Middle East Oct. 5th
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.
|
