By Robert Schlesinger, Globe Staff, 3/5/2003
ASHINGTON - The protective suits are lighter and more durable. The gas
masks seal tighter to the face. The chemical detectors are designed to
avoid the false alarms that plagued US troops during the Gulf War.
Largely because of those upgrades in the last dozen years, military
planners say US forces gathering in the Persian Gulf region are
well-prepared to protect themselves against any attacks with chemical or
biological weapons, which the Bush administration and Britain insist Iraq
retains, despite Baghdad's denials.
Still, some military specialists and members of Congress remain concerned
that troops who would fight a war against Iraq are not adequately prepared,
mainly because of a history of poor training until recent months. An Army
audit completed last July found that most units selected at random were not
well-trained in using the protective gear, while a string of congressional
studies have reached similar conclusions.
Weapons of mass destruction remain the greatest threat to an invading
force. In 1988, Iraq used chemical weapons to kill at least 5,000 Kurdish
civilians in the northern town of Halabja. But Iraq's ability to
effectively use these weapons in a US-led war depends on its uncertain
capacity to spot and target swift-moving forces, whether it has sufficient
quantities to blanket battlefields, and even the weather conditions, which
could dissipate or disperse the deadly aerosols.
''You could paint the most positive picture of the situation of their
weapons of mass destruction programs, from an Iraqi point of view, and I
wouldn't want to be in the US units in question,'' said Owen Cote, a
defense specialist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ''But you're
not going to stop us. ... I don't care what they have: You may cause
casualties in those units, but you're not going to stop the war.''
Each member of US military units deploying in the Gulf region gets at least
two of the new protective suits, and Marines get three. The two-piece
outfits, akin to light ski suits, are less cumbersome than the ones used in
the Gulf War. The new suits use charcoal lining to neutralize the noxious
agents. The military is holding a contingency supply of the older version -
two for everyone deployed - as backups.
The new suits can be worn for 45 days after they are removed from their
vacuum-packed bags, but once exposed to a chemical or biological agent,
they should be changed within 24 hours.
According to the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of
Congress, the military cannot account for as many as 250,000 older suits
from a defective batch that had small tears. Military officials say those
suits were used in training exercises and destroyed.
Critics fret that the backup supply in the Gulf could include the defective
250,000. But General Stephen V. Reeves, executive officer of the Pentagon's
Chemical and Biological Defense program, said Monday the supply has been
inspected to ensure that it does not contain the torn suits.
US troops also have received new masks. They feature a wider field of view,
a silicon inner seal that fits more tightly than the rubber seal on the old
mask, and a device that tests the seal.
In addition, the military has several new systems designed to detect
chemical or biological agents, without sounding as many false alarms as
there were in the Gulf War, when old devices mistook insecticide and diesel
fuel for chemical weapons. One new detector for biological agents is
mounted on Humvees, while another can can spot chemical clouds 3 miles away.
''Our young soldiers are trained and ready, and their equipment is world
class,'' said General John C. Doesburg, who heads the Army's Soldier and
Biological Chemical Command.
But military officials acknowledge that the new detectors are not foolproof.
''The laws of physics and chemistry on this planet kind of restrict your
ability to rule out all false alarms,'' said Colonel Thomas W. Spoehr, who
commands the Third Chemical Brigade at the US Army Chemical School.
Over the last several years, reports issued by the GAO, Army auditors, and
the inspector general of the Defense Department have criticized the
adequacy of military training for chemical and biological warfare. In July,
an Army audit reportedly found 18 of 25 randomly selected units at two
bases were not adequately prepared to use their protective equipment.
''I am not convinced the realism and the degree of training that has to
happen at the unit level all the way up through the higher echelons takes
place on a regular basis,'' Raymond J. Decker of the GAO told the House
Government Reform Committee's subcommittee on national security last October.
''Our audits have found deficiencies,'' Joseph E. Schmitz, the Defense
Department's inspector general, testified at the same hearing. But he also
noted that ''the units that are currently in position, the most likely ones
to be sent into harm's way, are the best-trained and best-equipped.''
Spoehr, the chemical brigade commander, said the previous deficiencies in
training had been recognized and said responsible officers have ''taken
corrective action to fix every one of those shortcomings.''
Military officials note that the troops sent to the Gulf have been training
for months for their missions in Iraq, including how to protect themselves
from chemical and biological attacks.
''This is like someone doing the term paper the night before. It makes you
a little uncomfortable,'' said Representative Christopher Shays, a
Republican from Connecticut who chaired the congressional hearing in
October. ''Right now, do I think they're ready? No,'' he said Monday. ''Do
I think they will be? Yes.''
Aside from questions about US preparedness, Iraq would face difficulties
launching attacks with chemical and biological weapons.
''Chemical and biological weapons are not a terribly practical battlefield
weapon in terms of lethality,'' said Reeves, of the Chemical and Biological
Defense program. ''You really have to have the right delivery means, and
you have to have the right meteorological conditions.''
Bright sunlight kills some biological agents. A number of nerve agents,
such as VX, are designed to linger for days or weeks, but high or cold
temperatures could shorten that period.
Iraq has in the past used artillery, rockets, missiles, and aircraft to
deploy these weapons, but each delivery system would probably have limited
effectiveness.
The Iraqis have drones that can spray agents from the air, but they would
run up against US air superiority. Scud missiles proved unreliable weapons
for Iraq in the Gulf War, and they would share a problem with artillery and
rockets - Iraq is believed to lack a precise way to aim, especially at
dispersed, fast-moving troops. It seems unlikely they could deliver a large
enough quantity to have a decisive impact on large battlefields, defense
specialists say.
''Most Iraqi artillery batteries would be lucky to get off more than a few
rounds before they were silenced by American guns,'' Kenneth Pollack, a
former CIA Persian Gulf military analyst, wrote in his book, ''The
Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq.''
If US forces can identify and locate the delivery system being used,
Doesburg said, ''We'll take it out, and we'll kill it.''
Robert Schlesinger can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/064/nation/Military_hopes_gear_can_repel_bioattack+.shtml
