Afghanistan - The Nuclear Nightmare Begins
national |
miscellaneous |
news report
Wednesday January 08, 2003 23:47
by Davey Garland - Pandora DU Research Project
pduproject at yahoo dot co dot uk

New research points to large amounts of uranium having been used by US forces during the Afghanistan conflict, with devestating consequences upon the local population.
Afghanistan: The Nuclear Nightmare Starts
By Davey Garland
When questions were asked in the British parliament a
year ago about whether depleted uranium (DU) weapons
had been used in the military strikes on Afghanistan,
"It is not being used at present" was defense minister
Geoff Hoon's reply.
A few days earlier, Hoon had been similarly vague on
the issue, assuring us that: "No British forces
currently engaged in operations around Afghanistan are
armed with depleted uranium ammunition. However, we do
not rule out the use of depleted uranium ammunition in
Afghanistan, should its penetrative capability be
judged necessary in the future."
The defense minister played his cards close to his
chest, no doubt having been informed that DU or other
uranium weapons were being used by the United States
(and no doubt British) forces to penetrate the caverns
of Tora Bora and other targets (including civilian
ones), especially in the vicinity of Kabul.
The refusal of the Ministry of Defense to fully admit
that dangerous uranium weapons may have been used in
Afghanistan and the conflicts in the Balkans (Bosnia
and Kosova), when evidence shows the contrary,
illustrates just how sensitive the government is to
the possibility that its use, or its collusion in the
use, of weapons of mass destruction may be discovered.
This is not just because thousands of innocent
civilians will suffer due to radiological (and heavy
metal) poisoning, but also because the government is
prepared to send British troops and aid workers,
possibly for a long occupation of the war zones,
ill-equipped and vulnerable to contamination.
When the Afghan crisis began, many of us believed that
a great amount of DU/dirty uranium would be used to
achieve the US-British campaign objectives, both to
penetrate the opposition's hideouts in rocky terrain
and to test new weapons systems (dirty uranium or
dirty DU contains radioactive contaminants, such as
plutonium isotopes, derived from spent fuel from power
reactors). The amount used in Afghanistan might have
exceeded the several hundred ton's of DU/dirty uranium
used in the 1990-91 Gulf War and the Balkans
conflicts.
Startling report
A startling new report based on research in
Afghanistan indicates that our worst fears have been
realized. The study, produced by the Uranium Medical
Research Centre (UMRC), points to the likelihood of
large numbers of the population being exposed to
uranium dust and debris.
Dr. Asaf Durakovic, a professor of nuclear medicine
and radiology and a former science adviser to the US
military, who set-up the independent UMRC, has been
testing US, British, and Canadian troops and civilians
for DU and uranium poisoning over the past few years.
His findings confirm significant amounts in the
subjects' urine as much as nine years after exposure.
Two scientific study teams were sent to Afghanistan in
the aftermath of the conflict in 2001-02. The first
arrived in June 2002, concentrating on the Jalalabad
region. The second arrived four months later,
broadening the study to include the capital Kabul,
which has a population of nearly 3.5 million people.
The city itself contains the highest recorded number
of fixed targets during Operation Enduring Freedom.
For the study's purposes, the vicinity of three major
bomb sites were examined.
It was predicted that signatures of depleted or
enriched uranium would be found in the urine and soil
samples taken during the research. The team was
unprepared for the shock of its findings, which
indicated in both Jalalabad and Kabul, DU was possibly
causing the high levels of illness but also high
concentrations of non-depleted uranium. Tests taken
from a number of Jalalabadd subjects showed
concentrations 400% to 2000% above that for normal
populations, amounts which have not been recorded in
civilian studies before.
Those in Kabul who were directly exposed to US-British
precision bombing showed extreme signs of
contamination, consistent with uranium exposure and
with some types of chemical or biological weaponry.
These included pains in joints, back/kidney pain,
muscle weakness, memory problems and confusion and
disorientation. Many of these symptoms are found in
Gulf War and Balkans veterans and civilians. Those
exposed to the bombing report symptoms of flu-type
illnesses, bleeding, runny noses and blood-stained
mucous.
The study team itself complained of similar symptoms
during their stay. Most of these symptoms last for
days or months. The team also conducted a preliminary
sample examination of new-born infants, discovering
that at least 25% may be suffering from congenital and
post-natal health problems that could be associated
with uranium contamination. These include undeveloped
muscles, large head in comparison to body size, skin
rashes and infant lethargy. Considering that the
children had access to sufficient levels of nutrition,
the symptoms could not be due to malnourishment.
Durakovic and his team have searched for possible
alternative causes, such as geological or industrial
sources, or the likelihood of Al Qaeda having uranium
reserves. But the uranium found is not consistent with
the "dirty bomb" scenario proposed by the US (in which
stores of radioactive materials might explain the
findings), nor is it connected to DU, or an enriched
uranium-type dust that has been found in Iraq and
Kosova.
The only conclusion is that the allied forces are now
possibly using milled uranium ore in their warheads to
maximize the effectiveness and strength of their
weapons, as well as to mask the uranium, hoping that
it may be discounteded as part of any local natural
deposits.
However, marked differences between natural uranium
and the uranium used in the metal fragments found in
Afghanistan was uncovered with the use of an electron
microscope, which revealed the presence of small
ceramic particles produced by the high temperatures
created on impact. This method of disguising uranium
would benefit governments that are under pressure from
the growing anti-DU lobby.
Repeated warnings of this possible contamination was
sent to both the British and Afghan governments in
April by scientific researcher Dai Williams in his
report, "Mystery Metal in Afghanistan". Warning were
also sent to the UN Environment Program, the World
Health Organization and Oxfam. All have ignored them
and failed to conduct their own investigations.
Iraq
Present information and studies stressing the growing
mortality rates amongst young children, especially the
new born, indicate that malnutrition and other social
causes cannot be the only attributable source of this
phenomenon. This is confirmed by health specialists,
international observers and a few brave officials from
local hospitals who are convinced that this rise in
illnesses and malformation are due to uranium/DU
weapons.
In October, Durakovic spoke on al Jazeera television,
claiming that the amount of DU/uranium used in
Afghanistan far exceeded that of past conflicts. He
also warned that if the scale of the attacks in
Afghanistan was matched or exceeded in a forthcoming
war in Iraq, then the consequences would be of
appalling proportions for both civilians and military
forces alike.
This scenario has substance, if the $393 billion
defense authorization bill that Congress approved
recently is taken into account. More than $15 million
was assigned to modifying bunker busters bombs to
nuclear capable, quite apart from uranium being added
to conventional and bunker buster systems.s. Money was
also invested in other weapons of mass destruction,
including thermobaric and electromagnetic weapons.
The anti-war movement must oppose radiological and
other weapons, as well as research and access to the
source materials. Many of us have seen the
heart-wrenching pictures of deformity and death in
Iraq, and know of the growing cancer wards in Bosnia
and Kosova, not to mention the 80,000 American, 15,000
Canadian and thousands of British, Australian, French
and other troops! who are suffering a painful
existence from Gulf War Syndrome plus the growing
number suffering from a Balkans equivalent.
Davey Garland is a coordinator of the British-based
Pandora DU Research Project. Source; Green Left
Weekly, Issue of December 2002.
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (7 of 7)
Jump To Comment: 7 6 5 4 3 2 1izzat da white Zulu? How's it going?
Yes, as a later commenter said, Sean Healy got his isotopes mixed up - 235 is the fissible one and 238 the "stable" one. I support the other comments on danger of inhalation etc.
Recently I came across a reference to the use of "natural" uranium in weapons (I use the quotes because it doesn't occur naturally in metallic form). Besides indicating an alarming escalation of use (if reserves of depleted uranium are insufficient) this would also lead to greater difficulty of proof of use as the isotope "signature" of depleted uranium is what stands out against possible background levels.
What will the bastards think of next?
DU isn't only a danger when it is "used" an turns into dust. Weapons using depleted uranium, such as those which Raytheon own patents for, use mixed nuclear waste containing all sorts of radioactive materials.
Sean points out the dangers of DU exist mainly upon ingestion or being hit by the actual weapon, puting acroos this as an argumet that it is relativly harmless. However the fact that he has ignored is that this DU dust is spread across wide areas around hwere it is used. It only takes one DU particle lodged in the lungs to present a danger of cancer, and other such conditions if swallowed. DU does not present a problem until it is a dust. But when a dust it is deadly. The results of its use can be found in any country in which it has been used
I could well be wrong, but I thought that U235 was the highly radioactive isotope used in nuclear weapons and U238 was the more common and less radioactive isotope? Can anyone clarity this please?
DU is uranium 235, a heavy metal with a radioctive half-life of over 1 billion years, making it a little more radioactive than granite. It is used specifically for its armour-piercing qualities (it ignites and heats to very high temperatures, penetrating tank armour and causing explosions inside the vehicle). Unless you are hit with a shell, are in the immediate vicinity of its explosion, or ingest it, DU isn't going to cause you any trouble - even so, the trouble is of the heavy-metal variety, not nuclear. If DU was even half as dangerous as this article suggests, wouldn't arms factory workers have long ago filed numerous class action lawsuits in the lawsuit-happy US, where surely they would be suffering from cancer, etc.? Even the tobacco companies, with all their lobbying power, couldn't stop the lawsuits.
So either the writer of this article doesn't know that DU is neither a nuclear weapon nor a "weapon of mass destruction" or he does know and hopes readers will mistake DU for the seriously poisonous uranium 238, thereby scoring a cheap propaganda victory with those predisposed to distrust the US and UK militaries.
Protest is much more effective when you stick to the facts.
please post a summary and a link, instead of copying over the entire article