from Sunday Herald, 03 April 2011
The countries involved in air strikes on Colonel Gaddafi’s forces in Libya are coming under mounting pressure to ban the use of toxic depleted uranium (DU) weapons because of the dangers they could pose to civilians.
The US has refused to rule out the use DU shells in Libya, though it claims not to have fired any so far. “I don't want to speculate on what may or may not be used in the future,” the US air force spokeswoman, Paula Kurtz, told the Sunday Herald yesterday.
The US has admitted to using A-10 tankbuster aircraft in the conflict. They are designed to destroy armoured cars and tanks, and are capable of firing 3,900 armour-piercing DU-tipped shells every minute.
But Kurtz insisted that so far the A-10s had not been loaded with DU ammunition, but with other shells instead. “Weapons with depleted uranium have not been used in Libya,” she said.
But this doesn’t satisfy critics, who say that the US has sometimes been economical with the truth about the use of DU weapons in the past. “We continue to seek a cast iron guarantee that depleted uranium has not been used and will not be used in Libya,” said Kate Hudson, the general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.
“Despite their claim, the US has a long history of only admitting to deploying this radioactive material months or years after it has been used – mostly when the health effects on civilians or allied troops have already become apparent.”
Hudson said it took the US six years to own up to dropping thousands of DU shells in the Balkans. “Without a political commitment which completely rules out firing uranium-tipped rounds, we cannot be satisfied that it is not just the tactical consideration of air force commanders from one day to the next as to whether this toxic material is used,” she added.
DU is a radioactive and chemically toxic heavy metal produced as waste by the nuclear industry. It has been widely used by UK and US military forces to harden armour-piercing shells fired in the Gulf, Balkans and Iraq wars, and is thought to be in use by around 18 other countries, including France, Israel, Russia, China and Saudi Arabia.
When DU weapons burn, they release a hazardous dust which can contaminate wide areas. Civilians and soldiers exposed to the contamination claim to have suffered from cancers, birth defects and other illnesses as a result.
“DU weapons are weapons of indiscriminate effect,” argued Hudson. “Using them in built up areas in effect targets civilians. This runs counter to everything the coalition has claimed about protecting civilians.”
The British Prime Minister, David Cameron, has said that DU has not been used and will not be used in Libya. But the UK’s only DU weapons are fired from Challenger tanks, which are not involved in enforcing the no-fly zone across Libya.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD), however, insists that DU remains part of its armoury. "DU anti-armour munitions will remain part of our arsenal for the foreseeable future because we have a duty to provide our troops with the best available equipment with which to protect them and succeed in conflict,” says the MoD website.
The Labour MP, John McDonnell, has written to Cameron, urging him to put pressure on the US not to deploy DU weapons. “The stated purpose of our actions in Libya is to protect civilians,” he said. “This will not be accomplished if we, or our allies, use depleted uranium weapons.”
He added: “These weapons have the potential to cause long term health risks to
civilian populations recovering in post-conflict zones. We have seen cancer and birth defect epidemics in Iraqi cities where it is believed that these weapons have been used.”
Bill Wilson, the Scottish Nationalist candidate for Lothian region, called for a complete ban on DU weapons. “Why the US Air Force remains silent yet continues to allow the use of a waste product of the nuclear industry in their weapons beggars belief,” he said.
“The use of depleted uranium weapons in any conflict is a cause of great concern and will always cause alarm and suspicions across the world wherever it has been used.”
In a letter to Wilson in February, the British defence secretary, Liam Fox, said: “The MoD does not consider DU is 'safe'. It is hazardous.” But he refused to back a United Nations draft resolution expressing concerns about its use.
“The government’s policy remains that DU can be used within weapons. It is not prohibited under current or likely future international agreements,” added Fox. “It would be quite wrong to deny our serving personnel a legitimate capability.”
Fox’s remarks were “astounding”, according to Wilson. “Causing disproportionate civilian casualties is a crime against humanity,” he said. “There has long been significant evidence of the potential for DU weapons to cause significant health problems.”
Comments