Chapter 1 The Challenge of Outlining the CBRN Definitional Framework

Since the early years of the 21st century, incidents related to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear agents have been referred to as CBRN threats or events. However, there is no universally accepted definition of a CBRN threat or event, and States, international organisations (IO s) and non-State actors have given their own definitions and designed their own strategies to face such threats. At times, the abbreviation CBRNE is also used, to take into account the use of explosives (E) and improvised explosive devices (IED s) in terrorist attacks. Although a CBRN legal framework has been established in the context of some IO s, there seems to be a general lack of coordination among the different actors involved, even at the initial stage of identifying the most relevant challenges and including them under a CBRN categorisation. CBRN threats and events may include the use of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons, both by State and non-State actors (including terrorist movements); the use of CBRN agents for smaller-scale crimes; industrial accidents involving the release of CBRN agents into the environment; natural disasters or other calamities – such as the spread of COVID-19 in 2020 and the ensuing world pandemic.1 However, notwithstanding the diversity of CBRN agents and events, States and IO s have traditionally used the CBRN label mainly when addressing security issues – or even more narrowly in a counter-terrorism perspective – whereas, the CBRN categorisation is very rarely employed when addressing natural disasters and public health emergencies. A telling example of the predominant view is UN Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) – the first resolution to refer to CBRN agents (although not under this acronym) – where the emphasis was placed on the connection between international terrorism and the illegal movement of nuclear, chemical, biological and other potentially deadly materials. Again in a counter-terrorism perspective, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1540 (2004), where it affirmed that the proliferation of CBRN weapons and their means of delivery, and the illicit trafficking of related materials, constitute a threat to international peace and security.3 The acronym was not used in either of these resolutions, but we can see that the CBRN concept was starting to take shape and progress in the direction of setting obligations for States to counter the proliferation and smuggling of weapons of mass destruction, with the specific objective of preventing terrorist acts. Indeed, within the counter-terrorism context, various measures were adopted by the UN Security Council in the following years. On the other hand, no express references to CBRN threats are found if one looks at the UN framework for disaster relief or, more generally, to the area commonly labelled as disaster risk reduction (DRR). The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 not only does not explicitly refer to CBRN threats, but it excludes armed conflicts and it is mainly focused on natural disasters. Hence, the urgent call by the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Disaster Risk Reduction, Mami Mizutori, for the disaster management agencies to include biological hazards and health emergencies as a top priority when developing their preparedness and response capacities. The debate is ongoing on the need for a paradigm shift towards an all-hazards approach and for a transition from managing disasters to managing risks, as the development of the Global Risk Assessment Framework (GRAF) concept clearly shows.