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