A chilling warning from two British academics has brought the dystopian concept of “brain weapons” from science fiction into the realm of urgent international security debate. Michael Crowley and Professor Malcolm Dando of Bradford University are urging global action to prevent the weaponisation of neuroscience, arguing that the human mind is the next frontier in warfare. Their findings, detailed in a new book, are being presented this weekend at a key meeting of states in The Hague, home to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

The researchers warn that rapid advances in neuroscience, pharmacology, and artificial intelligence (AI) are converging to create a new class of weapons capable of attacking human consciousness, memory, and behaviour. “We are entering an era where the brain itself could become a battlefield,” Crowley stated, highlighting the increasing precision and accessibility of tools designed to sedate, confuse, or coerce individuals. Their book, “Preventing Weaponization of CNS-acting Chemicals: A Holistic Arms Control Analysis,” published by the Royal Society of Chemistry, outlines how benignly intended neurological research could be misused to develop novel chemical agents for conflict or repression.

Implications for Global Arms Control

This emerging threat poses a significant challenge to existing international laws. While the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) form the bedrock of the global ban on such arms, experts argue there are dangerous gaps in these treaties concerning neuro-weapons. Dando, an emeritus professor of international security and a leading expert on chemical and biological arms control, has stressed the need for a new, proactive governance framework to prevent a new arms race.

The academics' intervention is timed for the 30th Session of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP), the principal body of the OPCW that oversees the implementation of the CWC. Kenya is an active and committed member of the OPCW. In a statement at a previous OPCW conference, Ambassador Margaret W. N. Shava, Kenya's Permanent Representative, reaffirmed the nation's “longstanding position against the use of chemical weapons by any State, persons or organisations, under any circumstances or justifications.” Kenya has consistently advocated for the full and non-discriminatory implementation of the CWC to ensure international peace and security.

The Kenyan and African Context

While there is no evidence of such weapons being developed in East Africa, the global proliferation of any new class of weapon has direct implications for regional stability and Kenyan security interests. As a significant contributor to peacekeeping missions, Kenya and other African nations could see their forces face new, disorienting threats on the battlefield. The African Union has already been developing common positions on emerging weapons technologies, such as autonomous weapons systems and the illicit trade in small arms, recognising the need for continental unity in arms control.

Kenya's commitment to the CWC is robust, involving legal and administrative measures, participation in OPCW assistance programs, and efforts to counter chemical terrorism. In February 2025, Interior Principal Secretary Raymond Omollo reiterated Kenya's dedication to a world free of chemical weapons during a workshop in Nairobi focused on preventing dual-use chemicals from falling into the hands of non-state actors. The weaponisation of neuroscience represents a dangerous evolution of this dual-use problem, where legitimate medical research could be diverted for malign purposes.

The Dual-Use Dilemma of Technology

The convergence of AI and pharmacology is accelerating the potential for misuse. AI is revolutionising drug discovery by rapidly analysing vast datasets to identify new compounds and predict their effects on the human body. While this promises breakthroughs in treating neurological disorders, the same technology could be used to design chemicals that target the central nervous system for hostile purposes. This dual-use dilemma is at the heart of the researchers' call for action. They are not seeking to stifle scientific progress but to ensure that robust ethical and legal guardrails are established to prevent its misuse.

The historical precedent for such weapons is disturbing. State-sponsored research into central nervous system (CNS)-acting chemicals was pursued by major powers during the Cold War. A notable modern use was in 2002, when Russian security forces used fentanyl derivatives to end the Moscow theatre siege, a deployment that resulted in numerous casualties. The new generation of potential neuro-weapons could be far more sophisticated and targeted. As the international community gathers in The Hague, the warning from Crowley and Dando serves as a critical wake-up call: the battle for the mind must be prevented before it begins.