US plan to strike enemy with Valium
Pentagon scientists aim for future battlefield victories with the aid of tranquillising drugs and GM bugs
Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
Sunday May 26, 2002
The Observer
American military chiefs are developing plans to use Valium as a potential weapon against enemy forces and to control hostile populations, according to official documents seen by The Observer.
The Pentagon has also asked scientists to evaluate proposals to use genetically modified bugs that 'eat' the enemy's fuel and ammunition supplies without harming humans.
The development of these 'non-lethal' weapons angers campaigners who claim that they would breach international treaties on biological and chemical weapons.
US documents reveal that two years ago the Pentagon commissioned scientists at Pennsylvania State University to look at potential military uses for a range of chemicals known as calmatives. The scientists concluded that several drugs would be effective to control crowds or in military operations such as anti-terrorist campaigns. The drugs they recommended for 'immediate consideration' included diazepam, better known as the tranquilliser Valium, and dexmedetomidine, used to sedate patients in intensive care. The scientists advised that these drugs can 'effectively act on central nervous system tissues and produces a less anxious, less aggressive, more tranquil-like behaviour'.
Other official documents reveal how genetically engineered micro-organisms to destroy equipment but not harm troops are also being considered by US military scientists as 'non-lethal' weapons. One proposal from the Office of Naval Research in Arlington, Virginia, proposes creating genetically modified bugs that would corrode roads and runways and produce 'targeted deterioration of metal parts, coatings and lubricants of weapons vehicles and support equipment as well as fuels'.
This group of scientists has already patented micro-organisms that would decompose polyurethane, 'a common component of paint for ships and aircraft'. Another proposal from a biotech laboratory at Brooks air force base in Texas was to modify 'anti-material biocatalysts' already under development. One of these breaks down fuels and plastics.
Most of the research was funded by Washington's joint non-lethal weapons programme, in which Britain plays an active part. But further US documents, also seen by The Observer, reveal how a split has developed between the two nations, with British officials backing campaigners' claims that using drugs such as Valium or other calmatives would be outlawed under the 1991 Chemical Weapons Convention. This protocol prohibits 'any chemical which... can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm'.
A report of a meeting in the Ministry of Defence's headquarters in London in November 2000 states: 'The US and UK interpret the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) differently regarding riot control agents (RCA). The UK interpretation considers them to be chemical weapons under the CWC and thus proscribed; the US view is that they are not banned under that agreement. This could lead to difficulties in combined operations in certain circumstances, a situation compounded by the fact that the UK is a signatory to the European Convention of Human Rights, which further governs the use of NLW [non-lethal weapons].'
Some experts believe the use of genetically-modified microbes in military operations would breach the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
Ed Hammond of the Sunshine Project - the US campaigners against biological and chemical weapons that obtained the documents - said: 'What is absolutely shocking about these disclosures is that it represents either a massive institutional failure to implement US commitments under international treaties or it reflects an effort by some people in the Pentagon to undermine those treaties.'
A US military spokesman has denied that the Pentagon is developing 'non-lethal' biological or chemical weapons.
A spokesman from the Foreign Office said: 'There are discussions between Britain and the US on all sorts of technical issues. But we both share a commitment to comply with all the international conventions governing chemical and biological weapons.'
