von Kai Ting Vor 7 Jahren
251
Mehr dazu
While this whole issue may be primarily a domestic court case, the UN may be required to step in should the US be found guility of using chemical weapons. According to the 1907 Hague Conventions the 1925 Geneva Protocol, and the 1969 UN General Assembly Resolution, all chemical weapons are prohibited as per international law.
Starting off his second term with overwhelming support from the American Public, Ronald Reagan would not want to disappoint his supporters. If the final resolution supports the US government too much without much benefits for the veterans, public opinion of his administration may be severely hampered. His administration has to balance finely between supporting the veterans while at the same time, not implicating themselves into a dangerous situation with global regulatory powers such as the UN.
The Vietnam War has been a thorny issue since its inception in America. Public support would undoubtedly be towards the veterans; the veterans' challenge would be to actively engage the public more to garner more support for their case against the chemical corporations.
Mounting public pressure onto the government would be in the veterans' best interest as they would then be able to negotiate a better deal in their favor.
Given that the Vietnam War was terribly unpopular amongst the general population of the time, further showcasing the plight of the American Veterans would vilify the government even further, which may sway public opinion in the veterans' favor. This might result in having the current administration more willing to accede to the demands of the veterans to win back popular support.
Also, the media would play a large role in educating the masses about the detrimental health effects of Agent Orange, which is essential to building the case against the chemical corporations and by extension, the DoD.
Vietnam should be invested into the development of this case as they would be aware of how the resolution of this case may have repercussions on their future attempts at seeking recompense.
Although their diplomatic relations with the US were suspended in the 1970s and 80s, there were attempts by foreign journalists to uncover the aftermath of Agent Orange on Vietnam soil. If news about Vietnam's condition were to be publicized, there would be ever-growing public pressure on the US government to resolve the issue of Agent Orange
Would play a key role in determining the direct toxicity of dioxin on the affected claimants. However, a particular challenge they face is that, this lawsuit was only raised in 1979, with the case only making court in 1984, a full 10 years after US withdrew its forces in Vietnam. How could the veterans prove conclusively, that Agent Orange was the source of their afflictions?
This being said, it was widely known that dioxin did have serious consequences on human health upon exposure to it, even in minute concentrations ranging from 1 to 5 parts per billion.
However, since the claims that the veterans' are making are for afflictions with many varied causes (such as cancer, where environmental, genetic factors play a large part), the labs have a tough challenge in conclusively proving that Agent Orange was the defining cause of their afflictions.
The initial defendant of the case that was planned to be mounted by the American Veterans seeking reparations. Since directives were to be handed out directly from the Department of Defence, it is only natural for the directives to be traced back towards its issuing source and to be held responsible.
However, because of a previous Supreme Court ruling (Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 in 1950), the affected veterans would not be able to take the US government to court. As such, a different method of approach would have to be deviced.
Furthermore, as an executive branch department of the federal government, an unfavorable ruling that implicates the DoD could have serious repercussions even on the global stage.
Claims for reparation were made based on the grounds of being misled by the US Department of Defense into thinking that Agent Orange was not toxic.
American veterans in particular were the plaintiffs of the case, while some Australian and New Zealand veterans who served in the Vietnam War were included in the class action lawsuit as well.
Disability claims ranged from acute afflictions such as chloracne and severe neuropathy (nerve pain) to more chronic conditions such as various cancers and sterility. Also, claims were being made because of the teratogenic effects Agent Orange potentially had on the offspring of the American Veterans
The VA is the avenue for veterans to make their disability claims to receive due recompense for injuries sustained in their line of service. Also, the VA happens to operate the nation's largest integrated direct health care delivery system, primarily because of the veterans under its care.
However, being a subsidiary of the DoD, the VA would not be able to approve of any disability claims because of Agent Orange as that would be akin to admission of guilt over the use of Agent Orange. That is why questions were raised when Congress appointed the VA to conduct "independent" studies into the effects of Agent Orange in 1979. Three years after they were instructed by Congress to do so, their study turned up with nothing to show for.
How would they be able to define what are "injuries due to Agent Orange exposure" without implicating the DoD?
Resolving demands that were made will be really tough. On the one hand, if the government admits to being privy to knowledge of Agent Orange's carcinogenic effects, they would suffer a "peaceful defeat" at the hands of its own veterans. Also, it would also further condemn its involvement in the Vietnam War. It would also set a precedent and a strong case for Vietnam, if in the future, when they decide to pursue claims of reparations from the US. As admitting that Agent Orange was a chemical weapon would be tantamount to admitting its flouting of international laws, the US administration would be unlikely to grant its own veterans their claims.
On the other hand, if the government were to shut out the veterans' claims directly, further animosity would be generated between the public and the current administration. In addition to this, a failure to support its own disabled veterans would severely cripple public confidence in its own government
For a successful case to be launched, the plaintiffs would have to prove conclusively that their current afflictions are solely due to Agent Orange exposure.
For the defendants, it would be easier on them as they would only have to introduce doubt onto the research being conducted into dioxin toxicity.
A key consideration here for both parties here would be the issue of time. For the veterans, it is of paramount importance that they settle the issue as soon as possible, so that the needy afflicted veterans can begin medical treatment promptly. On the other hand, it may be beneficial for chemical corporations to drag out the proceedings as the relevancy of the case may diminish over time due to the death of the veterans, less public interest in the case etc.
(They might want to settle the case faster as at that point in time, scientific information about the long-term effects of dioxin were rather scarce, which may work in their favor)
Arguably, they were privately contracted by the Department of Defence (DoD) to produce the required chemicals for the Vietnam War.
How can the chemical companies absolve themselves of the blame that the veterans would soon direct at them? Some of the possible tactics that they could employ would be to claim that
1) They had no choice as they were mandated by the DoD
2) They had fully adhered to the specifications given to them by the DoD and were not responsible for any misuse
3) The chemicals were not the cause of the veterans' disabilities
An unfavorable ruling against them would cost the companies hundreds of millions, maybe even billions of dollars as reparations would be long-lasting, as they would have to pay for the futures that were lost.
Filing for compensation against the US government faces a series of challenges. Firstly, the affected veterans would have to prove that their current affliction is due to exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. Secondly, they would also have to prove that their current affliction is entirely due to their exposure during the war and not anything else. Furthermore, the US is not likely to acknowledge the toxicity of Agent Orange for a multitude of reasons
