Uganda’s strategic role in protecting the integrity of OPCW

_____________

OPINION

By Nabil Segawa

The global effort to eliminate chemical weapons has long been regarded as one of the most successful achievements of modern multilateral diplomacy. At the centre of this effort is the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international body responsible for implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

Established to ensure the complete elimination of chemical weapons worldwide, the OPCW has been widely respected for its technical expertise, neutrality, and commitment to international law. However, growing concerns among developing nations suggest that geopolitical tensions risk undermining the credibility of this important institution.

The Chemical Weapons Convention, which entered into force in 1997, is considered one of the most comprehensive arms-control agreements in history. According to the OPCW, more than 99 percent of declared chemical weapons stockpiles have been destroyed under its supervision, a remarkable achievement that earned the organisation the Nobel Peace Prize 2013. The Convention’s success is rooted in principles of impartiality, sovereign equality, and consensus-based decision-making among its member states. These principles have ensured that technical investigations remain separated from political influence.

Nevertheless, in recent years, debates have intensified over whether the OPCW is gradually being drawn into geopolitical disputes. Some member states, particularly from the developing world, argue that the increasing use of voting procedures rather than consensus in sensitive matters could risk politicising the organisation’s technical mandate. Critics fear that powerful states may use their numerical influence or diplomatic pressure to shape outcomes in ways that reflect geopolitical interests rather than purely scientific findings.

These concerns are not merely procedural. Trust in international institutions is essential for global compliance with arms-control agreements. If member states begin to doubt the impartiality of the OPCW, the consequences could include weakened adherence to the Chemical Weapons Convention and a broader erosion of multilateral disarmament frameworks.

Scholars of international relations have long warned that institutions tasked with global security must remain insulated from political rivalry in order to maintain legitimacy. As Professor Richard Price observed in his book The Chemical Weapons Taboo, the strength of global norms against chemical weapons depends largely on the credibility of the institutions that enforce them.

The issue is particularly important for developing countries that rely heavily on multilateral institutions to ensure fairness in global governance. Within groups such as the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the African Group at the United Nations, there is increasing emphasis on maintaining consensus-based approaches in international organisations. Many countries argue that consensus protects smaller states from being marginalised in decision-making processes dominated by major powers.

For Uganda, the issue carries both diplomatic and strategic significance. Uganda has historically championed principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and equitable participation in global institutions. The country’s leadership role within the Non-Aligned Movement places it in a unique position to promote dialogue aimed at strengthening the credibility of the OPCW and other multilateral organisations.

Ugandan diplomacy has consistently emphasised the importance of reforming international institutions through inclusiveness and fairness rather than confrontation. Former Ugandan diplomat Mirjam Blaak once highlighted in international forums that multilateral institutions must be strengthened through respect for international law and balanced participation by all states. Her remarks reflected a long-standing principle of Uganda’s foreign policy: that global governance structures should serve the interests of all nations equally, not only the most powerful.

In practical terms, Uganda can contribute to constructive dialogue on improving transparency in investigations, reinforcing procedural safeguards, and encouraging broader consultation among member states. By working through the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, Uganda could help build consensus on measures that protect the impartial character of the OPCW while ensuring accountability in addressing allegations of chemical weapons use.

Maintaining the integrity of international institutions is increasingly important in an era marked by geopolitical rivalry. The OPCW was created to eliminate one of humanity’s most destructive categories of weapons. Preserving its credibility is therefore not merely a diplomatic concern but a global security imperative.

If multilateral institutions lose the trust of the international community, the entire system of collective security could weaken. Uganda, through principled diplomacy and engagement with partners in the developing world, has an opportunity to play a constructive role in safeguarding the neutrality of the OPCW and strengthening the broader framework of international law.

In the end, the global prohibition against chemical weapons depends not only on treaties and technical expertise but also on trust. Protecting that trust must remain a shared responsibility of all nations committed to peace, security, and the rule of law.

The Author is a private Researcher