CHAP4_Pg_115-154.pdf

History of the Chemical Threat

Chapter 4

History of tHe CHemiCal tHreat,

CHemiCal terrorism, and its

impliCations for military mediCine

Jeffery K. Smart, ma * ; al mauroni, mS † ; BenJamin a. Hill J r , Do, mS, me d ‡ ; a n d allart B. KoK, mS §

introduCtion

development of CHemiCal Weaponry

History of CHemiCal terrorism

CHemiCal Warfare Capabilities

CHemiCal Weapons agreements

present and future impliCations for military mediCine

summary

* Command Historian, US Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command, 5183 Blackhawk Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland

21010-5424

† Senior Policy Analyst, Northrop-Grumman Information Technology, 8211 Terminal Road, Suite 1000, Lorton, Virginia 22079

‡ Lieutenant Colonel, US Army Medical Corps; Physician Faculty, Chemical Casualty Care Division, US Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical

Defense, 3100 Ricketts Point Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5400

§ Biomedical Scientist, Science Applications International Corporation, 3465 Box Hill Corporate Center Drive, Abingdon, Maryland 21085

115

Medical Aspects of Chemical Warfare

introduCtion

this chapter is the third in the series of historical

investigations into the use of chemicals as weapons,

following Chapter 2, History of Chemical Warfare,

which focuses on the history of chemical warfare on

the battlefield, and Chapter 3, History of the medical

management of Chemical Casualties, which describes

the organizational management of the resultant

casualties. over the last 20 years, the nature of the

chemical threat dramatically changed. this chap-

ter outlines the historical progression of chemical

weapon development, summarizes how conventional

and unconventional agents may be delivered in the

contexts of conventional conflict and terrorism, and

addreses the status of current chemcial warfare capa-

bilities in relation to the evolution and implementaion

of international chemical warfare agreements.

development of CHemiCal Weaponry

Before World War i, the united States knew little

about the potential of chemical warfare, particularly

in terms of preparing soldiers for future wars. By the

end of the war, the large-scale chemical warfare used

by and against american soldiers on the battlefield had

drastically changed the situation (figure 4-1).

early History

few of the chemical agents first used in combat dur-

ing World War i were 20th-century discoveries. many

of the key agents (table 4-1) were already known to

chemists; they were actually discovered during the

18th and 19th centuries and could have been used on

earlier battlefields. the 18th-century finds included

chlorine (Cl 2 ), discovered by Carl Wilhelm Scheele,

a Swedish chemist, in 1774. Scheele also determined

the properties and composition of hydrogen cyanide

(HCn; north american treaty organization [nato]

designation: aC) in 1782. in the 19th century, Charles

a Wurtz first discovered cyanogen chloride (nato

designation: CK), which was synthesized in 1802

by a french chemist, Comte Claude-louis Berthol-

let. in 1812 phosgene (nato designation: CG) was

synthesized by a British chemist, Sir Humphry Davy.

Dichlorethylsulphide (commonly known as mustard

agent, H, or HS) was synthesized by Cesar-mansuete

table 4-1

early CHemiCal Warfare agents

us army Code

agent

Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide

Cyanogen chloride

fig. 4-1. the German 150-mm t-Shell, which mixed xylyl

bromide with an explosive charge. the explosive charge was

in the front and the chemical agent in the rear compartment.

this design is similar to the one proposed in 1862 by John

Doughty during the american Civil War.

reproduced from: army War College. German Methods of

Offense. Vol 1. in: Gas Warfare. Washington, DC: War Depart-

ment; 1918: 59.

lung agents

CG (phosgene) Carbonyl chloride

DP (diphosgene) trichloromethyl chloroformate

Vesicants

HD (mustard)

bis -2-Chloroethyl sulfide

tear gas

2-Chloro-1-phenylethanone

2-Chlorobenzalmalononitrile

Vomiting gas

Dm (adamsite) 10-Chloro-5,10-dihydrophenarsazine

116

History of the Chemical Threat

fig. 4-2. filling 75-mm artillery shells with mustard agent

at edgewood arsenal, maryland. facilities designed to fill

shells with chemical agents were notoriously hazardous.

anecdotal reports from mustard shell-filling plants indicated

that over several months, the entire labor force could be

expected to become ill.

Photograph: Courtesy of Chemical and Biological Defense

Command Historical research and response team, ab-

erdeen Proving Ground, maryland.

and four chemical agent production plants. the first

shell-filling plant filled 75-mm shells with a mixture

of chloropicrin and stannic chloride (designated

nC) and livens projectiles with phosgene. a second

plant filled 75-mm shells with mustard agent. two

additional shell-filling plants were started but not

completed before the end of the war.

the four agent production plants made the agents

thought to be the highest priority for use on the western

front in 1917. these were chlorine, chloropicrin, phos-

gene, and mustard agent. By 1918 the first two were no

longer considered critical agents, although chlorine was

used in phosgene production. over 935 tons of phosgene

and 711 tons of mustard agent were produced at the

arsenal by the end of the war. Government contractors

also produced these four agents and lewisite, named after

Captain W lee lewis, a member of the CWS research

Division. lewisite, however, never reached the front and

was disposed of in the atlantic after the armistice. 4,5

Chemical Weapons

the CWS used foreign technology during the war

for offensive weapons (see Chapters 2 and 3). the ini-

tial mode of offensive chemical attack was the portable

chemical cylinder, designed to hold 30 to 70 lb of agent.

to release the agent from the cylinders, soldiers opened

a valve and relied on the wind to carry the agent in the

correct direction. the resulting cloud could drift many

miles behind enemy lines or, if the wind changed,

contaminate friendly troops. the British improved on

Despretz in 1822, by alfred riche in 1854, and finally

fully identified in 1886 by a German chemist, Victor

meyer. in 1848 chloropicrin (PS) was synthesized by a

Scottish chemist and inventor, John Stenhouse. 1

numerous chemical weapons were used or pro-

posed for use during campaigns and battles prior

to World War i (see Chapters 2 and 3). in 1887 Ger-

many apparently considered using lachrymators (tear

agents) for military purposes. the french also began a

rudimentary chemical weapons program, developing

a tear gas grenade containing ethylbromoacetate and

proposing to fill artillery shells with chloropicrin. 2,3

World War i

Chemical Agent Production

Shortly after entering World War i in april 1917,

the united States initiated a large-scale chemical

weapons program. Chemical agent production and

chemical shell filling were initially assigned to the uS

army ordnance Department, and then to the Chemi-

cal Warfare Service (CWS) when it was organized in

June 1918. the primary facility for production and

filling was edgewood arsenal, maryland, erected in

the winter of 1917–1918 (figures 4-2 and 4-3). the

facility was designed to have four shell-filling plants

fig. 4-3. interior view of the mustard agent production plant

at edgewood arsenal, maryland. Photograph: Courtesy of

research, Development and engineering Command His-

torical research and response team, aberdeen Proving

Ground, maryland.

117

Medical Aspects of Chemical Warfare

this delivery system by developing the livens projec-

tor, an 8-in, mortar-like tube that shot or projected a

cylinder into the enemy’s lines (figures 4-4 and 4-5).

its range was 1,700 yd, with a flight time of 25 seconds.

the livens system had several problems; a battery of

the projectors required extensive preparation because

they were electrically fired and could not be moved

once they were set up, and a battery could normally

only be emplaced and fired once a day. this limited

mobility required the element of surprise to prevent

the Germans from taking counter measures.

British 4-in trench mortars, called “Stokes mortars”

(figure 4-6), provided a solution to some of the prob-

lems with the livens projectors. Stokes mortars did not

require extensive preparation and could be moved as

needed. Because it was not rifled, the mortar’s range

was only 1,200 yd, which meant about a 14-second

flight time. the small shell held only about 6 to 9 lb of

agent, but experienced gunners could fire 25 rounds

per minute. american troops used both livens projec-

tors and Stokes mortars during the war. an american

version of the Stokes mortar failed to reach the front

before the end of the war.

in addition to the special chemical weapons, the

CWS fired chemical rounds from 75-mm, 4.7-in, 155-

mm, and larger caliber guns. many of these guns had

ranges of 5 to 10 miles and payloads of as much as 50

lb of agent. Because of a shortage of shell parts and the

late completion of uS shell-filling plants, uS artillery

primarily fired french chemical rounds. 2,4,5

the 1920s

the 1920s brought reports of isolated chemical

attacks during the russian civil war, as well as later

accounts of the British, french, and Spanish using

chemical weapons at various times during the decade

(see chapter 2). 6 in addition, reports of italy’s develop-

ing chemical warfare service particularly alarmed the

united States. 7–9 the CWS improved various delivery

systems for chemical weapons during the 1920s. as

early as 1920, Captain lewis m mcBride experimented

with rifling the barrel of the Stokes mortar, and in

1924 a rifled Stokes mortar barrel was tested. truing

the inside diameter of the 4-in barrel before rifling

expanded the bore’s diameter to 4.2 in. this increased

the range of the mortar from 1,100 yd (0.63 miles) to

2,400 yd (1.3 miles). in 1928 the improved mortar was

standardized as the m1 4.2-in chemical mortar and

became the CWS’s prized ground weapon for deliver-

ing toxic chemical agents as well as smoke and high

explosives. 5

an expanded role for airplanes in the next chemical

war was predicted in 1920:

the dropping of gas bombs of all kinds upon assem-

bly points, concentration camps, rest areas and the

fig. 4-4. a battery of dug-in livens projectors, with one gas

shell and its propellant charge shown in the foreground.

electrically-controlled salvo firing was the usual mode of

operation. emplacement was a slow process that limited the

possibility of a surprise attack.

Photograph: Courtesy of research, Development and engi-

neering Command Historical research and response team,

aberdeen Proving Ground, maryland.

fig. 4-5. Sectionalized view of a livens projectile. the cen-

tral tube contains a small explosive charge, which, when

detonated by the contact fuse, breaks the shell, aiding in the

dissemination of the chemical agent. the usual weight of the

chemical agent was 30 lb; the shell weighed an additional

30 lb. Photograph: Courtesy of research, Development and

engineering Command Historical research and response

team, aberdeen Proving Ground, maryland.

118

History of the Chemical Threat

in 1937 edgewood arsenal rehabilitated its mustard

agent plant and produced 154 tons of mustard agent

to increase its stockpile. the same year, the phosgene

plant was renovated for additional production and the

CWS changed phosgene from substitute standard to

standard chemical warfare agent. 14

the confidence in these selected agents resulted in

the CWS overlooking the development of several key

new agents. in the same article quoted above, Waitt

wrote:

fig. 4-6. a complete Stokes mortar with ammunition and

accessories for firing.

Photograph: Courtesy of research, Development and engi-

neering Command Historical research and response team,

aberdeen Proving Ground, maryland.

occasionally a statement appears in the newspapers

that a new gas has been discovered superior to any

previously known. Such statements make good copy,

but not one of them has ever been veriied. Today no

gases are known that are superior to those known

during the World War. it is unlikely that information

about a new gas will be obtained until it is used in

war. the chemical agent is too well adapted to se-

crecy. the only insurance against surprise by a new

gas is painstaking research to ind for ourselves ev-

ery chemical agent that offers promise for offensive

or defensive uses. it seems fairly safe to say that to-

day mustard gas is still the king of warfare chemicals

and to base our tactical schemes on that agent as a

type. 13(p285)

like, will be so fruitful a ield for casualties and for

wearing down the morale of armies in the future that

it will certainly be done and done on the very irst

stroke of war. 10(p4–5)

However, the reign of mustard agent was already

ending. in 1935 Kyle Ward, Jr, published an article de-

scribing nitrogen mustard, an odorless vesicant agent.

the CWS investigated the substance, but found it less

vesicant than mustard. it was eventually standardized

as Hn-1, and while the united States discounted it,

Germany took a great interest in the new vesicant. 5

Germany also developed tabun and sarin in the late

1930s and began production of the new agents by the

time World War ii began in 1939 (see chapter 2). 15,16

in response to this prediction, the CWS standardized

the m1 30-lb chemical bomb, which held only about

10 lb of agent because of its thick shell. 2 to test the use

of airplanes in a chemical war, the CWS simulated

chemical attacks against battleships in 1921. 11 in 1928

the CWS began stockpiling select chemical agents (see

Chapter 2). 12

the 1930s

New Chemical Weapons

New Chemical Agents

in preparation for a future war, the CWS continued

to stockpile chemical agents and weapons, primarily

the livens projectors, Stokes mortars, and portable

cylinders, as well as chemical shells for 75-mm, 105-

mm, and 155-mm artillery pieces. the production of

the new 4.2-in chemical mortar eventually made that

weapon the key ground delivery system for the CWS

(figures 4-7 and 4-8). Between 1928 and 1935 the army

attempted to make the 4.2-in a mechanized weapon

by mounting it on various vehicles. the CWS also

began experiments in 1934 to make the mortar a more

versatile weapon by testing high explosive shells as an

alternative to chemical rounds.

the improved m1a1 mortar was standardized in

1935. it had an improved barrel, an improved base-

the CWS continued to maintain stockpiles of the

key World War i chemical agents during the 1930s. in

1935 Captain alden H Waitt, then secretary of the uS

army Chemical Warfare School at edgewood arsenal

and later chief chemical officer, summed up the CWS’s

planning for the next war:

Foreign writers agree that at least for the irst few

months of any war, should one occur within a few

years, the gases that were known at the end of the

World War would be used. of these, the opinion is

unanimous that mustard gas would be the principal

agent and the most valuable. opinion in the united

States coincides with this. 13(p285)

119

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: