Official Touts Nonlethal Weapons for Use

[SWJED]

I ran across this earlier but forgot to post. Lots to ponder - especially on the use of NLW on our own citizens before deploying this capability OCONUS.

12 September Associated Press - Official Touts Nonlethal Weapons for Use by Lolita Baldor.

Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before they are used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.

Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions in the international community over any possible safety concerns, said Secretary Michael Wynne.

"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."...

[979797]

As a cop, I carry expansive small-arms rounds to be used against American citizens but I have to employ full-jacket rounds against my nation's enemies because of an outdated convention. I can utilize oleoresin capsicum against an American citizen to bring him under control to safely effect an arrest yet I cannot carry it in Iraq because JAG lawyers consider it a "chemical weapon" even though it is merely a non-lethal irritant.

Non-lethal options are a tool whose time has come... and the military still fears it (at least, from my experience, the Army does). They are not, and should never be, a replacement for lethal weapons... but in the limited wars and counter-insurgencies that we're facing, non-lethal can be a valuable tool in many situations.

Think of OC or CS being employed on a crowd being used as human shields for insurgents. Unprotected civilians would scatter... even if they're more fearful of armed insurgents, their physical reaction will be to get away from the irritant... and would expose the armed insurgents (who themselves would also likely be incapacitated) to soldiers or Marines who could bring lethal fire to bear with minimal chance of collateral damage.

[LawVol]

I agree that NLW could be a valuable tool in a small war environment, particularly OC and other riot control agents as you've described. Your JAG probably does too.

However, it is not your JAG that considers OC a chemical agent and, therefore, unlawful as a method of warfare, but international law and executive authority. The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, of which the US is a party specifically proscribes the use of riot control agents in war. Executive Order 11850 proscribes "first use" of riot control agents in an armed conflict. The US classifies OC as a riot control agent. Thus, your JAG is merely quoting you the law, not making it. Don't fault the JAG for laws made by politicians.

A point to consider on the use of riot control agents is the unintended effect. We've already seen how insurgents use perceived violations of the law of war against us (e.g. shooting from a crowd in hopes that we fire back, or using collateral damage as a propaganda tool). If we used the riot control agents in Iraq, the next day's headline would read something like "US uses WMD, hundreds die" or something like that. Lost in the sensationalism would be the fact that these are non-lethal agents. After that, we'd probably hear about how the only WMD found in Iraq was in the US Army arsenal.

[Merv Benson]

The enemy's tactics and strategy in Iraq violate the Geneva Conventions in several regards and the media does not care. However, they are pretty compliant when following his propaganda scripts. Evidently our lawyers need to do a better job of making the case against the enemy violations.

[slapout9]

979797, have you heard or seen any use of the TASER. Just before I retired these were coming on line, not the older model but the newer ones M26 or newer. Anyone else can answer as well. I think NLW show a lot more promise than is realized in a COIN environment.

[Ironhorse]

Excellent point from LawVol re source of issue in law not JAG -- though in my book it is classic absurd / strange-but-true.

The WMD propaganda angle is similarly very real and I have heard that often as one line of reasoning supporting the status quo. However, I disagree. First, seems the spin artists are pretty good no matter which way we go, so I'm willing to concede them that small arrow in their quiver if I get a much more useful one in mine. Second, the utility is HUGE and this is not some reefer madness slippery slope, just something with a bit more resolution than in the '93 convention. We are woefully ill prepared to do anything less than kill but more than build schools and shake hands.

Finally, I do have some very real concern about slinging a bunch of stuff on a soldier or Marine, or a squad/team, and having them have to lug it all around and/or keep sorted out which weapon has the bean bags and which grenade is a real frag. There are some real implementation issues. But bring it on! Concur w/ 979797, the time has come.