Veritably, in the wake of the ongoing global war on COVID-19, nothing seems so much important than to have a profound adherence to saving humanity from the future infliction of diseases via biological warfare. The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), officially known as “Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction” – entered into force on March 26, 1975, and 183 nations signed it, is a legally binding treaty that outlaws biological arms. In making the fresh call to ban biological weapons on the occasion of the 45th anniversary (March 26) of the Biological Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) coming into force, the world nations made mention of the fast-spreading coronavirus and its global impact. This was the very end-result of United Nations’ disarmament negotiations that started in 1969 that the BWC remained opened for signature on April 10, 1972, and subsequently, it entered into force on March 26, 1975. It currently has 183 states-parties, including Palestine Authority (PA) and four signatories: Egypt, Haiti, Somalia, Syria, and Tanzania. Ten states that have neither signed nor ratified the BWC are Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Israel, Kiribati, Micronesia, Namibia, South Sudan and Tuvalu. Since 1975 the BWC has symbolically remained the bedrock of disarmament and international security. It remains the first international treaty to ban an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. The international community’s action to prohibit the weaponisation of biological agents is a significant step towards making this world a safer place. The Russian Federation, as a founding father of the Convention and its depositary, attaches utmost importance to universalizing the BWC as well as to improving its implementation. Unfortunately, for the last 45 years, we looked at the BWC with a very myopic vision and never revitalized its scope of addressing the challenges associated with handling the pandemics Objectively, the BWC is important because it represents the international community’s will to prevent biological warfare and the deliberate use of disease as a weapon. It is the first disarmament treaty to completely ban an entire class of weapons. The Convention is an indispensable legal and political instrument that reinforces the widespread condemnation of biological weapons. Principally, the BWC complements the Geneva Protocol, which banned biological warfare methods in 1925. Although the BWC (in its title and in Article I) does not explicitly prohibit “use” of biological weapons, the Final Declaration of the 1996 Treaty Review Conference reaffirmed that, although “use” is not explicitly prohibited under Article I of the BWC, it is still considered to be a violation of the Convention. The BWC: forbids: a-States Parties from developing, producing, stockpiling, or otherwise acquiring biological agents or toxins that have no justification for peaceful or defensive purposes; b-forbids States Parties from developing, producing, stockpiling, or otherwise acquiring equipment to deliver biological agents or toxins for hostile purposes; c-obligates States Parties to destroy or divert to peaceful purposes their existing stocks of prohibited items; d-forbids States Parties from transferring prohibited items to anyone or otherwise helping in the manufacture or acquisition of biological weapons; e-protects the rights of States Parties to exchange equipment, materials, and scientific and technological information for peaceful purposes in order to avoid hampering their economic and technological development; f-commits States Parties to cooperate in solving any problems through consultation and in carrying out any investigation initiated by the UN Security Council; h–commits States Parties to provide assistance to others that have been attacked using biological weapons. Unfortunately, the BWC does not foster a verification regime to ensure compliance with the Convention. Although Article VI does state that any State Party which suspects any other State Party to be acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the United Nations Security Council, which may, in turn, carry out an investigation, this instrument remains unused as yet . At the 1986 and 1991 BWC Review Conferences, the important CBMs were agreed. These consist of an exchange of information: states should report annually on relevant biological activities, on civilian research and production facilities as well as on national biodefense programmes. Sadly, only some 40 per cent of the States Parties participate in the CBMs each year. Importantly since an EU Joint Action was active on the issue in 2006, all EU member states have had submitted annual CBM returns. Yet, Germany is one of the few countries which permit their annual returns to be published on the website of the BWC Implementation Support Unit (ISU). Furthermore, Germany is campaigning with Switzerland and Norway for CBM returns to be more readily comprehensible and translated into all UN languages so that they can be evaluated more easily. As yet, however, no formal decision has been taken on this. Today, the emerging threats posed to the global community owing to the COVID-19 are so enormous that actually every country is a bit confused. Obviously, the world is not prepared to tackle the challenge of such enormity. It is a reality that no country in the world was actually prepared to address the threat of this mega nature. And yet, what we have had been lacking since the outbreaks of SARS and MERS is our profound endowment to quickly develop a vaccine/antidote to any disease spread. Unfortunately, for the last 45 years, we looked at the BWC with a very myopic vision and never revitalized its scope of addressing the challenges associated with handling the pandemics. This ongoing lack of an enforcement mechanism, a real calumny, has undermined the effectiveness of the BWC, as it is unable to prevent systematic violations by the so-called global powers. The US officially holds the conviction: the USA is not in a position to police other countries because violations to this policy also occur here in American Level 3 and Level 4 labs. Ironically, the world powers do not rely solely on nuclear weapons, missiles, warplanes and tanks but they also use biological weapons including different types of viruses. Genetics experts also make viruses in laboratories through genetic engineering. However, the United Nations has banned the creation and use of these types of weapons. Yet, it is ostensibly clear that world powers have invented viruses in order to use these as a biological weapon without realizing the potential of its fatal destruction. Biological weapons via bioterrorism may spread some deadly germs, bacteria, and mildew. Today, the BWC needs urgent institutional and operational strengthening whilst addressing collectively legal, financial, technical and other challenges that the Convention continues to face. There arises an exigency of revising the said treaty with pragmatics dynamics/approaches evolved because of the grave implications of the ongoing Coronavirus that demand inclusion of any….objective clause to be inducted into it. The writer is an independent ‘IR’ researcher and international law analyst based in Pakistan