Description
This paper rethinks international law via the prohibition of weapons, examining the overall issue of whether arms control and disarmament principles apply in the same way to different categories of weapons. Using the concept of ‘taboo’, it examines the prohibitions of certain instruments of war which have developed throughout history in relation to the moral opprobrium concerning their usage. Through an examination of international treaties on conventional weapons, chemical weapons, and nuclear weapons, this paper explores the overall issue of whether arms control and disarmament principles apply in the same manner to different categories of weapons. This area of law, which has traditionally aimed to protect combatants and non-combatants from unnecessary suffering in war, has come to be regarded as an important component of international peace and security through the limitation and/or control of the uses and number of certain weapons. Inquiring into the motivations which lay behind the prohibition of certain types of weapons, the use of ‘taboo’ as a concept allows for an understanding of the different motivations and interests lying at the heart of arms control and disarmament treaties. Providing a valuable lens through which to understand the origins of different prohibitions of certain instruments of war and how these have been developed internationally.
