Give $2$ substantive annotations

$3.$ Challenges in Establishing a Verification Mechanism

Verification mechanisms are important in disarmament treaties to build confidence, detect violations, and deter non$-$compliance. Since its inception, the BWC$\text{'}$s lack of a formal verification mechanism has been a significant concern. Developing a suitable regime for biological agents is challenging due to their unique characteristics. The dual$-$use nature of biological materials and technologies makes ensuring compliance without intrusive verification difficult. Efforts to establish such a mechanism have been central in the BWC$\text{'}$s diplomatic history, marked by progress and setbacks.

Discussions on verification began at the First RevCon, where concerns about the lack of means to verify compliance were raised. The need for verification to ensure lasting compliance was acknowledged, but no concrete steps were taken. The

Third RevCon in $1991$ addressed verification more directly than before. It confirmed the need for verification and established an Ad Hoc Group of Governmental Experts known as VEREX to identify and examine potential measures from a scientific and technical standpoint.

VEREX held four sessions in $1992$ and $1993$ in which $21$ potential verification measures, grouped into off$-$site and on$-$site categories were identified and evaluated. The group concluded that while some measures could strengthen the BWC$,$ no single measure or combination would suffice for comprehensive verification. This difficulty arises from the dual$-$use nature of facilities and materials, the ease of concealing illicit activities, and the inherent difficulty of distinguishing peaceful from prohibited activities. Importantly, nevertheless, some measures in combination could help resolve ambiguities about compliance by increasing, for example, the focus and improving the quality of information, thereby improving the possibility of differentiating between prohibited and permitted activities and of resolving ambiguities about compliance.

Building on VEREX's work, a Special Conference in $1994$ established the Ad Hoc Group $"$to consider appropriate measures, including possible verification measures, and draft proposals to strengthen the Convention, to be included, as appropriate, in a legally binding instrument, to be submitted for the consideration of the States Parties." Although often referred to as a verification protocol, the negotiations were actually oriented toward devising a balanced package comprising four key components: definitions; enhanced confidence$-$building measures; measures to promote compliance, including the verification measures VEREX discussed; and, measures to ensure effective and full implementation of Article X of the BWC$,$ which deals with international cooperation.

The group produced a "rolling text" of a draft protocol. Key proposed elements included:

Mandatory declarations of relevant facilities and activities

Routine on$-$site visits

Challenge investigations

A new organisation to oversee implementation

Despite progress, negotiations collapsed in $2001$ when the United States rejected the draft protocol, arguing it would not effectively enhance the BWC and might compromise national security and proprietary information. Notably, even before the U$.$S$.$ decision, the last version of the rolling text had over $1,000$ contested terms in square brackets, with $87$ issues raised, many of them quite significant, signaling that consensus was improbable.

The failure to establish a verification mechanism profoundly impacted the BWC$\text{'}$s diplomatic process. It led to increased reliance on other mechanisms and shifted focus toward alternative methods of strengthening the BWC$,$ such as enhancing national implementation measures, promoting transparency through confidencebuilding, and continuing engagement through an intersessional process. We will explore this issue in greater detail in Module $3.$

$4.$ Established and Evolving Diplomatic Mechanisms

Beyond Review Conferences and the pursuit of a protocol, the BWC framework includes various diplomatic processes that have evolved over time or are outlined in the Convention.

$4\mathrm{.}1$ The Intersessional Process

Established at the Fifth RevCon in $2002,$ the intersessional process has helped sustain multilateral disarmament diplomacy. Between $2002$ and $2022,$ the intersessional processes consisted of annual Meetings of States Parties $($MSPs$)$ and Meetings of Experts $($MXs$)$ between RevCons. These meetings provide forums for discussing topics related to implementation, such as national measures, international cooperation, and scientific developments.

The intersessional process maintains momentum between RevCons, facilitates technical discussions, promotes information exchange, and allows for frequent