Use of CS gas in Gulf is illegal, Red Cross warns U.S.

The Independent ^ | 09 March 2003 | Severin Carrell

[yankeedame]

Use of CS gas in Gulf is illegal, says Red Cross

By Severin Carrell
09 March 2003

The International Committee of the Red Cross has led protests by medical and human rights groups at plans by the US to deploy tear gas and pepper spray to the Gulf.

Senior officials in the ICRC, which champions legal rights for soldiers and civilians in wartime, warn that using these "riot control agents" would violate the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

Peter Herby, an arms and mines control specialist with the ICRC, said: "We can say quite categorically that the use of chemical agents, whether riot control agents or lethal agents, in warfare would be entirely prohibited."

Their protests, which follow The Independent on Sunday's disclosure last week that US troops could use CS gas and pepper spray in the Gulf, were supported by the British Medical Association and the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists.

They claimed that using even CS gas would undermine the prohibition on using chemical and biological weapons in war, and would be exploited by rogue states to justify their use of more dangerous weapons.

In the Commons, four senior Labour MPs have tabled questions asking the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, and the Defence Secretary, Geoff Hoon, whether the Government had objected to the US plans. British officials also believe the use of CS gas in war would be illegal.

But, in a letter to the IoS, a senior Pentagon official insisted the use of tear gas for "defensive purposes to save lives" and to "protect non-combatants" would be "consistent" with the convention.

Victoria Clarke, the Assistant Secretary of Defence for Public Affairs, denied allegations from a senior US military expert and Gulf War veteran that US special forces could use "knock out" gases.

The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said using tear gas against human shields or to pacify prisoners would be justified – claims disputed by international legal experts.

[yankeedame]

LOL! Re: these characters... my stars and garters but the mind just reels with sarcastic replies!

[Lucky Lyn]

Why? It was good enough for Waco!

[angkor]

Too bizarre for words.

Hopefully ICRC will escalate this to some more noticable forum, so that Americans will no longer send them $$$.

[Asclepius]

Senior officials in the ICRC, which champions legal rights for soldiers and civilians in wartime, warn that using these "riot control agents" would violate the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

I hope our commanders in the field laugh this stuff off. Non-lethal agents save lives.

[George W. Bush]

Let's see: America has CS tear gas and pepper spray. Saddam has tabun and sarin and anthrax and VX. So, the fair and balanced thing to do would be to warn America against the use of gas. No need to say anything about Saddam's gas weapons.

Lunatics.

[American Soldier]

I have been CS'd, but I have never been shot. However, I still feel confident in saying that I would rather by CS'd. I imagine the Iraqis would feel the same way if they were given a chance to express their opinions on the matter.

[Defender2]

""RED"" Cross, aptly named!!!!

[I still care]

Unbelievable. The red cross is right, don't pepper spray them or tear gas them, just shoot them. THAT'S legal.

Unbelievable.

[observer5]

"warn that using these "riot control agents" would violate the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention."

They just want to make the point that bombing them is more HUMANE!

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

The Red Cross saw their last nickel from me when I donated two hundred fifty dollars to the victims of 911, and they used it for a variety of things, including community outreach.

[americanbychoice]

You can shoot them, but don't use cs gas to make them surrender? What a crock.

[clintonh8r]

Oh, my! The Red Cross! This is series.....

[RS]

Good thing the Red Cross is not allowed in Arab countries ( it's the Red Crescent )

[Normal4me]

This confirms it for me. The earth has fallen off its axis!!

[PhilDragoo]

KGB use of gas against Chechen terrorists in hostage situation--no Red Cross protest.

Saddam Hussein use of lethal gas against Iranis and Kurds--no Red Cross protest.

Aum cult uses sarin gas in Tokyo subway March 1995--no Red Cross protest.

BATF/FBI/Delta uses CS gas to kill 80 U.S. civilians April 19, 1995--no Red Cross protest.

Now, U.S. forces have NOT used any gas, and Red Cross protests:

QED: Red Cross approves terrorism but not its defeat.

[dalereed]

"The Red Cross! This is series"

The Red Cross and the UN, both totally corrupt organizations, should be sent the same place of the dodo bird, extinction!

[Semper911]

just shoot them. THAT'S legal.

We can also plunge a bayonette into their chest, or beat them about the head with the butt of our rifle. All perfectly legal. But we cannot make them cry with pepper spray.

[way-right-of-center]

Red Cross = extortionists

The RC is concerned primarily with the RC. I unfortunately get the pleasure of dealing with these clowns at work, as our safety regs. are "American Red Cross Cerified." What a joke. If you write them a check, they'll certify anything.

[20yearvet]

OK Red cross we will not use CS on Iranis, we will just shoot them.

[optimistically_conservative]

FYI, the ICRC is correct.

Clinton pushed the CWC through the Senate in 1997. We had opposed it because of this. Remember, we also almost signed the land mine ban.

This is series, and stoopid. But it is also what the Treaty says.

I commented on this before with links here.