• Russia
  • Military strategy
  • YouTube Channel
  • About
    ▲
    • Privacy Policy
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Romeo Squared

Defense with a Baltic edge

  • Russia
  • Military strategy
  • YouTube Channel
  • About
    • Privacy Policy

Synthetic biology creates concerns about proliferation of biological weapons

2018-08-17 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

Al Mauroni in War on the Rocks about the advances in synthetic biology which can make it much easier to produce biological weapons:

Synthetic biology is a relatively recent technology whose future applications are being increasingly discussed within industry and academic circles. Like other technologies, it has potential dual-use (commercial and military) applications. As much as scientists and engineers are looking forward to creating new commercial processes and products with this capability, some experts are warning that synthetic biology could also lead to new military capabilities — specifically, new biological warfare agents and diseases that could be dangerous in the wrong hands. The John Hopkins Center for Health Security recently hosted a group exercise in which a bioengineered virus called “Clade X” was deliberately released by a violent extremist group, resulting in 150 million dead after 20 months. Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute warns that synthetic biology could allow the development of “a super pathogen threatening the survival of large populations, and even civilization.”

There is something particularly creepy about biological weapons. The immediate impact of nuclear or chemical weapons means that you know that an attack has taken place.1 With biological weapons people just start dying for no obvious reason.

It seems possible that we’ll face serious non-proliferation issues for biological weapons as synthetic biology matures as a technology.


  1. Well, at least you’ll normally know that a nuclear or chemical attack takes place. Technically speaking the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko was a nuclear attack, and Sergey Skripal was poisoned with a chemical weapon. But in those cases the weapons weren’t used as weapons of mass destruction. ↩

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit

Related

Filed Under: Nuclear weapons Tagged With: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Anders Puck Nielsen is the writer of the Romeo Squared blog. He is a military analyst at the Center for Maritime Operations at the Royal Danish Defense College.

Reader Interactions

< Previous
Next >

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Primary Sidebar

Follow blog

Follow blog on Twitter
Follow blog on Facebook

Featured

Russia’s A2/AD strategy is a myth

It is time to let go of the idea of impenetrable A2/AD bubbles. Russia does not have the technical capabilities to do it, and politically it is hard to see why they would even want to. We need to start thinking about Russia’s missiles as a layered defense system instead. That is the point of this conference paper.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Romeo Squared