0LFKDHO/*URVV

Asymmetric warfare is creating a new frontierfor bioethics as military organizations rushto develop nonlethal, medicalized weapons. Faced with small but increasingly sophisticated guer-rilla organizations that intermingle at will with the civilian population, the United States and many of its allies are searching for ways to disable insurgents while minimizing harm to civilians. One avenue is to build increasingly sophisticated “precision-guided munitions”—“smart, ” high-explosive bombs that, in theory, zero in on and destroy their targets without widespread collateral damage. However, these weapons—the purview of electronics and ballistic experts—can only go so far. Very often, there are no clearly defined guerrilla targets, or, as often happens, the targets are destroyed early on. Nonlethal weapons are an increasingly attractive option for rooting out insurgents without bringing catastrophic harm to civilians. Rather than disabling or killing enemy forces by causing traumatic injury, nonlethal weapons temporarily incapacitate their targets by causing physical distress, disorientation, or unconsciousness. These weapons are “medicalized” in that they rely on advances in neuroscience, physi-“Medicalized ” weapons—those that rely on advances in neuroscience, physiology, and pharmacology—offer the prospect of reducing casualties and protecting civilians. They could be especially useful in modern asymmetric wars in which conventional states are pitted against guerrilla or insurgent forces. But may physicians and other medical workers participate in their development