|
Interview Admiral Elmo Zumwalt
July 26, 1999
ADM's Moon Callison
interviews
the former Chief of Naval Operatons, for "Environmental Impact of War" |
||
Main
Show Page
Related ADM Videos:
CDI Resources:
Interview Transcripts:
|
ADM. ZUMWALT: During the Vietnam war from 1968 - 1970 I was
commander of U.S. Navel forces in Vietnam. For the following
four years I was Chief of Naval operations and a member of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. CALLISON: I had heard that you were, at some point, in charge
of ordering the use of Agent Orange. Can you explain what the
purpose of Agent Orange was? ADM. ZUMWALT: The U.S. Army began using Agent Orange in about 1965
to defoliate those jungle areas where they were taking heavy
casualties. In 1968, when I took command of the Brown Water Navy
and moved our 1000 small craft out of the ocean and major rivers
and into the narrow rivers and canals along the Cambodian
boarder, we began to take casualties at the rate of 6% a month,
which meant the average young man would have about a 70%
probability of being killed or wounded during his years' tour.
With the Army informing that they had seen no harmful effects on
humans except for the occasional skin problems, and with the
Pentagon's assurance that there were no human affects, I then
ordered the use along those narrow rivers and canals to
defoliate. And we reduced the casualties to less than 1% a
month. CALLISON: What exactly happens when you used Agent Orange? How
did if affect the foliage? ADM. ZUMWALT: Agent Orange, rather quickly, kills the leaves and
leaves just dead looking trees, and also kills the weeds and
grasses in which the enemy was hiding. CALLISON: You said fairly quickly, how long do you mean? ADM. ZUMWALT: A matter of days. CALLISON: When you were spraying along the rivers, you said
canals? ADM. ZUMWALT: The narrow rivers and canals that run several
hundred miles along the Cambodian border. CALLISON: Did that get in the water? Was there any affect on
the marine life or was it specific to foliage? ADM. ZUMWALT: Agent Orange was sprayed by Air Force Ranch Hand
aircraft and therefore that spray of Agent Orange not only hit
the foliage but also hit the water and populations living on
those narrow rivers and canals and our boat people. At the time
we of course did not know this would lead to rather permanent
poisoning of the areas. Recent studies show that Agent Orange
still remains in sprayed areas these many years after the use of
it. CALLISON: Did Agent Orange affect the agricultural land? Did
it get into the crops? And if so, does it still show up in tests or
has it dispersed and gone away? ADM. ZUMWALT: The Navy did not use Agent Orange in agricultural
lands. There may have been some little plots along those narrow
rivers and canals that were affected. The Air Force did spray
some agricultural areas that were under enemy control to deny
them the use of crops that they had planted in their hideaways
and outposts in the mountains particularly in Tucour. We now
know from recent studies done by Halifax Associates, a Canadian
firm, from tests that they made, there is evidence of dioxin
contamination in growth in those areas that were sprayed and in
animals. CALLISON: When you returned to Vietnam and saw some of the
areas that had been sprayed, what did it look like? ADM. ZUMWALT: When I returned to Vietnam in September of 1994, at my
request I was taken by the Vietnamese officials to see two areas
that had been sprayed that were agricultural and they were barren
of trees and agricultural products but were filled with a weed-like grass which the
Vietnamese had dubbed "American Grass." CALLISON: Have the jungles come back or do they look the same
as the agricultural land? ADM. ZUMWALT: It's my understanding that in some areas trees have
returned. I don't have first hand knowledge of that. And in
others it has not. I suppose it has to do with the extent of the
dioxin contamination. CALLISON: You have mentioned that you were very much involved
in getting the U.S. to pay benefits to veterans exposed to Agent
Orange. What made you get involved in this action? ADM. ZUMWALT: In 1989 the then Secretary of Affairs, Edward
Durinsky, having watched my battle with my son, our effort to
help him recover from exposure to Agent Orange and cancers, asked
me if I would serve as a pro bono special assistant and go
through all of the documents so that I could give him a
recommendation as to what he should do. The law giving him the
responsibility to make a judgement, to compensate for health
affects if the evidence was, proved it was likely as not that
there were correlations between exposure and specific diseases.
I spent about nine months doing that and turned in a study that
pointed that there were very badly flawed studies done by the
chemical corporations which had been used for years as a so
called reference study to denigrate very good scientific studies
done by Swedish scientists. I recommended that those flawed
studies be disregarded and that if one did that that there were,
in my judgement, assisted by scientific advisors, 28 diseases
that were as likely as not a result of exposure to Agent Orange.
We found and reported in that report that the Bureau of the
Budget had ordered all the agencies of government in essence not
to find a correlation between Agent Orange and health affects
stating that it would be most unfortunate for two reasons: A) the
cost of supporting the veterans and B) the court liability to
which corporations would be exposed.
To his great credit,
President Bush, faced with this report immediately ordered
compensation to be provided for the first three diseases and
supported the execution by the Congress of my recommendation that
the flawed scientific committee advising the Secretary of Energy
be disestablished and the responsibility was given to
the National Academy of Science to report every two years the
state of the science. This over time, has led to a total of 13
diseases to being compensated. And if I live we'll get to 28. CALLISON: When you were doing your research, did you look into
the health of the people in the areas that were sprayed or did
you focus on the veterans? ADM. ZUMWALT: It was focused exclusively on the veterans because
we just didn't have adequate data, although I did refer to the
fact that studies by Dr. Schecter did confirm that dioxin did
remain in the Vietnam area. We've been doing quite a bit to get
such work started and have some now after great reluctance on the
part of the Vietnamese for many years. CALLISON: Knowing what you do know, would you still use Agent
Orange? Were the loss of casualties enough to warrant the use of
Agent Orange? ADM. ZUMWALT: It's my understanding that we now have defoliants
that are not carcinogenic and obviously one would use those
instead. Faced with what we had at the time, had I known of
these long term affects, I would still have used it because we
saved literally thousands at the long term cost of several
hundreds being affected by it. CALLISON: Going back to your return visit to Vietnam, did you
see other evidence, besides defoliation, of the war in Vietnam? ADM. ZUMWALT: I did not. However, as I said, the studies done by
the Halifax Associates do show continuing evidence. CALLISON: Shifting gears a here a little. What is your
interest in the Gulf War? ADM. ZUMWALT: When the Gulf War began I called the Secretary of
Defense and recommended very strongly that positions each day be
recorded and I was assured that would be done; the positions of
our people. Regrettably it was not done.
I therefore, after the
war, because of my knowledge of how the government had
prostituted the process at the time of the Vietnam war, my
responsibility to keep in touch with both White House officials
and Pentagon officials, to make sure that we were going to do it
right this time. I think because of that contact, the President
decided to have me be a member of the Special Oversight Board
which was created in part as a result of the recommendation of an
earlier Presidential Advisory Committee and some concern of the
nature of the work going on in the Pentagon. CALLISON: What events and concerns have led up to these Public
hearings that the oversight board is overseeing? ADM. ZUMWALT: The creation of the Special Oversight Board was, in
my judgement, the result of the President's desire after he
received the recommendations of this earlier Presidential
Advisory Committee, to make sure that no stone was left unturned
in regard to ensuring that every aspect of what might have
occurred was examined. I think it was a very worth thing to do.
We will report directly to the President the out come of our
conclusions and make our recommendations. And that work is on-going at the present time. CALLISON: When you say no stone left unturned, what exactly
does that mean? ADM. ZUMWALT: The reason for saying that no stone should be left
unturned is that there are many possibilities of what might have
happened. All of them need to be researched and examination of
the possibility of synergistic effects of a group of such
exposures needs to be researched. And the job of the Special
Oversight Board is to make sure that all of this work is on-going
and in an objective fashion. CALLISON: When you say exposures, are you referring to
depleted uranium, oil fires, that type of stuff? ADM. ZUMWALT: Exposures that are being examined range all the way
from the oil fires, to the use of depleted uranium in our shells
and projectiles, to the shots that our people were given and the
sort of individual actions that were taken by our soldiers in
using Deet and other kinds of insect repellents that were not
specifically authorized. CALLISON: Shifting again to Kosovo, I've heard reports from
the Serbian media that NATO bombing has created severe
environmental damages. Do you have an opinion as to whether that
is wartime propaganda or if it's justified? ADM. ZUMWALT: I would not believe any of the Serbian propaganda.
They are under the control of a dictator whose concept of the
truth is his present desire projected backward. CALLISON: Do you think there is a possibility of health
problems? In Kuwait there was the oil fires and depleted uranium
and in Kosovo we have the burning of oil refineries and chemical
plants and minimal use of depleted uranium. Do you think that
could cause a public health concern down the line? ADM. ZUMWALT: There are undoubtably the possibility of health
concerns as a result of the military action that was taken
against the Serbian forces in Kosovo. These are the kinds of
consequences that have to be evaluated whenever one contemplates
military action and it is the reason why a policy decision to
initiate military action must be done with solemnity and care and
the judgement must be made that the overriding need for the
military action exceeds the possibility of the consequent health
affects. CALLISON: How would you decide that the need is important
enough? ADM. ZUMWALT: Well, I think the fact that in the case of Kosovo,
there were up to a million people who faced extinction or
expulsion and that murder and raping was going on to a
significant extent, made the need for military action to save
lives, far greater than the consequential circumstances that
other lives would face from the military action that was taken. CALLISON: Do you think that in the future military action will
be either prevented or halted or some how taken in a different
manner out of concern or public health or environmental
consequences? ADM. ZUMWALT: If we ever achieve a useful, functioning, system of
government that interlocks all nations in such a way that action
can be taken by a majority of nations against such repulsive
individuals as Milosevic in Yugoslavia, we may be able to avoid
the unilateral military actions or the actions by regional
groups. Even in that far off stage, the illusion of human
political relations some kind of police force would have to be
taking action against the human beings like Milosevic who resort
to murder and pillage. CALLISON: Protocol One and ENMOD were direct results of the
way the Vietnam war was fought. I interviewed Jay Austin from
the Environmental Law Institute and he seemed to think that the
military tries to go one step further than current policy on
environmental considerations. Do you have a sense of that? ADM. ZUMWALT: I do not believe that the military ever go beyond
the strict policy guidance they are given by civilian authority.
There was a day when that was the case. When Admiral Dewey was
instructed to seize the Philippines and destroy the Spanish fleet
he cut the cables to Hong Kong so he would have no further
instructions and was able to proceed to get the job done in 24
hours after he arrived there.
But now days, almost the reverse
is true, the military are so greatly restrained that wars last
longer and won less efficiently than they would otherwise be.
The most notable example of that being in Vietnam where the war
could have been won and lost by the constraints imposed by
civilian authority. CALLISON: What is your opinion of how Kosovo was fought. Was
the air campaign an effective way to fight a war? ADM. ZUMWALT: I believe, first, that it was necessary to take
action against Kosovo, and second that the only way it was
possible to achieve a NATO support, unified support from all
members of NATO, or remarkable support, was to agree not to use
ground forces. It would have been more efficient and quicker and
less casualties to the Albanian population had ground forces been
used, but I think it was politically not possible because we
certainly had to have the NATO concurrence. I think that that
decision, to take air power in use only, then was carried out in
a way that avoided a single military casualty, we lost two in
operational training , but none in the action. So, I think that
was to the great credit of the way the operation was carried out. CALLISON: Do you think the United States should be involved in
cleanup after war? I have heard that in Vietnam we weren't
invited back to do cleanup and I know that in Kuwait the Allies
had done some cleanup of the desert. What about Kosovo? Is there
an obligation on our part and on NATO's part to help cleanup? ADM. ZUMWALT: In the case of Vietnam there was initially no
obligation to participate in cleanup nor any possibility of doing
so because the communist forces won and wanted nothing at that
time, to do with U.S. help.
With regard to Kuwait, our actions
there, to help the Kuwaitis cleanup their mess largely at their
expense, was an appropriate thing to do. They were our ally and
had been invaded and badly brutalized.
With regard to Kosovo, I
think that NATO has clear responsibility to assist in
straightening out the damage there. But I would be very much
opposed in helping Serbia itself until Milosevic has been
dispatched to the lower world. CALLISON: What about the use of depleted uranium in Kosovo. ADM. ZUMWALT: With regard to depleted uranium, the Presidential
Oversight Board is studying the research that has been done on
that matter and has not yet taken an official public position and
for that reason I reserve a comment at this time. CALLISON: Do you want to add anything? ADM. ZUMWALT: ...innocent people and our capability to do that
has improved so remarkably, the Desert Storm War was so much more
efficiently used because of the accuracy of our weapons than in
Vietnam, and the recent action in Kosovo was an order of
magnitude better than Desert Storm because of the continued
improvement in the accuracy and control mechanisms of our
munitions. |