Pentagon denies developing bioweapons that attack machines
A U.S. military special weapons office is denying accusations it is seeking to develop biological agents that attack military equipment and material, but not personnel.
Such agents are banned by U.S. law, experts said.
The Joint Nonlethal Weapons Directorate--created in 1997 under Marine Corps command to recommend, develop and field nonlethal weapons research and development for the U.S. armed services--last year asked the National Academy of Sciences to study new nonlethal technologies. The directorate included two controversial proposals in its request--Navy and Air Force proposals to develop offensive, anti-materials biocatalysts.
Anti-material biocatalysts are microorganisms that can rapidly degrade certain materials as metals, fuels, paving materials and synthetic products. Military research already has been underway for using such organisms in nonoffensive purposes such as degrading paint on ships and aircraft and neutralizing environmental toxic spills.
Offensive research could violate the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, which some experts said can be interpreted to ban all forms of offensive biological agents, whether harmful to humans or not.
Furthermore, the research would certainly violate the U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, according to Edward Hammond, co-director of the Sunshine Project, a nongovernmental organization working to prevent the use of biotechnology advances to develop new weapons. The act provides for strict penalties, including life imprisonment, for development, production or use of "any biological agent, toxin or delivery system for use as a weapon."
"We have no work going on in either area," wrote directorate head Col. G.P. Fenton in an e-mail to Global Security Newswire, referring to agents for use against equipment or as sensors.
In written answers to questions, the directorate said it had received unsolicited proposals from other military offices for funding to conduct research on such agents and has rejected them.
"The directorate has and will continue to decline considering these proposals as they do not represent the types of nonlethal technology deemed appropriate to the directorate's mission," it said in an e-mailed statement.
The Air Force and Navy laboratories proposed developing the microorganisms for offensive uses, such as against runway and road surfaces, metal parts, coatings, lubricants and fuels of vehicles, weapons and equipment. "Vaccinations" would be needed to prevent harm to friendly equipment.
"The application of this technology is limitless. Catalysts can be engineered to destroy whatever war material is desired," said the Air Force proposal.
The directorate said in its statement it "has not and will not" solicit proposals involving anti-material biocatalysts or sensors, but added, "it is not unusual however for the directorate to receive unsolicited proposals based on biological research."
Asked whether it believes the Biological Weapons Convention and U.S. law allow offensive anti-material biocatalyst work, the directorate responded:
"The tenets of the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 are clear. Neither the United States Marine Corps nor the Joint Nonlethal Weapons Directorate believe that any research that deviates from strict adherence to the guidelines set forth in the act is appropriate."
In 1997, a U.S. Navy deputy assistant judge advocate general issued a legal review that offensive use of nonlethal anti-material biocatalysts would violate the convention.
"They say that they know it's illegal, and if they know it is illegal, why on earth are they continuing to promote the technology by continuing to distribute information about it and ask the National Academy of Sciences to study a proposal for development of illegal biological weapons?" asked Hammond.
"Why did they send it to NAS to examine? It makes no sense to send information on an illegal technology," said Hammond, who suspects the directorate might be hoping for "NAS to give a green light" to begin work on it.
Marine Corps Public Affairs Spokesman Capt. Shawn Turner, who serves as a spokesman for the directorate, said sending the documents to the National Academy of Sciences did not indicate the directorate is considering the technologies.
"When the Nonlethal Weapons Directorate went to NAS to ask for an assessment--I guess an audit for lack of a better term--both proposals that had been solicited and unsolicited, everything that had been discussed went to the NAS, that was just for a complete and thorough assessment," he said.
Referring to the many documents sent to the NAS, he said, "If you look at those documents, you'll see that there are all kinds of ideas in those documents and the Nonlethal Weapons Directorate director just passed it all to the NAS … There is lots of stuff in there that will never be acted upon."
The cache of documents, including the two proposals, was pulled from public inspection earlier this year, pending a security review, according to Turner.
The National Academy of Sciences report is due for release late this month at the earliest, NAS staffers said.