Sophisticated weapons capable of attacking or altering human consciousness, perception, memory or behaviour are no longer confined to the realm of science fiction, two British academics have warned.
Michael Crowley and Malcolm Dando, of Bradford University, are preparing to publish a book that they believe should serve as a wake‑up call to the international community. The pair argue that advances in neuroscience, pharmacology and artificial intelligence are converging to create a new frontier in warfare: the human mind.
This weekend, the academics will travel to The Hague to attend a key meeting of states, where they intend to press for urgent global action to prevent the weaponisation of neuroscience. The meeting, the 30th session of the Conference of the States Parties (CSP), oversees the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
“It does sound like science fiction,” said Crowley. “The danger is that it becomes science fact.”
The book, published by the Royal Society of Chemistry, explores how tools to manipulate the central nervous system are becoming increasingly precise, accessible and attractive to states. Crowley warned: “We are entering an era where the brain itself could become a battlefield. The tools to sedate, confuse or even coerce are advancing rapidly.”
The authors trace the disturbing history of state‑sponsored research into central nervous system (CNS)‑acting chemicals. During the Cold War and beyond, the United States, Soviet Union and China all actively sought to develop such weapons. Their aim was to cause prolonged incapacitation, ranging from loss of consciousness and hallucinations to incoherence, paralysis and disorientation.
The only large‑scale use of a CNS‑acting weapon occurred in 2002, when Russian security forces deployed fentanyl derivatives to end the Moscow theatre siege. Armed Chechen militants had taken 900 theatregoers hostage. While most hostages were freed, more than 120 died from the effects of the chemical agents, and an undetermined number suffered long‑term damage or died prematurely.
Since then, research has advanced significantly. Crowley and Dando argue that the ability now exists to create far more sophisticated and targeted weapons than previously imagined. Dando explained: “The same knowledge that helps us treat neurological disorders could be used to disrupt cognition, induce compliance, or even in the future turn people into unwitting agents.”
The academics insist the threat is real and growing, but say gaps in international arms control treaties mean it is not being addressed effectively. Dando, emeritus professor of international security at Bradford and a leading expert on biological and chemical weapons control, believes existing frameworks are insufficient. Crowley, an honorary visiting senior research fellow in peace studies and international development, agrees.
Their book calls for a new “holistic arms control” framework, rather than reliance on current treaties. Among the practical steps proposed are the establishment of a working group on CNS‑acting and broader incapacitating agents, improved training, monitoring and clearer definitions. “We need to move from reactive to proactive governance,” said Dando.
Both men emphasise that their concern is not with scientific progress itself. They acknowledge that advances in understanding the brain and central nervous system are beneficial for humanity. Their focus is on preventing malign intent. “This is a wake‑up call,” said Crowley. “We must act now to protect the integrity of science and the sanctity of the human mind.”
The warnings come at a time when international security experts are increasingly concerned about the potential misuse of emerging technologies. The prospect of “brain weapons” adds a new dimension to debates about the future of warfare and the adequacy of existing arms control regimes.
As delegates gather in The Hague, Crowley and Dando hope their message will resonate: that the human mind must not become the next battlefield.
