There is a moral point to be made here. This war was about Iraq possessing illegal weapons of mass destruction – yet we are using weapons of mass destruction ourselves… Such double-standards are repellent.¹

We had a great day… We killed a lot of people.²

Under Operation Iraqi Freedom

With the international media deliberately focused on overly publicized, highly exaggerated images of a few Iraqis dancing in the streets of Iraq, most international observers were spared images of the horrific devastation inflicted on the civilian population of Iraq. The tons of missiles and bombs being hurled at Iraq caused unspeakable savagery in a country that had already been bombed to the pre-industrial age in the 1991 Gulf War and devastated by more than twelve years of US-instigated sanctions. The current strategy of the US in its wars against both Afghanistan and Iraq is the ultimate culmination of its disregard for the sanctity of human life and its obliviousness to the human cost of war, as long as those bearing the brunt of its military actions are hapless civilians in Islamic countries with no recourse to the giant apologetic propaganda machine that the US has at its disposal.    

Despite multiple atrocities and flagrantly genocidal policies by the US in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the US suddenly discovered the virtues of international law when five of its captured soldiers were displayed on Iraqi television. Donald Rumsfeld, the champion of mass distortion, immediately complained that “it is against international law to show photographs of prisoners of war in a manner that is humiliating to them.”    

Rumsfeld seems to ignore the thousands of tons of depleted uranium used by US forces, as well as the thousands of unexploded cluster bomblets acting as death traps for the children of Afghanistan and Iraq. He seems to cast aside the fact that his own troops, alongside General Abdul Rashid Dostum’s forces, took part in the killing of several hundred, possibly thousands, of Taliban POWs being transported in container lorries near Mazar-i-Sharif in Afghanistan. Some reports indicate that as many as 8,000 surrendering Taliban soldiers were never seen again, and that Dostum’s men had been instructed by US Special Forces to “get rid of the bodies before satellite pictures can be taken.” Rumsfeld is also reminded that 641 men in Guantanamo Bay were not encouraged to address the cameras, but rather were forced to kneel on the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, were wearing blacked-out goggles and earmuffs and subjected to sleep deprivation and constant exposure to bright light.    

It is not hard, therefore, to see why the US government fought first to prevent the establishment of the international criminal court, and then to ensure that its own citizens are not subject to its jurisdiction. On that note, it seems that the five US soldiers that appeared on Iraqi television were lucky that they were prisoners, not of American forces “fighting for civilization,” but of the “barbaric and inhuman” Iraqis.³

The Institutionalization of Weapons of Terror    

Afghani children were primary victims of US bombing in Kabul

To determine that US-sponsored acts constitute a threat to the civilian populations of both Afghanistan and Iraq and represent a material breach of multiple resolutions and human rights conventions, one has only to assess the ghastly impact of depleted uranium (DU) and cluster bombs on future generations in those two countries. The citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan now need to not only contemplate the tragic loss of life suffered in the intense US bombing campaign, but also to deal with higher cancer rates, birth deformities, genetic mutations, contaminated water sources and lost limbs for decades to come.

The insistence on the use of those two deadly weapons falls in line with the brutal “shock and awe” military strategy devised by the Pentagon’s well-known and pro-Israeli Harlan Ullman, who was the Navy’s “head of extended planning.” One of his students was Secretary of State Colin Powell, who praised Ullman saying: “He raised my vision several times.”⁴ In many ways, the “shock and awe” strategy is based on the so-called “Rapid Dominance” battle plan that was drawn up by the Pentagon-run National Defense University in 1996 – that is, under the Clinton Administration and well before the events of September 11. The concept was then dubbed “shock and awe” because it seeks to quickly overwhelm the enemy psychologically through the use of military brute force, and by extension it also seeks to intimidate the enemy’s population. In the words of Ullman, the strategy would have a “simultaneous effect, rather like the nuclear weapons at Hiroshima, not taking days or weeks but minutes.”

Since September 11, the US has officially modified its strategic posture to involve all types of weapons in its so-called “war against terror.” Under a classified Pentagon nuclear posture review, signed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and issued in final form in early 2002, nuclear weapons could be employed “in the event of surprising military developments.” In addition, the White House has significantly lowered the nuclear threshold by removing nuclear weapons from their long established special category and lumping them with all other military options – such as special forces, covert operations, cyber warfare, “strategic deception,” psychological warfare and air power.⁵ In short, the US has legitimized the use of all weapons in its arsenal and thus opened the door for massive abuses and genocidal acts.

Occult Genocide & Depleted Uranium - The Silent Killer    

Iraqi child born with DU deformity

Depleted uranium is a by-product of the processes through which uranium is converted for use as nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons. Although considerably less radioactive than uranium, DU still has a half-life in the billions of years, as it possesses 60% of the radioactivity of ordinary uranium.⁶ DU has become a weapon of choice for the US military, as it can penetrate deep into several meters of reinforced concrete or rock in seconds. Furthermore, when a DU-tipped weapon (usually in the form of a bunker-buster bomb or an anti-tank shell) reaches its target, it is detonated, producing an explosive and incendiary effect.⁷ Once burnt, DU forms a black radioactive dust which when inhaled is believed to have devastating consequences involving cancer and genetic mutations among victims and their offspring.⁸

Depleted uranium is much cheaper than the existing alternative metal, Tungsten. In effect, the US military is trading off lower costs for increased health hazards by insisting on using DU munitions, which are considered weapons of mass destruction insofar as the consequences of their usage are indiscriminate.⁹    

In the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, British and American coalition forces used DU shells, deliberately flouting a UN resolution that classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction. According to an August 2002 report by the UN sub commission, laws which are breached by the use of DU shells include: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the Convention Against Torture; the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980. Moreover, the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 expressly forbid employing “poisons or poisoned weapons” and “arms, projectiles or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering.”     

Child of US Gulf War veteran born with DU deformity

In the 1991 Gulf War, the US-led Allied forces fired more than 944,000 DU rounds and some 2,700 tons of DU-tipped bombs. A UK Atomic Energy Authority Report stated that around 500,000 Iraqis would die before the end of the century due to radioactive debris left in the desert. The use of DU is also believed to be the cause of birth defects in the children of Allied veterans and among Iraqi children. Despite the fact that only one in 50 million births should be anopthalmic (babies born without eyes), one Baghdad hospital had eight cases in just two years. During the 1991 Gulf War, the Pentagon admitted that more than 320 metric tons of DU were left on the battlefield, with some Russian experts saying that 1,000 metric tons is a more accurate figure.¹⁰

Since 1991, more than 1.2 million Iraqis have died from soaring mortality rates since US-led UN sanctions were imposed in 1990. The July 1999 UNICEF Report on Mortality Rates from 1979-1999 revealed that Infant Mortality Rates increased from 47 deaths per 1000 live births for the period 1984-89, to 108 deaths per 1000 live births for the period 1994-99. Mortality rates for children under five increased over the same time period from 56 deaths per 1000 live births, to 131 deaths per 1000 live births.     

In 1999, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimated that the effects of 700-800 metric tons of DU weapons would kill half a million Iraqis near and around Basra, a city of 1.5 million inhabitants. In the recent war, US-UK forces used a much greater amount of DU, estimated above 2,000 tons as of early April. The DU ammunition was mainly used against Iraqi tanks in the desert near Basra.¹¹ In March-April 2003, a much larger quantity (more than 2,000 tons) was used in the immediate vicinity of residential areas of five million people in the heart of Baghdad. Based on previous research on the impact of DU, it is likely that the casualty toll will surpass one million deaths over the next few years. Moreover, the increased number of birth deformities and cancer in Iraq since the war of 1991 (cancer increased between seven and ten times and deformities between four and six times) will in all probability be greatly increased by the much larger quantities of DU weapons deployed in Baghdad and elsewhere in the recent war.    

In early December, Philip Coyle, a senior advisor to the Washington-based Center for Defense Information, said that DU was being employed heavily in Afghanistan. Other reports surfacing in November 2002 indicated that US forces had used more DU weapons in Afghanistan than they had in the 1991 Gulf War and the Balkans. In fact, some estimates predict that ten times more DU was used in Afghanistan than in the 1991 Gulf War. In early November 2002, reports of the birth of disabled and deformed children in Afghanistan began surfacing. Other concerns involve the use of DU-containing bunker-busting bombs being dropped on Taliban fighters in underground caves and tunnels, hence threatening the underground water supply in Afghanistan, should DU manage to seep into rivers and underground aquifers.    

However, the risks in densely populated target zones, such as Kabul, are more serious – DU oxide is likely to contaminate the soil, buildings and water.¹² On January 16^th, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld admitted that the US had found traces of radioactivity from DU in Afghanistan, but attributed such to the “nefarious” acts of al-Qa’eda, neglecting to explain how al-Qa’eda had been able to launch DU munitions without advanced military equipment to deploy them in the first place.    

None of the official US military literature on the health hazards of DU examines the long-term health risks posed by DU on resident civilian populations, or military troops from other nations maintaining a standing peacekeeping force. The focus is simply on the exposure of US troops passing by destroyed enemy tanks devastated by DU strikes. It must be noted that just as DU was a factor in the so-called Persian Gulf War syndrome that afflicted almost 200,000 veterans of the conflict with neurological disorders, cancers, and deformed children, many soldiers participating in the Balkans peacekeeping mission have complained of higher rates of cancer and leukemia among their troops.¹³ The official US military stance on its use of DU is clear – it has no plans to further investigate claims or remove any debris left over its use of DU weapons. This excerpt from the Depleted Uranium Factsheet of the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s website demonstrates the extent of US hypocrisy and denial:

DU is only mildly radioactive… The threat of chemical toxicity would also be minimal because there is little likelihood that sufficient quantities of DU could be inhaled or ingested to cause a heavy metal concern.¹⁴  

Conclusions    

US wars in the Muslim world have once again displayed flagrant hypocrisy and a blatant disregard for human life. As long as the victims of US policies have no recourse to CNN, ABC or FOX News, and do not have the luxury of media outlets dedicated to replaying their miseries and ill-fortunes, it becomes acceptable to do them harm. Ironically, when 3,000 Americans were killed in the WTC attacks, there was an international uproar: images of the attacks were replayed thousands of times, numerous conferences were held, religious scholars were forced to denounce “terrorism,” articles and books were published deploring the “terrorists” and suggesting multiple means of revenge against the “perpetrators of such atrocities.” Additionally, immediate official justification for US military action was given, signaling the beginning of an age of US wars. However, when millions die in the Muslim world and future generations are forsaken as a result of the genocidal policies of arrogant great powers, it is considered “business as usual.”   

Indeed, the world today is not only a world of multiple and competing interests, but multiple standards of justice, depending on where you come from and how much influence you command. As Aristotle once rightly noted: “Man when perfected is the best of all animals but when separated from law and justice, he is the worst of all.”  

Kareem M. Kamel is an Egyptian freelance writer based in Cairo, Egypt. He has an MA in International Relations and is specialized in security studies, decision-making, nuclear politics, Middle East politics and the politics of Islam. He is currently assistant to the Political Science Department at the American University in Cairo.

[1] Neil Mackay, “US Forces’ Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal,” Sunday Herald March 30^th 2003

[2] Nidal Sakr, “The Shock and Awe Photo Gallery,” April 23^rd, 2003

[3] George Monbiot, “One Rule For Them,” Common Dreams March 25^th, 2003

[4] Nidal Sakr, “The Shock and Awe Photo Gallery,”  April 23^rd, 2003

[5] Henry Michaels, “US Plans ‘Shock and Awe’ Blitzkrieg in Iraq,” World Socialist Website January 30^th, 2003

[6] Jusuf Fuduli, “The Politics of Depleted Uranium,” Inventory of Conflict and Environment May 2002.

[7] Robert James Parsons, “America’s Big Dirty Secret,” Le Monde Diplomatique March 2002

[8] “Was Depleted Uranium Used in Afghanistan?” ABC Network July 1^st, 2002

[9] Marc W. Herold, “Uranium Wars: The Pentagon Steps Up its Use of Radioactive Munitions,” Cursor November 13^th, 2002

[10] Neil Mackay, “US Forces’ Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal,” Sunday Herald March 30^th 2003

[11] Christian Scherrer, “DU and the Liberation of Iraq,” Znet  April 13^th, 2003 Also view, http://www.unicef.org/reseval/pdfs/irqscont.pdf

[12] Marc W. Herold, “Uranium Wars: The Pentagon Steps Up its Use of Radioactive Munitions,” Cursor November 13^th, 2002

[13] Robert James Parsons, “America’s Big Dirty Secret,” Le Monde Diplomatique March 2002

[14] Alex Kirby, “US Rejects Iraq DU Clean Up,” BBC News April 14^th, 2003  

The articles posted on this page reflect solely the opinions of the authors. Views Archive Advanced Search Views & Analyses