Chemical Warfare

Chemical Warfare

Use of petroleum as a weapon during the Gulf War of 1991-1992

Controls over the use of chemical weapons

Terrorism and chemical weapons

Resources

Chemical warfare involves the use of natural or synthetic substances to incapacitate or kill an enemy or to deny them the use of resources such as agricultural products or screening foliage. The effects of the chemicals may last only a short time, or they may result in permanent physical damage or death. Most of the chemicals used are toxic to humans or plant life. Other, normally mild chemicals have also been intentionally misused in more broadly destructive anti-environmental actions, called ecocide, and as a crude method of causing mayhem and damaging an enemy’s economic system. The deliberate dumping of large quantities of crude oil on the land or in the ocean is an example.

Chemical warfare dates back to the earliest use of weapons. Poisoned arrows and darts used for hunting were also used as weapons in intertribal conflicts; they are still used for these purposes today in some cultures. In 431 BC, the Spartans used burning sulfur and pitch to produce clouds of suffocating sulfur dioxide in their sieges against Athenian cities. When the Romans defeated the Carthaginians of North Africa in 146 BC, during the last of a series of Punic Wars, they leveled the city of Carthage and treated the surrounding fields with salt to destroy the agricultural capability of the land, thereby preventing the rebuilding of the city.

The attraction of chemicals as agents of warfare is their ability to inflict mass casualties or damage to an enemy with only limited risk to the forces using the chemicals. Poisoning a town’s water supply, for example, poses almost no threat to an attacking army, yet can result in the death of thousands of the town’s defenders. In many cases, the chemicals are also undetectable by the enemy until it is too late to take action.

Chemical agents can be classified into several general categories. Some cause only temporary incapacitation. Examples included tear gas and pepper spray. Other agents cause violent skin irritation and blistering and may result in death. Some agents are poisonous and are absorbed into the bloodstream through the lungs or skin to kill the victim. Nerve agents attack the nervous system and kill by causing the body’s vital functions to cease. Still others cause psychological reactions, including dis-orientation and hallucinations. Chemical agents that attack vegetation include: defoliants, which kill plant leaves; herbicides, which kill the entire plant; and soil sterilants, which prevent the growth of new vegetation.

The first large-scale use of poisonous chemicals in warfare occurred during World War I. More than 100,000 tons (90,700 metric tons) of lethal chemicals were used by both sides during several battles in an effort to break the stalemate of endless trench warfare. The most commonly used chemicals were four lung-destroying poisons: chlorine, chloropicrin, phosgene, and trichloromethyl chloroformate, along with a skin-blistering agent known as mustard gas, or bis (2-chloroethyl) sulfide. These poisons caused about 100, 000 deaths and another 1.2 million injuries, almost all of which involved military personnel.

Despite the agreements of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 to ban the use of most chemical weapons, the United States, Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, and other countries all continued development of these weapons during the period between World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945). This development included experimentation on animals and humans. Although there was only limited use of chemical weapons during World War II, the opposing sides had large stockpiles ready to deploy against military and civilian targets.

During the war in Vietnam, the United States military used a nonlethal “harassing agent” during many operations. About 9, 000 tons (8, 167 tonnes) of tear gas, known as CS or o-chlorobenzolmalononitrile, were sprayed over 2.5 million acres (1.0 million ha) of South Vietnam, rendering the areas uninhabitable for 15-45 days. Although CS is classified as non-lethal, several hundred deaths have been reported in

cases when CS has been used in heavy concentrations in confined spaces such as underground bunkers and bomb shelters.

Poisonous chemicals were also used during the Iran-Iraq War of 1981-1987, especially by Iraqi forces. During that war, both soldiers and civilians were targets of chemical weapons. Perhaps the most famous incident was the gassing of Halabja, a town in northern Iraq that had been overrun by Iranian-supported Kurds. The Iraqi military attacked Halabja with two rapidly acting neurotoxins, known as sabin and tabun, which cause rapid death by interfering with the transmission of nerve impulses. About 5, 000 people, mostly civilians, were killed in this incident.

Rumors of stockpiled chemical and biological weapons were a factor behind the invasion of Iraq in 2003 by coalition forces under the leadership of the United States. Large-scale stockpiles were not found.

During the Vietnam War (1954–1975), the U.S. military used large quantities of herbicides to deny their enemies agricultural food production and forest cover. Between 1961 and 1971, about 3.2 million acres (1.3 million ha) of forest and 247, 000 acres (100, 000 ha) of croplands were sprayed at least once. This is an area equivalent to about one-seventh of South Vietnam.

The most commonly used herbicide was called agent orange, a one-to-one blend of two phenoxy herbicides, 2, 4-D and 2, 4, 5-T. Picloram and cacodylic acid were also used, but in much smaller amounts. In total, this military action used about 25, 000 tons of 2, 4-D; 21, 000 tons of 2, 4, 5-T; and 1, 500 tons of picloram. Agent orange was sprayed at a rate of about 22.3 lb/acre (25 kg/ha), equivalent to about ten times the rate at which those same chemicals were used for plant control in forestry. The spray rate was much more intense during warfare, because the intention was to destroy the ecosystems through ecocide, rather than to manage them towards a more positive purpose.

The ecological damage caused by the military use of herbicides in Vietnam was not studied in detail; however, cursory surveys were made by some visiting ecologists. These scientists observed that coastal man-grove forests were especially sensitive to herbicides. About 36% of the mangrove ecosystem of South Vietnam was subjected to herbicides, amounting to 272, 000 acres (110, 000 ha). Almost all of the plant species of mangrove forests proved to be highly vulnerable to herbicides, including the dominant species, the red mangrove. Consequently, mangrove forests were devastated over large areas, and extensive coastal barrens were created.

There were also severe ecological effects of herbicide spraying in the extremely biodiverse upland forests of Vietnam, especially rain forests. Mature tropical forests in this region have many species of hardwood trees. Because this forested ecosystem has such a dense and complexly layered canopy, a single spraying of herbicide killed only about 10% of the larger trees. Resprays of upland forests were often made, however, to achieve a greater and longer-lasting defoliation. To achieve this effect, about 34% of the area of Vietnam that was subjected to herbicides was treated more than once.

The effects on animals of the herbicide spraying in Vietnam were not well documented; however, there are many accounts of sparse populations of birds, mammals, reptiles, and other animals in the herbicide-treated mangrove forests and of large decreases in the yield of near-shore fisheries, for which an intact mangrove ecosystem provides important spawning and nursery habitat. More than a decade after the war, Vietnamese ecologists examined an inland valley that had been converted by herbicide spraying from a rich upland tropical forest into a degraded ecosystem dominated by grasses and shrubs. The secondary, degraded landscape only supported 24 species of birds and five species of mammals, compared with 145-170 birds and 30-55 mammals in nearby unsprayed forests.

The effects on wild animals were probably caused mostly by habitat changes resulting from herbicide spraying. There were also numerous reports of domesticated agricultural animals becoming ill or dying. Because of the constraints of warfare, the specific causes of these illnesses and deaths were never studied properly by veterinary scientists; however, these ailments were commonly attributed to toxic effects of exposure to herbicides, mostly ingested with their food.

Use of petroleum as a weapon during the Gulf War of 1991-1992

Large quantities of petroleum are often spilled at sea during warfare, mostly through the shelling of tankers or facilities such as offshore production platforms. During the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s and the brief Gulf War of 1991-1992, oil spills were deliberately used to gain tactical advantage, as well as to inflict economic damages on the postwar economy.

The world’s all-time largest oceanic spill of petroleum occurred during the Gulf War, when the Iraqi military deliberately released almost 1.0 million tons (907, 441 tonnes) of crude oil into the Persian Gulf from several tankers and an offshore facility for loading tankers. In part, the oil was spilled to establish a defensive barrier against an amphibious counter-invasion of Kuwait by coalition forces. Presumably, if the immense quantities of spilled petroleum could have been ignited, the floating inferno might have provided an effective barrier to a seaborne invasion. The spilled oil might also have created some military advantage by contaminating the seawater intakes of Saudi Arabian desalination plants, which supply most of that nation’s fresh water and, therefore, have great strategic value.

Another view is that this immense spillage of petroleum into the ocean was simply intended to wreak economic and ecological havoc. Certainly, there was no other reason for the even larger spillages that were deliberately caused when Iraqi forces sabotaged and ignited the wellheads of 788 Kuwaiti oil wells on land. This act caused enormous releases of petroleum and combustion residues to the land and air for the following year. Although the wells were capped, there will be lingering pollution of the land for many decades.

Controls over the use of chemical weapons

The first treaty to control the use of chemical weapons was the Geneva Protocol, which was negotiated in 1925 and subsequently signed by the representatives of 132 nations. The Geneva Protocol was stimulated by the horrific uses of chemical weapons during World War I. It banned the use of asphyxiating, poisonous, or other gases, as well as bacteriological methods of warfare. In spite of signing this treaty, it is well known that all major nations subsequently engaged in research towards the development of new, more effective chemical and bacteriological weapons.

In 1993, negotiators for various nations finalized the Chemical Weapons Convention, which would require the destruction of all chemical weapons within 10-15 years of the ratification of the treaty. This treaty has been signed by 147 nations, but it is not yet being enforced. The Chemical Weapons Convention is an actual pact to achieve a disarmament of chemical weapons; however, its effectiveness depends on its ratification by all countries having significant stockpiles of chemical weapons, their subsequent good faith actions in executing the provisions of the treaty, and

KEY TERMS

Defoliant— A chemical that kills the leaves of plants and causes them to fall off.

Ecocide— The deliberate carrying out of anti-environmental actions over a large area as a tactical element of a military strategy.

Harassing agent— A chemical which causes temporary incapacitation of animals, including humans.

Herbicide— A chemical that kills entire plants; herbicide action can be selective.

Nerve agent— A chemical that kills animals, including humans, by attacking the nervous system and inhibiting vital functions such as respiration and heartbeat.

the effectiveness of the associated international monitoring program to detect non-compliance.

Terrorism and chemical weapons

Chemicals in the hands of terrorists hold a grave potential for disaster; indeed, chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons have been dubbed “weapons of mass destruction.” In 1995, the Japanese sect called Aum Shinrikyo unleashed sarin gas in a Tokyo subway. Twelve people died, and 5, 000 were sickened from the attack; experts claim that the toll should have been higher but for the terrorists’ minor errors. Counterterrorism forces have been established by various Federal agencies, but the substances and handbooks for synthesizing chemicals are available on the Internet, through the mail, and at survivalist shows. Dangers of dispersing chemicals (including effects of the weather) may dissuade some, but there are unknown quantities, such as who might have a grudge and the knowledge to choose chemicals as weapons. In addition, the location and speed of a chemical attack might make nuclear weapons seem better controlled and less dangerous by comparison.

Resources

BOOKS

Charles, Daniel. Master Mind: The Rise and Fall of Fritz Haber, the Nobel Laureate Who Launched the Age of Chemical Warfare. New York: Ecco, 2005.

Coleman, Kim. A History of Chemical Warfare. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005.

Tucker, Jonathan. War of Nerves: Chemical Warfare from World War I to al-Qaeda. New York: Pantheon, 2006.

PERIODICALS

“Better Killing Through Chemistry.” Scientific American. (December 2001).

Byrne, W. Russell, et al., “Clinical Recognition and Management of Patients Exposed to Biological Warfare Agents,” Laboratory Aspects of Biowarfare (Clinics in Laboratory Medicine) 21, No. 3, (September 2001): 459.

Dire, D. J., and T. W. McGovern. “CBRNE—Biological Warfare Agents.” eMedicine Journal no. 4 (April 2002): 1-39.

OTHER

“US Knew of Bioterror Tests in Iraq.” BBC News. August 20, 2002.

Bill Freedman

Chris Cavette