The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Dear CASI network This is an extract from my response to UN studies proposed for Iraq on 6 April, plus some explanations for people not familiar with recent uranium weapons investigations. The full paper (6 pages + latest UNEP press releases) is available on my website at http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/UNiraqissues.pdf yours in friendship Dai Williams Eos, Surrey, UK eosuk@btinternet.com Key issues for UN uranium testing in Iraq ----------------------------------------- Implications of UNEP recommendations for Depleted Uranium studies in Iraq Dai Williams, 10 April 2003 Summary On 6 April the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) recommended studies into the use of Depleted Uranium weapons in Iraq. See UNEP Press Release in Appendix 1. Their Post Conflict Assessment Unit (PCAU) started planning this Iraq project on 21 March, see earlier Press Release in Appendix 2. My worst case scenario is that coalition forces may have used up to 2000 tons of uranium weapons - several times more than in 1991. Fast, accurate UNEP assessments of uranium contamination are essential. But UN proposals for Uranium testing in Iraq raise a number of key issues if they are to be more rigorous than recent UNEP studies of Depleted Uranium in the Balkans. 5 conditions are essential if the proposed UNEP studies are to protect the people of Iraq: a) uranium testing must start without delay especially in urban areas b) targets must include known and suspected uranium weapons c) analysis must include all types of Uranium, depleted and undepleted d) the project will require powerful international support e) airborne radiation monitoring is required throughout the Gulf region. In addition the World Health Organisation (WHO) needs to start an urgent investigation into levels of uranium contamination for sick and healthy people in Iraqi communities, including troops and civilian casualties and victims of any new epidemics for several years. Most of the Iraqi population is at risk so studies will need NGO support. Parallel studies by UNEP and WHO are required in Afghanistan for the health effects of similar weapons. Like previous UN studies these projects are vulnerable. They are liable to be compromised by military, political and commercial interests to conceal the proliferation, use and health effects of Uranium weapons. They will need massive support from UN member states, from medical and other scientific organisations and from the international media. === The full paper is at at http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/UNiraqissues.pdf The UNEP press releases it responds to are: UNEP press release 2003 18,Monday, April 07, 2003 7:41 AM http://www.unep.org/Documents/Default.asp?DocumentID=309&ArticleID=3952 UNEP Recommends Studies of Depleted Uranium in Iraq Amman/Nairobi, 6 April 2003. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is recommending that a scientific assessment of sites targeted with weapons containing depleted uranium (DU) be conducted in Iraq as soon as conditions permit.<more> UNEP Press Release 2003 15, http://postconflict.unep.ch/high2.htm UNEP's Post-Conflict Assessment Unit Initiates Study of Environment in Iraq Nairobi/Geneva, 21 March 2003 - The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) today announced that its Post Conflict Assessment Unit (PCAU) has initiated a desk study of the environment in Iraq. <more> == I question serious limitations of previous UNEP and WHO reports apparently due to direct and indirect subversion by NATO or equivalent agencies. But I do so to highlight the need for international action to support UNEP and WHO in the fastest and most rigorous studies they have ever conducted. Both organisations can move fast. But WHO has been held back from offering vital DU assessments to Iraqi civilians for several years. Now the Shock and Awe campaign may have added 5-10 times more uranium contamination than was acknowledged in 1991. Every day of cumulative uranium exposure in contaminated areas increases the risks of irreversible internal radiation damage. Those in authority who have trivialised these risks may wish to reconsider their risk assessment principles. Recent investigations by ECRR, UMRC and Professor Schott, plus weapons data located by DU network contacts are relevant. Hundreds of thousands of lives - Iraqi citizens, and expatriate troops and civilians - may depend on the ability of UNEP and WHO with IAEA assistance to launch large scale assessments of low level radiation contamination to the highest safety standards WITHOUT interference. Few people understand the danger of radiological weapons. I appeal to all veterans groups, DU researchers and other humanitarian organisations to publicise and support these UN studies, with whatever warnings and encouragement you think appropriate. This is not the time for blame or disagreements. The stakes are far too high. A major radiation incident has occurred in Iraq - or rather a collection of thousands of individual radiation releases from each uranium weapon that has been used, from 120 grams to 1500 kilograms or more. Depending on the quantity of uranium contamination released the number of severely disabled victims and fatalities in this conflict may be several times higher from radiation damage than from all conventional blast and shrapnel injuries. Our world community through the UN now faces the grim task of quantifying this additional dimension to the humanitarian disaster in Iraq. The US and UK governments and military may help or hinder. This choice and the ultimate responsibility is theirs. It is probably too late to help people exposed to severe uranium contamination near to targets e.g. children playing on burned out tanks, or people exposed to uranium explosion plumes. Imagine them smothered in dust clouds like 9-11 survivors, except the dust is poisonous and radioactive. If the UN can act fast enough to identify contaminated target areas and concentrations of airborne radioactive particles it may be possible to minimise cumulative radiation exposures. The lack of response from politicians, the media and the UN to these warnings since before the Afghan war is desperately frustrating. It may have cost hundreds or thousands of lives in Afghanistan and more soon in Iraq. Be patient (DU researchers have awesome stamina) - they need the best facts we can offer, and cheerful encouragement to use them despite harassment or other severe risks to their work or careers. We need more evidence about the weapons that have been used - types, numbers, locations, target effects and pictures from recognised sources. Reports of unusual weapons e.g. deep craters, split warheads, intense heat, carbonised casualties, dense black smoke, fire in smoke plumes etc. Reports of any unusual injuries, health problems, fatalities or epidemics may also give vital clues to the use of radiological or other weapons of indiscriminate effect. Dates and locations are important and may assist in directing UNEP and WHO field testing. The truth about uranium weapons developed over the last 15 years will be known sooner or later. The ones used in Iraq in the last 3 weeks present the highest risk right now. Let's find them as fast as we can, and track their use back to Afghanistan too. Community health conditions in Afghanistan over the next 10 years will warn WHO and the people of Iraq of the post-conflict health problems they may face 18 months later. I hope my suspicions prove totally wrong. But until then we can leave no stone unturned to identify the existence and hazards of uranium weapons. Dai Williams Eos, Surrey, UK eosuk@btinternet.com _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk