Saturday, October 31, 2020

The Effects of Agent Orange

 



Agent Orange is an herbicide and defoliant chemical, one of the "tactical use" Rainbow Herbicides. It is widely known for its use by the U.S. military as part of its chemical warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971. It is a mixture of equal parts of two herbicides, 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. In addition to its damaging environmental effects, traces of dioxin (mainly TCDD, the most toxic of its type) found in the mixture have caused major health problems for many individuals who were exposed.


Up to four million people in Vietnam were exposed to the defoliant. The government of Vietnam says as many as three million people have suffered illness because of Agent Orange, and the Red Cross of Vietnam estimates that up to one million people are disabled or have health problems as a result of Agent Orange contamination. The United States government has described these figures as unreliable, while documenting higher cases of leukemia, Hodgkin's lymphoma, and various kinds of cancer in exposed US military veterans. An epidemiological study done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed that there was an increase in the rate of birth defects of the children of military personnel as a result of Agent Orange. Agent Orange has also caused enormous environmental damage in Vietnam. Over 3,100,000 hectares (31,000 km2 or 11,969 mi2) of forest were defoliated. Defoliants eroded tree cover and seedling forest stock, making reforestation difficult in numerous areas. Animal species diversity sharply reduced in contrast with unsprayed areas.


The use of Agent Orange in Vietnam resulted in numerous legal actions. The United Nations ratified United Nations General Assembly Resolution 31/72 and the Environmental Modification Convention. Lawsuits filed on behalf of both U.S. and Vietnamese veterans sought compensation for damages.


Agent Orange was first used by the British Armed Forces in Malaya during the Malayan Emergency. It was also used by the US military in Laos and Cambodia during the Vietnam War because forests near the border with Vietnam were used by the Viet Cong. The herbicide was also used in Brazil to clear out sections of land for agriculture.


Chemical composition


The active ingredient of Agent Orange was an equal mixture of two phenoxy herbicides – 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T) – in iso-octyl ester form, which contained traces of the dioxin 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD). TCDD was a trace (typically 2-3 ppm, ranging from 50 ppb to 50 ppm) - but significant - contaminant of Agent Orange.


Toxicology


TCDD is the most toxic of the dioxins and is classified as a human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The fat-soluble nature of TCDD causes it to readily enter the body through physical contact or ingestion. Dioxin easily accumulates in the food chain. Dioxin enters the body by attaching to a protein called the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), a transcription factor. When TCDD binds to AhR, the protein moves to the nucleus, where it influences gene expression.


According to U.S. government reports, if not bound chemically to a biological surface such as soil, leaves or grass, Agent Orange dries quickly after spraying and breaks down within hours to days when exposed to sunlight and is no longer harmful.


Development


Several herbicides were developed as part of efforts by the United States and Great Britain to create herbicidal weapons for use during World War II. These included 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, MCPA (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid, 1414B and 1414A, recoded LN-8 and LN-32), and isopropyl phenylcarbamate (1313, recoded LN-33).


In 1943, the United States Department of the Army contracted botanist and bioethicist Arthur Galston, who discovered the defoliants later used in Agent Orange, and his employer University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign to study the effects of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T on cereal grains (including rice) and broadleaf crops. While a graduate and post-graduate student at the University of Illinois, Galston's research and dissertation focused on finding a chemical means to make soybeans flower and fruit earlier. He discovered both that 2,3,5-triiodobenzoic acid (TIBA) would speed up the flowering of soybeans and that in higher concentrations it would defoliate the soybeans. From these studies arose the concept of using aerial applications of herbicides to destroy enemy crops to disrupt their food supply. In early 1945, the U.S. Army ran tests of various 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T mixtures at the Bushnell Army Airfield in Florida. As a result, the U.S. began a full-scale production of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T and would have used it against Japan in 1946 during Operation Downfall if the war had continued.


In the years after the war, the U.S. tested 1,100 compounds, and field trials of the more promising ones were done at British stations in India and Australia, in order to establish their effects in tropical conditions, as well as at the U.S.'s testing ground in Florida. Between 1950 and 1952, trials were conducted in Tanganyika, at Kikore and Stunyansa, to test arboricides and defoliants under tropical conditions. The chemicals involved were 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, and endothall (3,6-endoxohexahydrophthalic acid). During 1952–53, the unit supervised the aerial spraying of 2,4,5-T in Kenya to assess the value of defoliants in the eradication of tsetse fly.


Early use


During the Malayan Emergency (1948–1960), Britain was the first nation to employ the use of herbicides and defoliants to destroy bushes, trees, and vegetation to deprive insurgents of concealment and target food crops as part of a starvation campaign in the early 1950s. A detailed account of how the British experimented with the spraying of herbicides was written by two scientists, E.K. Woodford of Agricultural Research Council's Unit of Experimental Agronomy and H.G.H. Kearns of the University of Bristol.


After the Malayan conflict ended in 1960, the U.S. considered the British precedent in deciding that the use of defoliants was a legal tactic of warfare. Secretary of State Dean Rusk advised President John F. Kennedy that the British had established a precedent for warfare with herbicides in Malaya.


Use in the Vietnam War


In mid-1961, President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam asked the United States to conduct aerial herbicide spraying in his country. In August of that year, the Republic of Vietnam Air Force conducted herbicide operations with American help. Diem's request launched a policy debate in the White House and the State and Defense Departments. However, U.S. officials considered using it, pointing out that the British had already used herbicides and defoliants during the Malayan Emergency in the 1950s. In November 1961, Kennedy authorized the start of Operation Ranch Hand, the codename for the United States Air Force's herbicide program in Vietnam.


During the Vietnam War, between 1962 and 1971, the United States military sprayed nearly 20,000,000 U.S. gallons (76,000 m3) of various chemicals – the "rainbow herbicides" and defoliants – in Vietnam, eastern Laos, and parts of Cambodia as part of Operation Ranch Hand, reaching its peak from 1967 to 1969. For comparison purposes, an olympic size pool holds approximately 660,000 U.S. gal (2,500 m3). As the British did in Malaya, the goal of the U.S. was to defoliate rural/forested land, depriving guerrillas of food and concealment and clearing sensitive areas such as around base perimeters. The program was also a part of a general policy of forced draft urbanization, which aimed to destroy the ability of peasants to support themselves in the countryside, forcing them to flee to the U.S.-dominated cities, depriving the guerrillas of their rural support base. Agent Orange was usually sprayed from helicopters or from low-flying C-123 Provider aircraft, fitted with sprayers and "MC-1 Hourglass" pump systems and 1,000 U.S. gallons (3,800 L) chemical tanks. Spray runs were also conducted from trucks, boats, and backpack sprayers.


The first batch of herbicides was unloaded at Tan Son Nhut Air Base in South Vietnam, on January 9, 1962. U.S. Air Force records show at least 6,542 spraying missions took place over the course of Operation Ranch Hand. By 1971, 12 percent of the total area of South Vietnam had been sprayed with defoliating chemicals, at an average concentration of 13 times the recommended U.S. Department of Agriculture application rate for domestic use. In South Vietnam alone, an estimated 39,000 square miles (10,000,000 ha) of agricultural land was ultimately destroyed. In some areas, TCDD concentrations in soil and water were hundreds of times greater than the levels considered safe by the EPA.


The campaign destroyed 20,000 square kilometers (5×106 acres) of upland and mangrove forests and thousands of square kilometers of crops. Overall, more than 20% of South Vietnam's forests were sprayed at least once over the nine-year period.


In 1965, members of the U.S. Congress were told "crop destruction is understood to be the more important purpose ... but the emphasis is usually given to the jungle defoliation in public mention of the program." Military personnel were told they were destroying crops because they were going to be used to feed guerrillas. They later discovered nearly all of the food they had been destroying was not being produced for guerrillas; it was, in reality, only being grown to support the local civilian population. For example, in Quang Ngai province, 85% of the crop lands were scheduled to be destroyed in 1970 alone. This contributed to widespread famine, leaving hundreds of thousands of people malnourished or starving.


The U.S. military began targeting food crops in October 1962, primarily using Agent Blue; the American public was not made aware of the crop destruction programs until 1965 (and it was then believed that crop spraying had begun that spring). In 1965, 42% of all herbicide spraying was dedicated to food crops. The first official acknowledgement of the programs came from the State Department in March 1966.


Many experts at the time, including Arthur Galston, opposed herbicidal warfare because of concerns about the side effects to humans and the environment by indiscriminately spraying the chemical over a wide area. As early as 1966, resolutions were introduced to the United Nations charging that the U.S. was violating the 1925 Geneva Protocol, which regulated the use of chemical and biological weapons. The U.S. defeated most of the resolutions, arguing that Agent Orange was not a chemical or a biological weapon as it was considered a herbicide and a defoliant and it was used in effort to destroy plant crops and to deprive the enemy of concealment and not meant to target human beings. The U.S. delegation argued that a weapon, by definition, is any device used to injure, defeat, or destroy living beings, structures, or systems, and Agent Orange did not qualify under that definition. It also argued that if the U.S. were to be charged for using Agent Orange, then Britain and its Commonwealth nations should be charged since they also used it widely during the Malayan Emergency in the 1950s. In 1969, Britain commented on the draft Resolution 2603 (XXIV): "The evidence seems to us to be notably inadequate for the assertion that the use in war of chemical substances specifically toxic to plants is prohibited by international law."


Health effects


Vietnamese people


The government of Vietnam says that 4 million of its citizens were exposed to Agent Orange, and as many as 3 million have suffered illnesses because of it; these figures include their children who were exposed. The Red Cross of Vietnam estimates that up to 1 million people are disabled or have health problems due to contaminated Agent Orange. The United States government has challenged these figures as being unreliable.


According to a study by Dr. Nguyen Viet Nhan, children in the areas where Agent Orange was used have been affected and have multiple health problems, including cleft palate, mental disabilities, hernias, and extra fingers and toes. In the 1970s, high levels of dioxin were found in the breast milk of South Vietnamese women, and in the blood of U.S. military personnel who had served in Vietnam. The most affected zones are the mountainous area along Truong Son (Long Mountains) and the border between Vietnam and Cambodia. The affected residents are living in substandard conditions with many genetic diseases.


In 2006, Anh Duc Ngo and colleagues of the University of Texas Health Science Center published a meta-analysis that exposed a large amount of heterogeneity (different findings) between studies, a finding consistent with a lack of consensus on the issue. Despite this, statistical analysis of the studies they examined resulted in data that the increase in birth defects/relative risk (RR) from exposure to agent orange/dioxin "appears" to be on the order of 3 in Vietnamese-funded studies, but 1.29 in the rest of the world. There is data near the threshold of statistical significance suggesting Agent Orange contributes to still-births, cleft palate, and neural tube defects, with spina bifida being the most statistically significant defect. The large discrepancy in RR between Vietnamese studies and those in the rest of the world has been ascribed to bias in the Vietnamese studies.


Twenty-eight of the former U.S. military bases in Vietnam where the herbicides were stored and loaded onto airplanes may still have high levels of dioxins in the soil, posing a health threat to the surrounding communities. Extensive testing for dioxin contamination has been conducted at the former U.S. airbases in Da Nang, Phù Cát District and Biên Hòa. Some of the soil and sediment on the bases have extremely high levels of dioxin requiring remediation. The Da Nang Air Base has dioxin contamination up to 350 times higher than international recommendations for action. The contaminated soil and sediment continue to affect the citizens of Vietnam, poisoning their food chain and causing illnesses, serious skin diseases and a variety of cancers in the lungs, larynx, and prostate.


U.S. Veterans


While in Vietnam, the veterans were told not to worry and were persuaded the chemical was harmless. After returning home, Vietnam veterans began to suspect their ill health or the instances of their wives having miscarriages or children born with birth defects might be related to Agent Orange and the other toxic herbicides to which they had been exposed in Vietnam. Veterans began to file claims in 1977 to the Department of Veterans Affairs for disability payments for health care for conditions they believed were associated with exposure to Agent Orange, or more specifically, dioxin, but their claims were denied unless they could prove the condition began when they were in the service or within one year of their discharge. In order to qualify for compensation, veterans must have served on or near the perimeters of military bases in Thailand during the Vietnam Era, where herbicides were tested and stored outside of Vietnam, veterans who were crew members on C-123 planes flown after the Vietnam War, or were associated with Department of Defense (DoD) projects to test, dispose of, or store herbicides in the U.S.


By April 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs had compensated only 486 victims, although it had received disability claims from 39,419 soldiers who had been exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam.


In a November 2004 Zogby International poll of 987 people, 79% of respondents thought the U.S. chemical companies which produced Agent Orange defoliant should compensate U.S. soldiers who were affected by the toxic chemical used during the war in Vietnam. Also, 51% said they supported compensation for Vietnamese Agent Orange victims.


National Academy of Medicine


Starting in the early 1990s, the federal government directed the Institute of Medicine (IOM), now known as the National Academy of Medicine, to issue reports every 2 years on the health effects of Agent Orange and similar herbicides. First published in 1994 and titled Veterans and Agent Orange, the IOM reports assess the risk of both cancer and non-cancer health effects. Each health effect is categorized by evidence of association based on available research data. The last update was published in 2016, entitled "Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 2014."


The report shows sufficient evidence of an association with soft tissue sarcoma; non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); Hodgkin disease; Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL); including hairy cell leukemia and other chronic B-cell leukemias. Limited or suggested evidence of an association was linked with respiratory cancers (lung, bronchus, trachea, larynx); prostate cancer; multiple myeloma; and bladder cancer. Numerous other cancers were determined to have inadequate or insufficient evidence of links to Agent Orange.


The National Academy of Medicine has repeatedly concluded that any evidence suggestive of an association between Agent Orange and prostate cancer is, "limited because chance, bias, and confounding could not be ruled out with confidence."


At the request of the Veterans Administration, the Institute Of Medicine evaluated whether service in these C-123 aircraft could have plausibly exposed soldiers and been detrimental to their health. Their report "Post-Vietnam Dioxin Exposure in Agent Orange-Contaminated C-123 Aircraft" confirmed it.


U.S. Public Health Service


Publications by the United States Public Health Service have shown that Vietnam veterans, overall, have increased rates of cancer, and nerve, digestive, skin, and respiratory disorders. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that in particular, there are higher rates of acute/chronic leukemia, Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, throat cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, Ischemic heart disease, soft tissue sarcoma, and liver cancer. With the exception of liver cancer, these are the same conditions the U.S. Veterans Administration has determined may be associated with exposure to Agent Orange/dioxin and are on the list of conditions eligible for compensation and treatment.


Military personnel who were involved in storage, mixture and transportation (including aircraft mechanics), and actual use of the chemicals were probably among those who received the heaviest exposures. Military members who served on Okinawa also claim to have been exposed to the chemical, but there is no verifiable evidence to corroborate these claims.


Some studies have suggested that veterans exposed to Agent Orange may be more at risk of developing prostate cancer and potentially more than twice as likely to develop higher-grade, more lethal prostate cancers. However, a critical analysis of these studies and 35 others consistently found that there was no significant increase in prostate cancer incidence or mortality in those exposed to Agent Orange or 2,3,7,8-tetracholorodibenzo-p-dioxin.


U.S. Veterans of Laos and Cambodia


The United States fought secret wars in Laos and Cambodia, dropping large quantities of Agent Orange in each of those countries. According to one estimate, the U.S. dropped 475,500 gallons of Agent Orange in Laos and 40,900 in Cambodia. Because Laos and Cambodia were neutral during the Vietnam War, the U.S. attempted to keep secret its wars, including its bombing campaigns against those countries, from the American population and has largely avoided compensating American veterans and CIA personnel stationed in Cambodia and Laos who suffered permanent injuries as a result of exposure to Agent Orange there.


One noteworthy exception, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, is a claim filed with the CIA by an employee of "a self-insured contractor to the CIA that was no longer in business." The CIA advised the Department of Labor that it "had no objections" to paying the claim and Labor accepted the claim for payment. *


*Civilian Exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam: GAO-05-371


April 2005 Figure 3: Overview of the Workers' Compensation Claims Process for Contract Employees:


" ... Of the 20 claims filed by contract employees [of the united States government], 9 were initially denied by the insurance carriers and 1 was approved for payment. ... The claim that was approved by Labor for payment involved a self-insured contractor to the CIA that was no longer in business. Absent an employer or insurance carrier, the CIA--acting in the role of the employer and the insurance carrier--stated that it "had no objections" to paying the claim. Labor reviewed the claim and accepted it for payment."--https://www.gao.gov/htext/d05371.html


Ecological impact


About 17.8%—3,100,000 hectares (31,000 km2; 12,000 sq mi)—of the total forested area of Vietnam was sprayed during the war, which disrupted the ecological equilibrium. The persistent nature of dioxins, erosion caused by loss of tree cover, and loss of seedling forest stock meant that reforestation was difficult (or impossible) in many areas. Many defoliated forest areas were quickly invaded by aggressive pioneer species (such as bamboo and cogon grass), making forest regeneration difficult and unlikely. Animal species diversity was also impacted; in one study a Harvard biologist found 24 species of birds and 5 species of mammals in a sprayed forest, while in two adjacent sections of unsprayed forest there were 145 and 170 species of birds and 30 and 55 species of mammals.


Dioxins from Agent Orange have persisted in the Vietnamese environment since the war, settling in the soil and sediment and entering the food chain through animals and fish which feed in the contaminated areas. The movement of dioxins through the food web has resulted in bioconcentration and biomagnification. The areas most heavily contaminated with dioxins are former U.S. air bases.


Sociopolitical impact


American policy during the Vietnam War was to destroy crops, accepting the sociopolitical impact that that would have. The RAND Corporation's Memorandum 5446-ISA/ARPA states: "the fact that the VC [the Vietcong] obtain most of their food from the neutral rural population dictates the destruction of civilian crops ... if they are to be hampered by the crop destruction program, it will be necessary to destroy large portions of the rural economy – probably 50% or more". Crops were deliberately sprayed with Agent Orange, areas were bulldozed clear of vegetation, and the rural population was subjected to bombing and artillery fire. In consequence, the urban population in South Vietnam nearly tripled, growing from 2.8 million people in 1958 to 8 million by 1971. The rapid flow of people led to a fast-paced and uncontrolled urbanization; an estimated 1.5 million people were living in Saigon slums because of the overcrowding.


Legal and diplomatic proceedings


International


The extensive environmental damage that resulted from usage of the herbicide prompted the United Nations to pass Resolution 31/72 and ratify the Environmental Modification Convention. Many states do not regard this as a complete ban on the use of herbicides and defoliants in warfare, but it does require case-by-case consideration. In the Conference on Disarmament, Article 2(4) Protocol III of the weaponry convention contains "The Jungle Exception", which prohibits states from attacking forests or jungles "except if such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or military objectives or are military objectives themselves". This exception voids any protection of any military and civilian personnel from a napalm attack or something like Agent Orange and is clear that it was designed to cover situations like U.S. tactics in Vietnam.


Class action lawsuit


Since at least 1978, several lawsuits have been filed against the companies which produced Agent Orange, among them Dow Chemical, Monsanto, and Diamond Shamrock. Attorney Hy Mayerson was an early pioneer in Agent Orange litigation, working with environmental attorney Victor Yannacone in 1980 on the first class-action suits against wartime manufacturers of Agent Orange. In meeting Dr. Ronald A. Codario, one of the first civilian doctors to see affected patients, Mayerson, so impressed by the fact a physician would show so much interest in a Vietnam veteran, forwarded more than a thousand pages of information on Agent Orange and the effects of dioxin on animals and humans to Codario's office the day after he was first contacted by the doctor. The corporate defendants sought to escape culpability by blaming everything on the U.S. government.


In 1980, Mayerson, with Sgt. Charles E. Hartz as their principal client, filed the first U.S. Agent Orange class-action lawsuit in Pennsylvania, for the injuries military personnel in Vietnam suffered through exposure to toxic dioxins in the defoliant. Attorney Mayerson co-wrote the brief that certified the Agent Orange Product Liability action as a class action, the largest ever filed as of its filing. Hartz's deposition was one of the first ever taken in America, and the first for an Agent Orange trial, for the purpose of preserving testimony at trial, as it was understood that Hartz would not live to see the trial because of a brain tumor that began to develop while he was a member of Tiger Force, special forces, and LRRPs in Vietnam. The firm also located and supplied critical research to the veterans' lead expert, Dr. Codario, including about 100 articles from toxicology journals dating back more than a decade, as well as data about where herbicides had been sprayed, what the effects of dioxin had been on animals and humans, and every accident in factories where herbicides were produced or dioxin was a contaminant of some chemical reaction.


The chemical companies involved denied that there was a link between Agent Orange and the veterans' medical problems. However, on May 7, 1984, seven chemical companies settled the class-action suit out of court just hours before jury selection was to begin. The companies agreed to pay $180 million as compensation if the veterans dropped all claims against them. Slightly over 45% of the sum was ordered to be paid by Monsanto alone. Many veterans who were victims of Agent Orange exposure were outraged the case had been settled instead of going to court and felt they had been betrayed by the lawyers. "Fairness Hearings" were held in five major American cities, where veterans and their families discussed their reactions to the settlement and condemned the actions of the lawyers and courts, demanding the case be heard before a jury of their peers. Federal Judge Jack B. Weinstein refused the appeals, claiming the settlement was "fair and just". By 1989, the veterans' fears were confirmed when it was decided how the money from the settlement would be paid out. A totally disabled Vietnam veteran would receive a maximum of $12,000 spread out over the course of 10 years. Furthermore, by accepting the settlement payments, disabled veterans would become ineligible for many state benefits that provided far more monetary support than the settlement, such as food stamps, public assistance, and government pensions. A widow of a Vietnam veteran who died of Agent Orange exposure would receive $3,700.


In 2004, Monsanto spokesman Jill Montgomery said Monsanto should not be liable at all for injuries or deaths caused by Agent Orange, saying: "We are sympathetic with people who believe they have been injured and understand their concern to find the cause, but reliable scientific evidence indicates that Agent Orange is not the cause of serious long-term health effects."


New Jersey Agent Orange Commission


In 1980, New Jersey created the New Jersey Agent Orange Commission, the first state commission created to study its effects. The commission's research project in association with Rutgers University was called "The Pointman Project". It was disbanded by Governor Christine Todd Whitman in 1996. During the first phase of the project, commission researchers devised ways to determine small dioxin levels in blood. Prior to this, such levels could only be found in the adipose (fat) tissue. The project studied dioxin (TCDD) levels in blood as well as in adipose tissue in a small group of Vietnam veterans who had been exposed to Agent Orange and compared them to those of a matched control group; the levels were found to be higher in the former group. The second phase of the project continued to examine and compare dioxin levels in various groups of Vietnam veterans, including Army, Marines and brown water riverboat Navy personnel.


U.S. Congress


In 1991, Congress enacted the Agent Orange Act, giving the Department of Veterans Affairs the authority to declare certain conditions "presumptive" to exposure to Agent Orange/dioxin, making these veterans who served in Vietnam eligible to receive treatment and compensation for these conditions. The same law required the National Academy of Sciences to periodically review the science on dioxin and herbicides used in Vietnam to inform the Secretary of Veterans Affairs about the strength of the scientific evidence showing association between exposure to Agent Orange/dioxin and certain conditions. The authority for the National Academy of Sciences reviews and addition of any new diseases to the presumptive list by the VA is expiring in 2015 under the sunset clause of the Agent Orange Act of 1991. Through this process, the list of 'presumptive' conditions has grown since 1991, and currently the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has listed prostate cancer, respiratory cancers, multiple myeloma, type II diabetes mellitus, Hodgkin's disease, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, soft tissue sarcoma, chloracne, porphyria cutanea tarda, peripheral neuropathy, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and spina bifida in children of veterans exposed to Agent Orange as conditions associated with exposure to the herbicide. This list now includes B cell leukemias, such as hairy cell leukemia, Parkinson's disease and ischemic heart disease, these last three having been added on August 31, 2010. Several highly placed individuals in government are voicing concerns about whether some of the diseases on the list should, in fact, actually have been included.


In 2011, an appraisal of the 20 year long Air Force Health Study that began in 1982 indicates that the results of the AFHS as they pertain to Agent Orange, do not provide evidence of disease in the Operation Ranch Hand veterans caused by "their elevated levels of exposure to Agent Orange".


The VA initially denied the applications of post-Vietnam C-123 aircrew veterans because as veterans without "boots on the ground" service in Vietnam, they were not covered under VA's interpretation of "exposed". In June 2015, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs issued an Interim final rule providing presumptive service connection for post-Vietnam C-123 aircrews, maintenance staff and aeromedical evacuation crews. The VA now provides medical care and disability compensation for the recognized list of Agent Orange illnesses.


U.S.–Vietnamese government negotiations


In 2002, Vietnam and the U.S. held a joint conference on Human Health and Environmental Impacts of Agent Orange. Following the conference, the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) began scientific exchanges between the U.S. and Vietnam, and began discussions for a joint research project on the human health impacts of Agent Orange. These negotiations broke down in 2005, when neither side could agree on the research protocol and the research project was canceled. More progress has been made on the environmental front. In 2005, the first U.S.-Vietnam workshop on remediation of dioxin was held.


Starting in 2005, the EPA began to work with the Vietnamese government to measure the level of dioxin at the Da Nang Air Base. Also in 2005, the Joint Advisory Committee on Agent Orange, made up of representatives of Vietnamese and U.S. government agencies, was established. The committee has been meeting yearly to explore areas of scientific cooperation, technical assistance and environmental remediation of dioxin.


A breakthrough in the diplomatic stalemate on this issue occurred as a result of United States President George W. Bush's state visit to Vietnam in November 2006. In the joint statement, President Bush and President Triet agreed "further joint efforts to address the environmental contamination near former dioxin storage sites would make a valuable contribution to the continued development of their bilateral relationship." On May 25, 2007, President Bush signed the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007 into law for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that included an earmark of $3 million specifically for funding for programs for the remediation of dioxin 'hotspots' on former U.S. military bases, and for public health programs for the surrounding communities; some authors consider this to be completely inadequate, pointing out that the Da Nang Airbase alone will cost $14 million to clean up, and that three others are estimated to require $60 million for cleanup. The appropriation was renewed in the fiscal year 2009 and again in FY 2010. An additional $12 million was appropriated in the fiscal year 2010 in the Supplemental Appropriations Act and a total of $18.5 million appropriated for fiscal year 2011.


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated during a visit to Hanoi in October 2010 that the U.S. government would begin work on the clean-up of dioxin contamination at the Da Nang Airbase. In June 2011, a ceremony was held at Da Nang airport to mark the start of U.S.-funded decontamination of dioxin hotspots in Vietnam. Thirty-two million dollars has so far been allocated by the U.S. Congress to fund the program. A $43 million project began in the summer of 2012, as Vietnam and the U.S. forge closer ties to boost trade and counter China's rising influence in the disputed South China Sea.


Vietnamese victims class action lawsuit in U.S. courts


On January 31, 2004, a victim's rights group, the Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange/dioxin (VAVA), filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn, against several U.S. companies for liability in causing personal injury, by developing, and producing the chemical, and claimed that the use of Agent Orange violated the 1907 Hague Convention on Land Warfare, 1925 Geneva Protocol, and the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Dow Chemical and Monsanto were the two largest producers of Agent Orange for the U.S. military and were named in the suit, along with the dozens of other companies (Diamond Shamrock, Uniroyal, Thompson Chemicals, Hercules, etc.). On March 10, 2005, Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the Eastern District – who had presided over the 1984 U.S. veterans class-action lawsuit – dismissed the lawsuit, ruling there was no legal basis for the plaintiffs' claims. He concluded Agent Orange was not considered a poison under international law at the time of its use by the U.S.; the U.S. was not prohibited from using it as a herbicide; and the companies which produced the substance were not liable for the method of its use by the government. Weinstein used the British example to help dismiss the claims of people exposed to Agent Orange in their suit against the chemical companies that had supplied it.


The Department of Defense's Advanced Research Project Agency's (ARPA) Project AGILE was instrumental in the United States' development of herbicides as a military weapon, an undertaking inspired by the British use of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T to destroy jungle-grown crops and bushes during the insurgency in Malaya. The United States considered British precedent in deciding that the use of defoliants was a legally accepted tactic of war. On November 24, 1961, Secretary of State Dean Rusk advised President John F. Kennedy that herbicide use in Vietnam would be lawful, saying that "[t]he use of defoliant does not violate any rule of international law concerning the conduct of chemical warfare and is an accepted tactic of war. Precedent has been established by the British during the emergency in Malaya in their use of helicopters for destroying crops by chemical spraying."


George Jackson stated that "if the Americans were guilty of war crimes for using Agent Orange in Vietnam, then the British would be also guilty of war crimes as well since they were the first nation to deploy the use of herbicides and defoliants in warfare and used them on a large scale throughout the Malayan Emergency. Not only was there no outcry by other states in response to Britain's use, but the U.S. viewed it as establishing a precedent for the use of herbicides and defoliants in jungle warfare." The U.S. government was also not a party in the lawsuit because of sovereign immunity, and the court ruled the chemical companies, as contractors of the U.S. government, shared the same immunity. The case was appealed and heard by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on June 18, 2007. Three judges on the court upheld Weinstein's ruling to dismiss the case. They ruled that, though the herbicides contained a dioxin (a known poison), they were not intended to be used as a poison on humans. Therefore, they were not considered a chemical weapon and thus not a violation of international law. A further review of the case by the entire panel of judges of the Court of Appeals also confirmed this decision. The lawyers for the Vietnamese filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. On March 2, 2009, the Supreme Court denied certiorari and declined to reconsider the ruling of the Court of Appeals.


Help for those affected in Vietnam


To assist those who have been affected by Agent Orange/dioxin, the Vietnamese have established "peace villages", which each host between 50 and 100 victims, giving them medical and psychological help. As of 2006, there were 11 such villages, thus granting some social protection to fewer than a thousand victims. U.S. veterans of the war in Vietnam and individuals who are aware and sympathetic to the impacts of Agent Orange have supported these programs in Vietnam. An international group of veterans from the U.S. and its allies during the Vietnam War working with their former enemy—veterans from the Vietnam Veterans Association—established the Vietnam Friendship Village outside of Hanoi.


The center provides medical care, rehabilitation and vocational training for children and veterans from Vietnam who have been affected by Agent Orange. In 1998, The Vietnam Red Cross established the Vietnam Agent Orange Victims Fund to provide direct assistance to families throughout Vietnam that have been affected. In 2003, the Vietnam Association of Victims of Agent Orange (VAVA) was formed. In addition to filing the lawsuit against the chemical companies, VAVA provides medical care, rehabilitation services and financial assistance to those injured by Agent Orange.


The Vietnamese government provides small monthly stipends to more than 200,000 Vietnamese believed affected by the herbicides; this totaled $40.8 million in 2008. The Vietnam Red Cross has raised more than $22 million to assist the ill or disabled, and several U.S. foundations, United Nations agencies, European governments and nongovernmental organizations have given a total of about $23 million for site cleanup, reforestation, health care and other services to those in need.


Vuong Mo of the Vietnam News Agency described one of the centers:


May is 13, but she knows nothing, is unable to talk fluently, nor walk with ease due to for her bandy legs. Her father is dead and she has four elder brothers, all mentally retarded ... The students are all disabled, retarded and of different ages. Teaching them is a hard job. They are of the 3rd grade but many of them find it hard to do the reading. Only a few of them can. Their pronunciation is distorted due to their twisted lips and their memory is quite short. They easily forget what they've learned ... In the Village, it is quite hard to tell the kids' exact ages. Some in their twenties have a physical statures as small as the 7- or 8-years-old. They find it difficult to feed themselves, much less have mental ability or physical capacity for work. No one can hold back the tears when seeing the heads turning round unconsciously, the bandy arms managing to push the spoon of food into the mouths with awful difficulty ... Yet they still keep smiling, singing in their great innocence, at the presence of some visitors, craving for something beautiful.


On June 16, 2010, members of the U.S.-Vietnam Dialogue Group on Agent Orange/Dioxin unveiled a comprehensive 10-year Declaration and Plan of Action to address the toxic legacy of Agent Orange and other herbicides in Vietnam. The Plan of Action was released as an Aspen Institute publication and calls upon the U.S. and Vietnamese governments to join with other governments, foundations, businesses, and nonprofits in a partnership to clean up dioxin "hot spots" in Vietnam and to expand humanitarian services for people with disabilities there. On September 16, 2010, Senator Patrick Leahy acknowledged the work of the Dialogue Group by releasing a statement on the floor of the United States Senate. The statement urges the U.S. government to take the Plan of Action's recommendations into account in developing a multi-year plan of activities to address the Agent Orange/dioxin legacy.


Use outside of Vietnam


Australia


In 2008, Australian researcher Jean Williams claimed that cancer rates in Innisfail, Queensland, were 10 times higher than the state average because of secret testing of Agent Orange by the Australian military scientists during the Vietnam War. Williams, who had won the Order of Australia medal for her research on the effects of chemicals on U.S. war veterans, based her allegations on Australian government reports found in the Australian War Memorial's archives. A former soldier, Ted Bosworth, backed up the claims, saying that he had been involved in the secret testing. Neither Williams nor Bosworth have produced verifiable evidence to support their claims. The Queensland health department determined that cancer rates in Innisfail were no higher than those in other parts of the state.


Canada


The U.S. military, with the permission of the Canadian government, tested herbicides, including Agent Orange, in the forests near Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick. In 2007, the government of Canada offered a one-time ex gratia payment of $20,000 as compensation for Agent Orange exposure at CFB Gagetown. On July 12, 2005, Merchant Law Group, on behalf of over 1,100 Canadian veterans and civilians who were living in and around CFB Gagetown, filed a lawsuit to pursue class action litigation concerning Agent Orange and Agent Purple with the Federal Court of Canada. On August 4, 2009, the case was rejected by the court, citing lack of evidence. In 2007, the Canadian government announced that a research and fact-finding program initiated in 2005 had found the base was safe.


On February 17, 2011, the Toronto Star revealed that Agent Orange had been employed to clear extensive plots of Crown land in Northern Ontario. The Toronto Star reported that, "records from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s show forestry workers, often students and junior rangers, spent weeks at a time as human markers holding red, helium-filled balloons on fishing lines while low-flying planes sprayed toxic herbicides including an infamous chemical mixture known as Agent Orange on the brush and the boys below." In response to the Toronto Star article, the Ontario provincial government launched a probe into the use of Agent Orange.


Guam


An analysis of chemicals present in the island's soil, together with resolutions passed by Guam's legislature, suggest that Agent Orange was among the herbicides routinely used on and around Anderson Air Force Base and Naval Air Station Agana. Despite the evidence, the Department of Defense continues to deny that Agent Orange was stored or used on Guam. Several Guam veterans have collected evidence to assist in their disability claims for direct exposure to dioxin containing herbicides such as 2,4,5-T which are similar to the illness associations and disability coverage that has become standard for those who were harmed by the same chemical contaminant of Agent Orange used in Vietnam.


Korea


Agent Orange was used in Korea in the late 1960s. In 1999, about 20,000 South Koreans filed two separated lawsuits against U.S. companies, seeking more than $5 billion in damages. After losing a decision in 2002, they filed an appeal. In January 2006, the South Korean Appeals Court ordered Dow Chemical and Monsanto to pay $62 million in compensation to about 6,800 people. The ruling acknowledged that "the defendants failed to ensure safety as the defoliants manufactured by the defendants had higher levels of dioxins than standard", and, quoting the U.S. National Academy of Science report, declared that there was a "causal relationship" between Agent Orange and a range of diseases, including several cancers. The judges failed to acknowledge "the relationship between the chemical and peripheral neuropathy, the disease most widespread among Agent Orange victims".


In 2011, the United States local press KPHO-TV in Phoenix, Arizona, alleged that in 1978 the United States Army had buried 250 drums of Agent Orange in Camp Carroll, the U.S. Army base in Gyeongsangbuk-do, Korea.


Currently, veterans who provide evidence meeting VA requirements for service in Vietnam and who can medically establish that anytime after this 'presumptive exposure' they developed any medical problems on the list of presumptive diseases, may receive compensation from the VA. Certain veterans who served in Korea and are able to prove they were assigned to certain specified around the DMZ during a specific time frame are afforded similar presumption.


New Zealand


The use of Agent Orange has been controversial in New Zealand, because of the exposure of New Zealand troops in Vietnam and because of the production of Agent Orange for Vietnam and other users at an Ivon Watkins-Dow chemical plant in Paritutu, New Plymouth. There have been continuing claims, as yet unproven, that the suburb of Paritutu has also been polluted. There are cases of New Zealand soldiers developing cancers such as bone cancer, but none has been scientifically connected to exposure to herbicides. A controversial television documentary was broadcast in New Zealand on TV3 called "Let us Spray".


Philippines


Herbicide persistence studies of Agents Orange and White were conducted in the Philippines.


Johnston Atoll


The U.S. Air Force operation to remove Herbicide Orange from Vietnam in 1972 was named Operation Pacer IVY, while the operation to destroy the Agent Orange stored at Johnston Atoll in 1977 was named Operation Pacer HO. Operation Pacer IVY collected Agent Orange in South Vietnam and removed it in 1972 aboard the ship MV Transpacific for storage on Johnston Atoll. The EPA reports that 6,800,000 L (1,800,000 U.S. gal) of Herbicide Orange was stored at Johnston Island in the Pacific and 1,800,000 L (480,000 U.S. gal) at Gulfport, Mississippi.


Research and studies were initiated to find a safe method to destroy the materials, and it was discovered they could be incinerated safely under special conditions of temperature and dwell time. However, these herbicides were expensive, and the Air Force wanted to resell its surplus instead of dumping it at sea. Among many methods tested, a possibility of salvaging the herbicides by reprocessing and filtering out the TCDD contaminant with carbonized (charcoaled) coconut fibers. This concept was then tested in 1976 and a pilot plant constructed at Gulfport.


From July to September 1977 during Operation Pacer HO, the entire stock of Agent Orange from both Herbicide Orange storage sites at Gulfport and Johnston Atoll was subsequently incinerated in four separate burns in the vicinity of Johnston Island aboard the Dutch-owned waste incineration ship MT Vulcanus. As of 2004, some records of the storage and disposition of Agent Orange at Johnston Atoll have been associated with the historical records of Operation Red Hat.


Okinawa, Japan


There have been dozens of reports in the press about use and/or storage of military formulated herbicides on Okinawa that are based upon statements by former U.S. service members that had been stationed on the island, photographs, government records, and unearthed storage barrels. The U.S. Department of Defense has denied these allegations with statements by military officials and spokespersons, as well as a January 2013 report authored by Dr. Alvin Young that was released in April 2013.


A scientific study of the effects military contamination at Johnston Atoll included a statement confirming records of Agent Orange storage in Okinawa.


In particular, the 2013 report rebuts articles written by journalist Jon Mitchell as well as a statement from "An Ecological Assessment of Johnston Atoll" a 2003 publication produced by the United States Army Chemical Materials Agency that states, "in 1972, the U.S. Air Force also brought about 25,000 200L drums of the chemical, Herbicide Orange (HO) to Johnston Island that originated from Vietnam and was stored on Okinawa." The 2013 report states: "The authors of the [2003] report were not DoD employees, nor were they likely familiar with the issues surrounding Herbicide Orange or its actual history of transport to the Island." and detailed the transport phases and routes of Agent Orange from Vietnam to Johnston Atoll, none of which included Okinawa.


Further official confirmation of restricted (dioxin containing) herbicide storage on Okinawa appeared in a 1971 Fort Detrick report titled "Historical, Logistical, Political and Technical Aspects of the Herbicide/Defoliant Program", which mentions that the environmental statement should consider "Herbicide stockpiles elsewhere in PACOM (Pacific Command) U.S. Government restricted materials Thailand and Okinawa (Kadena AFB)." The 2013 DoD report says that the environmental statement urged by the 1971 report was published in 1974 as "The Department of Air Force Final Environmental Statement", and that the latter did not find Agent Orange was held in either Thailand or Okinawa.


Thailand


Agent Orange was tested by the United States in Thailand during the Vietnam War. In 1999, buried drums were uncovered and confirmed to be Agent Orange. Workers who uncovered the drums fell ill while upgrading the airport near Hua Hin District, 100 km south of Bangkok. Vietnam-era veterans whose service involved duty on or near the perimeters of military bases in Thailand anytime between February 28, 1961, and May 7, 1975, may have been exposed to herbicides and may qualify for VA benefits. A declassified Department of Defense report written in 1973, suggests that there was a significant use of herbicides on the fenced-in perimeters of military bases in Thailand to remove foliage that provided cover for enemy forces. In 2013, the VA determined that herbicides used on the Thailand base perimeters may have been tactical and procured from Vietnam, or a strong, commercial type resembling tactical herbicides.


United States


The University of Hawaii has acknowledged extensive testing of Agent Orange on behalf of the United States Department of Defense in Hawaii along with mixtures of Agent Orange on Kaua'i Island in 1967–68 and on Hawaii Island in 1966; testing and storage in other U.S. locations has been documented by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.


In 1971, the C-123 aircraft used for spraying Agent Orange were returned to the United States and assigned various East Coast USAF Reserve squadrons, and then employed in traditional airlift missions between 1972 and 1982. In 1994, testing by the Air Force identified some former spray aircraft as "heavily contaminated" with dioxin residue. Inquiries by aircrew veterans in 2011 brought a decision by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs opining that not enough dioxin residue remained to injure these post-Vietnam War veterans. On 26 January 2012, the U.S. Center For Disease Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry challenged this with their finding that former spray aircraft were indeed contaminated and the aircrews exposed to harmful levels of dioxin. In response to veterans' concerns, the VA in February 2014 referred the C-123 issue to the Institute of Medicine for a special study, with results released on January 9, 2015.


In 1978, the EPA suspended spraying of Agent Orange in National Forests. Agent Orange was sprayed on thousands of acres of brush in the Tennessee Valley for 15 years before scientists discovered the herbicide was dangerous. Monroe County, Tennessee, is one of the locations known to have been sprayed according to the Tennessee Valley Authority. Forty-four remote acres were doused with Agent Orange along power lines throughout the National Forest.


In 1983, New Jersey declared a Passaic River production site to be a state of emergency. The dioxin pollution in the Passaic River dates back to the Vietnam era, when Diamond Alkali manufactured it in a factory along the river. The tidal river carried dioxin upstream and down, tainting a 17-mile stretch of riverbed in one of New Jersey's most populous areas.


A December 2006 Department of Defense report listed Agent Orange testing, storage, and disposal sites at 32 locations throughout the United States, as well as in Canada, Thailand, Puerto Rico, Korea, and in the Pacific Ocean. The Veteran Administration has also acknowledged that Agent Orange was used domestically by U.S. forces in test sites throughout the United States. Eglin Air Force Base in Florida was one of the primary testing sites throughout the 1960s.


Cleanup programs


In February 2012, Monsanto agreed to settle a case covering dioxin contamination around a plant in Nitro, West Virginia, that had manufactured Agent Orange. Monsanto agreed to pay up to $9 million for cleanup of affected homes, $84 million for medical monitoring of people affected, and the community's legal fees.


On 9 August 2012, the United States and Vietnam began a cooperative cleaning up of the toxic chemical on part of Danang International Airport, marking the first time the U.S. government has been involved in cleaning up Agent Orange in Vietnam. Danang was the primary storage site of the chemical. Two other cleanup sites the United States and Vietnam are looking at is Biên Hòa, in the southern province of Đồng Nai—a "hotspot" for dioxin—and Phù Cát airport in the central province of Bình Định, says U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam David Shear. According to the Vietnamese newspaper Nhân Dân, the U.S. government provided $41 million to the project. As of 2017, some 110,000 cubic meters of soil have been "cleaned."


The Seabee's Naval Construction Battalion Center at Gulfport, Mississippi was the largest storage site in the United States for agent orange. It was 30 odd acres in size and was still being cleaned up in 2013.


In 2016, the EPA laid out its plan for cleaning up an 8-mile stretch of the Passaic River in New Jersey, with an estimated cost of $1.4 billion. The contaminants reached to Newark Bay and other waterways, according to the EPA, which has designated the area a Superfund site. Since destruction of the dioxin requires high temperatures over 1,000 °C, the destruction process is energy intensive.

History of Blood Diamonds

 



Blood diamonds (also called conflict diamonds, brown diamonds, hot diamonds, or red diamonds) are diamonds mined in a war zone and sold to finance an insurgency, an invading army's war efforts, or a warlord's activity. The term is used to highlight the negative consequences of the diamond trade in certain areas, or to label an individual diamond as having come from such an area. Diamonds mined during the recent civil wars in Angola, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea, and Guinea Bissau have been given the label. The term conflict resource refers to analogous situations involving other natural resources.


History


Angola


Reports estimated that as much as 21% of the total diamond production in the 1980s was being sold for illegal and unethical purposes and 19% was specifically conflict in nature. By 1999, the illegal diamond trade was estimated by the World Diamond Council to have been reduced to 4% of the world's diamond production. The World Diamond Council reported that by 2004 this percentage had fallen to approximately 1% and up to today the World Diamond Council refers to this illegal trade to be virtually eliminated, meaning that more than 99% of diamonds being sold have a legal background.


Despite the UN Resolution, UNITA was able to continue to sell or trade some diamonds in order to finance its war effort. The UN set out to find how this remaining illicit trade was being conducted and appointed Canadian ambassador Robert Fowler to investigate. In 2000, he produced the Fowler Report, which named those countries, organizations and individuals involved in the trade. The report is credited with establishing the link between diamonds and third world conflicts, and led directly to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1295, as well as the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme. Still, after the report was published in 2013 smugglers from these African countries were selling blood diamonds through channels less sophisticated such as social media posts. And rhinestones from Angola, produced by UNITA were being traded to Cameroon to get them a Cameroonian certificate naturalization to then be sold as legitimate.


Ivory Coast


Ivory Coast began to develop a fledgling diamond mining industry in the early 1990s. A coup overthrew the government in 1999, starting a civil war. The country became a route for exporting diamonds from Liberia and war-torn Sierra Leone. Foreign investment began to withdraw from Ivory Coast. To curtail the illegal trade, the nation stopped all diamond mining and the UN Security Council banned all exports of diamonds from Ivory Coast in December 2005. This ban lasted about ten years but it was later lifted in April 2014 when members of the UN council voted to suspend the sanction. The Kimberley process officials also notified in November 2013 that Ivory Coast was right producing artisanal diamonds.


Despite UN sanctions the illicit diamond trade still exists in Ivory Coast. Rough diamonds are exported out of the country to neighboring states and international trading centers through the northern Forces Nouvelles controlled section of the country, a group which is reported to be using these funds of chele to re-arm.


Democratic Republic of Congo


The Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire) has suffered numerous looting wars in the 1990s, but has been a member of the Kimberley Process since 2003 and now exports about 8% of the world's diamonds. 'However, even nowadays there is a warning concerning diamonds proceeding from this area since there have been multiple cases of fake Kimberley certificates accompanying the gems. Once one of De Beers most celebrated and priceless diamonds, the D-colour 777 carats (155.4 g) Millennium Star was discovered in the DRC and sold to De Beers, in open competition with other diamond buyers, between 1991 and 1992.


Liberia


From 1989 to 2003, Liberia was engaged in a civil war. In 2000, the UN accused Liberian president Charles G. Taylor of supporting the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) insurgency in neighboring Sierra Leone with weapons and training in exchange for diamonds. In 2001, the United Nations applied sanctions on the Liberian diamond trade. In August 2003, Taylor stepped down as president and, after being exiled to Nigeria, faced trial in The Hague. On July 21, 2006, he pleaded not guilty to crimes against humanity and war crimes, of which he was found guilty in April 2012. On May 30, 2012, he began a 50-year sentence in a high security prison in the United Kingdom.


Around the time of the 1998 United States embassy bombings, al-Qaeda allegedly bought gems from Liberia as some of its other financial assets were frozen.


Having regained peace, Liberia is attempting to construct a legitimate diamond mining industry. The UN has lifted sanctions and Liberia is now a member of the Kimberley Process.


In December 2014 however, Liberian diamonds were reported to be partly produced using child labor according to the U.S. Department of Labor's List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.

Sierra Leone


The civil war started in 1991 and continued until 2002, costing at least 50,000 lives and causing local people to suffer killings, mutilation, rape, torture and abduction, mainly due to the brutal warfare waged by rebel group, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF). The Revolutionary United Front (RUF) claimed that they supported causes of justice and democracy in the beginning, but later on they started to control the villages and to prevent local people from voting for the new government by chopping off their limbs. Victims included children and infants. It created numerous examples of physical and psychological harm across Sierra Leone.


Moreover, they also occupied the diamond mines in order to get access to funding and continued support of their actions. For example, during that time, RUF was mining up to $125 million of diamonds yearly. Since diamonds are used as a funding source, they also created opportunities for tax evasion and financial support of crime. Therefore, United Nations Security Council imposed diamond sanctions in 2000, which were then lifted in 2003. According to National Geographic News, all of these civil wars and conflicts created by rebel groups resulted in over four million deaths in the African population and injuries to over two million civilians. Another latest conflict diamond statistic from Statistic Brain, revealed that Sierra Leone has been listed as second highest in the production of conflict diamonds, which is shown as 1% of the world's production, after Angola, which produced 2.1% in 2016. 15% of Sierra Leone's diamond production are conflict diamonds. It shows that the production of conflict diamonds still exists in Sierra Leone.


According to the 2005 Country Reports on Human Right Practices of Africa from the United States, serious human rights issues still exist in Sierra Leone, even though the 11-year civil conflict had officially ended by 2002. Sierra Leone remains in an unstable political situation, although the country has elected a new government. The huge consequences of blood diamonds still remains a mainstream issue in Sierra Leone. One of the biggest issues is people still being abused by the security forces, including rape and the use of excessive force on detainees, including teenagers. Child abuse and child labor are other serious issues which took place in Sierra Leone after the civil conflicts. As they need a huge number of workers, the security forces started kidnapping and forcing young adults to be their slaves; children were forced to join their army as soldiers, and women were raped. They even burned entire villages. Thousands of men, women, and children are used as slaves to collect diamonds, and they are forced to use their bare hands to dig in mud along river banks instead of digging with tools.


Based on the report, The Truth About Diamonds: Conflict and Development from Global Witness, it mentioned that Sierra Leone is listed as second from the bottom of the United Nation Human Development Index. It also shows that Sierra Leone still makes slow progress, in 2016, in such different aspects as, for example, education, health, and human rights, since 1990, which is also the year that conflicts took place in Sierra Leone. It shows that it is a huge consequence of blood diamonds that it brought into Sierra Leone. Even though the war had ended in 2002 and the government tried to improve and adjust the cooperation of the diamond industry. Sierra Leone resulted in an increase of over US$140 million in 2005 and attempted a percentage return of export tax to diamond mining communities. However, it does not improve anything—the money is not reaching the public and it has not provided benefit to anyone in the communities. For instance, the Kono district in Sierra Leone has been mined for 70 years, but they still have no basic facilities, like electricity and repairing of roads. Houses are destroyed because of the civil wars. It also examines the unethical issues of how rebel groups treat those locals. They used brainwashing of inexperienced young children and forced them to be child soldiers as they lost their personal freedom and rights under command that included violence and intimidation.


Republic of Congo


The Republic of the Congo (Congo-Brazzaville) was expelled from the Kimberley Process in 2004 because, despite having no official diamond mining industry, the country was exporting large quantities of diamonds, the origin of which it could not detail. It was also accused of falsifying certificates of origin. The Republic of the Congo was readmitted in 2007.


Zimbabwe


Zimbabwe Diamonds are not considered conflict diamonds by the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.


In July 2010, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme agreed that diamonds from the country's disputed Marange Diamond Fields could be sold on the international market, after a report from the Scheme's monitor a month earlier described diamonds mined from the fields as conflict-free.


Conflict diamond campaign


Global Witness was one of the first organizations to pick up on the link between diamonds and conflicts in Africa in its 1998 report entitled "A Rough Trade". With the passing of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1173 in 1998, the United Nations identified the conflict diamond issue as a funding for war. The Fowler Report in 2000 detailed in depth how UNITA was financing its war activities, and in May 2000, led directly to the passing of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1295 and the diamond producing countries of southern Africa meeting in Kimberley, South Africa to plan a method by which the trade in conflict diamonds could be halted, and buyers of diamonds could be assured that their diamonds have not contributed to violence. In this resolution the Security Council wrote:


Welcomes the proposal that a meeting of experts be convened for the purpose of devising a system of controls to facilitate the implementation of the measures contained in Resolution 1173 (1998), including arrangements that would allow for increased transparency and accountability in the control of diamonds from their point of origin to the bourses, emphasizes that it is important that, in devising such controls, every effort be made to avoid inflicting collateral damage on the legitimate diamond trade, and welcomes the intention of the Republic of South Africa to host a relevant conference this year.


Kimberley Process Certification Scheme


On July 19, 2000, the World Diamond Congress at Antwerp adopted a resolution to strengthen the diamond industry's ability to block sales of conflict diamonds. The resolution called for an international certification system on the export and import of diamonds, legislation in all countries to accept only officially sealed packages of diamonds, for countries to impose criminal charges on anyone trafficking in conflict diamonds, and instituted a ban on any individual found trading in conflict diamonds from the diamond bourses of the World Federation of Diamond Bourses. The Kimberley Process was at the start led by South Africa and Canada as vice president and since then every year a new chair and vice chair country are elected to maintain the legitimacy of their practices. This system tracks diamonds from the mine to the market and regulates the policing surrounding the export, manufacture and sale of the products. Also in tourist countries like Dubai and the United Kingdom. All the Kimberley members are not allowed to trade with non members. Before a gemstone is allowed through the airports to other countries, the Kimberley Certification must be presented by the gem's owner or obtained from a renowned attorney. The certificate should also be requested by the customer when the gems have reached a retail store to ensure its provenance.


On January 17–18 of 2001, diamond industry figures convened and formed the new organization, the World Diamond Council. This new body set out to draft a new process, whereby all diamond rough could be certified as coming from a non-conflict source.


The KPCS was given approval by the UN on March 13, 2002, and in November, after two years of negotiation between governments, diamond producers, and Non-Government organizations, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme was created.


The Kimberley Process attempted to curtail the flow of conflict diamonds, help stabilize fragile countries and support their development. As the Kimberley Process has made life harder for criminals, it has brought large volumes of diamonds onto the legal market that would not otherwise have made it there. This has increased the revenues of poor governments, and helped them to address their countries’ development challenges. For instance, around $125 million worth of diamonds were legally exported from Sierra Leone in 2006, compared to almost none at the end of the 1990s.


Shortcomings and criticism


The Kimberley Process has ultimately failed to stem the flow of blood diamonds, leading key proponents such as Global Witness to abandon the scheme. In addition, there is no guarantee that diamonds with a Kimberley Process Certification are in fact conflict-free. This is due to the nature of the corrupt government officials in the leading diamond producing countries. It is common for these officials to be bribed with $50 to $100 a day in exchange for paperwork declaring that blood diamonds are Kimberley Process Certified.


Transparency


The Kimberley system attempted to increase governments' transparency by forcing them to keep records of the diamonds they are exporting and importing and how much they are worth. In theory, this would show governments their finances so that they can be held accountable for how much they are spending for the benefit of the country's population. However non-compliance by countries such as Venezuela has led to the failure of accountability.


The company Materialytics claims that it can trace the origin of virtually any diamond using Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy. However, there is no way to know whether a diamond purchased online is blood free or not.


Policy responses


American policy


On January 18, 2001, President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order 13194 which prohibited the importation of rough diamonds from Sierra Leone into the United States in accordance with the UN resolutions. On May 22, 2001, President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13213 which banned rough diamond importation from Liberia into the United States. Liberia had been recognized by the United Nations as acting as a pipeline for conflict diamonds from Sierra Leone.


United States enacted the Clean Diamond Trade Act (CDTA) on April 25, 2003, implemented on July 29, 2003, by Executive Order 13312. The CDTA installed the legislation to implement the KPCS in law in the United States. The implementation of this legislation was key to the success of the KPCS, as the United States is the largest consumer of diamonds. The CDTA states: 'As the consumer of a majority of the world's supply of diamonds, the United States has an obligation to help sever the link between diamonds and conflict and press for implementation of an effective solution.


The United States Department of State also maintains an office for a Special Adviser for Conflict Diamonds. As of October 14, 2015, the position is held by Ashley Orbach.


Canadian policy


During the 1990s diamond-rich areas were discovered in Northern Canada. Canada is one of the key players in the diamond industry. Partnership Africa Canada was created in 1986 to help with the crisis in Africa. This organization is also part of the Diamond Development Initiative. The Diamond Development Initiative helps improve and regulate the legal diamond industry.


The Kimberley Process was initiated in May 2000 by South Africa with Canada a major supporter of instituting the scheme. Canada has now passed several laws that help stop the trade of conflict diamonds. The laws deal with the export and import of rough diamonds, and also how they are transferred. In December 2002 the Export and Import of Rough Diamonds Act was passed by the Canadian government. This law acts as a system that helps control the importing, exporting and transporting of rough diamonds through Canada. The Export and Import of Rough Diamonds Act also states that the Kimberley Process is the minimum requirement of certifying rough diamonds and a certificate is also required for all shipments of diamonds. This certificate is called the Canadian Certificate, it gives permission for an officer to seize any shipment of diamonds that does not meet the requirements of the Export and Import of Rough Diamonds Act.


The Government of the Northwest Territories of Canada (GNWT) also has a unique certification program. They offer a Government certificate on all diamonds that are mined, cut, and polished in the Northwest Territories of Canada. Canadian diamonds are tracked from the mine, through the refining process, to the retail jeweler with a unique diamond identification number (DIN) laser inscribed on the diamond's girdle. To obtain this certificate one must cut and polish the diamond in the NWT.

Technology response


Technical services have emerged that may act as a solution for tracking diamond movement across borders. A service was launched in July 2016 that allows managers to build systems using a blockchain database for tracking high-value or highly regulated items through a supply chain. Everledger is one using such a system to "record the movement of diamonds from mines to jewelry stores" and is one of the inaugural clients of a new blockchain-based tracking service from IBM.


In popular culture


Conflict diamonds are a central plot point throughout the James Bond film Die Another Day (2002).


The origins of the Kimberley Process were dramatized in Ed Zwick's motion picture Blood Diamond (2006), starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Djimon Hounsou. The film helped to publicize the controversy surrounding conflict diamonds and led to worldwide awareness of the Western African involvement in the diamond trade.


The CSI: Miami episode "Man Down" (2007) involves the trafficking of African blood diamonds.


Law & Order episode "Soldier of Fortune" (2001) involves the murder of a diamond broker who has knowledge of a blood diamond connection between Sierra Leone and a Swiss diamond company.


Danish filmmaker Mads Brügger's documentary Ambassadøren (2011, in English: "The Ambassador") addresses the trade in diplomatic passports in order to make money with blood diamonds.


Players compete in Diamond Trust of London to extract diamonds out of Angola before the implementation of the Kimberley Process.


The remix version of Grammy-winning song Diamonds from Sierra Leone performed by American artist Kanye West, has verses that detail the blood diamond trade in Sierra Leone, and comments about the Western public unawareness of the origins of the diamonds linked to the conflict.


Blood Diamonds is a thriller fiction book title by Jon Land, copyright 2002; ISBN 0-765-30226-8


The Hawaii Five-0 (2010) episode Kalele revolves around the smuggling of conflict diamonds.


The 2009 Tamil Movie Ayan shows how an insurgent group in Democratic Republic of the Congo sold blood diamonds to international buyers to buy AK-47 guns in exchange.

Happy Birthday: October 31 (Halloween), 2020

 



Diedre Hall  (and her twin sister Andrea  Hall), 73

Peter Jackson, 59

Rob Schneider, 56

Vanilla Ice, 53

Piper Perabo, 44

Eddie Kaye Thomas, 40

Vanessa Marano, 28

Holly Taylor, 23

Danielle Rose Russell, 21

Willow Smith, 20

Lee Grant, 95

Michael Collins, 90

Tom Paxton, 83

Ron Rifkin, 82

Sally Kirkland, 79

Brian Doyle-Murray, 75

Stephen Rea, 74

Jane Pauley, 70

Brian Stokes, 63

Larry Muller, 59

Dermot Mulroney, 57

Mikkey Dee, 57

Johnny Marr, 57

Daryl Worley, 56

Mike O'Malley, 55

Adrock, 54

Roger Stevens, 51

Linn Berggren, 50

Troy Hartman, 49

Smokie Norful, 47

Brian Hallisay, 42

Samaire Armstrong, 40

Tay Strathairn, 40

Fran Iero, 39

Justin Chatwin, 38

Scott Clifton, 36

Dan Rather, 89

Nick Saban, 69

Jan Vermeer (October 31, 1632-December 1675)

John Keats (October 31, 1795-February 23, 1821)

Juliette Gordon Low (October 1860-January 17, 1927)

John Candy (October 31, 1950- March 4, 1994)

Michael Landon AKA Eugene Orowitz (October 31, 1936-July 1, 1991)

Friday, October 30, 2020

Happy Birthday: October 30, 2020

 



Henry Winkler, 75

Harry Hamlin, 69

Kevin Pollak, 63

Nia Long, 50

Matthew Morrison, 42

Janel Parrish, 32

Claude Lelouch, 83

Grace Slick, 81

Eddie Holland, 81

Otis Williams, 79

Joanna Shim Kus, 77

Chris Slade, 74

Timothy B. Schmit, 73

Leon Rippy, 71

Charles Martin Smith, 67

T. Graham Brown, 66

Jerry De Borg, 60

Michael Beach, 57

Gavin Rossdale, 55

Jack Plotnick, 52

Ben Bailey, 50

Billy Brown, 50

Kassidy Osborn 44

Gael Garcia Bernal, 42

Fiona Dourif, 39

Shaun Sipos, 39

Tasso Feldman, 37

Tequan Richmond, 28

Kennedy McMann, 24

Andrea Mitchell, 74

Ivanka Trump, 39

Natasha Liu Kin, 31

John Adams, 2nd U.S. President, (October 30, 1735-July 4, 1826)

Charles Atlas (October 30, 1892-December 24, 1972)

Happy Birthday: October 29, 2020

 



Richard Dreyfus, 73

Rufus Sewall, 53

Winona Ryder, 49

Gabrielle Union, 48

India Eisley, 27

Sonny Osborne, 83

Lee Clayton, 78

Denny Laine, 76

Melba Moore, 75

Kate Jackson, 72

Steve Kellough, 64

Dan Castellaneta, 63

Finola Hughes, 61

Randy Jackson, 59

Peter Timmins, 55

Joely Fisher, 53

Paris, 53

Grayson McCouch, 52

SA Martinez, 51

Tracee Ellis Ross, 48

Trevor Lissauer, 47

Milena Govich, 44

Jon Abrahams, 43

Brendan Fehr, 43

Ben Foster, 40

Chris Baio, 36

Janel Montgomery, 35

Tom Wilson, 63

Happy Birthday: October 28, 2029

 



Dennis Franz, 76

Annie Potts, 68

Andy Richter, 54

Julia Roberts, 53

Brad Paisley, 48

Joaquin Phoenix, 46

Gwendoline Christie, 42

Matt Smith, 38

Frank Ocean, 33

Cleo Laine, 93

Joan Plowright, 91

Jane Alexander, 81

Telma Hopkins, 72

Desmond Child, 67

Stephen Morris, 63

Ron Hemby, 62

William Reid, 62

Mark Derwin, 60

Daphne Zuniga, 58

Lauren Holly, 56

Sheryl Underwood, 57

Jami Gertz, 55

Chris Bauer, 54

Caitlin Cary, 52

Jeremy Davies, 51

Ben Harper, 51

Justin Guarini, 42

Brett Dennen, 41

Dave Tirio, 41

Charlie Semine, 40

Finn Wittrock, 36

Troian Bellisario, 35

Lexi Ainsworth, 28

Nolan Gould, 22

Lenny Wilfens, 83

Bill Gates, 65

Erasmus (October 28, 1466-July 12, 1536)

Jonas Salk (October 28, 1914-June 23, 1993)

Happy Birthday: October 27, 2020

 



John Cleese, 81

Ivan Reitman, 74

Roberto Benigni, 68

Kelly Osbourne, 36

Christine Evangelista, 34

Maxine Hong Kingston, 80

Lee Greenwood, 78

Garry Tallent, 71

Fran Lebowitz, 70

K. K. Downing, 69

Jayne Kennedy, 69

Peter Firth, 67

Robert Picardo, 67

Simon Dale McFadden, 56

Jason Finn, 53

Sean Holland, 52

Channon Roe, 51

Sheen Rappaport, 43

David Walton, 42

Vanessa-Mae, 42

Bryan Craig, 29

Troy Gentile, 27

Matt Drudge, 54

Brady Quinn, 36

Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt, 26th U.S. President (October 27, 1858-June 6, 1919)

Emily Post (October 27, 1827-September 25, 1960)

Roy Lichtenstein (October 27, 1923-September 29, 1997)

Ruby Dee (October 27, 1922-October 11, 2014)

Sylvia Plath (October 27, 1932-February 11, 1963)

Happy Birthday: October 26, 2020

 



Pat Sajak, 74

Bootsy Collins, 69

James Pickens, Jr., 68

Rita Wilson, 64

Dylan McDermott, 59

Natalie Merchant, 57

Keith Urban, 53

Seth MacFarlane, 47

Jon Heder, 43

Jaclyn Smith, 75

David Was, 68

Keith Strickland, 67

Lauren Tewes, 67

D. W. Moffett, 66

Patrick Breen, 60

Cary Elwes, 58

Steve Valentine, 54

Tom Cavanaugh, 52

Rose Marie DeWitt, 49

Anthony Rapp, 49

Lennon Parham, 45

Florence Kasumba, 44

Hal Ozsun, 44

Mark Barry, 42

Jonathon Chase, 41

Folake Olowofoyeku, 37

Schoolboy Q, 34

Beulah Koale, 29

Hilary Rodham-Clinton, 73

Bob Golic, 63

C M Punk, 42

Sasha Cohen, 36

Charles Post (October 26, 1854-May 9, 1914)

John S. Knight (October 26, 1894-June 16,  1981)

Jackie Coogan (October 26, 1914-March 1, 1984)

Bob Hoskins (October 26, 1942-April 29, 2014)