble.

3.2. Military-Technological Reasons for Adopting CWC

An important reason for most disarmament initiatives was also the attempts of big powers to cope with the progress of the enemy or to eliminate the lack of success in the development of the technology of a certain type of weapon. For example, in the 1960s, the big powers concluded that biological weapons (particularly pathogenic agents) are not practicable for military purposes, since their effects are quite beyond any control. The result of this was the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological/Biological and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, BTWC), which was signed in Geneva in 1972 and came into force three years later. As a drawback of the Convention, there is, however, the lack of a control mechanism. One of reasons for this is that the principle of biological weapons and their military use have not yet been unambiguously delimited.

There were no principal doubts about the perspective of chemical weapons in contrast to biological (especially bacteriological) weapons. In spite of this, at the dawn of the 1970s and 1980s, a number of problems were encountered. That time, the United States owned a rather outdated chemical arsenal accumulated in the course of the 1940s to 1950s (the Soviet Union had completed the chemical rearmament of nerve agents more than 10 years later). There was a possibility of solving this problem in two ways: by a complete rearmament based on the most recent scientific-technical knowledge or by completing the program for the development of binary ammunition. General rearmament is, however, enormously economically and technically tedious, and in addition, it also includes the destruction of outdated stocks. On the other hand, even the introduction of binary technology does not facilitate this task. The United States spent considerable funds for the binary program, but the volume of the binary ammunition produced finally accounted for only 2% of the total chemical arsenal. Under these conditions, it was more advantageous to promote the general prohibition of chemical weapons and their total destruction under an international supervision [ 1]. In this way, the big world powers, under the leadership of the United States and the Soviet Union (and its successor, Russia), gave up their chemical arsenals and considerably restricted the proliferation of chemical weapons and the danger of their use, even in developing countries.

3.3. Operation-Tactical Reasons for Adopting CWC

Adopting the CWC was also supported by certain new views of the operational-tactical use. There were prevalent opinions that chemical weapons could be replaced to the full extent by the most modern conventional weapon systems (so-called intelligent weapons). Particularly restricting factors were held against chemical weapons-the dependence on climatic conditions (in spite of the fact that modern chemical formulae, ammunition and tools for attacking considerably reduced this dependence) and also the difficulty of the activity of military troops in a contaminated field. The efficacy of chemical weapons also suffered from the introduction of an advanced system of technical and organizational provisions for the anti-chemical protection of military troops and the population. However, from a solely military standpoint, chemical weapons are still the only actual available weapon system of mass destruction, which can be used for cases where a living force should be hit, but material objects should remain intact. On the other hand, there are a number of CWA that can cause the long-term contamination of the ground, equipment and technology or damage to sensitive materials. These negative impacts can result in requirements for subsequent decontamination.

3.4. Contemporary Risks of the Use of Chemical Weapons

The CWC was supposed to reduce the war threshold. What is the contemporary situation? The danger of the origination of a world war, i.e., war between big powers, is ever persisting, if not immediate. General chemical disarmament has been implemented, except for a few cases (or at least all the facts suggest that this is the case). The historical experience shows that in the case of the danger of a world conflict or in the course of the conflict, the big powers are able to mobilize science and industry to produce a chemical arsenal at an even higher level. The immediate dangers are civil and ethnic wars, the frequency and intensity of which have demonstrated an increasing tendency over recent years. The accompanying phenomenon of these wars is the use of standard or improvised chemical weapons, the institutional control of which is enormously difficult. Any suspected ownership or use of chemical weapons in these wars can thus lead to enhancing the tension in international relationships (cases like Iraq or Syria).

A specific danger comes from international terrorism with the use of chemical weapons. The use of a poison as a tool for terror dates back even to ancient times and occurs in all the preceding historical eras, but in the time of scientific-technical development, it has appeared in certain new forms. A number of authors believe that the combination of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons, resulted in a modern form of terrorism, so-called ultra-terrorism [ 13, 14]. Over the last half of the century, several hundreds of "chemical incidents" were recorded in the world, which were associated in a certain way with terrorism, but only a portion of them concerns the actual use of toxic substances [ 15]. Terrorists were interested in 60 different chemicals, mostly cyanides, organophosphates (including sarin and VX), harassing agents (tear gases) and natural poisons and toxins (such as, e.g., ricin). There are various methods of using toxic chemicals; they include direct contact with a chemical substance, scattering of an aerosol, poisoning of food, drinks and consumer products or the use of chemicals together with an explosive device [ 16]. The possibility of chemical ultra-terrorism is documented by the sarin attack carried out by the sect, Aum Shinrikyo, on the Tokyo subway in 1995 [ 17].

4. Contemporary Condition and Traditional Methods of Chemical Weapons Development

4.1. Nerve Agents As Most Important Chemical Weapons

Until recently, there has been a concept that the research and development of chemical weapons is a linear process, which necessarily leads to new, even more toxic CWA. Over the two years of World War I, the inhalation toxicity of CWA (mustard) was increased by a factor of 10 compared to chlorine. Over the next 20 to 40 years, the toxicity of new CWA (G and V nerve agents) increased by a factor of 100 compared to mustard. Since 1915, when chlorine was first used on a mass scale, the toxicity of CWA was thus increased by a factor of 1000 (). However, after V nerve agents, there had been no discovery of considerably more toxic substances and their mass introduction into armaments [ 18].

Table 3

The currently existing nerve agents are exceptional synthetic warfare poisons. They are usually very stable and suitable for filling different types of chemical ammunition. They are well solubilized in organic solvents and penetrate into different natural, as well as artificial materials, thus causing unusual problems in the course of decontamination. The good solubility in water and resistance to hydrolysis makes their use for poisoning water sources or for other diverse purposes and sabotage (terroristic) possible. The spectrum of nerve agents given by the differences in the toxicity and physical-chemical characteristics makes it possible for the aggressor to select suitable substances under the conditions of different situations in the battlefield. Highly volatile substances, such as sarin, can be used in contact with the enemy to induce rapid inhalation poisonings without substantially limiting the activity of one's own troops. On the other hand, V agents can be used (e.g., such as a filling in the warheads of operational-tactical rockets) for chemical attacks at different depths in the enemy's position. Soman and other compounds of medium volatility, the vapors and aerosols of which can induce inhalation poisonings and the drops of which can efficiently strike the body surface, offer diverse methods of use. Symptoms of inhalation poisonings are manifested after several minutes, depending on the concentration (essentially immediately in the case of high doses), and in contrast to this, percutaneous poisonings (without warning manifestations) are characterized by a latent period, with the effect taking tens of minutes to several hours. A considerable characteristic of nerve agents is their cumulative action and relatively limited possibility for therapy with antidotes. In addition, the administration of antidotes can save the life of the persons exposed, but not their fighting capacity. The great psychological effect from the use of nerve agents is also of considerable importance [ 18].

4.2. The Problem of CWA with Increased Toxicity

For as long as several tens of years, military chemists have attempted to synthesize even more toxic nerve agents compared to those that have already been introduced into armaments. The synthesis of new substances is typically based on changes in particular groups of the basic chemical structure. The possibilities of G agents are thus limited, due to their relatively simple structure. In V agents, there are larger possibilities, particularly when changing the O-ester and thiocholine group, but even in this case, no compounds more toxic than VX or R-33 have been found. A further possibility is the synthesis of compounds based on mutual combinations of certain structural elements of G and V agents and possibly the introduction of certain new functional groups into the molecule. It is possible to believe that this approach was employed in the synthesis of the substances (A-230, A-232, A-234) of the Soviet binary program, NOVICHOK. The principle of these substances is, however, secret, and the admissible data are controversial. According to American sources, these are phosphorylated oximes from the group of O-chloro(fluorocarbiminoyl- O-[(2-chloro-1,2-dialkyl)ethyl]phosphorofluoridates [ 19]. Possibly more properly informed Russian sources report that the substance, A-230, is a liquid and stable methyl-{N-[1-(diethylamino)ethylidene]amido}phosphonofluoridate, the intravenous and percutaneous toxicity of which exceeds the toxicity of the VX by a factor of five to eight. Over several years, scientists synthesized more than a hundred structural variants of the substance, A-230, and tested them systematically. They also prepared its phosphate methoxy- and ethoxy-derivatives marked by the codes, A-232 and A-234. The toxicity of both substances is reportedly comparable with that of VX, but compared to the substance, A-230, they are less volatile and resistant to moisture. Ultra-toxic solid derivatives have also been reportedly synthesized, having a guanidine radical instead of the amidine one (substances A-242 and A-262) [ 20].

Relationships between atoms in molecules are strictly determined, and every sufficiently narrow interval of change in the molecular mass corresponds to a certain number of compounds. With increasing molecular mass, the structure and toxicity varies, but there is also a decrease in the probability that the substance will be volatile. The substances exerting considerably higher toxicity than nerve agents (VX or NOVICHOK) will thus be solid. The toxicity of solids is, however, also limited, and thus, the discovery of substances considerably more toxic than natural super-toxins (particularly botulinum toxin) is not expected. The fact should also be taken into consideration that even the introduction of CWA with higher toxicity does not result in the proportional enhancement of other combat characteristics. For example, the increase in the toxicity of a CWA by a factor of 10 corresponds to about a doubled area for the effective contamination with contemporary types of chemical ammunition [ 18].

4.3. Problem of Overcoming the Anti-Chemical Defense

The increase in the toxicity of CWA is not the only possibility for how to enhance the efficacy of chemical weapons. Every new CWA has been expected to be able to overcome the anti-chemical defense of the potential enemy and to force him to solve new and complex problems regarding detection, the protection of respiratory organs, as well as the body surface, decontamination and therapy. These requirements were obviously also followed in the development of the NOVICHOK program. In the case of their possible use, an insufficient sensitivity and selectivity of the existing means of detection is to be expected, except for those based on biochemical reactions. In the case of the phosphorylated oximes already discussed, the contemporary therapy for poisonings with nerve agents based on AChE reactivation could possibly fail.

4.3.1. Penetration of CWA through Isolation Barriers

The attempts to improve second generation chemical weapons resulted in searching for liquid CWA, which could easily penetrate through the anti-chemical isolation polymer barrier and also eliminate living forces through percutaneous action. The research was focused on organophosphate nerve agents, which are more persistent than sarin and more volatile than VX. The military laboratories of the United States synthesized compounds marked IVA (intermediate volatility agents), the structure of which is most likely to contain certain typical elements of the G agents (fluorine), as well as the V agents (2-dialkylaminoalkyl group). In the special literature, they are thus marked by the code, GV (or GP). Their disadvantage is their low stability, but this problem was solved by the design of the binary ammunition (IVA-2). The Soviet Union and Iraq introduced soman and cyclosarin, respectively, with similar effects.

4.3.2. "Mask Crushers"

As early as World War I, the German army elaborated the concept of "mask crushers" based on the use of solid organic compounds of arsenic (diphenylchloroarsane, diphenylcyanoarsane, later adamsite) exerting irritating effects on the airways. Even negligible concentrations of these substances in an aerosol easily penetrated through protecting charcoal filters and forced soldiers to remove protective masks, thus facilitating the effects of the concomitantly used lethal species of the CWA. Because of this, new filters with a special anti-smoke insert have been introduced. Further military research was focused on overcoming the protective filters by using volatile substances with lethal effects. Already in the 1930s, choking agents were studied that exerted an enhanced capability for penetration, such as, for example, trifluoronitromethane (the fluorine analogue of chloropicrin), trifluoronitrosomethane, hexafluoroazomethane, chlorotrifluoride and perfluoroisobutene. These substances are highly toxic (for example perfluoroisobutene is more toxic than phosgene by a factor of eight), but their disadvantage is in the slower onset of their effects. The "mask crushers" can also be considered to include simple toxic gases, such as carbon monoxide, arsane, phosphane or cyanogen chloride. Still, the best solution for protection from the effects of the inhalation of "mask crushers" is the use of isolation devices.

4.3.3. Replacement of Nerve Agents

In the past, there were tactical, as well as technological reasons for compounds that could completely replace the existing organophosphorus nerve agents. Attention has long been given to carbamates, which exert a similar pattern of intoxication, but in the course of therapy, it is (in contrast to organophosphates) impossible to employ antidotes based on AChE reactivators. However, volatile carbamates exert a low toxicity. The most toxic carbamates are quaternary arylcarbamates (for example, T-1123), which are solid and, thus, cannot replace nerve agents in standard chemical ammunition. They are, however, ideal as poisons for the purposes of diversion or sabotage.

An integral part of military programs has also been the study of substances with unusual mechanisms of action compared to traditional CWA. From this standpoint, certain highly toxic, industrially available and easily acquired organophosphorus bicyclic compounds, particularly bicyclophosphates, have been of interest. The mechanism of their toxic effect is not completely understood, but in accordance with the most recent findings, in contrast to G and V nerve agents, it is based on the inhibition of the neurotransmitter, GABA (γ-aminobutyric acid). There is the assumption that toxic bicycloorthocarboxylates and norbornanes also interact with GABA-receptors. The advantage of this group of substances for military purposes is, in particular, their difficult detection and the unavailability of a specific therapy.

4.3.4. Tactical Mixtures

The physical and chemical characteristics of CWA-filled ammunition (such as, e.g., the stability) have formerly been typically adjusted with suitable admixtures. Certain CWA (mustard, lewisite, soman, R-33) were applied in a thickened form, which improved the ballistic characteristics of the ammunition and made possible the effective transfer of the agent into combat conditions. In addition, auxiliary components were searched for to accelerate the absorption of CWA into the organism. It is, for example, known that dimethyl sulfoxide increases the ability of CWA to penetrate through the skin several times over. Similar penetration characteristics are also known for substances that are currently subjected to intensive medicinal, pharmaceutical and cosmetic research (for example, 1-dodecylazocycloheptane-2-one) [ 21].

In the past, mixtures of CWA were also proposed that exerted unusual toxic effects and were associated with the enhanced tediousness of chemical analysis and the use of protective tools, decontamination and therapy. These were, for example, mixtures of mustard with O-mustard, mustard with lewisite, mustard (or lewisite) with diphosgene, mustard with chloroacetophenone, hydrogen cyanide with cyanogen chloride or BZ agent with liquid, irritating 1-methoxy-1,3,5-heptatriene. There were also attempts to combine nerve agents with the aim of enhancing their volatility or capability of penetration through the skin. An example is a mixture of sarin with cyclosarin. Some combinations of organic phosphorus compounds may also have a synergistic effect [ 22]. A special chapter of the history of chemical weapons comprises mixtures of CWA with natural toxins or with infectious agents (for example, mustard with aflatoxins or mustard with anthrax).

4.4. Natural Poisons and Toxins

Natural poisons and toxins are a very extensive group with respect to the number and structural types of substances, presenting a basis for toxic (chemical, biochemical, toxin, biological) weapons. Plant poisons, animal poisons, bacterial toxins, toxins of cyanobacteria and algae or fungal poisons (mycotoxins) have been employed by man for fighting and hunting purposes since the earliest times. Some of them, such as ricin (W), botulinum toxin (X) or saxitoxin (TZ), were formerly proposed as standard fillings of military ammunition, and some others (palytoxin, batrachotoxin, tetrodotoxin) were subjected to intensive military research. There are several differences between toxins and traditional chemical weapons. Toxins have higher molecular weights (as solids); most of them are odorless and not dermally active, and a number of them produce immune responses. Their attractiveness results from their extreme toxicity and the possibility of their industrial manufacturing with the use of the most modern technologies (although difficult on a large scale). From the operational-tactical standpoint, natural poisons and toxins are essentially easy to use, some of them as inhalation poisons. For example, the lethal inhalation concentration (LCt ₅₀) of a botulinum toxin aerosol is of 0.02-0.1 mg·min/m ³, which exceeds the toxicity of sarin vapors by a factor of about 1,000 on average. In the case of these substances, detection, protection and therapy are complicated, due to the diverse forms of toxic effects, and in addition, their military use is difficult to demonstrate, due to their possible natural abundance in the target area. By way of example, it is possible to mention a unconfirmed suspicion that at the end of the 1980s, the Soviet army used a chemical weapon in South-East Asia based on mycotoxins from the group of trichothecenes (toxin T-2), in the form of so-called yellow rain [ 23].

4.5. Binary Chemical Ammunition

Binary ammunition is a special chemical reactor containing two relatively non-toxic components, which react with each other in the course of the flight to the target, producing CWA. The binary system offers a number of advantages. It particularly increases the safety in the manufacturing, storing, transfer, use and destruction of chemical weapons. The shelf-life of the chemical ammunition is considerably prolonged. Binary technology makes possible a simple exchange of precursors in accordance with operational plans and the tactical situation. In binary ammunition, it is also possible to use CWA, which are less suitable (instable) for filling unitary ammunition, or possibly in different tactical mixtures. The principle of binary chemical weapons, however, has drawbacks, such as, e.g., a reduction in the useful mass of the filling or a decrease in the transfer coefficient of the CWA to the action conditions. The chemical reaction in the ammunition is then accompanied by heating the reaction mixture, which can result in a decomposition of the CWA produced, particularly in areas with a hot climate. In shooting directed at close targets, the reaction time, and thus, also, the reaction yield, is reduced. The synthesis of solid CWA is extremely difficult in binary ammunition. Tests of binary chemical ammunition demonstrated its efficacy to be at least 1.5-2 times lower compared to single-component ammunition. This means that in the course of its design, the CWA used should be more toxic by a factor of at least 2-3 than V agents [ 18]. There is a possibility that this condition was adhered to within the framework of the NOVICHOK program. In addition to the improvement of the binary system, there is the possibility of the development of multi-component ammunition (comprising three or more components), which calls for even higher requirements for the characteristics of CWA and the implementation of the CWC. They were developed as alternatives and less advanced concepts for binary weapons. For example, Iraq developed "binary" aerial bombs, warheads for tactical missiles and artillery shells filled with only one component (a mixture of isopropyl alcohol with cyclohexanol). The second component (methylphosphonyl difluoride) was added just before combat use. After mixing the two components, mixtures of sarin with cyclosarin were obtained.

4.6. Non-Lethal Chemical Weapons

4.6.1. Characteristics of Non-lethal Chemical Weapons

The pressure for the development of the conduction of "non-bloody and humane war" has recently been ever increasing as a part of a wider discussion about the revolution in the matter of military science and technology. Non-lethal weapons are currently a common supplement to conventional weapon systems [ 24]. These are weapons explicitly designed and developed for making persons unable to fight or for their elimination from action with a lower probability of fatal (or permanent) injury or for the elimination of armaments. A part of these technologies are also chemical weapons, the action of which is based on non-lethal (or lower than lethal) toxic effects.

Under currently existing conditions for the means of anti-chemical protection, a situation can be encountered for which the destruction of living forces by lethal species of the CWA would be non-realistic. There will be a higher importance of temporarily incapacitating effects (immobilization, binding) with the help of non-lethal CWA, which act even at extremely low concentrations. This group includes very different physiologically active substances with a different nature to the toxic effects, in which the effective (incapacitating) doses are lower by a factor of at least 100 compared to lethal doses. This is different, for example, from the use of nerve agents. Of course, it should be emphasized that from the toxicological standpoint, the classification of chemical substances as lethal and non-lethal is problematic (see the definition of poisons by Paracelsus). The safety of a chemical substance can only be established based on experiments in animals and only estimates can be obtained for humans. The estimate does not take into consideration individual sensitivity to chemical compounds and particular conditions of their use.

The genetic association between non-lethal chemical weapons and incapacitating agents, which has always been a part of military chemical arsenals, cannot be omitted. These were first harassing substances-tear gases and respiratory irritants; the psychoactive BZ agent or, possibly, other anticholinergics based on glycolates occurred later in chemical arsenals. The military specialists were, however, also interested in other groups of substances with effects causing mental and physical disability, such as, e.g., sympathomimetic (LSD-25), dissociative anesthetics (phencyclidine, ketamine), narcotic analgesics (fentanyl and its derivatives), neuroleptics, tremorgenes (tremorine) or emetics (apomorphin, staphylococcal enterotoxin B). The ideal incapacitating substance is highly efficient (in a dose of the order of magnitude of μg/kg and below) and exerts rapid and short-term action (several minutes). Its effect is reversible and also expectable, depending on the dose. There is also an obvious requirement for its good stability upon storing and handling [ 25]. These requirements considerably restrict the group of potential candidates, but also indicate the direction for the future research and development of incapacitating agents.

So-called calmatives are of special interest from the military standpoint (knock-out gases, immobilizing agents), which hit the organism at different levels of the central nervous system, compared to irritating substances, and induce changes in the mental condition and behavior. Many of these compounds are quite commonly used in human and veterinary medicine, such as, e.g., sedatives, hypnotics, anesthetics, analgesics, myorelaxants, anxiolytics, antipsychotics, antidepressants, etc. However, specialists are interested in benzodiazepines affecting GABA-receptors, alpha ₂-antagonists with bonds to alpha ₂-adrenergic receptors or opioids, with enormous effects on opiate receptors. The enhanced interest in synthetic opioids induced an antiterrorist intervention of Russian safety forces in October, 2002. To rescue the hostages in the Moscow theatre, Dubrovka, they probably used an aerosol containing a mixture of carfentanil and remifentanil [ 26]. Synthetic opioids are considered as extremely potent analgesics and anesthetics with a very rapid onset of action. For example, the narcotic effect of carfentanil is higher by a factor of 10,000 compared to morphine and by a factor of 100 compared to fenantyl. It is used in veterinary medicine to immobilize big mammals (elephants, bears) in the form of special gun projectiles and aerosol generators. However, the effect can be unexpected and can endanger life. This was also supported by the result of the antiterrorist intervention in Moscow, where about 130 ( i.e., 15%) of the persons present died from poisoning.

It should be emphasized that the category of non-lethal chemical weapons finds no support in the CWC. CWC defines only chemical weapons, which means toxic chemicals and their precursors. Toxic chemical means any chemical that can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals through its chemical action on life processes. This means that any toxic chemical intended for use in war (including internal armed conflicts) is a chemical weapon.

4.6.2. Riot Control Agents

Certain characteristic features of non-lethal chemical weapons are also encountered in so-called riot control agents (RCA). This can cause confusion, because RCA have a separate definition and regimen under the CWC. RCA means any chemical not listed in a schedule that can rapidly produce sensory irritation or disabling effects in humans, which disappear within a short time after the exposure. RCA may be used for purposes relating to law enforcement including a domestic riot control. Each State Party of CWC undertakes not to use RCA as a method of warfare.

The traditional representatives of these means are harassing agents (tear gases). As shown in , CS and CN agents enjoy the highest interest throughout the world, but other agents are also finding their application stepwise (CR agent, capsaicin or its synthetic homologues, such as, e.g., pelargonic acid vanillylamide). The development of this group of physiologically active substances has not yet been completed. It is known that the substances with extremely irritating effects include many esters of plants of the genus, Euphorbia. Some of them (for example, resiniferatoxin) have already been completely synthesized in laboratories [ 27]. A tendency to accept RCA, as well as other substances with mentally and physically incapacitating effects (including the fentanyl derivatives used by Russian special corps in the Moscow incident), has recently occurred. This may be against the purpose of the CWC.

4.6.3. Malodorants

A special case of non-lethal chemical weapons and potential RCA are agents that cause intense odor (so-called malodorants). This is not a new technology. So-called stink bombs have been known since the Middle Age, and in World War I, they served to mask the presence of CWA. There is information from the mid-1960s concerning the development of malodorants as effective components of chemical weapons and means for suppressing riots in areas inhabited by certain ethnic groups. The contemporary programs are oriented toward the research of malodorants with enormous effects on human chemical sensors and toward defining the nature and measure of the response. A number of known and available chemicals, which are present in the defensive secretion of certain animals, can be used for police or military purposes. For example, the secretions of skunks ( Mephitis mephitis and related species) contain unbearably smelly thiols (2-butene-1-thiol, 3-methyl-1-butanethiol), their thioacetates and alkaloids, which are easy to synthesize, chemically modify and industrially manufacture. Chemical compounds having structures close to cadaverous poisons (putrescine, cadaverine) or human pheromones that release body odors are other examples.

The use of malodorants not based on toxic effects (in certain substances, however, toxicity was described) can meet the criteria for the definition of RCA by CWC (they are able to rapidly induce irritation of sensory organs). Consequently, they cannot be used in a war. The development and introduction of natural malodorants is also problematic in terms of the BTWC. In spite of this, malodorants can become the basis of an attractive modern concept for the conduct of war. They also can mask the development and production of weapons and ammunition (delivery systems) in which other chemical agents can also be used, including lethal ones [ 28].

4.7. Toxic Industrial Chemicals

The term toxic industrial chemicals (TIC) refers to a variety of chemicals used or produced by industry that can have significant impacts on human health if released into the air or water. According to the CWC, any TIC can be considered a chemical weapon, if it is designed or used for military purposes. In the past, much of the CWA consisted of TIC (chlorine, phosgene, hydrogen cyanide, chloropicrin, etc.) or were developed in the context of civilian research and development (for example, nerve agents). The main risk of TIC's is that they are manufactured and stored in vast quantities and can be relatively easily used in war or domestic armed conflicts. The general limitation of the production and consumption of TIC is extremely difficult for various reasons.

The group of TIC's also includes some unusual compounds that may be of interest to experts in chemical weapons. These are, for example, dioxin (2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, TCDD) and its analogues. TCDD is well known as an impurity in the herbicides (for example, Agent Orange) used in the war in Indochina. It is also known in connection with an industrial accident in 1976 in Italy (Seveso). This is an extremely toxic synthetic agent capable of alkylating various cellular polymers, including DNA. Some clinical symptoms of poisoning are similar to mustard gas. TCDD has a long latency period, and poisoning is difficult to treat. It is ideal for ecological war, because it can cause long-term and dangerous contamination of large areas, even when used at relatively low concentrations.

5. New Technologies in the Development of Chemical Weapons

A rule has usually been valid in history that any weapon vanished only if it was replaced by a new and even more effective one. This probably mostly holds for chemical weapons. In addition, the possible exhaustion of the possibilities for technology of weapons of mass destruction does not mean a decrease in demand. The control of chemical weapons and the possibilities of their further development are associated with the term "dual use technology" [ 29]. This is technology involving civil and, simultaneously, military applications. These are materials, programs and knowledge used in peaceful applications, which can, however, also be used in the production of weapons. The dual use technologies can considerably facilitate and speed the manufacturing of standard chemical weapons. They make possible a better understanding of biological systems, and the results of the study can be then used for the development of new, still unknown types of chemical weapons. With the help of these technologies, it is also possible to propose new, more effective forms of toxic substance applications. Their effects on adherence to international legal standards, including the CWC and BTWC, are thus negative [ 30].

In association with the development of chemical weapons, the term biochemical weapons has recently been used, which reflects the fragile boundary between chemical and biological weapons () [ 31]. It is tightly related to the term biochemicals, which are biologically active chemical compounds or compounds produced by a specific chemical mechanism in a living organism. If traditional chemical weapons are the products of chemistry and the chemical industry, then biochemical weapons should analogously belong to the domain of biochemistry and the pharmaceutical industry [ 32].

Table 4

5.1. Technology for Acquiring New Biologically Active Substances

5.1.1. Combinatorial Chemistry

The traditional research and development of new physiologically active substances is enormously expensive, tedious and offers unsure result. In laboratories, large quantities of different compounds are produced; their efficacy is tested, and the chemical structure is searched for, which could be suitable for the further development of a medicine or other product. This will be changed in a revolutionary manner in the future. The synthesis of peptides based on changing amino acids and the development of "parallel synthesis" techniques or "split-and-pool" synthesis were established for so-called combinatorial chemistry, which makes it possible to systematically combine different chemical construction blocks and, thus, to obtain big files (libraries) of structurally close compounds. These libraries can then be used with the technique termed "high-throughput screening" to identify specific compounds, depending on the effect required. There is a consideration that the probability of finding a new biologically active compound is increased by a factor of an order of magnitude of about 1000. These possibilities were also extended by the discovery of a new method named "click chemistry". The risks of using combinatorial chemistry and associated procedures for the development of toxic compounds with military potential are difficult to estimate. The technology is particularly suitable for the synthesis of compounds with a molecular mass of about 700 Dalton, which is more than the value in traditional CWA. It can be used for the development of incapacitating agents of a new generation [ 30].

5.1.2. Protein Engineering

Protein engineering, first described in early 1980s, deals with the targeted production of proteins, particularly enzymes. It also has penetrated into the pharmaceutical industry, including the field of the development of protein hybrid (fusion) toxins suitable for therapeutic purposes. Protein toxins occurring in nature as animal and plant poisons are capable of a specific action on cellular metabolism, and thus, they are dangerous, even at extremely low doses. Based on protein engineering, it is possible to combine the binding and catalytic domains of two different protein toxins and, thus, to produce a hybrid toxin. On laboratory, as well as industrial scales, it is possible to obtain hybrid or modified protein toxins with enhanced lethality, with a greater extent of effects and resistance to detection, diagnosis and therapy. For example, the extremely toxic, but under common conditions, less resistant, botulinum toxin presents a highly lethal hybrid toxin in combination with stable and resistant staphylococcal enterotoxin, which is also resistant to heat and to adverse media. By a combination of the catalytic domain of tetanus or shiga toxin with the binding domain of anthrax toxin, a hybrid toxin is obtained, affecting a wider spectrum of monkey cells compared to the original toxins [ 33, 34, 35].

5.2. Technology of Manipulation with Biological Systems

5.2.1. Research of Psychoactive Substances

In the early 1990s, scientists acquired new knowledge on protein neurotransmitter receptors bound to the outer neuron membrane with the help of the techniques of molecular biology and genetics. In contrast to simple acetylcholine, some of these neurotransmitters have a complex peptide structure with short amino acid chains. For example, in a study of the sleep disorder called narcolepsy, in the 1990s, new neurotransmitters, hypocretins (orexins), were discovered, which are produced by hypothalamus cells [ 36]. In the mammalian hypothalamus, a neuropeptide hormone, oxytocin, is also produced, which is associated with social behavior and reproduction (the so-called hormone of love and trust). One of the possible forms of its pharmacological application is aerosol [ 37]. Knowledge from the area of neuropeptides can also be obviously used for the development of new agents as potential non-lethal weapons [ 38]. Knowledge is also being extended concerning the effects of psychoactive substances, which were formerly considered as standard or potential components of military armament. It was, for example, found that the BZ agent and its analogues are bound to five sub-types of muscarine acetylcholine receptors, which have different functions in the brain. This explains their pleiotropic and variable effects [ 39].

5.2.2. Synthesis of Bioregulators

Bioregulators are natural organic compounds that regulate different cellular processes in multiple organic systems [ 40]. They regulate the division and differentiation of cells, blood pressure, heart activity, respiration, muscle contractions, body temperature or sleep and affect mood, emotion and immunity functions. Bioregulators are effective, even at extremely low concentrations, and act essentially immediately. At higher than normal doses, they can induce different toxic effects or even death. The enhanced interest of biotechnological and pharmaceutical institutions and companies in bioregulators is associated with the progress in the field of molecular biology and biotechnology and with the development of a new generation of pharmaceuticals with increased specificity and efficacy. Based on estimates, about 10,000 bioregulators exerting different chemical structures and functions are active in the body of homoeothermic animals. In addition, many of them contain not so large structural fragments exerting the same activity of the original bioregulator. These fragments, which occur independently in nature, can be used as initial materials for the synthesis of analogues. The number of these compounds, where some of them have toxicity comparable with nerve agents, is ever growing [ 39].

The idea for the development of chemical (biochemical) weapons based on bioregulators occurred as early as the pioneering era of the United States' center for the development of biological weapons in Fort Detrick, but its implementation was impossible that time, due to the lack of suitable technology. In spite of this, the Ministry of Defense financed several research and development programs as early as the 1980s, focused on biotechnology, including a project for the development of biochemical (hormonal) weapons, including bioregulators [ 41]. That time, the Soviet Union reportedly included bioregulators in an offensive program for the development of biological weapons [ 42]. The bioregulators are currently considered to be prospective incapacitating (non-lethal) weapons, and their research is being performed by scientific teams throughout the world (as, for example, in the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, China, Israel). The most recent progress in the field of molecular biology and biotechnology essentially simplified the preparation of bioregulators, which would be formerly available only in negligible amounts from natural sources. The methods of gene engineering make possible the production of bioregulators, even in amounts sufficient for filling ammunition. Bioregulators can thus present a new dimension in the conduct of modern war. Their accepting by certain countries as non-lethal weapons of a new type can also legitimize the use of toxic substances in war [ 43]. They can also be considered as potential terrorist weapons [ 44].

Endorphins and enkephalins can also be of importance for military purposes. These are opioid polypeptides excreted from the hypophysis in the course of physical stress, which can block pain or induce feelings of peace of mind (so-called "hormones of happiness"). One can speak about neurokinins, for example, substance P, which is a peptide participating in the transfer of nociceptive impulses and controls adaptation stress mechanisms. The regulation peptide, cholecystokinin (CCK), can also be of interest, which induces strong emotional reactions to panic. There are several natural forms of this peptide with different numbers of amino acids (such as, for example, CCK-8, CCK-33), but with a high physiological activity, and also having shorter fragment molecules of this peptide, so-called CCK-4. Further research resulted in the synthesis of CCK-4 analogues, which are characterized by their enhanced affinity to receptors, metabolic stability and ability to overcome the hematoencephalic barrier. An example of high-activity peptide bioregulators is also endothelin, which increases arterial pressure and reduces heart beat frequency. It is close to sarafotoxins with respect to its structure and function, which were isolated from snake venom ( Atractaspis engaddensis). Certain metabolites of arachidonic acids (prostaglandins, prostacyclins, thromboxanes, leukotrienes) or the bioregulator of the phospholipid structure, known as the thrombocyte activating factor, are also effective regulators of the cardiovascular and respiratory systems or mediators of different pathological conditions (inflammations, allergy, anaphylaxis, shock). The disadvantage of bioregulators is their low stability. Endogenous bioregulators are rapidly degraded in the organism in the presence of catalytic ferments. Due to this, the use of bioregulators in the form of formulae containing efficient inhibitors of these ferments is considered. However, these regulators alone can be highly active substances causing pathological effects [ 18].

5.2.3. RNA Interference

RNA interference is a process regulating transcription and intracellular gene expression in such a way that certain fragments of the double-helix RNA interfere with the genes expressed. The first experiments were performed by American scientists as early as in 1990. They genetically modified petunia by introducing the gene for enhancing the level of the enzyme participating in the synthesis of the violet dye. This technology was later tested in other organisms and introduced into pharmacy and medicine as a promising method of treatment of still non-curable diseases at the molecular level. However, RNA interference can also be abused, for example for the preparation of genetically-modified toxins or for affecting an organism's immunity. There is, for example, a possibility of abusing RNA interference for the targeted affecting of genes present in specific ethnic groups only [ 45]. This can serve as a basis of modern chemical (ethnic) weapons [ 46].

5.3. Technology of Manufacture and Use of Toxic Substances

5.3.1. Chemical Microprocessor Devices

In the 1980s, chemical microtechnology was developed, which induced revolutionary changes in chemical and pharmaceutical industries. Compared to standard chemical operations, the miniaturized devices are safer, more rapid, more selective and more effective with respect to the energy requirements. These are automatized devices with micromixers, miniaturized heat exchangers and reactors of a volume of about 2 L. The capacity of a line, the installation of which a room of 30 m ³ is sufficient, provides several kilograms of the pure product per hour. Chemical microprocessors for the manufacture of pure chemical and pharmaceutical products are currently quite commonly used in big global companies [ 47]. There is a risk that this technology will also be employed for the manufacturing of toxic compounds important for military purposes, which will attenuate the control mechanisms of the CWC. According to certain specialists, it is less suitable for the manufacturing of classic CWA [ 48], but it may be very progressive for the manufacturing of toxic agents of a new generation (including prospective non-lethal chemical weapons).

5.3.2. Microencapsulation

Special techniques have also been developed that enhance the CWA stability and make possible the penetration of the agents and their controlled release into an organism. One of these techniques is microencapsulation based on covering the CWA in a micro-droplet with a biologically degradable polymer envelope. This is the same technique as that used in the manufacturing of pharmaceutical products. The microcapsules can be employed in different ways. For example, during the explosion of the ammunition, they produce an aerosol cloud and penetrate via the respiratory tract into the organism, where their envelope is dissolved, releasing the CWA. This technology can also be easily used for the development of new forms for the application of non-lethal chemical weapons, and thus, it is being intensively studied [ 49]. Unstable biologically active agents, which would otherwise be quite unsuitable as chemical weapons, can also be employed based on the microencapsulation technique.

5.3.3. Nanotechnology

The effects of nanoparticles on living organisms result from certain interesting characteristics. Nanoparticles exert high chemical and catalytic activities, which have not been observed in larger particles of the same substance. In the medium (in air), nanoparticles form high concentrations, even at a relatively low amount of the substance dispersed. Nanoparticles can easily penetrate into the human organism through all of the means of entrance (for example, by inhalation, percutaneously, by ingestion, through the eye barrier) and invade any organs and tissues, including the central nervous system. Nanoparticles can exert serious (even lethal) effects on humans, which is manifested by the clinical pattern of a disease that is unknown to physician or masked by other clinical symptoms. A special case is given by nanoparticles smaller than 50 nm, which can cause genotoxic effects due to their capability of penetrating into the cellular nucleus [ 50].

The use of nanoparticles for military purposes is not quite new. For example, solid organic compounds of arsenic ("mask crushers"), used in World War I through the explosion of ammunition, produced (by so-called self-condensation) irritating aerosol, which contained aggregates with a particle size under 100 nm. Toxic smokes were later produced with the help of thermogenerators and smoke pots. In the Vietnam War, the American army used the harassing CS agent [ 51] in the form of the formulae, CS1 and CS2. The formula CS1 is a finely ground powder of the effective compounds with an admixture of 5% pyrogenic silica gel (Cab-O-Sil, particle size of 5-50 nm). It is suitable in all the types of weapons with a highly explosive charge or in special dispersing equipment. CS2 is essentially the formula CS1 microencapsulated with the help of hexamethyldisilazane, which is resistant to hydrolysis and high temperatures. Both formulae are currently common parts of riot control ammunition. Scientists have also been recently interested in the preparation of nano-materials based on biologically active peptides [ 52, 53] and other substances. These technologies are prospects, for example, medicine, but can also be used for the production of new forms of bioregulators, calmatives and other groups of toxic substances for military purposes.

6. Conclusions

The existence of chemical weapons is shown not to be generally associated with a particular historical era, though their development is, of course, conditioned by the level of science and technology. In a certain sense, chemical weapons have a "universal nature" in history. The acceptance and implementation of the CWC is an important human action, the topical nature of which has not been realized, even the factual destruction of all of the stocks of chemical weapons. The CWC should be open to the future and provide protection from scientific and technological development. In accordance with many parameters, chemical weapons based on traditional technologies have achieved the limit of their development. There is, however, a big potential for their further development based on the most recent knowledge of modern scientific and technical disciplines, particularly at the boundary of chemistry and biology. The risk is even higher due to the fact that already today, there is a general acceptance of the development of non-lethal chemical weapons (or RCA) at a technologically higher level. It is thus possible to assume that in the future, new forms of the accumulation of stocks of chemical (biochemical) weapons will occur, which will be produced by the virtual synthesis of new toxic substances from unmonitored chemical agents. Their characteristics will be studied on the microscale, and computerized models will be used to simulate the possibilities of their military use. In the future, the chemical arsenal will be based on the accumulation of important information from the fields of chemical, biological and toxin weapons. Data banks obtained in this way will be hardly accessible and the risk of their materialization will persist. In practice, this means that in the future, the control mechanisms should include declarations of relevant scientific and research programs and their control [ 54]. This is, however, very problematic, since free scientific investigations should not be prevented by any control mechanism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Overall View of Chemical and Biochemical Weapons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention, CWC) was submitted for signing in Paris on 13 January 1993, after complicated negotiations. The Convention came into effect on 29 April 1997, and up to the present time (31 March 2014), 190 countries have participated in the Convention.

# data[].attributes.body
A nuclear weapon is commonly defined as a device, which uses a nuclear reaction for destructive means.

Introduction

The first nuclear weapon was successfully detonated on July 16, 1945. The nuclear weapon, code named “Trinity”, yielded an explosion which was equivalent to 20 kilotons of Trinitrotoluene (TNT). This reaction unexpectedly had a shock wave which could be felt 100 miles away. Compared to chemical reactions, the amount of energy that can be released from nuclear reactions can be up to a million times greater. Before we can fully understand the chemical complexity and appreciate the engineering elegance of a nuclear weapon, however, it is important to grasp basic nuclear chemistry concepts.

Basic Nuclear Chemistry Definitions and Concepts

Nuclear Fission- This type of nuclear reaction is caused by nuclear decay of an unstable atom that has been hit by a neutron. As a result of the instability of the atom, the nucleus splits into two fission fragments also yielding free neutrons and exorbitant amounts of energy (both in the form of electromagnetic radiation and kinetic energy). A neutron carries no electric charge but the nucleus of an atom does - a positive charge. Like with magnets, like charges repel each other, so particles that carry positive electric charges like alpha particles are repelled by the nucleus of an atom and thus do not stick to the nucleus. However, a neutrally charged neutron can combine with the nucleus of an atom which then causes the nucleus to become unstable and split into 2 nuclei. According to Einstein's formula, E=mc 2, energy is released from this reaction along with other neutrons that have the same effect on nearby nuclei and a chain reaction occurs which yields an incredible amount of enePicture of the Fission reaction of Uranium-236 producing fission fragments, neutrons and 3.20X10 11 Joules of energy. Provided by "Wikipedia".

Nuclear Fusion- Fusion is almost completely complimentary to fission. It is the process in which a nuclear reaction where two nuclei are joined together to form a heavier nucleus. The reaction also yields free neutrons and exorbitant amounts of energy from binding energy.  Our sun is a "nuclear furnace" in the sense that it is a place where nuclear fusion occurs. Although a nuclear fusion reactor would undoubtedly be better for our environment, such reactions are not yet possible because no known material can withstand the incredible high temperatures needed for such reactions to occur.

Figure 2: An example of nuclear fusion in which deuterium and tritium fuse together to form helium-4 and freeing a neutron.  Provided by "Wikipedia".

Example of Fusion Reaction

2D+3T → 42He +10N + 17.6 MeV

Fissile / Fissionable – An atom is fissionable if it is capable of undergoing fission. If an atom is Fissile it is not only able to undergo fission, but it is also capable of sustaining a nuclear chain reaction.

Nuclear Chain Reaction- As stated earlier in the text, a nuclear fission reaction yields free neutrons. In a nuclear chain reaction, the free neutrons from a nuclear fission reaction bombard nearby Fissile isotopes resulting in multiple fission reactions. These reactions result in colossal amounts of kinetic energy and gamma radiation.

Critical Mass- The amount of fissile isotope required to successfully assist a nuclear chain reaction. If the fissile material is at a subcritical mass it cannot sustain a nuclear chain reaction. On the other hand, if the fissile material is at a supercritical mass, it will undergo a chain reaction at a faster rate.

Nuclear Weaponry

A nuclear weapon can either undergo a nuclear fission reaction (atomic bomb) or a nuclear fusion reaction (H bomb or thermonuclear bomb).

Weapons Utilizing Fission Reactions

The first nuclear weapons built underwent pure nuclear fission. Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239 were the most common fissile isotopes used. (Uranium-235 is less than 1% naturally abundant. It requires complex methods of enrichment to be a fissile isotope). There are 2 basic nuclear fission weapon designs:

Gun assembly- An uranium-235 bullet is fired through a barrel at a fissile Uranium-235 target. The collision of the two isotopes initiates a chain reaction. The gun assembly design only proves practical with the uranium-235 isotope.

Implosion- A critical mass of a fissile material (U-235 or Pu-239) is surrounded by highly explosive material. When detonated, the high explosives compress the fissile material causing it to assume a state of supercritical mass. The supercritical mass instantaneously begins to undergo a chain react

Weapons Utilizing Fusion Reactions

The first nuclear fusion weapons (also known as thermonuclear weapons) were designed to initiate a fission-based chain reaction. The fusion reaction between tritium and deuterium would result in the free neutrons necessary to bombard a fissile isotope and start a nuclear chain reaction. The first thermonuclear weapon was detonated in November of 1952. Similar to the nuclear implosion design, thermonuclear weapons use the heat and radiation from a fission reaction to make the fissile material assume a state of supercritical mass. The supercritical mass then instantaneously undergoes a fusion chain reaction yielding exponentially more energy than a fission chain reaction.

# data[].attributes.body
Missile

Originally developed as weapons during the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union spent billions of dollars developing rocket technology which could carry humans into space (and even eventually to the moon). The development of this peaceful rocket technology paralleled the development of intercontinental ballistic missile technology and was a way of demonstrating to the other side the potential of ones own rockets.

Within peaceful rocket programs different peaceful applications can be seen as having parallel military ones for example the demonstration of the ability to launch multiple satellites with a single launch vehicle can be seen in a military context as having the potential to deploy multiple independently targettable reentry vehicles.

Nuclear

Dual-use technology refers to the possibility of military use of civilian nuclear power  technology. Many technologies and materials associated with the creation of a nuclear power program have a dual-use capability, in that several stages of the nuclear fuel cycle allow diversion of nuclear materials for nuclear weapons. When this happens a nuclear power program can become a route leading to the atomic bomb or a public annex to a secret bomb program.

Chemical

The modern history of chemical weapons  can be traced back to the chemical industries of the belligerent nations of World War I, especially that of Germany. Many industrial chemical processes produce toxic intermediary stages, final products and by products, and any nation with a chemical industry has the potential to create weaponised chemical agents.

Biological

Lax bio-security at laboratories is worrying researchers and regulators  that potential select agents  may have fallen into the hands of malevolent parties. It may have been instrumental to the 2001 anthrax attacks in the US. Universities sometimes flout regulations, complacent as to the dangers in doing so.

At the 2008 Meeting of States Parties to the  B.T.W.C, it was agreed by consensus that: States Parties recognized the importance of ensuring that those working in the biological sciences are aware of their obligations under the Convention and relevant national legislation and guidelines.

Other technologies

In addition to obvious and headline grabbing dual-use technologies there are some less obvious ones, many erstwhile peaceful technologies can be used in weapons. One example during the First and Second World War, is the role of German toy manufacturers. Germany was one of the leading nations in the production of wind up toys, the ability to produce large numbers of small and reliable clockwork motors was converted into the ability to produce shell and bomb fuses.

Control

Most industrial countries have export controls on certain types of designated dual-use technologies, and they are required by a number of treaties as well. These controls restrict the export of certain commodities and technologies without the permission of the government. The principal agency for investigating violations of dual use export controls in the United States is the Department Of Homeland Security,Homeland Security Investigations. Interagency coordination of export control cases are conducted through the Export Enforcement Coordination Center (E2C2).

# data[].attributes.body
The effects of nanoparticles on living organisms result from certain interesting characteristics. Nanoparticles exert high chemical and catalytic activities, which have not been observed in larger particles of the same substance. In the medium (in air), nanoparticles form high concentrations, even at a relatively low amount of the substance dispersed. Nanoparticles can easily penetrate into the human organism through all of the means of entrance (for example, by inhalation, percutaneously, by ingestion, through the eye barrier) and invade any organs and tissues, including the central nervous system. Nanoparticles can exert serious (even lethal) effects on humans, which is manifested by the clinical pattern of a disease that is unknown to physician or masked by other clinical symptoms. A special case is given by nanoparticles smaller than 50 nm, which can cause genotoxic effects due to their capability of penetrating into the cellular nucleus

The use of nanoparticles for military purposes is not quite new. For example, solid organic compounds of arsenic (“mask crushers”), used in World War I through the explosion of ammunition, produced (by so-called self-condensation) irritating aerosol, which contained aggregates with a particle size under 100 nm. Toxic smokes were later produced with the help of thermogenerators and smoke pots. In the Vietnam War, the American army used the harassing CS agent in the form of the formulae, CS1 and CS2. The formula CS1 is a finely ground powder of the effective compounds with an admixture of 5% pyrogenic silica gel (Cab-O-Sil, particle size of 5–50 nm). It is suitable in all the types of weapons with a highly explosive charge or in special dispersing equipment. CS2 is essentially the formula CS1 microencapsulated with the help of hexamethyldisilazane, which is resistant to hydrolysis and high temperatures. Both formulae are currently common parts of riot control ammunition. Scientists have also been recently interested in the preparation of nano-materials based on biologically active peptides and other substances. These technologies are prospects, for example, medicine, but can also be used for the production of new forms of bioregulators, calmatives and other groups of toxic substances for military purposes

# data[].attributes.body
<<<<<DAMINI>>>>

There are 2 basic nuclear fission weapon designs:

Gun assembly- An uranium-235 bullet is fired through a barrel at a fissile Uranium-235 target. The collision of the two isotopes initiates a chain reaction. The gun assembly design only proves practical with the uranium-235 isotope.

Implosion- A critical mass of a fissile material (U-235 or Pu-239) is surrounded by highly explosive material. When detonated, the high explosives compress the fissile material causing it to assume a state of supercritical mass. The supercritical mass instantaneously begins to undergo a chain reaction.

# data[].attributes.body
<<<DAMINI>>>>

1 Operation Sandstone

It was a series of nuclear weapon test in 1948

2 Thermonuclear Reaction

It is of two of types

Fission reaction

Nuclear fission is either a nuclear reaction or a radioactive decay process in which the nucleus of an atom splits into smaller parts.

Fusion Reaction

Nuclear fusionis a reaction in which two or more atomic nuclei come very close and then collide at a very high speed and join to form a new nucleus.

3 Booster

Device in which a small amount of thermonuclear fuel is ignited by a fission reaction and produces neutrons that in turn enhance the fission reaction.

# data[].attributes.body
NEW TERMS AND THEIR MEANINGS

Indispensable  :- that one cannot do without;that cannot be allowed by bending the canonical rules.  adversary   :- an opponent or rival   tactical   :-of ,or relating to military operations that are smaller or more local than strategic  ones   Ballistic  :-or relating projectiles moving under their own momentum , air drag , gravity and sometimes rocket power   stovepipe  :-a channel for body of information which is compartmentalized in such a manner that some parties which might be interested in its use or able to utilize it are restricted from access to it

Shrapnel  :-a collective term for shot,fragments,or debris thrown out by an exploding shell or landmine

Spall  :-to break into small pieces

Bankruptcy  :-a legally declared or recognized condition of insolvency of a person or organization

Turret  :-an armoured , rotating gun installation, on a fort ,ship ,aircraft ,or armoured fighting vehicle   deterrence  :-the art of producing in one’s enemy the fear of attack   formidable  :- difficult to defeat or overcome  stockpile  :- a supply of something kept safe for future use.   Proliferation  :-the spread of biochemical , nuclear and other weapons  of mass destruction to countries not originally involved in developing them  Adherents  :-sticking to something   refurbish   :- to rebuild or replenish with all new material   reinvigorate:-to revitalise(to give new life ,energy ,activity ,or success to something )

# data[].attributes.body
Which of the following is not a form of nuclear radiation?

A) | beta
B) | gamma
C) | omega.
D) | alpha
E) | all of the above are forms of nuclear radiation

A nuclear fission chain reaction produces all of the following except

A) | extra neutrons that are split away from a nucleus.
B) | smaller atoms.
C) | energy.
D) | protons that split other atoms..
E) | all of the above are produced.

In a nuclear reactor, the control rods are made from fissionable material and they moderate the speed of the neutrons.

A) | True
B) | False.

The various types of nuclear reactors that have been constructed to furnish heat for the production of steam differ from each other in what ways?

A) | in what kind of moderator is used
B) | how the reactor core is cooled
C) | how the heat energy is used to generate steam
D) | they can differ in all of the above ways.
E) | they do not differ in any of the above ways

Which of the following hazards is not associated with a liquid metal breeder reactor (LMFBR)?

A) | little fissionable material is formed.
B) | a sodium explosion occurs if it comes in contact with water
C) | the plutonium by-product can be made into nuclear weapons and, therefore, poses a security risk
D) | reaction rates are very rapid
E) | all of the above are hazards associated with the LMFBR

The United States Department of Energy oversaw the production of nuclear weapons in such a way that there is little, if any, residual radioactive waste that now needs to be disposed of in the nuclear laboratories.

A) | True
B) | False.

Currently, nuclear power provides approximately ___ of the world's energy.

A) | less than 1%
B) | about 7%.
C) | about one-third
D) | nearly 75%

Despite the nuclear scares at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, nuclear power plant building projects increased by 200% over what was projected during the 1980s.

A) | True
B) | False.

The degree and kind of damage due to radiation varies in which of the following ways?

A) | kind of radiation
B) | duration of exposure
C) | amount of radiation
D) | types of cells irradiated
E) | all of the above.

Spent fuel rods and obsolete nuclear weapons are examples of

A) | decommissioned waste
B) | high-level nuclear waste.
C) | low-level nuclear waste
D) | recycled nuclear waste
E) | itinerant nuclear waste

The medical field is a large producer of low-level nuclear waste.

A) | True.

False

What is the tradition view of state-to-state war? Please select all that apply.
a) Inter-state war may be becoming increasingly obsolete..b) Inter-state war is rooted in our understanding of a Westphalian state system.c) Inter-state war is not based upon a Westphalian state-centric model.d) None of the options given are correct.

Where did the definition of war as "organized violence carried on by political units against each other" come from?
a) Thucydides.b) Quincy Wright.c) Hedley Bull..d) Karl von Clausewitz.

Which of the following aspects of this statement are true?: "War made the state, and the state made war."
a) It comes from the work of historical sociologist Charles Tilly..b) It applies to the development and use of atomic weapons.c) It is the primary argument of Robert Heinlein.d) It is used to explain civil conflict in Africa.

What are the characteristics of the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)? Please select all that apply.
a) It emphasizes the role of advances in military technology as bringing about radical change in the character of war..b) It neglects the complex political dimensions of warfare..c) It is a non-Western concept.

Why is State autonomy challenged in the "post-Westphalian" order?
a) Identity politics are increasingly important.b) Economic insecurity provokes civil conflict.c) Technological development and 'virtual war' have enabled Western intervention.d) All of the options given are correct..

'New wars' are supported by which types of activities?
a) Hostage-taking.b) Illegal trafficking of diamonds and drugs.c) Arms smuggling across weakly enforced borders.d) All of the options given are correct..

# data[].attributes.body
///////NAVEENA////////

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Europe is now a petri dish for hybrid war. Events of the past decade, not to mention the last few years, have reaffirmed the value of a concept that sought to explain a range of diverse, coercive instruments across the operational spectrum of war. Hybrid warfare is a term that sought to capture the blurring and blending of previously separate categories of conflict. It uses a blend of military, economic, diplomatic, criminal, and informational means to achieve desired political goals. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, has referred to these hybrid threats as an " inflection point " in modern war. Indeed, in the disordered post-Cold War world, hybrid warfare remains an excellent framework for understanding the changing character of war.

So why, at a recent off-the-record Washington gathering of Baltic and Central Europeans concerned about Russia (it was not hard to fill the room) did a high-ranking Estonian with substantial experience working on Russian issues express his frustration with the concept? Indeed, why do many Estonians, as well as their Baltic neighbors and even some Poles, Swedes and Finns, dislike the phrase? These concerns are worth considering, particularly since Estonia and its neighbors are the prime targets of this form of warfare. There are two apparent reasons for their concern. First, many in the Baltic region view the concept as merely another mechanism by which the West can avoid decisive action against Russia, particularly because NATO has not developed, really, an operational concept to address hybrid threats. The concept, according to this Estonian official, allows NATO to avoid action because a range of activities - from the aggressive use of disinformation by Moscow, to economic pressure, to bribery and threats, to use of "locals" to stir up protests - become conveniently categorized as being under the threshold of war. Indeed as one expert, James Sherr, has observed, in the hands of Russia hybrid warfare could " cripple a state before that state even realizes the conflict had begun," and yet it manages to "slip under NATO's threshold of perception and reaction." Sherr is right.

Today, NATO members are the objects of this form of force- not perpetrators of it. NATO, established as a defensive alliance against a clear cut territorial threat, is not structured to operate in a "perpetual competition" mindset that today's confrontation in Europe requires. In the past, NATO's readiness centered on the readiness of its conventional forces: It made clear that military forays into allied territory would be met with military opposition. But in the post-Cold War period, the United States and other allies are much less comfortable responding to actions that are in the gray areas of political subversion - areas at which Russia excels. In effect, NATO's focus on Article V - the provision that dates from the birth of the alliance in 1949 and states that an attack against one is an attack against all - may today be its fatal flaw. The provision requires that members " agree [emphasis mine] that if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense...will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force."

Hybrid threats provide the "perfect" conundrum: the injection of so much uncertainty that NATO collapses under its own principle of allied consensus. At what point does the alliance decide if the Lithuanian President, Dalia Grybauskaite, is correct when she remarked that Lithuania was "already under attack," with the first stage of confrontation taking place - informational war, propaganda and cyberattack? Watching tanks roll through the Fulda Gap in the Cold War, or now across the Bug River, or into Narva would provide much clearer evidence of war, but Russia is unlikely to make it easy for NATO to reach consensus. Moscow appears to be deliberately staying under the Article V threshold, while still pursuing its aggressive aims and seeking to destabilize NATO members. For decades, NATO leaders argued about coordinating against "out of area threats" and whether attacks in places such as the Middle East and Africa merited a NATO response. It is ironic that conflict in the very heart of Europe could lead to the same divisions.

The hybrid warfare concept gives many in the West the luxury of picking and choosing from a range of actions - a media campaign here, a cyber-intrusion there (and even the occasional political assassination) - and interpreting them as one-off isolated events. There is no need to connect the dots. Indeed, it is often easier to look at the unfinished page, suggestive of possibilities that become clear only with a deliberate completion of the picture. Inadvertently, the flexibility of the instruments inherent in hybrid warfare tempts policy makers to detach the specific tactics from the overarching political goals that drive a war. A war fought with hybrid means becomes thus an incomprehensible sequence of improvisations, disparate actions along various geographic fronts - "humanitarian convoys" followed by conventional war with artillery and tanks in Eastern Ukraine, "peacekeeping operations" in Transnistria, cyber-attacks in Estonia, vast disinformation campaigns on mass media, seemingly random forays of heavy bombers in the North Sea, submarine games in the Baltic Sea, and so on - that appear vaguely connected. But they are a part of a whole.

Hybrid tactics are not a random sequence of improvisations but reflect an order behind the spectrum of tools used. That makes it incumbent upon political leaders and strategic thinkers (not always one and the same) to fit such activities squarely within the political objectives discussed by Carl von Clausewitz, who explained that war was an extension of politics by other means. In thinking through the ongoing competition with Russia, we must keep in mind that "hybrid" refers to the means, not to the principles, goals, or nature of war. There is nothing inherent about the concept that prevents this. Indeed, the Russians have it down. We do not.
Nadia Schadlow is a senior program officer at the Smith Richardson Foundation who occasionally writes on defense and foreign policy related issues.
Photo credit: U.S. Army Europe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Problem with Hybrid Warfare - War on the Rocks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Europe is now a petri dish for hybrid war. Events of the past decade, not to mention the last few years, have reaffirmed the value of a concept that sought to explain a range of diverse, coercive instruments across the operational spectrum of war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Silently, the drone aircraft glides above the arid terrain of New Mexico - until it suddenly pivots out of control and plummets to the ground.

Then a mortar round rises from its launcher, arcs high and begins to descend towards its target - only to flare and explode in mid-flight.

On the desert floor, on top of a big, sand-coloured truck, a cubic mechanism pivots and fires an invisible infrared beam to zap one target after another. This High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator (HEL MD) is a prototype laser weapon developed for the US Army by aerospace giant Boeing of Chicago, Illinois. Inside the truck, Boeing electrophysics engineer Stephanie Blount stares at the targets on her laptop's screen and directs the laser using a handheld game controller. "It has a very game-like feel," she says.

That seems only natural: laser weapons are a staple of modern video games, and ray-guns of various sorts were common in science fiction for decades before the first real-life laser was demonstrated in 1960. But they are not a fantasy anymore. The Boeing prototype is just one of several such weapons developed in recent years in both the United States and Europe, largely thanks to the advent of relatively cheap, portable and robust lasers that generate their beams using optical fibres.

The output of these fibre weapons is measured in kilowatts (kW), orders of magnitude less than the megawatt-class devices once envisioned for the US Strategic Defense Initiative - an ultimately unsuccessful cold-war plan that sought to use lasers to disable ballistic missiles carrying nuclear warheads.

But the modern, less ambitious, weapons are on the brink of real-world deployment. Tests such as those of the Boeing system show that the lasers have enough power to overcome threats from terror groups - at a fraction of the price of conventional defences. "It's a very cost-effective solution to taking out cheaply made weapons like small mortars or rockets made out of sewer pipe," says Blount.

In late 2014, for example, the US Navy showed that a ship-mounted laser-weapon system called LaWS could target small boats, such as those used by terrorists and pirates. That experimental weapon is currently installed on the USS Ponce, an amphibious support ship in the Gulf.

Many challenges to full-scale deployment remain, warn developers, from the need to boost the weapons' power to the difficulty of operating a laser in fog and clouds. But specialists in defence and security are starting to take lasers seriously. "After a nearly half-century quest, the US military today is on the cusp of finally fielding operationally relevant directed-energy weapons," wrote Paul Scharre, an advanced-technology specialist at the Washington DC-based Center for a New American Security (CNAS), in a report on laser weapons released in April.

The power predicament

Laser weapons have long fascinated weapons developers - most notably during the heyday of the Strategic Defense Initiative, nicknamed Star Wars, in the 1980s and 1990s. US spending on laser-weapons research peaked in 1989 when, according to the CNAS report, the government spent the equivalent of US$2.4 billion in 2014 dollars. Funding has continued at lower levels ever since. Yet the original goal, of being able to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles, proved unattainable.

The trick with any laser weapon is to focus its energy into a spot that is small enough to heat up and damage the target - and to do that with a machine that is compact and portable enough for the battlefield. This is easier said than done. In 1996, for example, the US Air Force initiated the Airborne Laser project as one of its contributions to defence against ballistic missiles. Because it was impossible at the time to generate the required megawatts of optical power electrically, the developers chose a chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) that could be fuelled by a chemical reaction. But the COIL was so bulky that it could only be carried on a Boeing 747, and left little space for laser fuel. "It needed remote mixing units and chemicals weighing tens of thousands of pounds," says Paul Shattuck, head of directed-energy systems for Lockheed Martin Space Systems, which provided the project's beam-control technology.

Another major problem was the atmosphere, says Phillip Sprangle, senior scientist for directed-energy physics at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC. Not only was the beam scattered by dust and natural turbulence, he says, but its passage caused 'thermal blooming'. When the beam propagated at very high powers, Sprangle explains, "the atmosphere absorbed laser light, heating the air and causing the laser beam to spread out". That spreading, in turn, dissipated the laser's energy.

The good news for the Airborne Laser project was that this issue, at least, had a solution: adaptive optics technology similar to that used by astronomers to clarify their view of the stars (see ). The technology uses mirrors to automatically distort the laser beam in a way that cancels the effects of the turbulence, with the same result as a pair of glasses correcting for aberrations in the eye. "As the laser beam passes through the atmosphere," says Shattuck, "it cleans up, and it's nice and tight when it gets to the target."

By 2010, the adaptive optics was good enough for the Airborne Laser to destroy a ballistic missile in flight. By then, however, logistical issues such as the size problem had led the Department of Defense to lose its enthusiasm for energy weapons in general. It cancelled the Airborne Laser programme outright by early 2012. At the same time, the department's spending on high-energy lasers in general was falling; it dropped from $961 million in 2007 to $344 million in 2014.

Fibres in the spotlight

The money did not vanish entirely: attention was already shifting to fibre lasers as a way to deliver results more economically. Fibre lasers were invented in 1963, and since the 1990s they have been advanced almost entirely by IPG Photonics in Oxford, Massachusetts. Whereas other solid-state lasers use rigid rods, slabs or discs of crystal to generate the beam, and so have to be fairly large, fibre lasers use thin optical fibres that can be wrapped into compact coils (see 'Fibre power'). The fibres can collect their optical energy from brighter versions of the cheap laser diodes used in DVD players, and then amplify the light to higher power, with overall electrical-to-optical conversion efficiencies greater than 30%. This is at least double the efficiency typical of other solid-state lasers, and close to that of chemical lasers such as COIL. And, being intrinsically long and thin, the fibres have a high surface area to volume ratio and can radiate away waste heat very quickly - an ability that helps to give the lasers a long working life and low maintenance requirements.

These advantages first attracted attention during the 1990s, when fibre lasers began to be used to beef up optical signals carrying Internet data through undersea cables. But since the early 2000s, IPG has focused on developing kilowatt-class industrial lasers for welding, drilling and cutting - devices that also attracted the attention of military researchers.

Around 2010, recalls Shattuck, he and his colleagues at Lockheed Martin heard from Israeli civilians targeted by rockets launched from the Gaza Strip. "The mayor of a village stood up and said, 'Please, give me some kind of defence,'" Shattuck says. This inspired Lockheed Martin to develop the Area Defense Anti-Munitions (ADAM) system, which uses an off-the-shelf 10-kW laser from IPG to keep costs down. Since 2012, the company has shown that ADAM can disable targets such as boats, drones and simulated small-calibre rockets from about 1.5 kilometres away. Although unwilling to disclose the price of ADAM - or whether anybody has bought one - Lockheed Martin says that it is now ready to provide the system to customers.

Blount is less reticent about Boeing's HEL MD prototype, which also uses a commercial 10-kW fibre laser. With the system drawing its power from the vehicle engine or a separate generator, she says, "it takes less than two cups of fuel to fire the laser for long enough to disable many targets." This makes it much cheaper to use for defence than conventional missiles. "An inexpensive missile is $100,000 and that's one shot," says David DeYoung, Boeing's director of directed-energy systems. "To shoot a laser-weapon system once is less than $10."

Blount stresses that the resurgence of laser weapons owes at least as much to advanced image-recognition and targeting systems as to the laser itself. "The better the pointing and tracking system," she says, "the better able you are to put the beam on the most vulnerable point of a target."

Thanks to computerized aiming, HEL MD can operate in wholly autonomous mode, which Boeing tested successfully in May 2014 - although the trials uncovered an unexpected challenge. The weapon's laser beam is silent and invisible, and not all targets explode as they are destroyed, so an automated battle can be over before operators have noticed anything. "The engagements happen quickly, and unless you're staring at a screen 24-7 you'll never see them," Blount says. "So we've built sound in for whenever we fire the laser. We plan on taking advantage of lots of Star Trek and Star Wars sound bites."

Strength in numbers

Aiming and targeting may be battle-ready, but power is still a problem. A commercial laser's 10-kW output is at the low end of what is useful for laser weapons. And using fibres puts limits on the beam's power and quality - not least because at high powers, the cascade of photons surging through the fibre can heat it up faster than it can radiate the energy, and can thus cause damage. To avoid this, researchers are working to combine the output from several lasers.

The ideal way to do this would be 'coherent combining', in which the waves from each laser march together in tightly synchronized formation. This technique is widely used in radio and microwave applications, says Tso Yee Fan, a laser scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's defence-oriented Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington. But coherence is much tougher to achieve with visible and infrared light. The waves from each laser must have almost identical wavelengths, the planes of their oscillations must precisely align, and the peaks and troughs of each wave must coincide. "In radio-frequency or microwaves, the wavelength's a few centimetres," Fan says. "In optics, the wavelength's around a micrometre, so being able to do those kinds of controls has been really difficult."

But that may not matter much, says Sprangle. In 2006, he and his team reported computer simulations suggesting that an 'incoherent combination' of several fibre-laser beams hitting a single spot would be almost as effective as a coherent combination. With either approach, he says, "when you're propagating over long ranges through atmospheric turbulence, you get approximately the same power on the target". In 2009, his group confirmed this theory by using mirrors to combine 4 fibre-laser beams into a 5-centimetre spot on a target more than 3 kilometres away.

Building on Sprangle's work, the US Office of Naval Research has developed the 30-kW LaWS, which incoherently combines six commercial fibre-lasers. LaWS has been installed on the USS Ponce since September 2014, and has been tested on objects such as small boats and drones.

The missile-specialist MBDA Germany in Schrobenhausen has developed a similar approach. In October 2012, the firm successfully used its 40-kW combined fibre-beam system to destroy model artillery shells towed through the air some 2 kilometres away. MBDA's tests have also helped to debunk the science-fiction idea that reflective armour would defend against laser weapons. They found that any dust on the mirrored surface would get burned in, and lead to the destruction of the target even faster than with a non-reflective surface.

Markus Martinstetter from MBDA's Future Systems Directorate argues that high-precision targeting minimizes the chances of accidentally hurting bystanders while trying to shoot down targets, especially compared with conventional explosives. "There is no risk from fragmenting ammunition and we only start the irradiation when the aim point is exactly on target," he says.

Lockheed Martin is also working on laser weapons that can take on targets that are more complex or farther away than can be tackled by its low-cost ADAM system. In March, for example, the company reported that its Advanced Test High Energy Asset (ATHENA) system could disable the running engine of a small truck mounted on a test platform. ATHENA uses a similar adaptive-optics system to the Airborne Laser, coupled with Lockheed's Accelerated Laser Demonstration Initiative (ALADIN) fibre-laser system.

Boeing

ALADIN combines the output of several fibre lasers, each with a slightly different wavelength, into a single 30-kW beam. This 'wavelength beam combining' approach originated at the Lincoln Laboratory and is similar to methods that channel Internet traffic into fibre-optic cables. Fan notes that this method is easier than coherent combining, but gives better-quality beams than incoherent combining, so it can more easily hit smaller targets from longer distances.

Jason Ellis, a visiting fellow at the CNAS and lead author of the think tank's laser-weapons report, says that such developments convince him that fibre-laser weapons are coming of age - and that emerging advances could take them to hundreds of kilowatts and extend their range to hundreds of kilometres.

Despite such advances, a February 2014 poll of US national-security specialists found that just one-fifth believed that directed-energy weapon technologies would be mature within a decade.

Michael Carter, a programme manager for photon science at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, cautions that today's lasers are a very long way from their science-fiction counterparts. "They're not yet the Star Trek phaser," he says. "People talk about speed-of-light engagement, but it still takes time to demolish targets. At the most basic level, if you can't see it - if there's too much rain or fog - your laser can't hit it." He suggests that the greatest value of the current generation of demonstration systems may be in working out how to handle such broader challenges before better lasers emerge. "Don't mistake what they're doing on the USS Ponce for a new strategic superiority," Carter warns. "It may be the first step in that direction but it's not going to change the game by itself."

Even the weapons companies are cautious not to overstate their case. For example, MBDA expects that it will take 3-5 years for truly operational systems to appear even in the tens of kilowatts range. And in some circumstances - such as a foggy day - conventional weapons will always be more effective. "You give the defender of the future both, and put the choice in their hands," DeYoung recommends.

Despite their modest capabilities, Scharre claims that fibre-laser weapons could find a niche in US military defence in 5-10 years. "They may not be as grand and strategic as the Star Wars concept," he says, "but they could save lives, protect US bases, ships and service members."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Military technology: Laser weapons get real

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Silently, the drone aircraft glides above the arid terrain of New Mexico - until it suddenly pivots out of control and plummets to the ground. Then a mortar round rises from its launcher, arcs high and begins to descend towards its target - only to flare and explode in mid-flight.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Silently, the drone aircraft glides above the arid terrain of New Mexico - until it suddenly pivots out of control and plummets to the ground.

Then a mortar round rises from its launcher, arcs high and begins to descend towards its target - only to flare and explode in mid-flight.

On the desert floor, on top of a big, sand-coloured truck, a cubic mechanism pivots and fires an invisible infrared beam to zap one target after another. This High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator (HEL MD) is a prototype laser weapon developed for the US Army by aerospace giant Boeing of Chicago, Illinois. Inside the truck, Boeing electrophysics engineer Stephanie Blount stares at the targets on her laptop's screen and directs the laser using a handheld game controller. "It has a very game-like feel," she says.

That seems only natural: laser weapons are a staple of modern video games, and ray-guns of various sorts were common in science fiction for decades before the first real-life laser was demonstrated in 1960. But they are not a fantasy anymore. The Boeing prototype is just one of several such weapons developed in recent years in both the United States and Europe, largely thanks to the advent of relatively cheap, portable and robust lasers that generate their beams using optical fibres.

The output of these fibre weapons is measured in kilowatts (kW), orders of magnitude less than the megawatt-class devices once envisioned for the US Strategic Defense Initiative - an ultimately unsuccessful cold-war plan that sought to use lasers to disable ballistic missiles carrying nuclear warheads.

But the modern, less ambitious, weapons are on the brink of real-world deployment. Tests such as those of the Boeing system show that the lasers have enough power to overcome threats from terror groups - at a fraction of the price of conventional defences. "It's a very cost-effective solution to taking out cheaply made weapons like small mortars or rockets made out of sewer pipe," says Blount.

In late 2014, for example, the US Navy showed that a ship-mounted laser-weapon system called LaWS could target small boats, such as those used by terrorists and pirates. That experimental weapon is currently installed on the USS Ponce, an amphibious support ship in the Gulf.

Many challenges to full-scale deployment remain, warn developers, from the need to boost the weapons' power to the difficulty of operating a laser in fog and clouds. But specialists in defence and security are starting to take lasers seriously. "After a nearly half-century quest, the US military today is on the cusp of finally fielding operationally relevant directed-energy weapons," wrote Paul Scharre, an advanced-technology specialist at the Washington DC-based Center for a New American Security (CNAS), in a report on laser weapons released in April.

The power predicament

Laser weapons have long fascinated weapons developers - most notably during the heyday of the Strategic Defense Initiative, nicknamed Star Wars, in the 1980s and 1990s. US spending on laser-weapons research peaked in 1989 when, according to the CNAS report, the government spent the equivalent of US$2.4 billion in 2014 dollars. Funding has continued at lower levels ever since. Yet the original goal, of being able to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles, proved unattainable.

The trick with any laser weapon is to focus its energy into a spot that is small enough to heat up and damage the target - and to do that with a machine that is compact and portable enough for the battlefield. This is easier said than done. In 1996, for example, the US Air Force initiated the Airborne Laser project as one of its contributions to defence against ballistic missiles. Because it was impossible at the time to generate the required megawatts of optical power electrically, the developers chose a chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) that could be fuelled by a chemical reaction. But the COIL was so bulky that it could only be carried on a Boeing 747, and left little space for laser fuel. "It needed remote mixing units and chemicals weighing tens of thousands of pounds," says Paul Shattuck, head of directed-energy systems for Lockheed Martin Space Systems, which provided the project's beam-control technology.

Another major problem was the atmosphere, says Phillip Sprangle, senior scientist for directed-energy physics at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC. Not only was the beam scattered by dust and natural turbulence, he says, but its passage caused 'thermal blooming'. When the beam propagated at very high powers, Sprangle explains, "the atmosphere absorbed laser light, heating the air and causing the laser beam to spread out". That spreading, in turn, dissipated the laser's energy.

The good news for the Airborne Laser project was that this issue, at least, had a solution: adaptive optics technology similar to that used by astronomers to clarify their view of the stars (see ). The technology uses mirrors to automatically distort the laser beam in a way that cancels the effects of the turbulence, with the same result as a pair of glasses correcting for aberrations in the eye. "As the laser beam passes through the atmosphere," says Shattuck, "it cleans up, and it's nice and tight when it gets to the target."

By 2010, the adaptive optics was good enough for the Airborne Laser to destroy a ballistic missile in flight. By then, however, logistical issues such as the size problem had led the Department of Defense to lose its enthusiasm for energy weapons in general. It cancelled the Airborne Laser programme outright by early 2012. At the same time, the department's spending on high-energy lasers in general was falling; it dropped from $961 million in 2007 to $344 million in 2014.

Fibres in the spotlight

The money did not vanish entirely: attention was already shifting to fibre lasers as a way to deliver results more economically. Fibre lasers were invented in 1963, and since the 1990s they have been advanced almost entirely by IPG Photonics in Oxford, Massachusetts. Whereas other solid-state lasers use rigid rods, slabs or discs of crystal to generate the beam, and so have to be fairly large, fibre lasers use thin optical fibres that can be wrapped into compact coils (see 'Fibre power'). The fibres can collect their optical energy from brighter versions of the cheap laser diodes used in DVD players, and then amplify the light to higher power, with overall electrical-to-optical conversion efficiencies greater than 30%. This is at least double the efficiency typical of other solid-state lasers, and close to that of chemical lasers such as COIL. And, being intrinsically long and thin, the fibres have a high surface area to volume ratio and can radiate away waste heat very quickly - an ability that helps to give the lasers a long working life and low maintenance requirements.

These advantages first attracted attention during the 1990s, when fibre lasers began to be used to beef up optical signals carrying Internet data through undersea cables. But since the early 2000s, IPG has focused on developing kilowatt-class industrial lasers for welding, drilling and cutting - devices that also attracted the attention of military researchers.

Around 2010, recalls Shattuck, he and his colleagues at Lockheed Martin heard from Israeli civilians targeted by rockets launched from the Gaza Strip. "The mayor of a village stood up and said, 'Please, give me some kind of defence,'" Shattuck says. This inspired Lockheed Martin to develop the Area Defense Anti-Munitions (ADAM) system, which uses an off-the-shelf 10-kW laser from IPG to keep costs down. Since 2012, the company has shown that ADAM can disable targets such as boats, drones and simulated small-calibre rockets from about 1.5 kilometres away. Although unwilling to disclose the price of ADAM - or whether anybody has bought one - Lockheed Martin says that it is now ready to provide the system to customers.

Blount is less reticent about Boeing's HEL MD prototype, which also uses a commercial 10-kW fibre laser. With the system drawing its power from the vehicle engine or a separate generator, she says, "it takes less than two cups of fuel to fire the laser for long enough to disable many targets." This makes it much cheaper to use for defence than conventional missiles. "An inexpensive missile is $100,000 and that's one shot," says David DeYoung, Boeing's director of directed-energy systems. "To shoot a laser-weapon system once is less than $10."

Blount stresses that the resurgence of laser weapons owes at least as much to advanced image-recognition and targeting systems as to the laser itself. "The better the pointing and tracking system," she says, "the better able you are to put the beam on the most vulnerable point of a target."

Thanks to computerized aiming, HEL MD can operate in wholly autonomous mode, which Boeing tested successfully in May 2014 - although the trials uncovered an unexpected challenge. The weapon's laser beam is silent and invisible, and not all targets explode as they are destroyed, so an automated battle can be over before operators have noticed anything. "The engagements happen quickly, and unless you're staring at a screen 24-7 you'll never see them," Blount says. "So we've built sound in for whenever we fire the laser. We plan on taking advantage of lots of Star Trek and Star Wars sound bites."

Strength in numbers

Aiming and targeting may be battle-ready, but power is still a problem. A commercial laser's 10-kW output is at the low end of what is useful for laser weapons. And using fibres puts limits on the beam's power and quality - not least because at high powers, the cascade of photons surging through the fibre can heat it up faster than it can radiate the energy, and can thus cause damage. To avoid this, researchers are working to combine the output from several lasers.

The ideal way to do this would be 'coherent combining', in which the waves from each laser march together in tightly synchronized formation. This technique is widely used in radio and microwave applications, says Tso Yee Fan, a laser scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's defence-oriented Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington. But coherence is much tougher to achieve with visible and infrared light. The waves from each laser must have almost identical wavelengths, the planes of their oscillations must precisely align, and the peaks and troughs of each wave must coincide. "In radio-frequency or microwaves, the wavelength's a few centimetres," Fan says. "In optics, the wavelength's around a micrometre, so being able to do those kinds of controls has been really difficult."

But that may not matter much, says Sprangle. In 2006, he and his team reported computer simulations suggesting that an 'incoherent combination' of several fibre-laser beams hitting a single spot would be almost as effective as a coherent combination. With either approach, he says, "when you're propagating over long ranges through atmospheric turbulence, you get approximately the same power on the target". In 2009, his group confirmed this theory by using mirrors to combine 4 fibre-laser beams into a 5-centimetre spot on a target more than 3 kilometres away.

Building on Sprangle's work, the US Office of Naval Research has developed the 30-kW LaWS, which incoherently combines six commercial fibre-lasers. LaWS has been installed on the USS Ponce since September 2014, and has been tested on objects such as small boats and drones.

The missile-specialist MBDA Germany in Schrobenhausen has developed a similar approach. In October 2012, the firm successfully used its 40-kW combined fibre-beam system to destroy model artillery shells towed through the air some 2 kilometres away. MBDA's tests have also helped to debunk the science-fiction idea that reflective armour would defend against laser weapons. They found that any dust on the mirrored surface would get burned in, and lead to the destruction of the target even faster than with a non-reflective surface.

Markus Martinstetter from MBDA's Future Systems Directorate argues that high-precision targeting minimizes the chances of accidentally hurting bystanders while trying to shoot down targets, especially compared with conventional explosives. "There is no risk from fragmenting ammunition and we only start the irradiation when the aim point is exactly on target," he says.

Lockheed Martin is also working on laser weapons that can take on targets that are more complex or farther away than can be tackled by its low-cost ADAM system. In March, for example, the company reported that its Advanced Test High Energy Asset (ATHENA) system could disable the running engine of a small truck mounted on a test platform. ATHENA uses a similar adaptive-optics system to the Airborne Laser, coupled with Lockheed's Accelerated Laser Demonstration Initiative (ALADIN) fibre-laser system.

Boeing

ALADIN combines the output of several fibre lasers, each with a slightly different wavelength, into a single 30-kW beam. This 'wavelength beam combining' approach originated at the Lincoln Laboratory and is similar to methods that channel Internet traffic into fibre-optic cables. Fan notes that this method is easier than coherent combining, but gives better-quality beams than incoherent combining, so it can more easily hit smaller targets from longer distances.

Jason Ellis, a visiting fellow at the CNAS and lead author of the think tank's laser-weapons report, says that such developments convince him that fibre-laser weapons are coming of age - and that emerging advances could take them to hundreds of kilowatts and extend their range to hundreds of kilometres.

Despite such advances, a February 2014 poll of US national-security specialists found that just one-fifth believed that directed-energy weapon technologies would be mature within a decade.

Michael Carter, a programme manager for photon science at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, cautions that today's lasers are a very long way from their science-fiction counterparts. "They're not yet the Star Trek phaser," he says. "People talk about speed-of-light engagement, but it still takes time to demolish targets. At the most basic level, if you can't see it - if there's too much rain or fog - your laser can't hit it." He suggests that the greatest value of the current generation of demonstration systems may be in working out how to handle such broader challenges before better lasers emerge. "Don't mistake what they're doing on the USS Ponce for a new strategic superiority," Carter warns. "It may be the first step in that direction but it's not going to change the game by itself."

Even the weapons companies are cautious not to overstate their case. For example, MBDA expects that it will take 3-5 years for truly operational systems to appear even in the tens of kilowatts range. And in some circumstances - such as a foggy day - conventional weapons will always be more effective. "You give the defender of the future both, and put the choice in their hands," DeYoung recommends.

Despite their modest capabilities, Scharre claims that fibre-laser weapons could find a niche in US military defence in 5-10 years. "They may not be as grand and strategic as the Star Wars concept," he says, "but they could save lives, protect US bases, ships and service members."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Military technology: Laser weapons get real

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Silently, the drone aircraft glides above the arid terrain of New Mexico - until it suddenly pivots out of control and plummets to the ground. Then a mortar round rises from its launcher, arcs high and begins to descend towards its target - only to flare and explode in mid-flight.

# data[].attributes.body
1.http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=825416&newsearch=true&queryText=Hybrid%20Power%20Systems

2.http://www.army-technology.com/projects/groun-combat-vehicle-gcv/

3.http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsbae-northrop-reveal-infographic-details-hybrid-ground-combat-vehicle/

4.http://www.military.com/video/combat-vehicles/armored-vehicles/the-hybrid-electric-drive-combat-vehicle-is-real/3839155324001/

5.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9xqdoDc3oI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Power & Energy Systems Integration Laboratory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
BAE Systems ' Proven Combat Vehicle Electric Drive History

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Combat Simulation & Integration Laboratory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overview of BAE Systems-Ground Systems in Santa Clara, California, capabilities in design of Hybrid Propulsion for combat vehicles. Including overview of Power Electronics Development Laboratory(PEDL), Power & Energy Systems Integration Laboratory(P&E SIL), Combat Simulation & Integration Laboratory(CSIL). BAE Systems' Proven Combat Vehicle Electric Drive History including prototypes and Future Combat Systems(FCS) efforts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
slow motion bullet impacts and vz.58 rifle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Like us on facebook for more videos, pics, updates, website discounts, giveaways, and more: https://www.facebook.com/czechpoint.usa CzechPoint, Inc. is the USA importer and distributor for Czech Small Arms (C.S.A). C.S.A. is a firearms manufacturer in Jablunka, Czech Republic. Please see our website (shown in the video) for parts, magazines, and C.S.A.

# data[].attributes.body
1)http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

2)https://padlet-uploads.storage.googleapis.com/72671533/36464787bcf11e53ad37449f6a1086c82fc4dc84/3c743868ecbed1913c94d95025e16219.pdf

3)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFjGbOyd2ek

4)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PqAk-qianA

5)http://www.nature.com/news/military-technology-laser-weapons-get-real-1.17613

6)http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_FutureDefenseIndustry_FitzGeraldSayler.pdf

7)http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/Nuclear-Weapons-Report_FN.pdf

8)http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073128/

____________________________

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapons

# data[].attributes.body
1.http://atomicarchive.com/Docs/pdfs/00416630.pdf

2.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swUA33FGXZU

3.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNYe_UaWZ3U

4.http://s280.photobucket.com/user/khawja/media/bendib-red-alert.jpg.html

5.http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NWFZ

6.https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQEbsWYDfIFz1UwW1qF5-bUrnyqPnqcq_5sU0Bg5AJL04O0E5xp

7.https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQyrEW13-w2V9xf0o_E4PypLSrwl7cm27vXmvA5URylHDekdDMSVg

# data[].attributes.body
<<<<<Damini>>>>

# data[].attributes.body
I also found my article at google. I found my article at atomi archieve

# data[].attributes.body
hey Damini,where did you find your article,it was amazing...

i found my article from google when i was searching for an article on energy weapon technology.Then i found an article written by Jason.B.Ellis.

# data[].attributes.body
Weapons are needed because it helps in securing the country.

Every coin has 2 faces.Similarly wisely use of weapon by acountry is impo

# data[].attributes.body
Nuclear weapons are basically engineering ,chemical,physical arrangements which cause nuclear explosive.

This are the result of basic nuclear fusion and fission reactiom.

# data[].attributes.headline
why do we need weapons ?Are they  must for a country????<<<>>>

# data[].attributes.subject
why do we need weapons ?Are they  must for a country????<<<>>>

# data[].attributes.body
Ancient inventors
Archimedes may have used mirrors acting collectively as a parabolic reflector to burn ships attacking syracuse.Main article:Archimedes Heat Ray
According to legend, the concept of the "burning mirror" or death ray began with Archimedes who created a mirror with an adjustable focal length (or more likely, a series of mirrors focused on a common point) to focus sunlight on ships of the Roman fleet as they invaded Syracuse, setting them on fire.Historians point out that the earliest accounts of the battle did not mention a "burning mirror", but merely stated that Archimedes's ingenuity combined with a way to hurl fire were relevant to the victory. Some attempts to replicate this feat have had some success; in particular, an experiment by students at MIT showed that a mirror-based weapon was at least possible, if not necessarily practical.

Robert Watson-Watt

In 1935, the British Air Ministry, asked Robert Watson -Watt of the Radio Research Station  whether a "death ray " was possible. He and colleague Arnold Wilkins quickly concluded that it was not feasible, but as a consequence suggested using radio for the detection of aircraft and this started the development of radar in Britain.

Engine-stopping rays

Engine-stopping rays are a variant that occurs in fiction and myth. Such stories were circulating in Britain around 1938. The tales varied but in general terms told of tourists whose car engine suddenly died and were then approached by a German soldier who told them that they had to wait. The soldier returned a short time later to say that the engine would now work and the tourists drove off. A possible origin of some of these stories arises from the testing of the television transmitter in Feldberg, Germany. Because electrical noise from car engines would interfere with field strength measurements, sentries would stop all traffic in the vicinity for the twenty minutes or so needed for a test. A distorted retelling of the events might give rise to the idea that a transmission killed the engine.

Modern automobile engines are not mechanically but electronically controlled. Disabling the electronics can indeed stop the engine. This has been implemented in OnStar, which has a remote control feature, but this is not a weapon. It is an add-on to the electronics of the car. Because a car is operating on a closed system, it would be impossible to use an electronic means of disengaging an engine, short of electrocuting it via laser or pulse weaponry. See also Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP), which is known for its engine-stopping effect, but is an undirected -energy weapon.

In 2015, Lockheed Martin reported a demonstration of the ATHENA Laser Weapons System that disabled the engine of a truck from a distance of one mile.

Tesla

Tesla (1856–1943), a noted inventor, scientist and electrical engineer, developed early high frequency technologies. Tesla worked on plans for a directed-energy weapon from the early 1900s until his death. In 1937, Tesla composed a treatise entitled The Art of Projecting Concentrated Non-dispersive Energy through the Natural Media concerning charged particle beams.

In the later phases of World War 2,Nazi Germany increasingly put its hopes on research into technologically revolutionary secret weapons, the WunderWaffen.

Among the directed-energy weapons the Nazis investigated were X-Ray beam weapons developed under Heinz Schmellenmeier, Richard Gans and Fritz Houtermans. They built an electron accelerator called Rheotron (invented by Max Steenbeck at Siemens in the 1930s, these were later called Betatronsby the Americans) to generate hard X-ray synchroton beams for the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM). The intent was to pre-ionize ignition in aircraft engines and hence serve as anti-aircraft DEW and bring planes down into the reach of the FLAK. The Rheotron was captured by the Americans in Burggrub on April 14,

# data[].attributes.headline
what are the problems we face by using energy weapons??<<<<<>>>>>

# data[].attributes.subject
what are the problems we face by using energy weapons??<<<<<>>>>>

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War 3 Main Weapon ? Laser Cannon Against Rocket/Drone and Missille - LaWS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Laser Weapon System (in English : Laser Weapon System ) A Directed-energy weapon in the Navy, America has developed. The field on the ship in 2014 for Zmayhay Yvasas Pvns installed. The laser weapon to use against UAVs and small boats invasive made ​​and now the ability to engage with missiles, large aircraft, ships and not underwater targets.

# data[].attributes.body
A directed-energy weapon (DEW) emits highly focused ener, transferring that energy to a target to damage it.

Potential applications of this technology include anti-personnel weapon systems, potential missile defense system, and the disabling of lightly armored vehicles such as cars, drones, jet skis, and electronic devices such as mobile phones.

The energy can come in various forms:

Electromagnetic Radiation, including radio frequency, microwave, lasers and masers.

Particles with mass, in particle beam weapons (technically a form of micro-projectile weapon)

sound, in sonic weapons.

# data[].attributes.body
A directed-energy weapon (DEW) emits highly focused energy, transferring that energy to a target to damage it.

Potential applications of this technology include anti-personnel weapon systems, potential missile defense system, and the disabling of lightly armored vehicles such as cars, drones, jet skis, and electronic devices such as mobile phones.[1][2]

The energy can come in various forms:

Electromagnetic radiation, including radio frequency, microwave, lasers and masers

Particles with mass, in particle-beam weapons (technically a form of micro-projectile weapon)

Sound, in sonic weapons

# data[].attributes.headline
how the energy weapons came into existence

# data[].attributes.subject
how the energy weapons came into existence

# data[].attributes.body
The nation’s stockpile of nuclear weapons has included about fifty designed by the Laboratory, each having unique nuclear yield, size, weight, shape, ballistic performance, and safety features. The Mark 5 was a smaller and lighter implosion weapon than previous designs. Its weight was one-third that of the Hiroshima weapon and one-half that of the Nagasaki weapon. The nuclear warhead was loaded through the doors in the casing. The Mark 7, which could be carried on the outside of an airplane rather than in a bomb bay, added nuclear capability to smaller, faster fighter aircraft. The Mark 8, an early penetration bomb, could penetrate 22 feet of reinforced concrete, 90 feet of hard sand, 120 feet of clay, or 5 inches of armor plate before detonating. The Mark 17 was the first deliverable thermonuclear weapon. This massive bomb weighed 21 tons and could be carried in a B-36 after modifications were made to the bomb bay. Pilots who test-dropped the weapon reported that the plane rose hundreds of feet after the weapon was dropped, as if the bomb released the plane rather than the reverse. Two weapons armed with the W28 warhead. The W28 warhead was a high-yield, small-diameter thermonuclear device. The Mark 19, a projectile weapon, added nuclear capability to artillery that previously fired conventional shells.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

The rapidly developing capability in fission weapon design made it possible to design a weapon that would perform as desired when desired and yet that would have only a vanishingly small probability of producing a measurable nuclear yield through an accidental detonation of the high explosive

Another major development in nuclear weapon safety has to do with the high explosives themselves. Most of the explosives that have been used in nuclear weapons are of intermediate sensitivity.

A final development worthy of attention is the advent of “weapon systems.” This term refers to the integration of a carrier missile and its warhead, that is. to the specific tailoring of the warhead to the weight, shape, and size characteristics of the missile—as in the case of a Minuteman ICBM or a submarine-launched ballistic missile

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
//// The Largest Nuclear Bomb //// Tsar Bomba

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Documentary: TSAR Bomb and Thermonuclear Warhead - - The largest nuclear bomb ever tested.. October 30, 1961... The Tsar Bomb.. Soviet era 50 megaton = 50 millions tons of TNT. Total destruction - 15 mile radius.. 3rd degree burns - 64 mile radius .. visible 600 miles away.

# data[].attributes.headline
WEAPON  TECHNOLOGY                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

# data[].attributes.subject
WEAPON  TECHNOLOGY                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

# data[].attributes.body
Directed-Energy Weapons:Promise and ProspectsAPRIL 20156|The Department of Defense (DOD) must modernize its forces to meet growing anti-access operational challenges within a sharply constrained  environment. It has launched a new Defense Innovation Initiative to identify promising technologies and operational concepts to secure and retain U.S. military advantage. In this con-text, directed-energy (DE) weapons, including high-energy lasers (HEL), high-power microwaves (HPM) and related radiofrequency technolo-gies, offer the prospect of cost-effective precision attack or enhanced point defense and can provide warfighters with flexible nonkinetic employment options. But any treatment of the role, relevance and importance of DE weapons to the U.S. defense posture must from the outset deal with the ele-phant in the room: a history of overpromise and underperformance. DOD’s long-standing quest to develop high-energy lasers for ballistic missile defence  in decades past, the well-funded, large-scale and high-profile programs such as the Airborne or Space-Based Lasers  pushed the art of the possible but ultimately failed to deliver viable operational solutions to identified threats. Ironically, today, despite resource levels that are inadequate to fully exploit the potential of directed energy weapons, there is substantial and growing evidence that laser and microwave weapon systems are finally coming of age for battlefield use. Indeed, DE weapons have finally demonstrated sufficient technical maturity that they may be integrated into naval, air and ground force structure for various mission applications within the next decade. While more modest in power and capabil-ity than previous large scale DE programs, modern HEL and HPM weapons can help defend ships and bases from some forms of attack; enhance the performance of existing combat identification, self-protection and other systems; and provide novel counterelectronic attack options. As DOD seeks EXECUTIVE SUMMARYBy Jason EllisCNAS.ORG|7next-generation technologies and operating con-cepts to offset growing foreign military capabilities, it should seek to close the continuing gap between the warfighting potential of directed-energy weap-ons and their actual performance to date. While noteworthy technical progress is evident, there is nothing inevitable about success. And while cur-rent developments can lead to a set of battlefield weapons that increase U.S. combat power, they are not yet game-changers. Ultimately, for DE weapons to become seri-ous offset candidates — those technologies that enable U.S. forces to maintain battlefield superior-ity against any adversary — DOD must become serious about their development. While some technical areas can leverage advances in commer-cial technologies, there is no commercial market for systems that can effectively counter high-end threats. Therefore, development of substantially more capable DE weapon systems will require that DOD actively shape next-generation capabili-ties. Their prospective payoff in mission critical areas warrants focused and sustained senior leader attention. To realize the capability-enhancing promise of DE weapons in a cost-effective and time-efficient man-ner, DOD should: •Develop, and communicate, a DOD-wide strategic plan. Defense planning efforts for DE weapons have typically been prospective in nature, aligned with future capabilities — should they eventually be developed. Today, even as select weapon systems appear to have reached a point of operational maturity for some missions, their role — and that of subsequent systems — in the defense posture is unclear. DOD needs a game plan: an institutional strategy to develop and field suitable DE weapon systems for the department’s highest priorities.•Empower, and hold accountable, a DOD cham-pion. Today’s directed-energy developments are largely stovepiped, loosely coordinated under a Communities of Interest framework. Such an approach neither effectively marshals scarce resources toward closing operational capability gaps nor drives the development of operation-ally relevant weapon systems aligned with DOD’s strategic priorities. DOD should build on the existing HEL-Joint Technology Office (HEL-JTO), establishing a joint directed-energy weapon program office to help drive mission-focused programmatic outcomes in a context of time and budget constraints. •Resource to effect. The current fiscal context is clearly the realm of hard choices, but at a ballpark fiscal year 2014 investment of $405.3 million for DE weapons, DOD spends (adjusted for inflation) just 36 percent of what it spent in 2007. If DOD is to field operationally meaningful DE weapons, it should increase spending by two to three times for HEL and by five to 10 times for HPM. With this plus-up, spending would rise to roughly half what DOD spent at the end of the C old Wa r.•Harvest the low-hanging fruit. DOD has begun to integrate some directed-energy technologies but has not yet fully capitalized on success-fully demonstrated high-power radio-frequency weapon developments. At the same time, key solid-state and combined beam fiber HEL programs will likely be available to transition to the warfighter within the next decade. DOD should push the most promising developments forward, ultimately considering limited-quantity While noteworthy technical progress is evident, there is nothing inevitable about successDirected-Energy Weapons:Promise and ProspectsAPRIL 20158|procurements of those systems that address pri-ority theater warfighting capability gaps.•Invest for longer-term success. DOD conducts research and engineering to create technology surprise for potential adversaries. Yet, current developments largely cater to the lower end of the threat spectrum (for example, unmanned aerial vehicles or small boats). Ultimately, if higher-end threats (for example, high-speed ballistic or cruise missiles) require substantially more capable laser and/or HPM weapon systems, DOD should allocate a greater share of available resources to develop and field effective high-end DE capabilities. •Conduct a net assessment and actively moni-tor foreign developments. Globalization both erodes longevity in technological superiority and facilitates more rapid development of next-gen-eration technologies. Potential U.S. adversaries benefit from the same underlying technology trends and, in some cases, aggressively seek to counter U.S. military superiority. DOD should increase its coverage of relevant foreign scientific and technical developments, both for early warn-ing and to identify technology breakthroughs and potential opportunities. It should also con-duct a net assessment of foreign developments on the U.S. defense posture.•Put directed-energy weapons in context. Directed-energy weapons are not silver bullets, but rather one of a broader set of tools in the warfighter’s toolbox. Taken together, the paral-lel advances in directed energy, cybersecurity and electronic warfare could — if operated as a cohesive system — provide the nation an impor-tant, if dynamic, qualitative military edge. While these functional areas are doctrinally linked, they are stovepiped technically and not well-integrated operationally. An enhanced focus on combined directed energy/electronic warfare/cyberexperimentation and wargaming would help DOD appropriately adjust its warfighting