Gulf War: DU Weapons and Toxic Dust (Hansard, 2 March 1998)

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether chemically toxic dust created and scattered by the explosion of depleted uranium weapons by allied forces in the Gulf was responsible for casualties on either side.

§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Gilbert)
My Lords, the Government are not aware of any coalition personnel who have become ill or have died as a result of any such exposure. We have no information regarding any Iraqi casualties resulting from exposure to such dust.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is it the view of the Government that toxic chemicals produced by their nuclear weapons are legal but that if such substances were produced by an enemy they would become illegal?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, my noble friend may be suffering from a misunderstanding. DU shells are in no sense nuclear weapons and no nuclear explosion is caused when they hit any object.

§ The Countess of Mar
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware of a study carried out in 1993 by three US scientists which found that in the first eight months after the Gulf War about 50,000 children died from DU-related illnesses? In the light of that, what does the Minister think of the remark made by General Gallois in 1995 that if tanks are equipped with these kinds of munitions, chemical/nuclear war is morally allowable?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I am not familiar with the study to which the noble Countess has referred. But I find those figures quite remarkable because, if anyone did suffer from the inhalation of depleted uranium dust, he would have had to be very close to the point of impact of the shell on the tank. It would have to be a hard and not a soft target. On the basis that I dispute the premise of the noble Countess's question, I cannot follow the rest of it.

§ Lord Burnham
My Lords, in a reply to an earlier question that I asked about depleted uranium, the noble Lord said that it was a heavy metal with toxic properties similar to lead. Can he confirm that that is the case and that DU has no more dangerous properties than lead?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his question. I can confirm what he has said. 946 Depleted uranium is a material used for many civilian purposes. It is used in hospitals for radiological protection, for balancing the keels of small boats and in aircraft. There are several tens of thousands of tonnes of this material in civil hands in this country.

§ Lord Hayhoe
My Lords, can the Minister confirm that depleted uranium is used because of its high density and that as a result it can penetrate armour? Does he agree that there is no question of depleted uranium surrounding explosives and dust being created, and that the only dust that may arise from the use of depleted uranium ammunition results from the shattering of ammunition as it hits a very hard object, as the noble Lord implied?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord. I agree entirely with what he has said.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, does my noble friend suggest that no toxic chemical is produced by the explosion of depleted uranium, or does he suggest that a nuclear weapon exploded by us is in a different category from a nuclear weapon exploded by anyone else?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, my noble friend cannot have heard my original reply. These substances are not parts of nuclear weapons. No nuclear explosion takes place whatsoever when a DU shell hits the main battle tank of an opposing force. He is quite right that toxic dust arises from such incidents. It also arises when other materials hit main battle tanks.