The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons: Establishment and Cooperation

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was established by the states parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. On 13 January 1993, when the Convention opened for signature in Paris, the signatory states adopted a resolution establishing a Preparatory Commission. From 8 to 12 February, 92 signatory states attended its first meeting in The Hague, including China, the United States, Russia, France, India and Brazil. Participation as a signatory did not mean that a state was already a full member under the Convention after its entry into force.

On 11 February, the Commission established a Provisional Technical Secretariat, appointed Ian Kenyon of the United Kingdom as Executive Secretary, and created working bodies for budget and administration and for verification and technical cooperation. Its provisional budget for the first three months was US$1,801,397, apportioned among members to cover personnel, meetings, communications and other expenses. From the outset, cooperation thus involved employees, accounts and work plans, as well as expressions of support.

References: [1]

The technical foundations of the preparatory work also gradually took shape. The Netherlands provided the Secretariat's early office premises and maintenance free of charge. A laboratory and equipment store in Rijswijk opened on 11 September 1996; the Commission paid about 1.3 million Dutch guilders to fit out this rented facility. In January 1997, 148 trainee inspectors began professional training, while equipment purchases had to comply with jointly accepted technical specifications.

The Commission's final report recorded 31 October 1996 as the date on which deposit of the 65th instrument of ratification triggered the entry-into-force timetable. Article XXI of the Convention stipulated entry into force 180 days afterward. The 1997 budget document explicitly identified 29 April as that date. Read together with Article VIII's provisions establishing the organization, it marks the formal organization's foundation and must be distinguished from the preparatory phase begun in 1993.

References: [2] [3] [5]

The Convention located the headquarters in The Hague and established the Conference of the States Parties, the Executive Council and the Technical Secretariat. The Conference controlled the budget, appointments and implementation policy. The 41-state Council supervised routine implementation, with seats taking account of regional distribution, chemical industries and security interests. The Secretariat performed verification and technical-administrative work, and inspection teams formed part of it.

The first Conference of the States Parties met from 6 to 23 May 1997; its formal report listed 80 states parties. Russia participated in discussions as a signatory that had not yet ratified the Convention. On 12 May, the Conference elected the 41-state Council and appointed Brazilian diplomat José Maurício Bustani as the first Director-General, with his term beginning on 13 May. Appointments and the division of institutional responsibilities gave the treaty's obligations identifiable implementers.

References: [3] [4] [7]

The budget decision of 23 May authorized 1997 expenditure of 88,873,800 Dutch guilders for the period from 29 April to year-end. Of this amount, 88,773,800 guilders were apportioned among states parties and 100,000 guilders were expected from interest. A separate working capital fund of 10 million guilders was established to advance budget expenditure before contributions arrived. Assessments were based on an adjusted United Nations scale, and the budget distinguished administrative and related costs from verification costs.

Budget authorization and actual receipts did not coincide. An organizational bulletin in August reported that some states had not yet paid and that the Secretariat faced serious cash-flow difficulties. Requests for payment had been issued only after budget approval in May, leaving insufficient time for some domestic payment procedures. The Council called for outstanding contributions and continued monitoring, showing that an international body had to manage both political commitments and everyday cash flow.

References: [3] [5] [6]

States first had to provide information on stockpiles, facilities and other activities subject to the Convention. In a contemporary Arms Control Today report, Erik J. Leklem stated that the United States submitted its initial declaration on 29 May, including chemical-weapons stockpiles and destruction arrangements. Declarations formed the basis for organizing verification; this did not make all the detailed data public, and international verification did not mean disclosing military and commercial secrets.

Fieldwork began in early June. The original bulletin of 11 August reported that the Secretariat had conducted more than 30 initial inspections and had begun continuous monitoring at two operating destruction facilities. Meanwhile, some states had still not submitted declarations on time, and the Secretariat contacted them and supplied additional forms. Confidential information was protected by restricting personnel access and using special registration and handling procedures. Inspection counts cannot be converted into quantities of weapons destroyed.

References: [6] [7]

Article VII required each state party to designate or establish a National Authority for effective liaison with the organization and other members, while adopting legislative and administrative measures for implementation. The professional bodies in The Hague needed these domestic points of contact to connect declarations, visiting inspections and subsequent replies with responsible national entities. Secretariat staff members' international duties were also not to be governed by instructions from their national governments.

Article X additionally provided for a protective-information database and channels of assistance, including contributions to a voluntary fund, assistance agreements or declarations of available assistance. The first Conference had already adopted decisions on the assistance fund, protective-information database and a list of emergency supplies. Early cooperation therefore combined verification of other states' compliance with preparation for collective protection, both depending on members' continuing provision of funds, information and professional expertise.

References: [3] [4]