| Many states and organizations have developed biological weapons programs. In response to that threat the U.S. defense strategy includes the option for a preemptive strike against a WMD target if it poses a clear and present danger to the U.S. or its interests. Recently President Bush has made it clear that preemptive strike is a real option, not just a threat.;Through customary international law and UN-based international law, preemptive strike can be justified under certain circumstances. While the International Court of Justice has issued rulings that applied stringent criteria on what constitutes an armed attack and legitimizes a self-defense response, in other rulings they have been unwilling or unable to rule out the use, or threat of use, of force as self-defense. With the lack of specific and clear criteria on the use of anticipatory self-defense in the international community, individual nations are left to develop their own interpretation of preemptive strike legality.;The U.S. has historically reserved the right of anticipatory self-defense, and has exercised that right. Large advances have been made and the U.S. has the ability to conduct a preemptive strike if it is necessary. While concerns, such as state sovereignty, collateral effects, and the response of the targeted nation, will prevent the use of a preemptive strike on a biological target in most situations, the U.S. has the legal right and the ability to use this tool in certain circumstances.;However, to exercise this option successfully, the U.S. must improve its intelligence gathering on biological targets. This will require better sensors and human intelligence, as well as more defined criteria for classifying a target. The U.S. has also been reactionary in its programs, not looking to the next threat as much as trying to react to an existing situation. While agent defeat and penetrating weapon technologies have greatly improved the U.S.'s ability to target biological facilities, more effort needs to be placed in identifying and solving the next embodiment of the threat. |
