Weapons of Mass Destruction: An Encyclopedia of Worldwide Policy, Technology, and History; Volume I: Chemical and Biological Weapons and Volume II:: ... Technology, and History

466 Pages·2004·4.89 MB·English

by  James J. Wirtz, Eric A. Croddy, Jeffrey A. Larsen

Weapons of
Mass Destruction
An Encyclopedia of Worldwide Policy,
Technology, and History
Eric A. Croddy and James J. Wirtz, Editors
Jeffrey A. Larsen, Managing Editor
Foreword by David Kay
Volume I: Chemical and Biological Weapons
Eric A. Croddy, Editor
Santa Barbara, California Denver, Colorado Oxford, England
Copyright 2005 by Eric A. Croddy, James J. Wirtz, and Jeffrey A. Larsen
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except for the inclusion of brief
quotations in a review, without prior permission in writing from the publishers.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Weapons of mass destruction : an encyclopedia of worldwide policy, technology, and history / Eric A. Croddy and
James J. Wirtz, editors.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 1-85109-490-3 (hardback : alk. paper)—ISBN 1-85109-495-4 (e-book)
1. Weapons of mass destruction—Encyclopedias. I. Croddy, Eric, 1966– II. Wirtz, James J., 1958–
U793.W427 2005
358'.3'03—dc22 2004024651
0807060510987654321
This book is also available on the World Wide Web as an eBook. Visit abc-clio.com for details.
ABC-CLIO, Inc.
130 Cremona Drive, P.O. Box 1911
Santa Barbara, California 93116–1911
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Manufactured in the United States of America
Contents
Weapons of Mass Destruction
An Encyclopedia of Worldwide Policy, Technology, and History
Volume I: Chemical and Biological Weapons
Foreword, vii
Preface: Weapons of Mass Destruction, ix
Editors and Contributors, xiii
A-to-Z List of Entries, Volumes I and II, xvii
Introduction: Chemical and Biological Weapons, xxv
Chronology: Chemical and Biological Weapons, xxxi
Chemical and Biological Weapons, Entries A to Y, 1
Key Documents: Chemical and Biological Weapons, 341
Bibliography, 395
Index, 413
v
Foreword
David Kay
Senior Research Analyst, Potomac Institute,
The importance of this encyclopedia was under-
Washington, D.C., and former Director,
scored by the fact that virtually the only area of
Iraq Survey Group (2003–2004)
agreement in the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign
between the two major candidates, President
George W. Bush and Senator John F. Kerry, was that
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
poses the most serious national security threat with made new classes of weapons possible. But scientific
which the next president would have to deal. progress marches at a very fast rate, leaving behind
While the prospect of chemical, biological, radi- old, but still dangerous, knowledge. For example,
ological, or nuclear weapons falling into the hands the secrets regarding methods for enriching ura-
of terrorists or regimes hostile to the United States nium were simply bought by the Iraqis from the
and its friends is indeed a frightening prospect, how U.S. Government Printing Office. That office could
many of us understand exactly what this means? not imagine that there was anything important in a
When were such weapons first developed? Which 40-year-old project from the dawn of the U.S. nu-
states and scientists are leading these developments? clear program.
Have these weapons actually been used in the past? In another remarkable case, uranium enrichment
How often and with what consequence—not only technology was stolen from a commercial company
for the populations they were used against, but for in Holland by A. Q. Khan—a rather ordinary Pak-
those that used them, as well? Do these weapons re- istani who went to Germany to earn an engineering
ally give states a decisive edge over their adversaries? degree. Khan subsequently used this technology to
How easy are they to develop and use? Does the ease develop Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and then sold the
of development or use of such weapons by states, same technology to North Korea, Iran, and Libya.
like North Korea, differ from the obstacles faced by The techniques of gene modification, which less than
terrorist groups, like al-Qaeda? What are the tools 20 years ago were the stuff of Nobel prizes, are now
available to the United States to halt the spread of routinely taught in American high schools and com-
such weapons? Have we had any success in limiting munity colleges and have opened up whole new
the spread of these weapons? Are there any protec- classes of biological weapons. As this study also
tive measures that individuals can take to lessen makes clear, even the safe disposal of weapons of
their vulnerability if such weapons are used? mass destruction following a state’s decision to aban-
These are but a few of the questions that the au- don or limit their programs presents serious chal-
thors of this authoritative two-volume study at- lenges of preventing the weapons and associated
tempt to answer. This encyclopedia will have endur- technology from falling into the hands of terrorists.
ing importance as states and societies attempt to The thousands of Soviet-era nuclear weapons and
come to terms with the consequence of the collision the engineering talent that created them represent a
of scientific progress with the failure to develop a re- clear and present danger with which the world has
liable global security structure. The initial develop- not yet completely dealt. The readers of this work will
ment of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, find numerous examples of the lowering of the bar-
as this study makes clear, often involved scientific riers to the acquisition by states and terrorists of these
and engineering breakthroughs of the highest most terrible of weapons.
order. The paths to enriching uranium and geneti- But this study does not simply present the horrors
cally modifying pathogens are but two examples of of a world filled with weapons of mass destruction. It
such successes, scientific breakthroughs that have also catalogs and illuminates the various methods of
vii
viii FOREWORD
attempting to control and constrain these weapons— the few efforts made in this regard, it is hard not to
including treaties and agreements such as the Nuclear come away with a sense of dread for the future. Most
Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons control efforts have been aimed at states, not at ter-
Convention, as well as intrusive inspections, such as rorists operating outside of the control of states.
the efforts of the United Nations to hunt such Hopefully students and policy makers using this
weapons in Iraq after the first Gulf War. As will be book a few years hence will be able to record more
clear to the reader, such endeavors have had both suc- progress toward meeting this new challenge.
cesses and failures. Much remains to be done to en- The authors and editors have done an important
sure that their effectiveness matches the problems service by pulling together such an illuminating
posed by the proliferation of such weapons. The study at exactly the point when there is a broad po-
largest gap in effective mechanisms of control and re- litical consensus of the importance of the problem.
sponse to the acquisition of such weapons is with re- One can only hope that our citizens and our politi-
gard to the efforts of terrorists groups to acquire the cal leaders take the time to explore the depth of in-
means of mass murder. While these volumes identify formation presented here.
Preface: Weapons
of Mass Destruction
The term “weapon of mass destruction” (WMD) is
a relatively modern expression. It was probably
Eric A. Croddy and James J. Wirtz
first used in print media following the interna-
tional uproar over Germany’s aerial bombardment
of the Basque city of Guernica in April 1937. (The
latter event was famously depicted in Picasso’s
painting Guernica y Luno.) Only a year before, an- never particularly enamored by chemical or biolog-
other Axis power, Italy, had begun using mustard ical weapons and treated them as a deterrent to be
and other chemical warfare (CW) agents in used in retaliation for the use of chemical or bio-
Abyssinia (modern-day Ethiopia).1 During the logical weapons used by the opponent. By the early
anxious years leading up World War II, WMD re- 1990s, the U.S. military had abandoned offensive
ferred to the indiscriminate killing of civilians by use of these weapons, although it maintained a re-
modern weaponry, especially aircraft. It also search and development program designed to pro-
echoed the fear of chemical weapons that was un- duce effective equipment, procedures, medications,
leashed by World War I, which had come to a con- and inoculations to defend against chemical and bi-
clusion just a few years earlier. ological attack.
Following the development of the atomic bomb Over the last decade, much has been written
in 1945, the term “WMD” came to include nuclear about WMD. The meaning of the term itself is
and eventually biological weapons. WMD was ap- somewhat controversial, although there is a formal,
parently first used to describe nuclear warfare by legalistic definition. According to U.S. Code Title
Soviet strategists. In 1956, during the 20th Commu- 50, “War and National Defense,” per the U.S. Con-
nist Party Congress in Moscow, the Soviet Minister gress, the term “weapon of mass destruction”means
of Defense—and “Hero of Stalingrad”—Marshal “any weapon or device that is intended, or has the
Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov prophesied that capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to
modern warfare “will be characterized by the mas- a significant number of people through the release,
sive use of air forces, various rocket weapons and dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous
various means of mass destruction such as atomic, chemicals or their precursors; a disease organism;
thermonuclear, chemical and bacteriological radiation or radioactivity.”4 For its part, the U.S. De-
weapons.”2 In that same year, the Hungarian Minis- partment of Defense has a similar characterization
ter of Defense echoed Marshal Zhukov, stating that of WMD, although in addition it includes “...the
“Under modern conditions, the decisive aspect of means to deliver [WMD].”5 So, what makes a
operational planning is the use of nuclear and other weapon massively destructive? Is it the type of inju-
weapons of mass destruction.”3 rious agents involved, namely radioactive, chemical,
When the West learned of Zhukov’s speech, na- or biological, or is it that the attack itself produces
tional security strategists in the United States and significant casualties or destruction? Also what
elsewhere became quite concerned. By inference, would “significant”mean in this context: ten, a hun-
they concluded that WMD—nuclear, biological, dred, or a thousand casualties? What if very few
and chemical weapons—were an integral part of people are actually killed or hurt by at attack? In the
Soviet military doctrine. Partly in response to latter respect, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investiga-
Zhukov’s ministrations on WMD, the United States tion has a rather unique and somewhat satisfying
reviewed its offensive chemical and biological interpretation of the term “WMD,” invoked when
weapons program in 1958. The U.S. military was the U.S. government indicted Timothy McVeigh
ix
x PREFACE
with using a WMD in his 1995 terrorist attack in ture and that civilized people everywhere reject the
Oklahoma City. In this case, although the device use of chemical and biological weapons. Interna-
used was a conventional bomb (employing ammo- tional law is replete with treaties, agreements, and
nium nitrate-fuel oil explosive), “A weapon crosses regimes whose purpose is to proscribe the use of
the WMD threshold when the consequences of its these weapons, or mitigate the consequences of any
6
release overwhelm local responders.” such use. In particular, the world has successfully
Some analysts, however, have suggested that kept nuclear weapons in reserve for almost sixty
various technical hurdles prevent chemical and years as truly deterrent weapons of last resort.
even biological weapons from causing casualties Our encyclopedia covers a wide range of topics,
on a truly massive scale. Some point to the Aum some historical, some drawn from today’s headlines.
Shinrikyo sarin attack on the Tokyo subway system We describe many of the pathogens, diseases, sub-
on March 20, 1995, which resulted in eleven stances, and machines that can serve as weapons of
deaths, as an example of the limits of WMD. They mass destruction, as well as their associated delivery
note that high-explosives have been used with far systems. We also describe important events and in-
greater lethal effects than sarin in the annals of dividuals that have been influential in the develop-
modern terrorism. Others are increasingly con- ment of weapons of mass destruction and doctrines
cerned about the destructive potential of even for their use (or control). We have encouraged our
rudimentary weapons. Analysts today are worried, contributors to highlight ongoing controversies and
for instance, that terrorists might try to employ ra- contemporary concerns about WMD and current
diological dispersal devices or “dirty bombs.” international arms control and nonproliferation ef-
These weapons do not detonate with a fission re- forts intended to reduce the threat they pose to
action, but rather utilize conventional explosives to world peace and security. Even a work of this length,
distribute radiological materials and contaminate however, cannot completely cover the history, sci-
a given area. Few deaths are likely to result from the ence, and personal stories associated with a topic of
effects of a dirty bomb, but the consequences—in this magnitude, so we have included abundant ref-
terms of anxiety, clean-up, and the recognized abil- erences to help readers take those initial steps for
ity of a terrorist to conduct the very act itself— further study of the topics we survey.
would likely be far reaching.
Acknowledgments
About the Encyclopedia Our deepest debt is to the contributors who made
The very presence of chemical, biological and nu- this volume a reality. Many of them joined the proj-
clear weapons in international arsenals and the po- ect at its inauguration several years ago and have
tential that they might fall into the hands of terror- waited a long time to see their work in print. It is im-
ist organizations guarantees that weapons of mass possible for just three people to be experts on all of
destruction will be of great policy, public, and schol- the subjects covered in this volume, and without the
arly interest for years to come. We cannot resolve the hard work of our contributors, this encyclopedia
debates prompted by WMD, but we hope that we would never have been completed. Thanks to our
and our contributors can provide facts to help the research assistants, Abraham Denmark and Laura
reader sort through the controversies that are likely Fontaine, who uncovered most of the key docu-
to emerge in the years ahead. Much that is contained ments in both volumes and wrote a few entries for
in these volumes is disturbing and even frightening; us, as well. We also want to express our appreciation
it is impossible to write a cheery encyclopedia about to a senior government official who reviewed Vol-
weapons whose primary purpose is to conduct ume II for accuracy and sensitive material. We owe
postindustrial-scale mass murder. The sad truth of a special debt to Jeff Larsen, our managing editor,
the matter is that chemical, biological, radiological, whose help was instrumental in the success of this
and nuclear weapons reflect the willingness of hu- project. Not only did he provide editorial support to
mans to go to great lengths to find increasingly both volumes, but he displayed a keen ability to deal
lethal and destructive instruments of war and vio- with the publisher and our 95 contributors, keep
lence. We are pleased to note, however, that much of track of timelines, requirements, and progress, and
what is reported in these volumes is historical in na- gently push the two of us when we needed encour-
PREFACE xi
agement during this multiyear project that involved Frederick R. Sidell, Ernest T. Takafuji, and David
over 500 separate parts. Finally, we also want to ex- R. Franz, eds., Textbook of Military Medicine,
press our appreciation to Alicia Merritt, Martha Part I: Warfare, Weaponry, and the Casualty:
Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological
Whitt, Giulia Rossi, and the behind-the-scenes
Warfare (Washington, DC: Borden Institute,
copyeditors at ABC-CLIO who worked tirelessly to
Walter Reed Army Medical Center, 1997), p. 54.
help get this manuscript into print. We discovered
3. Quoted in the archives, “Report of Colonel-
that nothing is a trivial matter when it comes to a
General István Bata, Hungarian Minister of
manuscript of this size. The commitment of our
Defense, to Members of the HWP Central
publisher to this topic, and the dedication of the
Committee on the Conduct of the Staff-
production staff at ABC-CLIO, greatly facilitated
Command Exercise Held, 17 July 1956,” found at
the completion of these volumes. the International Relations and Security
We hope that this encyclopedia will help inform Network (Switzerland), documents collection,
the public debate about weapons of mass destruc- http://www.isn.ethz.ch/
tion and international security policy, with the goal 4. Title 50, Chapter 40, Sec. 2302.
of never again seeing such weapons used in anger. 5. Office of the Secretary of Defense, Proliferation:
Threat and Response (Washington, DC: U.S.
Notes Government Printing Office, 2001), p. 4.
1. Stanley D. Fair, “Mussolini’s Chemical War,” 6. U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), “The
Army, January 1985, p. 52. FBI and Weapons of Mass Destruction,” 4
2. Jeffery K. Smart, “History of Chemical and August 1999, http://norfolk.fbi.gov.wmd.htm
Biological Warfare: An American Perspective,” in
Editors and
Editors
ERIC A. CRODDY (EDITOR, VOLUME I,
Contributors
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS)
Analyst with U.S. Pacific Command, Pearl
Harbor, HI
JAMES J. WIRTZ (EDITOR, VOLUME II, JEFFREY M. BALE
NUCLEAR WEAPONS) Senior Research Associate, Monterey Institute
Professor and Chair, Department of National of International Studies, Monterey, CA
Security Affairs, U.S. Naval Postgraduate
School, Monterey, CA, and Senior Fellow, ZACH BECKER
Center for International Security and Science Applications International Corporation,
Cooperation, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA Arlington, VA
JEFFREY A. LARSEN (MANAGING EDITOR, ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE
VOLUMES I AND II) Research Associate, WMD Terrorism Project,
Senior Policy Analyst, Science Applications Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey
International Corporation and President, Institute of International Studies, Monterey, CA
Larsen Consulting Group, Colorado Springs,
CO JENNIFER BROWER
Science and Technology Policy Analyst, The
Contributors RAND Corporation, Arlington, VA
GARY ACKERMAN
Deputy Director, Chemical and Biological WILLIAM D. CASEBEER
Weapons Nonproliferation Program, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy,
Monterey Institute of International Studies, U.S. Air Force Academy, CO
Monterey, CA
KALPANA CHITTARANJAN
JEFFREY A. ADAMS Research Fellow, Observer Research
Senior Analyst, Analytic Services, Inc. (ANSER), Foundation, Chennai Chapter, Chennai, India
Arlington, VA
CLAY CHUN
PETER ALMQUIST Chairman, Department of Distance Education,
Bureau of Arms Control, U.S. Department of U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA
State, Washington, DC
WILLIAM S. CLARK
ELIZABETH AYLOTT Defense Policy Analyst, Science Applications
Plans and Policy Analyst, Science Applications International Corporation, Arlington, VA
International Corporation, Ramstein Air Base,
Germany CHRIS CRAIGE
Graduate Student, U.S. Naval Postgraduate
School, Monterey, CA
xiii
xiv EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS
MALCOLM DAVIS ANDREA GABBITAS
Lecturer, Defence Studies Department, King’s Graduate Student, Department of Political
College London, London, UK Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA
ABE DENMARK
Graduate Student, Graduate School of SCOTT SIGMUND GARTNER
International Studies, University of Denver, Associate Professor, Department of Political
Denver, CO Science, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA
JOHN W. DIETRICH MICHAEL GEORGE
Assistant Professor, Bryant University, Policy Analyst, Science Applications
Smithfield, RI International Corporation, Arlington, VA
ANDREW M. DORMAN DON GILLICH
Lecturer in Defence Studies, King’s College Nuclear Research and Operations Officer, U.S.
London, London, UK Army, Colorado Springs, CO
FRANNIE EDWARDS DAN GOODRICH
Office of Emergency Services, San Jose, CA Public Health Department, Santa Clara, CA
LAWRENCE R. FINK PHIL GRIMLEY
Corporate Export Administration, International Professor of Pathology and Molecular Cell
Legal Department, Science Applications Biology, F. Edward Herbert Medical School,
International Corporation, Arlington, VA Uniformed Services University of Health
Sciences, Bethesda, MD
STEPHANIE FITZPATRICK
Arms Control/Policy Analyst, Independent EUGENIA K. GUILMARTIN
Consultant, Arlington, VA Assistant Professor, Department of Social
Sciences, U.S. Military Academy, West Point, NY
SCHUYLER FOERSTER
President, World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh, JOHN HART
Pittsburgh, PA Researcher, Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute, Solna, Sweden
LAURA FONTAINE
Graduate Student, Graduate School of PETER HAYS
International Studies, University of Denver, Executive Editor, Joint Force Quarterly, National
Denver, CO Defense University, Washington, DC
J. RUSS FORNEY JAMES JOYNER
Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry Managing Editor, Strategic Insights,
and Life Science, U.S. Military Academy, West Washington, DC
Point, NY
AARON KARP
MARTIN FURMANSKI Professor, Old Dominion University, and
Scientists Working Group on Biological and Assistant Professor, U.S. Joint Forces Staff
Chemical Weapons, Center for Arms Control College, Norfolk, VA
and Nonproliferation, Ventura, CA
KERRY KARTCHNER
Senior Advisor for Missile Defense Policy, U.S.
State Department, Washington, DC