No killing, just more pain for
Iraq By David Isenberg
WASHINGTON - It is a military axiom that every
war is a testing ground for something - tactics, weapons,
doctrine, logistic support arrangements, etc.
US forces in Iraq are continuing that tradition. But
this time the lab rat is something distinctly
unconventional: weapons that are less than lethal, commonly referred to
as non-lethal weapons (NLW).
NLW are
something the military has been working on for a number
of years. It's part sci-fi - think of "set phasers on
stun" from Star Trek,
and a lot of experimentation in both military
and civilian labs.
The idea of
using NLW to avoid death or permanent injury isn't
new. A report commissioned by the US National
Science Foundation in 1971 on possible uses for law enforcement
called for the development of non-lethal weapons such
as soft-plastic ricochet rounds, lasers and foam generators. And
since then many civilian law-enforcement agencies have
supported research into NLW in an effort to come up with
an alternative to shooting someone or using a nightstick
or other blunt-force instrument.
But in the
early 1990s, NLW began receiving high-level attention from the
Pentagon. Military planners operated on the assumption
that US forces would intervene overseas. But
increasingly, they believed these interventions would be
in civil and ethnic conflicts or peacekeeping operations
such as have taken place in Somalia, Haiti and Bosnia,
or limited attacks, such as in Panama and Grenada, what
the military calls "operations other than war".
NLW first gained attention thanks to Somalia.
When US forces escorted the last of the United Nations
peacekeepers out of there they used a variety of
non-lethals that already had proved effective in law
enforcement, including "sticky foam", a sprayable
substance that can glue a suspect to the ground; stinger
grenades that explode into rubber shrapnel that deters;
and spikes called caltrops capable of puncturing tires.
NLW were considered especially valuable in
non-traditional operations where high collateral damage
can inflame the situation, put US lives at risk, and
undermine the political objectives of the mission. The
idea was that non-lethal weapons could disable or
incapacitate soldiers and equipment while causing
minimal damage to civilians and property.
Of
course, at that time NLW were not being considered for
fighting an insurgency while occupying a country, but
the core mission of incapacitating but not killing
people remains the same.
NLW have
always labored under the erroneous assumption that
nobody gets killed. This can't be guaranteed. A study
released by the Pentagon's Defense Science Board in 1994
found that "a usually non-lethal weapon may cause
unintended lethality under certain conditions: A stun
gun could kill someone with a weak heart. A 'rubber'
bullet could hit a particularly vulnerable body part
like the throat, and thus become lethal. And microwave
devices could have unintended affects."
Still,
the concept has gained support. In March the Defense
Science Board issued a report that, among other
things, called for developing chemical agents, ie
"calmative agents", for temporarily incapacitating
humans.
As it turns out, the Pentagon had
reportedly deployed such chemical agents to the Persian
Gulf last year prior to the start of the war.
The military's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons
Directorate (JNLWD) in Quantico, Virginia, the
coordinating body for US military NLW research, always
claims its products are non-lethal. But since their
programs operate under high classification it is
difficult to be certain. When there isn't any public or
legal policy discussion, one does not know if their use
is consistent with international law.
Plus,
given the variability among people, it is unlikely that
what is non-lethal for one person will be the same for
someone else. When it comes to chemical and biological
"non-lethal" weapons, which are prohibited by treaty,
JNLWD has the most explaining - and disclosing - to do.
The Boston Globe reported on September 24 that
the US military is considering deploying a directed
energy weapon to Iraq. The device, informally known as a
pain ray, and formally as the Active Denial System
(ADS), shoots an invisible beam of energy that leaves a
burning sensation on the skin even through clothing. It
operates by heating the water molecules in the skin with
microwave energy.
The ADS reportedly can operate
beyond small-arms range, enabling an operator to deter a
foe long before a potentially fatal clash occurs.
The weapon is made by Raytheon. The
Marine Corps and other services have paid at least US$51
million over 11 years to develop the technology.
Raytheon, which developed the ADS for the Pentagon, says it
is testing it in the field and fixing technical
glitches before delivering a working system mounted on a
Humvee that will be named Sheriffs, which may be
delivered this year. US Army and Marine Corps units should
receive four to six ADS-equipped Sheriffs by next September. But
even if it is deployed, this will hardly be the first NLW
in Iraq. Others are already there.
For example,
the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), a device that can
shoot compact sound waves across several hundred meters
at up to 150 decibels, is for fending off insurgents,
dispersing crowds, and flushing out buildings. It was developed after the 2000 attack on the
USS Cole off Yemen as a way to keep operators of small
boats from approaching US warships.
In February,
the marines signed a $1.1 million contract for the
devices; the I Marine Expeditionary Force took them to
Fallujah and the navy's 5th Fleet has them in the
Persian Gulf.
David Isenberg, a senior
analyst with the Washington-based British American
Security Information Council (BASIC), has a wide
background in arms control and national security issues.
The views expressed are his own.
(Copyright
2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
