The first large scale use of chemical weapons happened during the First World War. German forces aimed to break the French-British defenses north of Ypres, Belgium, and chose a wind that carried chlorine gas toward Allied troops. The resulting cloud forced a retreat but also prevented the Germans from exploiting any breakthrough. At the time, chemical warfare was seen as shameful and in opposition to the 1899 Hague Convention. The German response claimed the convention only banned poisonous bullets, not fixed gas cylinders, so the Allies argued for a symmetrical, principled countermeasure.
This approach to warfare was condemned by many Allied leaders and soldiers, who argued that victory would require suppressing opponents more efficiently than they could harm one’s own side. The lesson was stark: if tactics echoed the enemy’s, the war would not end through moral means but through escalation. This notion shaped early Allied discussions on reprisal and deterrence.
Shortly after, both sides deployed chemical projectiles and experimented with substitutes for chlorine. When inhaled, chlorine creates hydrochloric acid inside the lungs, causing burns and suffocation, though a high concentration is necessary for severe harm. The gas is detectable by smell and sight, and even simple protective measures like a damp cloth can provide some defense. In response, efforts shifted toward colorless, less odorous agents such as phosgene, which disrupts the exchange of gases in the lungs and can lead to pulmonary edema. Its major drawbacks included a delayed onset of effects and uneven distribution across terrain.
Mustard gas emerged as another option, an oily liquid used as an aerosol that damages skin and mucous membranes. It forms painful ulcers, blisters, eye injuries, and can cause serious lung inflammation. Alongside these agents, other chemicals such as cyanogen chloride were explored, but none proved to be a universal solution. In practice, armies began issuing gas masks and training troops in self-protection. Large-scale chemical use could overwhelm protective gear if masks were removed, a risk that limited the battlefield impact for long periods. Russia faced shortages of both chemical stockpiles and protective equipment, which tempered any supposed advantage for German forces or their allies.
science achievements
Early chemical warfare showed how crude and deadly these agents could be. Public opinion shifted against poisoning foes, and the Vienna Protocol later banned the use of chemical weapons while allowing possession and production. In the mid-1930s, German chemist Gerhard Schrader developed a new class of toxic compounds, tabun, which inhibits an essential nervous-system enzyme. This class, known as nerve agents, interrupts nerve-transmission and can cause severe paralysis and death in minutes if exposure is significant.
Similarly, sarin demonstrated the ability to induce pupil constriction, dizziness, and progressive asphyxiation with enough exposure. The scale of threat became clear as tens of thousands of tons of these compounds emerged during the later era. The Nazi regime showed limited adherence to international agreements on humane warfare, though the actual use of these gases remained limited in part due to strategic uncertainties and logistical challenges. Historical records indicate that gas masks were widespread, yet not always fully protective against the most potent agents of the era.
The era of nerve agents evolved into a new phase decades later, notably during regional conflicts in the late 20th century. In those confrontations, nerve agents played a role in shaping military doctrine, casualty patterns, and international responses. The moral and legal fallout from these programs remains a focal point of discussions about compliance with international norms and the necessity of robust safeguards against the spread of such weapons.
These developments helped drive global efforts to ban and control chemical weapons, with subsequent treaties and verification regimes designed to prevent their spread and use. The enduring lesson is clear: chemical weapons pose grave risks not just to soldiers but to civilians, and national security depends on strict adherence to prohibitions and effective prevention measures.
What is “Novichok”?
In the latter half of the 20th century, several nations pursued more potent nerve agents. The Soviet program known as Foliant aimed to create third-generation agents with greater lethality. Like earlier compounds, these agents act by blocking the cholinesterase enzyme, which is crucial for nerve signaling. Without proper functioning of this system, nerves and muscles can be overwhelmed, leading to rapid incapacitation or death. A few of these substances, including those allegedly labeled Novichok, gained notoriety in the public imagination due to later high-profile cases.
Reports from the late 2010s describe a range of formulations that existed in gas, liquid, and solid forms. These materials were extraordinarily toxic, capable of delivering fatal effects through skin contact or inhalation. Accounts from scientists involved in the program note the extreme danger and the difficulty of assessing exact toxicity. The discussion surrounding Novichok also touches on issues of disclosure, accountability, and the long shadows cast by such research.
As part of international efforts, Russia ratified conventions that ban the development, production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and undertook destruction of its arsenal. The global framework that emerged around these concerns continues to influence security policies, crisis response, and public health defenses to reduce the risk of chemical threats now and in the future.