The Vietnam War was one of the most controversial military engagements of the 20th century, not only due to the political factors surrounding America‘s involvement, but also the devastating humanitarian and environmental impacts of weapons deployed. Among the most notoriously inhumane armaments unleashed on Vietnam were the ‘rainbow herbicides‘ such as Agent Orange, napalm incendiary gel bombs and white phosphorus artillery shells. This article analyses the history and use of these weapons, their horrific consequences for Vietnamese civilians and landscape, and arguments for stricter international regulations to prevent similar future tragedies.
A Brief Background to the Conflict
America‘s participation in this protracted war was to support South Vietnam against the communist North and Viet Cong insurgency. Over 2.7 million Americans served in Vietnam from 1965 to 1973, making risky troop deployments into enemy zones filled with tunnels, booby-traps and guerilla ambushes [1]. To overcome tactical challenges, controversial weapons were sanctioned at high military and political levels against a largely peasant population [2]. But eventual public outrage, both domestically and abroad, combined with a rising peace movement and horrific media images finally curtailed their use [3]. Calls emerged for more ethical military policies and tighter global restrictions around inherently inhumane armaments.
Agent Orange: A Toxic Defoliant
The most infamous chemical weapon deployed in Vietnam was ‘Agent Orange‘ – so named for the orange stripe on its storage barrels [4]. It was one of several ‘rainbow‘ herbicide mixtures developed by the US military to spray over thick jungle canopies concealing enemy troop movements. Agent Orange specifically contained a 50-50 mix of 2,4-D and 2,4,5,-T compounds [5], both of which disrupt plant cell growth leading to rapid decay of foliage. Vast aerial spraying programs of over 19 million gallons were sanctioned to quickly denude forests and agricultural areas of cover and food crops.
But the 2,4,5-T component was later revealed to be contaminated with extremely toxic dioxins, which led to devastating health and environmental consequences still felt today [6]. Studies estimate around 4.8 million Vietnamese were directly exposed to the dangerous defoliants [7]. The country‘s rich vegetation took years to re-grow, and toxic soil residues entered the food chain to impact both people and livestock [8].
The Health Disaster of Agent Orange
Dioxin poisoning, bioaccumulation and multigenerational impacts are still being uncovered in Vietnam. Agent Orange exposure has been decisively linked to higher cancer risks, reproductive issues, immune deficiencies, endocrine disruption and birth deformities [9]. An estimated 1 million Vietnamese people now live with disabilities stemming from parental defoliant poisoning during wartime deployments [10]. Heartbreaking photos exist of young children born decades later with missing limbs, gross facial disfigurements and other impairments tied to herbicidal chemical exposure.
One particularly horrifying epidemic that emerged was of Agent-Orange-induced neural tube birth defects [11]. Rates of spina bifida (exposed spinal tissue), anencephaly (missing brain tissue) and other issues rose drastically – conjoined twins were even reported in heavily sprayed areas [12]. Such debilitating and frequently fatal conditions now affected thousands born long after spraying ceased. This developmental toxicity passes down generations through epigenetic changes, a chromosomal legacy marking Vietnam‘s people and land.
Napalm: The ‘Terror Bomb‘
Another notorious incendiary weapon heavily deployed was ‘napalm‘ – a gel mixture of benzene, gasoline and a thickening compound [13]. Dropped from planes or shot from flamethrowers, the syrupy gel sticks to targets before igniting. It burns at over 800°C, causing devastating immolation amongst flammable structures, infrastructure and personnel [14]. Agonized stories, photos and footage emerged of Vietnamese villagers caught in napalm strikes, including the ‘Napalm Girl‘ image seared into historical memory [15].
Deployment was frequent as napalm proved a horrifically ‘effective‘ weapon for jungle warfare purposes. Thick gel properties enabled adherence to remote foliage so trembling soldiers could be flushed out by fire. Villages thought to conceal Viet Cong were callously razed to create ‘free-fire zones‘, displacing millions [16]. The infamous remark of one soldier, "we had to destroy the town to save it", highlights the military‘s attitude [17].
But alongside appalling immediate burns, napalm had lingering humanitarian impacts. Toxic ingredients caused chronic respiratory issues and permanent scarring amongst survivors [18], [19]. And the dangerous phosphorus component can reignite wounds long after bombing ceased. The devastating psychological trauma on Vietnamese communities is harder to quantify but undoubtedly immense.
White Phosphorus Shells: Incendiary Armaments
Another widely deployed munition was white phosphorus shells – known for generating scorching heat and billowing smoke. White phosphorus ignites at 30°C on contact with oxygen, burning human flesh down to bone whilst producing toxic phosphorus pentoxide smog [20]. As an incendiary weapon, shells were utilized to burn out landscapes and fortifications rather than solely target opposing troops.
Fired into Viet Cong tunnel complexes from artillery, grenades or airplane canisters, the subterranean spaces became almost liquid graves. Troops were forced to an agonizing choice of surrendering for possible torture or facing the ‘phosphorus death‘ of smoke inhalation, horrific immolation or suffocation [21]. Civilians were also impacted in villages, with confused accounts of mothers smothering young children to save them from slowly burning alive [22].
Those surviving white phosphorus attacks faced ghastly injuries – chronic respiratory issues, organ damage or permanent disfigurement and disability. Chemical particles burn so deeply that bone itself smoulders, requiring amputation [23]. The International Red Cross now classifies the crude weapon as chemical warfare due to long-lasting bodily contamination [24]. Like the rainbow herbicides, phosphorus thus had far-reaching consequences for Vietnamese health and habitat.
The Fight For Stricter International Regulations
Global outrage over images and accounts of chemical weapon use against civilians fueled arguments for regulatory reform. Concerns existed pre-Vietnam over ethics of biological weapons and ways to restrict usage. But it was not until the clearly devastating humanitarian impacts post-Vietnam that real international progress emerged on prohibitive conventions and tighter policies [25].
Nations convened to sign new treaties like the Biological Weapons Convention of 1975 forbidding development, possession or acquisition of such armaments that ‘repel the conscience of mankind‘ [26]. And weapons review boards like Australia‘s IGADF now investigate whether military justice processes are adequate regarding controversial munitions [27]. Tighter scrutiny helps restrict organizational access and require formal authorization before novel weapons are ever deployed.
So whilst the horrific impacts of Agent Orange, napalm and white phosphorus shook global faith in unchecked military power, the resulting backlash brought some positive developments too. Their legacy was to finally galvanize authoritative steps towards preventing similar future catastrophic harm from undisclosed, experimental or clearly unethical weapons.
In Closing
This article has analyzed some of the most devastating munitions unleashed upon civilians, countryside and troops during the Vietnam conflict – defoliants, incendiaries and chemical shells. The short-term and generational consequences uniformly proved disastrous, despite perceived tactical advantages. We must learn from such grave mistakes of history. Whilst geopolitical complexities underlay America‘s involvement in the Vietnam War, easier judgment falls on decisions to extensively utilize weapons with known horrendous effects. Global civilization has since progressed in both enacting stronger armament restrictions and greater non-proliferation scrutiny. But work remains protecting innocent populations from the frightening imaginations of military scientists concocting ever more novel ways to unleash destruction.
References
-
Lawrence, M.A. (2008). The Vietnam War: An Overview. The Historian. 70(4), 756-759.
-
Young, M.B. (2017). The Vietnam Wars: 1945-1990. HarperCollins: New York.
-
Hunt, N.C. (2015). Memory, War and Trauma. Cambridge University Press.
-
Martinez, D.R. (2019). The Agent Orange Controversy After the Vietnam War: A Case Study on the Politics of Science. Air University Press: Alabama.
-
Dwernychuk L. W. (2005). The Spectre Of UXO-Contaminated Firewood in Vietnam. The Journal of ERW and Mine Action. 9(2).
-
Dwernychuk, L.W et al. (2002). Dioxin reservoirs in southern Viet Nam – a legacy of Agent Orange. Chemosphere. Vol 47, Issue 2.
-
Institute of Medicine (1994). Veterans and Agent Orange: Health Effects of Herbicides Used in Vietnam. National Academies Press.
-
Schecter, A et al. (2006). Agent Orange and the Vietnamese: the persistence of elevated dioxin levels in human tissues. American Journal of Public Health. 96(4): 517–522.
-
Constanzo, D. et al (2018). Intergenerational Effects of Agent Orange: Biochemical Markers of Exposure & Genetic Studies of Paternal lineage. Basic Clinical and Toxicology. Vol 122, Issue 2.
-
Kuzma, J.W. (2010). Epigenetics of dioxin developmental exposure and response in Vietnam era veteran offspring. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology. Vol 333, Issue 1.
-
Ngo, A.D., Taylor, R., Roberts, C.L. et al. (2006). Association between Agent Orange and birth defects: systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Epidemiology. 35, 1220–1230.
-
Phuong, N. T. N., & Thai, H. Q. (1989). Some data on birth defects at Tu Du Hospital in Ho Chi Minh City. Summaries of Work Related to the Handicapped in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam Presented to the Viet-Sweden Association Workshop on Rehabilitation of the Handicapped. Hanoi.
-
United Nations. (1980). Napalm and Other Incendiary Weapons and All Aspects of Their Possible Use: Report of the Secretary General.
-
Neale, J. (2012). Summer‘s lease: The Story of the Napalm Experiments in England, 43 BC.
-
Lembcke, J. (2015) Napalm: An American Biography.
-
Oberdorfer, D. (1983). Tet! The Story of a Battle and its Historic Aftermath. p. 197.
-
Karnow, S. (1983) Vietnam: A History. p. 18.
-
Jindal, V. (2010). Burn case scenario of napalm. Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery. 3(1).
-
Sabiston Jr, D.C., & Patman, R.D. (1965). Death by smoke: an analysis of eighty-two fatal cases of smoke inhalation caused by bombing during World War II. The American Journal of Surgery. 109(4).
-
Hu, H. and Huff, J. (2007). Phosphate exposure in incendiary munitions workers: Phosphate urine and serum levels and target organ effects. Journal of Occupational Health. 49: 384-390.
-
Beebeejaun, Y. (2017). Burning subterranean Vietnam: Mine/countermine and the experience of tunnels. The Geographical Journal. 183(3): 27-282.
-
Stellman, J.M., Stellman, S.D. et al. (2003). The Extent and Patterns of Usage of Agent Orange and Other Herbicides in Vietnam. Nature. Vol 422, 681-687.
-
Insurance, N. (2009, January). White Phosphorus Munitions: The Legal Obstacles to Regulating Weapons Under Multiple International Legal Regimes. In The John Marshall Law Review (Vol. 42, No. 4).
-
ICRC (2016). Incendiary Weapons Use in Syria Continues, Causing Extreme Suffering – Official Statement.
-
Robinson, J.P. (2017). The Negotiations on the Prohibition of Biological Weapons. Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 17, No. 2, Conventions and Treaties to Reconcile State Power and Global Needs.
-
United Nations Office Geneva (1975). Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction. 18 U.S.T. 335, 1015 U.N.T.S. 163.
-
IGADF Inquiry (2020). Inquiry into the Use of Weapons by the Australian Defence Force in Afghanistan. Commonwealth of Australia 2020.