Chemical Weapons Conventions and Phosphorous Bombs
By Gul Raiz • Jun 8th, 2008 • Category: Politics • 18 CommentsI don’t know and I want to ask from the learned readers that does the phosphorous bombs come under the jurisdiction of Chemical Weapons Convention, of which Pakistan is a signatory?
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. Its complete name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction.
Now as the former Corps Commander, Lt. Gen Jamshaid Gulzar Kayani has claimed that phosphorous bombs were used in the operation over the Lal Masjid, in which reportedly hundreds of students were killed. If that is proved and if phosphorous bombs were at all used in that operation and they come under the CWC, then that is alarming for Pakistan, as then United Nations could come and probe anywhere in Pakistan in that regard including our atomic installation.
Does that put any sense into Lt. Gen Gulzar?
Trackback URL
|
|
|
Effects on humans
White phosphorus can cause injuries and death in three ways: by burning deep into soft tissue, by being inhaled as a smoke and by being ingested. Extensive exposure in any way can be fatal.
Effects of exposure to WP weapons
Incandescent particles of WP cast off by a WP weapon’s initial explosion can produce extensive, deep (second and third degree), painful burns. Phosphorus burns carry a greater risk of mortality than other forms of burns due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area, resulting in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multi-organ failure.[25] These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed, in some cases burning right down to the bone. In some cases, burns may be limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed. According to GlobalSecurity.org, quoted by “The Guardian”, “White phosphorus results in painful chemical burn injuries”[26] .
Exposure and inhalation of smoke
Burning WP produces a hot, dense white smoke. Most forms of smoke are not hazardous in the kinds of concentrations produced by a battlefield smoke shell. However, exposure to heavy smoke concentrations of any kind for an extended period (particularly if near the source of emission) does have the potential to cause illness or even death.
WP smoke irritates the eyes and nose in moderate concentrations. With intense exposures, a very explosive cough may occur. However, no recorded casualties from the effects of WP smoke alone have occurred in combat operations and to date there are no confirmed deaths resulting from exposure to phosphorus smokes.[26] The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has set an acute inhalation Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for white phosphorus smoke of 0.02 mg/m³, the same as fuel oil fumes. (By contrast, the chemical weapon mustard gas is 30 times more potent: 0.0007 mg/m³.)[27]
Oral ingestion
The accepted lethal dose when white phosphorus is ingested orally is 1 mg per kg of body weight, although the ingestion of as little as 15 mg has resulted in death.[28] It may also cause liver, heart or kidney damage.[29][30] There are reports of individuals with a history of oral ingestion who have passed phosphorus-laden stool (”smoking stool syndrome”).[28]
Arms control status and military regulations
Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as ‘any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target’. The same protocol also prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilians or in civilian areas.
However, the use against military targets outside civilian areas is not explicitly banned by any treaty. There is a debate on whether white phosphorus should be considered a chemical weapon and thus be outlawed by the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) which went into effect in April of 1997. The convention is meant to prohibit weapons that are “dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare” (Article II, Definitions, 9, “Purposes not Prohibited” c.).
The convention defines a “toxic chemical” as a chemical “which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals”.(CWC, II). An annex lists chemicals that fall under this definition.[31], but WP is not listed, possibly because its primary function was not seen to be chemical. However, today, legal opinion may be shifting, according to some: “there is potential for white phosphorus to fall under the classification of a chemical weapon[32]“.
In an 2005 interview to RAI, Peter Kaiser, spokesman for the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (an organization overseeing the CWC and reporting directly to the UN General Assembly), questioned whether the weapon should fall under the convention’s provisions:
No it’s not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application which does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement.
If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the convention legitimate use.
If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that of course is prohibited, because the way the convention is structured or the way it is in fact applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons”[5].
Kaiser was a staff spokesman for the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.[33]. He is not listed as Director-General, or the head of any of the nine divisions listed for the OPCW secretariat. The OPCW, using member votes, creates Schedules of chemical weapons or dual-use chemicals of concern [34], and white phosphorus is not in any of these schedules.
The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, not the Chemical Weapons Convention, goes on, in its Protocol III, to prohibit the use of all air-delivered incendiary weapons against civilian populations, or for indiscriminate incendiary attacks against military forces co-located with civilians[35]. However, that protocol also specifically excludes weapons whose incendiary effects are secondary, such as smoke grenades. This has often been read as excluding white phosphorus munitions from this protocol, as well. In any case, several countries, including the United States and Israel, are not signatories to Protocol III.[36]
The legal position however, is not the only consideration in any war. For instance, concerning the U.S. use of WP in Iraq, the British Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell, said
“The use of this weapon may technically have been legal, but its effects are such that it will hand a propaganda victory to the insurgency. The denial of use followed by the admission will simply convince the doubters that there was something to hide”[37].
White phosphorus weapons are controversial today because of its potential use against humans, for whom one-tenth of a gram is a deadly dose. In recent years, the US and Israel[3] have admitted using WP against enemy targets. Particularly, its use by the US, given the public stance against chemical weapons, has resulted in considerable controversy (see White phosphorus use in Iraq). Initial field reports from Iraq casually referred to White Phosphorus use against humans[4], but it was officially denied until November 2005[5].
Subsequently however, the Pentagon admitted [6] to its use while claiming that its use for smoke signals is legal and does not violate chemical weapon conventions[7]. However, a statement by a Pentagon spokesman says “It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants,”[8]
In any event, the United States is not a signatory to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, and even this mentions WP only in a Schedule[9], and not as a chemical weapon per se (more details below).
the above mentioned detail has been taken from wikipedia dictionary .after going through the detail ,i have an assessment that writer impression can not be disregarded and it is a real a upcoming that should not be ignored.
nice article gulraiz ,brilliantly digged.if we correlate these turning points all together ,from exserviceman to multiple foreighn secretaries ,seconding the activity one after the other ,i have a sense to accept that some preplanned activity is in conductivity .once again thanks for providing a new visionary angle.
Are you part of the same group (QAZI hUSSAIN, LIAQUAT BALOCH, IMRAN KHAN , KIAYANI QADEER KHAN ETCwho enjoys destabilizing country by spreading anarchy and chaos with their speech and writing s to prpogate hatred and enmity between masses by digging skeletons from the graves.
How much more you want to destroy this country to satiate your inner selfish feelings?
I think you guys don’t know yourself!!
Ashique mush,
I thinkyou have to ask yours mush,
How much more you want to destroy this country ?
yes, weapons were used which burnt the students of Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa due to the internal geography of both buildings otherwise death loss on goverment side would be much higher.
Aashiqua musharaf
The topic of phosporus bomb was not raised by any of politicians that are mentioned in yours golden lines.Observe minutley that the man who reveals the realites is Mush ’s man who directly worked under him for at least 8 years.Kiyani was directly promoted on the basis of Mush ACR not by such politicians.Use of phosphorus bomb can be identified in minutes by any Dr Or chemical engr if they were allowed to see the deadbodies of so called terroists or visited to the site.All know that journalists were allowed there after three days and bodies were hidden in wooden box and burried immedietly without post mortem
After seeing yours comment about your buddy,it is clear that love is blind, deaf and dumb.so you keep on loving him but we are not blind, deaf, dumb and sensleless.If mush proved to be a better ruler in his 8 year period then surely the system could not welcome the expired characters of Sharif and zardari.Its his destructive policies that have given way to such evil characters back to system.
Ms. Nazia,
Good reply and well written. Please keep commenting and spreading awareness.
With best regards.
Ms. Nazia
I tell you if Musharraf proved to be a better ruler in last 8 or 9 years, I promise openly he might had ruled fro another 40 years.
I think even 5 years are enough for one man to change whole system and bring back country on track. He is failed man at every level. He got failed in school, then got failed in PMA, then got promotions by references, then failed in Kargil, then failed in combating against terrorism, then failed in governing in right manner, got failed in his personal life too.
Where he succeeded??? On every wrong, illegal and unethical track…. From his personal activities to unconstitutional Presidency.
Nazia, don’t you sometimes wish that you were “blind, deaf, dumb and senseless” but could think straight? Believe me at any rate a thinking person is much more powerful than those can just see, hear, talk, and feel the taste of nice food (or whatever). TRY TO THINK, JUST TRY!
If this Raseed Ghazi (may Allah curse him and kept him in the deepest part of the hell for his irresponsible and un-islamic behaviour by stopping children leaving out of the mosque during this operation; as a shield and shelter to save his life……..which hundreds of childrens and their parents told to the media ) was MSC, I am sure he must be an insane or a conspirator working for the enemy, who wanted to use him to bring bad name to Islam and Pakistan
He and only he and his brother (and no one else) to be blamed for all these killings, I firmly believe
I hate these kinds of jahil mullahs, the day when they destroyed Quaid-e-Azam academy in Karachi as a retaliation over some of their mullah’s killing.
These mullahs from the madressas supposed to be an example best behaviour but alas! they are the worst.
A new Lal Mosque is getting ready to take off, this time in Gulistan-e-Jauhar (I was reading in newspaper the other day), these worst people of the world had occupied nearby public park in the name of a hospital and started giving threats to the neighbours if anyone complains.
I don’t know what kind of Islam is this and what kind of teachings are giving to the students of these Dar-ul-Uloom.
O! Allah! mujhe aisey Islam se aur aisy Fitne sey Bacha, AMMEEN.
Aameen!
Or mujhe bhi!
Aur mujhe bhi! Aameen.
Aftab
sorry to say that I had never thankless to my Lord for giving me the blessings of senses.I have these senses and I practically utilised them accordingly.How could I believe you as I seen million of thinking person around me that have done nothing accept building castles in the air and placed my homeland in the list of lowest developed country in the world .Thinking is only valid if it is implemented in your sorrounding and would make difference.
Good reply. No need to comment more because Nazia did her job in best manner. Keep it up.
To all , specially those who are lover of Mush… Finally he resign any comments???