Chemical & Engineering
NEWS
Sen. Fulbright Open hearings on CBW likely
MAY 12, 1969
Harvard's Meselson Outspoken critic of present policies
Rep. McCarthy Calls for multinational commission
ΑΝΤΙ-CBW PRESSURES BUILD Chemical and biological warfare (CBW) seldom has been as lively a topic of public debate as it has been this past fortnight. Hub of this de bate has been the U.S. Congress, where last week at least a score of frontal assaults were under way aimed all the way from stripping away the security wrap which has shielded U.S. CBW activities from Congres sional and private scrutiny so effec tively to date, to doing away with such activities altogether. Items: The House Government Operations Committee's Subcommittee on Con servation and Natural Resources will begin hearings Tuesday on the "dangers of open air testing of persis tent lethal chemicals." According to subcommittee chairman Rep. Henry S. Reuss (D.-Wis.), the hearings are prompted by recent Defense Depart ment confirmation that outdoor test ing of nerve gas was continuing at the Army's Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah despite the highly publicized sheep kill incident last year. Meanwhile the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee has made its initial foray into what here tofore has been the private preserve of military committees with its probe of the Pentagon's CBW activities.
Committee chairman J. William Ful bright (D.-Ark.) says he probably will hold open hearings on the sub ject. And 12 days ago, Rep. Richard D. McCarthy (D.-N.Y.) cosponsored a resolution calling for establishment of a "multinational commission" to study the use and effects of anticrop sprays and chemical defoliants in Vietnam. Cosponsor New York Democrat Ed ward I. Koch says, "There is another issue not covered by this resolution which must be answered, that is the immorality of our using chemical agents, not in retaliation, but as part of our offensive tactics in Vietnam." On these and other activities along the CBW front, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee probe perhaps promises a much-needed clarification of U.S. policy on CBW. Sen. Fulbright has joined Rep. Mc Carthy in calling on the President to resubmit the 1925 Geneva Protocol to the Senate for ratification. The pro tocol bans use in war of "asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of bio logical methods of warfare." Al though not a party to the agreement, the U.S. repeatedly has pledged sup port for its principles. But on at least one key point—the use of nonlethal
riot control agents—the U.S. is at odds with protocol signatories. The only formal activity by the Fulbright Committee to date has been a one-day closed session at which CBW expert Matthew S. Meselson, noted Harvard biologist, was the sole witness. A few days later, Dr. Meselson—a chemist turned biologist and outspoken critic of present U.S. CBW policies—turned up as one of three leading U.S. authorities taking part in a public symposium on the science and politics of toxic chemical weapons sponsored by the ACS Connecticut Valley Section. Dr. Meselson sparked the sympo sium by adding a few new twists to the usual arguments given by those who oppose attempts to "legitimize" chemical and biological agents as weapons of war. One was that be cause of their wide spectrum of de structive power, chemical and bio logical weapons would tend to blur the distinction between conventional weapons and weapons of overwhelm ing destructive force, such as nuclear weapons. Advocates of this "fire break" theory maintain that such a distinction must be maintained to pre vent small conflicts from escalating into a major nuclear confrontation. MAY 12, 1969 C&EN 17
