The Legacy of the OPCW and the Threat to Global Security
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was established in the aftermath of wars that left humanity with a painful lesson: chemical weapons do not differentiate between a soldier and a child. These weapons, which have no place in modern warfare, were banned forever due to their indiscriminate and devastating effects. However, this principle has been repeatedly violated, especially on the battlefields of Ukraine.
Independent reports reveal a troubling pattern: Russia’s repeated use of toxic substances, including riot control agents, directly contravenes the Chemical Weapons Convention. This is not just a violation of international law; it is an act of aggression that targets both military and civilian populations. Russian forces have used banned weapons to kill civilians and have even turned these poisons against their own people, demonstrating a complete disregard for human life.
One of the most shocking examples of this abuse came in 2020 when a nerve agent from the ‘Novichok’ group was used to poison Alexei Navalny in Russia. Similarly, in 2018, Russian agents used a nerve agent from the same group to attack Julia and Sergei Skripal in the United Kingdom. The OPCW independently confirmed the use of ‘Novichok’ in these cases, underscoring the global nature of this threat.
Despite these violations, Moscow is now seeking to return to the very council that enforces the ban on chemical weapons. This move is not just a matter of diplomacy—it is a challenge to the integrity of the entire international system. The OPCW exists because the world agreed, after immense suffering, that certain weapons must never be used again. If a state accused of breaching the convention gains influence over the mechanisms designed to prevent such breaches, the deterrent power of the entire regime weakens.
Why Should Kenyan Readers Care?
Kenya’s involvement in global affairs matters because the strength of multilateral institutions depends on the willingness of member states to defend them. If a country credibly accused of violating the convention is allowed to shape the rules, it undermines the credibility of the entire system. The erosion of such institutions would lead to chaos—ending the world order as we know it.
This erosion emboldens not only distant powers but also anyone tempted to weaponize chemistry against civilians, politicians, or democracy itself. Preserving the OPCW’s credibility is an act of leadership, not partisanship. Kenya, known for its commitment to dignity and responsibility, understands this better than most.
From peacekeeping missions to mediation efforts across Africa, Nairobi has shown that adherence to rules brings stability, not submission. Kenya has long stood as a voice of reason in Africa—a nation that believes law should prevail over the violent power of dictatorship and that protection of civilians is a duty, not a privilege.
A Unique Opportunity for Kenya
This tradition gives Kenya a unique role in the upcoming elections to the OPCW Executive Council. The world is watching whether the values we all claim to defend will be reaffirmed in action. Africa’s growing role in global governance means its votes—and its silence—carry more weight than ever before.
As decisions are made in The Hague, history will not ask who lobbied hardest, but who stood for the principle that those who use poison cannot be trusted to guard the antidote.
A Call for Leadership
This is not an appeal to take sides in a distant war. It is a plea to defend the principle that protects lives. Kenya is now advocating for stronger African representation in the United Nations Security Council, a cause that is just and worthy. Now the world is watching closely—will this representation bring merely transactional leverage to emerging regional powers, or will it embody the true, mature, and humane leadership the world so urgently seeks?