International Relations Ee eS ry INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Nature and Scope of International Relations:- The present world community is divided into a number of nation states, each possessing a system of its own. These states have different political, economic, sociological and geographical characteristics. All the divergences and national interests give rise to hostile programmes towards each other. The states are often guided by self-interests. The actions of one state have a deep impact on the interests of others. Therefore, it has become necessary that there should be a proper relationship between the states. The states of ancient and medieval times mostly established relations with the states of the same region, and they were regional relations. As a result of the Renaissance and Reformation, territorial states emerged and with the peace treaty of West-Phalia of 1648, the tradition of international relations between states was set up, which continues to this day. The term international relations’ has been interpreted and defined in narrow and broad sense. In the narrow and ordinary sense, “International relations are official relations conducted by authorized leaders of the state only.” In the broader sense, in the words of Hartmann,” International relations are all intercourse among states and all movements of people, goods, ideas across national frontiers. However, as a field of study, its focus in on the processes by which states adjust their national interests to those of other states." || {v “International Relations is a Science: ¥ International Relations are considered as a science. Science is a systematized mass of knowledge. Science is an exact knowledge. Its facts can be verified because its laws are based on observations and experimentation of natural phenomena from which laws of universal application and truth are deduced. The laws of generalization are made after due observations, investigation, experimentation, tabulations and Classifications. The generalizations, rules and laws are exact and Verifiable. It is on the basis of the scientific generalization that a new era Gee oe in sight though still for off. Personal acy narrows conflicts by settling the differences bilaterally and through peaceful means.) © -> " . International Relations is not a Science:-J. Stalin, happen only once; never before or afterwards e coor another oe there is entirely different from eth vert not geerat the results of the events. The actor on, parle stage are all human beings. The nature of human beings x uncertain. Nobody can understand the real intentions of an money ‘actor, The complexities of international relations make simple solutions and trust worthy prophecies impossible, In every event, different forces and motivations, are at work according to the prevailing circumstances and it is very difficult to deduce generalizations from them, which could be made applicable to future situations. In this sense, ‘intemational relations is a field extraordinarily difficult for science to enter."Intemational relations, at best, can claim to be a social science and no more than that. The international relations as a subject of study is considered by some scholars as “a poor relation of political science and ,, itis still far from being a well organized discipline. It lacks clear cut \ frame work and a systematic body of applicable discipline. b) Approaches to the Study of International Relations:- The relationship between states can be of two types-cooperative and oppositional. The cooperative relations are mainly of non-political character such as economic, cultural etc, and do not involve any use of power. The oppositional relations, on the other hand, imply conflict or struggle among groups and demand use of power. Therefore, international relations is a study of both cooperative ind oppositi relations among the states. : : vat First Stage(Descriptive-Historical Approach) __In the intial stages, international relations were treated as a study s enetions, diplomatic history, law and philosophy. It implies a study the post wih a vew Ie Rad oat he eye ee le short comings of the i eso pe ere history, diplomatic history and Wenetoe ied became the -comer-stones of the study of international relations. The saiey, ven marty esl loca, finding and no deductions of any vere none ore sae which could help in the understanding of Second Stage(Current Events. Approach) 2—— international Relations 5 past. If the first stage was defective in laying stress upon history and ignoring the current events, the second stage was equally defective in Jaying stress on current events while ignoring the historical aspect. The result was that no well conceived theory could emerge by which the significance of the current events could be understood. Third Stage(Institutional or Normative or Idealist Approach) After the establishment of the League the frontier of the study of international relations was further widened and the study of international institutions or organization was also included in it. Henceforth, an effort was made to understand interstate relations by studying the behavior of states in the various international organizations and the control, if any, ‘exercised by the international organizations over the sovereign states. It stressed the institutionalization of international relations through law and organization, and was inspired by the belief that international community would be able to create institutions and thereby international problems. would be automatically solved. Forth Stage(Theoretical or Realistic Approach):- After the Second World War the field of international relations was: further widened. Since the foreign policy and the military policy are closely related, study of war and its strategy should also be included in the international relations. The scholars consider the struggle for power, as reality in international politics. They claimed that the purpose of the study of the world issues was to understand them in the real sense through theoretical investigation. This had to be done in the context of present day world; social and economic order rather in isolation. The concern of international relations now is threefold; motivating factors of foreign policies everywhere, techniques of the conduct of foreign policies and mode of resolution of international conflicts. Fifth Stage(The Scientific Approach) The advances in the field of psychology made certain people study international relations through personality and backward analysis. They started a study of the behavior of leaders, group as well as the role of public opinion. Further, it gave a break to the study of certain areas or regions. The impact of behavioral revolution in international relation forced for the building up theories and models which can explain with a considerable degree of accuracy the patterns of behavior of political unitsinternational Relations 0 a)Traditional Approach:- }) Historical Approach:- This approach is the ancient approach for the study of international relations. The past events are the sources for this approach. The events were presented in a descriptive and chronological manner. History is important because it tells us as to how international system undergoes change. This approach failed to develop any theory. As history never repeats, this approach has not attained the status of prefect scientific approach. It was directed towards the past and not the future. ii)Current Event Approach:- The study of current events would provide necessary understanding of the causes of conflicts in international relations. This approach remained in vogue during the inter-war years. The scholars wanted to understand the behavior of the state in the contemporary world and then to explain the problems of conflict and cooperation. This approach also failed to give a theory as it never linked the past with the present. iii) Institutional, Legal and Normative Approach:- the institutional approach gained important after the establishment of the League. The main theme of this approach was to institutionalize international relations through international law and organizations. It was their belief that peace would be brought about only if we follow international law and international organizations. b) Philosophical Approaches:- Human nature is the main source for philosophical approach. By this approach we can understand how human nature influences international studies. There are three philosophical approaches namely, idealistic, realistic and the eclectic approach. i)The Idealistic or Utopian Approach:- The Idealistic approach is also one of the classical approaches. It is the liberal approach followed in between the two world wars. Woodrow Wilson was the proponent of this approach. It regards the power politics as the passing phase of history. According to this approach, a society or nation is formed due to evolution. in the evolution, there may be good or bad. In 1975, Condorcet wrote a treatise which contained everything considered as the essential basis of idealism in the international relations. He visualized a world order free from war, inequality and tyranny. This new order would be marked by constant progress in human welfare brought about by the use of reason,7 J. Stalin ; the future system was visualized to be free ! jence. Thus oe a Fh immorality and violence. ! = the principles of realist theory of international relations are:- i) foreign policy sho : ii) foreign policy should be based on national interest defined in terms of power, iti) meaning of national interest defined in term of power should change with the changing circumstances; iv) no place for universal moral principles in international relations; v) no identity between moral principles of a nation and universal moral principles; vi) Political sphere is autonomous and pervading. ili) Eclectical Approach:- The Eclecticism does not regard either the realist approach or the idealist approach as completely satisfactory. They offer syntheses of the pessimism of realism and the optimism of idealism. It emphasizes sociological aspects of International Relations where conflicts and cooperation exist. It takes into account the impact of science and technology in the modern world. The recent inventions in science and technology have reduced the factor of distance in the world and have changed the character of war. The war has become destructive, beyond resort to war as an instrument of national policy. War is being avoided. Peace has come to be regarded as the sole aim of national Policy. Continuous efforts are being made towards disarmament and strengthening the United Nations. N) Scientific or Behavioral Approaches:- ] ‘ The scientific approach is based upon the simple ion that international relations like any other social activity, ae eae and hence it can be analyzed and explained only by analyzing and explaining the behavior of the people as it reflected in their activities in the field of interational relations. The scientific concentrate on the collection of all the relevant facts and on the basis of these facts, they reach to the sas benassi uld be based on facts and reason; { conclusions as the fat aanInternational Relations 7 from the phenomenon of interaction. The activities of a nation are always directed towards the preservation of its national interest. But at the same time nations live with one another. They live in an international environment and participate in that environment. The behavior of a nation is thus a two-way activity of taking from and giving to the international environment. This process of exchange is called the international system. It is believed that the systems approach was evolved to explain certain regular behavior approaches in the political set up. d) Morton Kaplan’s Six Systems Approach:- (International Actors) Morton is one of the best exponents of the systems approach. The systems theory is the result of the behavioral resolution in international relations. Morton is of the opinion that there is some coherence, regularity and order in international relations. International relations implies two things:- international system and nation state system. According to him nation state system is a political system in the strict sense of the term while intemational system is not in fact a real ‘political system. Nations or States are the main actors in the international politics and the role of the state changes with the change of international system. Morton Kaplan treats six models of major international systems they are:~ i) The Balance of Power System:- The balance of power system prevailed in Europe in the 18" and 19” centuries. It implies a sort of equilibrium of political power favorable to a particular nation at a particular time. England, Germany, France, Italy the USA etc. were the essential national actors. Theoretically it means even distribution of power between various nations to prevent any particular nation from imposing its will upon other, the following rules are:~ __a)each state may increase its power without war i.e., through primary object of each state is to protect its national interests of War; not eliminate an essential national participant; should opposed any coalition of other d predominance of that group in relation to theJ. Stalin the defeated participants should be permitted to re-enter the ) ra i individually or collectively, do nts in the system, In f not rere ee six rules, the system becomes unstable. The moment this system becomes unstable, it is bound to be changed into a eo .- the unstable balance of power system The Bipolar system: i urs if two national if into a bipolar system. This change occurs I 'y ional ee ge cooperating actors come to constitute dominance over a blocks. In this system each block has a leading power. The two super powers were surrounded by @ group of smaller powers and non-aligned states. The existence of non-aligned states made the power of the major actors loose. The loose bipolar system was characterized by the presence of two major bloc actors. The US and USSR , non-member actorsithe Non-Aligned States),and the universal actor(the UNO) all of them performed unique and distinctive role within the system. ill)The Tight Bipolar System:- the tight bipolar system with the disappear of non-aligned states, this system will operate only around two super bloc. Even universal actor shall not be in position to mediate between the two blocs, as after the disappearance of the uncommitted national actors, the universal actor will not have sufficiently wide frame of preference. iv)The Universal International System:- the universal intemational system could be equated to World Federation. The chief feature of this system is that even though the national actors constantly tty for more power, they are prevented effectively from going to war with each other by are UN. So this system envisages that the universal actor is sufficiently powerful to prevent war among national actors. y)Hierarchical International System:- this s i » r 3 system is an utopian poses dl is a nro which practically the whole of the world, except ne brought under the control of one universal actor. In this nat a ee become territorial sub-divisions of the nes heute Sovereign, independent political pet ae if found by world conquest and non- power would amor i it nde the domination of a single national ie a lone feto System:- unit veto ‘system is possible only under the States possess such Weapons individually as to destroyInternational Relations 9 any other actor even though it cannot avoid its own destruction. The essence of this system is that each state will be equally able to destroy each other. The unit veto system would remain stable only if, oo are prepared to resist threats and retaliate in case if an attack. i 2) Fourteen Point's of Woodrow Wilson The fourteen points was a statement given on Jan. 8 1918 by United States President Woodrow Wilson declaring that World War | was being fought for a moral cause and calling for post war peace in Europe. Europeans generally welcomed Wilson's intervention, but his main Allied colleagues Georges Clemenceau of France, David Lloyd George of Great Britain and Vittorio Emanuele Orlando of Italy were skeptical of the applicability of Wilsonian idealism. ‘The U.S. had joined the Allies in fighting the Central Powers on April 6, 1917. Its entry into the war had in part been due to Germany's resumption of submarine warfare against merchant ships trading with France and Britain. However, Wilson wanted to avoid the U.S. involvement in the long-standing European tensions between the great powers; if America was going to fight, he would try to unlink the war from nationalistic disputes or ambitions. The need for moral aims was made more important, when after the fall of the Russian Regime, the Bolsheviks disclosed Secret treaties made between the allies. Wilson's speech also responded to Vladimir Lenin's Decree on peace of Nov.1917, immediately after the October Revolution, which proposed in immediate withdrawal of Russia from the War calling for a just and democratic peace that was not compromised by territorial annexations, and led to the Treaty of Brest- Litovsk on March 3, 1918. __ The speech made by Wilson on January 8, 1918 laid out a policy @ trade, open agreements, democracy and self-determination. The 14 was only explicit statement of war aims by any of the in World War |. oodrow Wilsons fourteen points were first outlined in a speech to the American congress in January 1918. Wilson's fourteen basis for a peace programme and it was on the back of t Germany and her allies agreed to an armistice inInternational Relations 1 vw Germany or not in referendum. The League also took control of Germany's overseas colonies; Germnay had to return to’ Russia land taken in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Military:- Germany's army was reduced to 100,000 men, the army was not allowed tanks, she was not allowed an airforce she was allowed only six capital naval ships and no submarines. The west of the Rhineland and 50 Kms east of the River Rhine was made into a demilitarized Zone(DMZ). Financial:- The loss of vital industrial territory would be a severe blow to any attempts by Germany to rebuild her economy. Coal from the saar and upper Silesia in particular was a vital economic loss. Combined with the financial penalties linked to reparations, it seemed clear to Germany that the Allies wanted nothing else but to bankrupt her. General:- Germany had to admit full responsibility for starting the war, therefore responsible for all the war damage caused by First World War. Therefore, she had to pay reparations, the bulk of which would go to France and Belgium to pay for the damage done to the infrastructure of both countries by the war. The German reaction to the Treaty of Versailles:- After agreeing to the Armistice in November 1918, the Germans had been convinced that they would be consulted by the Allies on the contents of the Treaty. This did not happen and the Germans were in no position to continue the war as her army had all but disintegrated. Though this lack of consultation angered them, there was nothing they could do about it. Therefore, the first time that the German representatives saw the terms of the Treaty was just week before they were due to sign it in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles on June 28” 1919. There was anger throughout Germany when the terms were made public. The Treaty became known as a Diktat as it was being forced on them and the Germans had no choice but to sing it. Many in Germany did not want the Treaty signed, but the representatives there knew that they |no choice as Germany was in capable of restarting the war again. In one last gesture of defiance, the captured German naval force was given two choices:- i)sign the Treaty or ii)be invaded . They signed the treaty as in reality they had no choice. was over, Clemenceau went out into the gardens of1. Stalin 12 The Treaty of Versailles concluded between owers and Germany on June 28, 1919, after foundation of the League of Nations for the tional peace and security and the promotion Court of International co-operation. The Permanent rear eeuaal in 1921 in accordance with the provisions of ‘Article 14 of Covenant of the League of Nations. — First World War:- the Allied and Associated Pe the first World War laid the purpose of maintaining internal Mandatory System:- A League of Nations mandate was a legal status for certain territories transferred from the control of one country to another following World War |, or the legal instruments that contained the internationally agreed-upon terms for administering the territory on behaf of the League. These were of the nature of both a treaty and constitution which contained minority rights clauses that provided for the right of petition and adjudication by the International Court. The mandate system was established under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, entered into on 28 June 1919. With the dissolution of the League of Nations after World War I, it was stipulated at the Yalta Conference that the remaining Mandates should be placed under the trusteeship of the United Nations, subject to future discussions and formal agreements. Most of the remaining mandates of the League of Nations (with the ‘exception of South-West Africa) thus eventually became United Nations Trust Territories. All of the territories subject to League of Nations mandates were previously controlled by states defeated in World War |, principally Imperial Germany and the Ottoman Empire. The mandates were fundamentally different from the protectorates in that the Mandatory power undertook obligations to the inhabitants of the territory and to the League of Nations. The process of establishing the mandates consisted of two phases: ithe formal removal of i i coftroning the tok tee sovereignty of the state previously iifhe transfer of mandat eo [BAlied Powers. itory powers to individual states:among the ‘The divestiture of Germany's overseas colonies, along with three territories disentangled from its European homeland area i [ (the Free City of Danzig, Memel Territory, and Saar), was accomplished in the Treaty of ie pe lrritories being allotted among the Allies on Aty of Sevres (1920) con (eitorial claims were first addressed in the (1920) and finalized in the Treaty of Lausanne (1923)International Relations 13 The Turkish territories were allotted among the Allied Powers at the San Remo conference in 1920. Peace treaties have played an important role in the formation of the modem law of nations. Many rules that govern the relations between states have been introduced and codified in the terms of peace treaties. The first twenty-six articles of the Versailles Treaty of 28 June 1919 contained the Covenant of the League of Nations, It contained the international machinery for the enforcement of the terms of the treaty. Article 22 established a system of Mandates to administer former colonies and territories, Article 22 was written two months before the signing of the peace treaty, before it was known what "communities", “peoples”, or “territories” were related to sub-paragraphs 4, 5, and 6. The treaty was signed, and the peace conference had been adjourned, before a formal decision was made {citation needed] The mandates were arrangements guaranteed by, or arising out of the general treaty which stipulated that mandates were to be exercised on behalf of the League. The treaty contained no provision for the mandates to be allocated on the basis of decisions taken by four members of the League acting in the name of the so-called "Principal Allied and Associated Powers". The decisions taken at the conferences of ‘the Council of Four were not made on the basis of consultation or League unanimity as stipulated by the Covenant. As a result, the actions of the conferees were viewed by some as having no legitimacy. In testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations a former US State Department official who had been a member of the American Commission at Paris, testified that the United Kingdom and France had simply gone ahead and arranged the world to suit themselves. He pointed out that the League of Nations could do nothing to alter their arrangements, since the League could only act by unanimous consent of its members - including the UK and France. United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing was a member of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace at Paris in 1919. He ‘explained that the system of mandates was a device created by the Great Powers to conceal their division of the spoils of war under the color of ational law. If the former German and Ottoman territories had been d to the victorious powers directly, their economic value would have edited to offset the Allies’ claims for war reparations. Article 243 of ar Valley and Alsace-Lorraine were to be reckoned as credits to /in respect of its reparation obligations.14 J. Stalin A The League of Nations decided the exact level of control by the Mandatory power over each mandate on an individual basis. However, in every case the Mandatory power was forbidden to construct fortifications or raise an army within the territory of the mandate, and was required to present an annual report on the territory to the League of Nations. The mandates were divided into three distinct groups based upon the level of development each population had achieved at that time. Class A mandates:-The first group, or Class A mandates, were territories formerly controlled by the Ottoman Empire that were deemed too "... have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.” The Class A mandates were:Syria (France), 29 September 1923 = 1 January 1944. This mandate included Lebanon; Hatay (a former Ottoman Alexandretta sandjak) broke away from it and became a French protectorate until it was ceded to the new Republic of Turkey. Following the termination of the French mandate, two separate independent republics, Syria and Lebanon, were formed. Mesopotamia (United Kingdom), not enacted and replaced by the Anglo-traqi Treaty Class B mandates:- The second group of mandates, or Class B mandates, were all former Schutzgebiete (German territories) in West and Central Africa which were deemed to require a greater level of control by the mandatory power: *...the Mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory under conditions which will guarantee freedom of conscience and religion." The mandatory power was forbidden to construct military or naval bases within the mandates. The Class B mandates were: Ruanda-Urundi (Belgium), from 20 July 1922 to 13 December 1946. Formerly two separate German protectorates, they were joined as a single mandate on 20 July 1922. From 1 March 1926 to 30 June 1960, Ruanda-Urundi was in administrative union with the neighbouring colony of Belgian Congo. After December 1946, it became a United Nations Trust Territory, remaining Belgian administration until the separate nations of Rwanda and gained independence on 1 July 1962. Tanganyika (United from 20 July 1922 to 11 December 1946. It became a United ust Territory on 11 December 1946, and was granted internal — |4 Mg i South Pacific Mandate (Japan),South West Africa (South Africas; Kingdom)from 1 October 1922, Walvisbaai's administration (st my having a Magistrate until its 16 March 1931 Municipal status, thence a Mayor) was also assigned to the mandate. According to the Council of the League of Nations, meeting o August 1920:"draft mandates adopted by the Allied and Associateg Powers would not be definitive until they had been considered ang approved by the League ... the legal title held by the mandatory Power must be a double one: one conferred by the Principal Powers and the other conferred by the League of Nations". After the United Nations was founded in 1945 and the League of Nations was disbanded, all but one of the mandated territories that remained under the control of the mandatory power became United Nations trust territories, a roughly equivalent status. In each case, the colonial power that held the mandate on each territory became the administering power of the trusteeship, except that Japan, which had been defeated in World War Il, lost its mandate over the South Pacific islands, which became a "strategic trust territory" known as the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands under United States administration. Remnant Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, the heirs of the last territories of the Trust, attained final independence on 22 December 1990. (The UN Security Council ratified termination of trusteeship, effectively dissolving trusteeship status, on 10 July 1987). The Republic of Palau, split off from the Federated States of Micronesia, became the last to get its independence effectively on 1 October 1994. Treaty of Locarno 1925:- The Locarno conference was called partly because of the failure of the Treaty of Versailles to satisfy many nations and solve the conflicts between countries that remained after world war | . The Treaty of Versailles ended military actions against Germany in World War Il. It resulted in the Rhineland Security Pact as well as six other treaties. In October of 1925, representatives of Seven European Countries met in Locarno, Switzerland. The Seven Countries involved were Belgium, United Kingdom, Czechoslovakia, France, , Italy and Poland. The purpose of the Conference was to 2uss political borders and to build permanent peace. It was the second ference. However, the most important issue was to find | in France and Germany and for the first time, nations any as a friendly nation.International Relations 17 The Rhineland security pact developed as the most important treaty, Germany had joined the League of nation, it helped set up a neutral zone in the Rhineland, which was an area covering Belgium, French and German soil. All signing powers vowed to guarantee France's and Belgium's borders with Germany. The Locarno Pact was an attempt to remove tensions between Germany and France. The couritries wanted an overall peace settlement and wanted to prevent a Second World War. The agreements consisted of i) a treaty of mutual guarantee between Germany, Belgium, France, Great Britain and Italy; ii) arbitration treaties between Germany and Belgium and between Germany and France; ja notice from the former allies to Germany explaining the use of sanctions against a covenant breaking state as outlined in Article-16 of the League of Nations Covenant; iv) arbitration treaties between Germany ‘and Czechoslovakia and between Germany and Poland; v)treaties of guarantee between France and Poland and between France and Czechoslovakia. Washington Conference:- 1921-22 also called Washington Naval Conference, by name of International Conference on Naval Limitation, (1921-22) international conference called by the U.S. to limit the naval arms race and to workout security agreements in the Pacific area. Held in Washington, D.C., the conference resulted in the drafting and signing of several major and minor treaty agreements. The four- power pact, signed by the U.S., Great Britain, Japan, and France on December 13, 1921. The signatories would be consulted in the event of a controversy between two of them over “ any pacific question”. An accompanying agreement stated they would respect one another rights regarding the various pacific islands and mandates that they possessed. These agreement ensured that a consultative framework existed between the U.S., Great Britain and Japan —i.e. the 3 great powers whose interests in the pacific were most likely to a clash between them. But the agreements were too. vaguely worded to have any binding effect, and their chief importance was that they abrogated the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1911, ‘which had previously been one of the principal means of g a balance of power in East Asia. _ The five power naval limitation treaty which was signed by the Britain, Japan, France, and Italy on February 6, 1922,grew out proposal at the Conference by U.S. Secretary of State Hughes to scrap almost 1,900,009 tons of warships Great Powers. This bold disarmament proposal bled delegates, but it was indeed enacted in aa i... I en tg modified form. The Five-Power Naval Limitation Treaty hated the post. world war | race in building warships and even reversed the trend; it necessitated the scrapping of 26 American, 24 British, and 16 Japanese warships that were elther already built or under construction. The Contacting nations also agreed to abandon their existing capital-ship building programs for a period of 10 years, subject to certain specified exceptions and the U.S, Great Britain, Japan agreed to maintain the status quo with regard to their fortifications and naval bases in the eastern pacific. The naval limitation treaty remained in force until the mid-1930s. At that time an demanded equality with the U.S. and Great Britain in regard to the size and number of its capital ships when this demand was rejected by the other contracting nations, Japan gave advance notice of its intention to terminate the treaty, which thus expired at the end of 1936. Geneva Protocol:- The Protocol for the Prohibition of the use in war of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological methods of warfare, usually called the Geneva Protocol, is a treaty Prohibiting the first use of Chemical and Biological Weapons. It was singed at Geneva on 17, 1925 and entered into force on February 8, 1928. It prohibits the use of chemical weapons and biological weapons, but has nothing to say about production, storage or transfer. Later treaties did cover these aspects the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention and the 4992 Chemical Weapons Convention. Chemical Weapons were used by the German Empire inypres, kingdom of Belgium in'1915, when chlorine gas was released. The Treaty ‘of Versailles included some provisions that banned Germany from manufacturing or importing chemical weapons similar treaties banned the First Austrian Republic, the kingdom of Bulgaria, and the Kingdom of | Hungary from chemical weapons. Three year’s after World War |, the Allies wanted to reaffirm the Treaty of Versailles, and the U.S. introduced the Treaty of Washington. The US. Senate gave consent for ratification but it failed to enter into force. At the 1925 Geneva conference for the Supervision of the International Traffic in Arms the Rate suggested a Protocol for non-use ‘of poisonous gases. The 2' polish Ri suggested the addition of bacteriological weapons. It was signed on June 17.1925. z To become party to t! he protocol, state parties must deposit an with the government of France ( the depository power) “ ned the protocol. France was the first signatory to rat 926. El-Salvador, the final signatory to ratify 18, In November 2010, 137 states have inally sigl , on 10 May 1 February 200! llInternational Relations 19 | acceded to, or succeeded to the treaty. These protocol now considered as the part of the customary International Law. In 1966 UN General Assembly Resolution 2162 B called for, without any dissent, all states to strictly observe the protocol. In 1969, UN | General Assembly Resolution 2603(XXIV) declares that the prohibition on | use of chemical biological weapons in international armed conflicts as embodied in protocol though restated in a more general form, were generally recognized rules of International Law. In 1955,a n appellate chamber in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ‘stated that