Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- When You're Cutting Social Security, 'Wealthy' Begins at $25K
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
Agent Orange in Vietnam: Ignoring the Crimes Before Our Eyes
On Oct. 13, the New York Times ran a news story headlined "Door Opens to Health Claims Tied to Agent Orange," which was sure to be good news to many American veterans of the Indochina War. It reported that 38 years after the Pentagon ceased spreading the deadly dioxin-laced herbicide/defoliant over much of South Vietnam, it was acknowledging what veterans have long claimed: in addition to 13 ailments already traced to exposure to the chemical, it was also responsible for three more dread diseases-Parkinson's, ischemic heart disease and hairy-cell leukemia.
Under a new policy adopted by the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, the VA will now start providing free care to any of the 2.1 million Vietnam-era veterans who can show that they might have been hurt by exposure to Agent Orange.
This is another belated step forward in the decades-long struggle by Vietnam War veterans to get the Defense Department and the VA to acknowledge the American government's responsibility for poisoning them and causing permanent damage to them and often to their children and grandchildren. Dioxin, one of the most poisonous substances known to man, is known to cause many serious systemic diseases, autoimmune illnesses, cancers and birth defects. (It is also a warning about the general Pentagon and government approach to other hazards caused by its battlefield use of toxins-most significantly the increasingly common use of depleted uranium projectiles in bombs, shells and bullets-an approach which features lack of concern about health effects on troops and civilians, denial of information to troops, and denial of care to eventual victims.)
Missing from the Times article, written by military affairs reporter James Dao, which did include mention of the obstructionist role the government has played through this whole sorry saga, was a single mention of the far larger number of victims of Agent Orange in Vietnam-the people on whose heads and lands the toxic chemical was actually dropped, or of the adamant refusal by the US government to accept any responsibility for what it did to them.
According to the article, the VA estimates that there may be as many as 200,000 US veterans who are suffering from Agent Orange-related illnesses. But according to a court case brought on behalf of Vietnamese victims, which was dismissed by a US Federal District Judge who ruled that there was "no basis for the claims," there are at least three million Vietnamese, and possibly as many as 4.8 million, who are suffering the same Agent Orange-related illnesses as American veterans and their children. It is estimated that as many as 800,000 Vietnamese in the country's south currently suffer from chronic health problems due to Agent Orange exposure, either to themselves, or to a parent or grandparent. Most of these victims, some of whom are retarded, and others of whom cannot walk or have no use of their arms, need constant care.
Veterans for Peace, an organization whose membership includes a large number of Vietnam War veterans, has issued a call for the US to provide funds for health care, education, vocational education, chronic care, home care and equipment to clean up hotspots of dioxin in Vietnam-a call which Congress and the White House have consistently ignored. Tests have found dioxin levels around the sites of the three main former US bases in what was South Vietnam to be 300-400 times recognized safe levels. The US dumped huge amounts of Agent Orange for miles around those bases to kill off jungle cover that Vietnamese fighters could use to approach the bases, but it was never cleaned up when the US pulled out.
One organization that includes a number of American veterans of the way, including former military doctors or soldiers who later became physicians, is the Vietnam Friendship Village Project USA Inc., which raises funds to help establish communities in Vietnam to care for the victims of Agent Orange.
It may seem a pathetic stab at principle given America's use of two nuclear weapons against civilian targets in Japan a few years later, but back in World War II, in the midst of the most brutal island-to-island fighting during the Pacific War, a US Judge Advocate General in the Pentagon ruled that a military request for permission to use herbicides against the Japanese on Pacific islands would be illegal under the Hague Convention (forerunner of what are now called the Geneva Conventions). He ruled that trying to destroy the crops of civilians on those islands to deny food to the Japanese troops would be a war crime. The US went ahead and used the herbicides anyway, arguing that even though it was illegal, the US was free to go ahead, since the Japanese had already broken the laws of war by using strychnine to kill military guard dogs in Siberia. Under the rules of war, if one side breaks a rule, the other side is no longer bound by it.
But the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese never used toxic materials against US forces or against South Vietnamese forces. And the Pentagon in the Vietnam War never even considered whether spraying a highly toxic herbicide over 1.4 million hectares-12% of the total land area of Vietnam and almost 25% of the southern half of the country-might be a war crime.
Moreover, the Pentagon knew, before it began its massive defoliation campaign, about studies showing that Agent Orange was heavily laced with deadly dioxin, but covered up those studies, some by the chemical's makers, Dow Chemical and Monsanto, and never even warned the troops who handled the material daily, or who were sent out to fight in areas that had been heavily sprayed.
The ongoing medical disaster in Vietnam caused by America's criminal use of Agent Orange to defoliate a nation would be a good place for President Obama to start earning his just-awarded Nobel Peace Prize. He could kick off his peace campaign by finally honoring President Richard Nixon's immediately broken promise to provide several billion dollars in reconstruction aid to Vietnam at the conclusion of peace talks at the end of the war. Not a dollar of such aid was ever given.
Dao says he didn't mention significance for Vietnamese dioxin victims of the VA's decision to recognize three new diseases as being Agent Orange-linked, because "my beat is veterans," and because he only had 800 words in which to cover his story. That may be true (though surely the Vietnamese at least deserved a one-sentence mention). But back on July 25, when the Times ran a story (by Janie Lorber, not by Dao) about the finding by an expert panel of the National Institute of Medicine linking Parkinsons, ischemic heart disease and leukemia to Agent Orange, upon which the latest VA decision was based, it also failed to mention the Vietnamese victims. In that case, the lapse was simply journalistically inexcuseable, since it was about a new medical finding, not a policy decision regarding the treatment of veterans.
At this point, the only way the New York Times can salvage a bit of its journalistic reputation on this topic would be by having Dao, Lorber or some other reporter write a piece about the impact of America's Agent Orange use on the people of Vietnam. They could start by calling a veteran at Veterans for Peace or the Vietnam Friendship Village Project USA.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



24 Comments so far
Show AllThanks for highlighting this issue.
Somewhere along the line -- coinciding with our imperialistic
and perpetual war shift -- humanity became irrelevant in the
battle for corporate profit and military control of government.
Can anyone truly believe that we can have behaved so inhumanely
in Vietnam and be a just government at home?
Do justice to our own soldiers inflicted with this poison
we have spread so viciously?
.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
I am amused by the tone of the article.
"The ongoing medical disaster in Vietnam caused by America's criminal use of Agent Orange to defoliate a nation would be a good place for President Obama to start earning his just-awarded Nobel Peace Prize."
The Nobel society decided to give Obama the award. I keep noticing all these rude articles on common dreams where authors who had nothing to do with that decision act like the wicked step sibling who is shocked by what *your* grandparents gave you for Christmas and tried to make you feel guilty about it or find a way to turn it to their own benefit. Grow up, Mr. Lindorff.
"He could kick off his peace campaign by finally honoring President Richard Nixon's immediately broken promise to provide several billion dollars in reconstruction aid to Vietnam at the conclusion of peace talks at the end of the war. Not a dollar of such aid was ever given."
Which Vietnam was that promise made to? The North or the South? Further didn't the North violate the Paris Peace Accords by conquering South Vietnam after we left? In any event, that offer was voided by the Vietnamese side.
"At this point, the only way the New York Times can salvage a bit of its journalistic reputation on this topic would be by having Dao, Lorber or some other reporter write a piece about the impact of America's Agent Orange use on the people of Vietnam."
I didn't realize that newspapers had to engage in activism in order to have integrity. There is nothing in either article which compelled them to devote print space to subsidizing someone's political agenda.
There is so much wrong and such a lack of understanding of what journalism is or is supposed to be in "Guess Who's" comment that I hardly know where to start. (I'm guessing that Guess Who is a gung-ho right winger or a shill from the Pentagon media office.)
The Vietnam Peace Accords, reached between Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho in Paris negotiations back in 1972-3, declared that the sides were to cease fire in place. At that point, the US was to leave Vietnam in 60 days.
Significantly, the forces from the North that were in the southern part of the country were not required to return north in the agreement. Unification of North and South was to be attained by peaceful means.
Guess Who, the writer of this letter, claims that the North broke the agreement. The truth is more complicated: the Army of the Republic of South Vietnam ARVN attacked Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces and the VC and North Vietnamese armies attacked ARVN forces, so no one could really say who broke the accord. But what's important is that the North and the VC did meet their end of the deal with respect to the US, returning POWs and allowing the US to withdraw.
The US, for its part, continued to provide aid to the south's army.
Given that the VC and North Vietnamese followed the agreement with respect to the US, the US should have done the same towards the North, by providing reconstruction aid. It did not.
Whether or not there were violations of the accord, at this point there is a moral question. The US was simply wrong for many reasons, humanitarian, environmental, and legal, for operating a massive nationwide defoliation program using toxic chemicals which it knew to be gravely dangerous to humans and to animals. It has belatedly accepted responsibility for the harm that it did to our own troops, who were left completely in the dark about the dangers, and then denied care when the terrible results of exposure began to show up. Now that that responsibility has been recognized, how can we as a nation allow the millions of people--most of them civilians, many of whom even supported the US at the time, and many of whom were even our own allies who were fighting in the ARVN alongside US troops, to continue to suffer the effects of Agent Orange with no support from the US?
There is no way such callousness can be accepted. Amid the trillions that this government is spending to rescue rich Wall Street Bankers, surely a few billion could be found to rectify a terrible wrong done to the people of Vietnam.
As for the Times doing an honest story on the impact of Agent Orange on the Vietnamese, this is not a case of "activism." It is an example of editors assigning an important story. Knowing that there is such a story, and blacking it out is "activism," and it has no place in quality journalism. The agenda, such as it is, is to deny American guilt for the crime of poisoning millions of people.
Dave Lindorff
Visit Dave Lindorff's website at www.thiscantbehappening.net
I heard that beyond defoiliation A.O.; the resulting lack of vegetation was meant to silt up irrigation canals and starve the countryside of rice.
This is how the US ended up defeating the Filipinos . They could not defeat the Filipinos that were resisting them directly so took the indirect approach setting up concentration camps to lock up the women and children and by destroying the rice crops so that the populations would starve.
This again counters the suggestion by those that suggest that the US Military fights with "honor" and restrains itself from excess out of concern for Civilians.
The fact is they threw every thing they could at the Vietnamese outside the use of Nukes. They were not "held back" from prosecuting the war as they wished.
Dave Lindorff
Extremely well said, As a Vietnam veteran, I have always found it quite loathsome that the plight of the Vietnamese, who had suffered so grievously due to American militarism, has almost always been neglected by those in the mainstream media. I have had extreme guilt for what I had done to those people. If only American journalists were able to show some compassion and insight concerning what the Vietnamese people had gone through as a result of American imperialism.
Again, allow me to say Bravo! for an article that needed to be written and which deserves to be read by a wide audience. If only this piece could have appeared in the New York Times, where it rightly belongs.
I must confess I am shocked that you yourself responded. Nevertheless I stand by what I said. NV was stocked with arms to the hilt from its allies while SV was cut off and was rationing down to the bullet numbers.
The US is off of the hook. Vietnam saw victory within reach and didn't mind a few niceties being violated in the process. We owe them nothing as the choice was theirs.
"didn't the North violate the Paris Peace Accords by conquering South Vietnam after we left?"
You mean didn't North Vietnam violate the Paris Peace accords by conquering capitalism? For sure, to conquer capitalism you have to break its treaties, its contracts, its terms. Do you have a problem with this?
"I didn't realize that newspapers had to engage in activism"
Sure, it's hard to realize things in such a confusing echo chamber as the US elite media. It would be nice if the elite media would shut down their political arms. Why don't you work on this? Start by telling the NYT editors you didn't realize they have to seek undue influence over the society. Let us know.
What precisely is your point? NV had a choice, reach out and grab victory by voiding the peace accords or living by the peace accords and voiding victory. They made their choice. They are not victims.
This is an immoral argument. If we believe as the US official position has it, that North Vietnam was a dictatorship, then the people of the southern part of Vietnam were the victims of the north, and so cannot be held responsible for its behavior. But the decision to use massive amounts of the dioxin-laced defoliant Agent Orange to destroy the environment of 25% of the south, to poison the water and to kill humans and animals was made by the US, not the North Vietnamese.
We have as a government accepted grudgingly and belatedly responsibility for the harm that these chemicals did to our own troops. How can we then NOT accept responsiblity for what we did to millions of innocent civilians in South Vietnam?
The answer is simple. No decent society can ignore that responsibility or deny it.
Visit Dave Lindorff's website at www.thiscantbehappening.net
For anyone thinking this is a policy of the past just do some google research on "depleted uranium." Sounds pretty innocent doesn't it? Think again. Tons and tons of the nuclear waste of various states are used as ammunitions for bullets and cannons in Iraq and Afghanistan and they are even more poisonous and deadly as "agent orange."
This isn't going to apply to Iraq/AfPak volunteers.
The poor fucking Vietnamese.
how many have died?
(how much money was saved?)
It is we the people who choose our leaders who in return choose their ways of controlling those war machines. We can only succeed if we continue to pressure Congress. The public did that and Vietnam was on its way to ending. Where's that same public pressuring of Congress? Am I one of the few left doing it these days?
There was also violent resistence including domestic sabotage and war theater fragging.
Plus a large number of USA troops dying every day.
Could you explain your first sentence? What domestic sabotage are you talking about? War theater fragging?
I agree with you that there are a lot of USA troops dying every day. I value both the lives of the troops and the civilians. I'm lucky that my current Congressman listens unlike Ms. Bachmann in my neighboring district.
"It is we the people who choose our leaders"
LOL!
that is a common misunderstanding.
dream on.
How many votes did Obama get vs the other candidates? 70 million voted Obama, 60 million Mccain, 1.2 million all the other loser third parties. Obama won. If that's common misunderstanding to you, it's a good thing I didn't bother going to college.
This was an important reminder about a situation it's too easy to put out of mind. Does anyone have experience with or can vouch for any organizations that are helping the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange. I'd like to find out about one or more such organizations. The article mentions "Vietnam Friendship Village Project USA" and I went to their homepage, which doesn't seem to have been updated in the past 7-8 years. I tried to join their mailing list and the page was not active... Anyone have some experiences to share?
thanks.
War is nothing but tragic, and it's clear that the powers that be have no trouble whatsoever with making soldiers and civilians guinea pigs. There was agent orange, now there's depleted uranium...what next?
Here's what I saw when I visited the homes of Agent Orange victims in Da Nang, Vietnam last year: http://www.steadyfootsteps.org/2008/02/being_here_now.html
Note to Dave Lindorff, the horror of the lies about the deadly dioxins continue. It is hard to believe, as I am a recent widow of one of those vets, a lifer, who had a total of 7 years exposure 2, in country breathing it in flying low and slow with windows open because of the heat, often following Ranch Hand aircraft and then returned for 5 more years hauling in the cargo, including Agent Orange, and taking out the wounded and bodies. Yes doing his duty, though when he finished his obligation, quit as he had seen enough. An anti-war former warrior to the day he died.
Considering the unresponsive Department of Veteran's affairs to those who are diagnosed with those presumptive conditions, as my spouse was with lung cancer that had metastasized to the brain, it is hardly surprising there is no response to not just the hundreds of thousands of vets, much less those who were victims of those deadly dioxins for no other reason, they were the residents of a nation where the choice was to use those rainbow killer dioxins.
The vets like my husband who continue to die of their unseen
wounds will never have their names added to the ones on that
long black wall though they too died because of the choice of a Pentagon no different than those subjected to depleted uranium, the Agent Orange of today and the future as well as the innocents who are residents of Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan expanded to include Pakistan too.
But what went unmentioned, for all of those exposed, Vietnamese or vets, there are those who will suffer and die not only for decades, but centuries as Dow and Monsanto knew even then, it is now in the gene pool. Is it even possible
to compensate for those who will also suffer in the future?