NGO director holds US firms accountable for AO victims

(10-03-2005)

Susan Hammond of the Fund for Reconciliation and Development, an NGO based in New York which works to foster understanding between the people of the US and Viet Nam, spoke to the Viet Nam News Agency about the lawsuit filed by Vietnamese Agent Orange victims against US chemical firms.

What are your com-ments on the Feb-ruary 28 hearing of the lawsuit filed by Vietnamese AO victims? Do you think Judge Jack B Weinstein will rule in favour of AO victims? 

The US chemical companies have both a legal and a moral responsibility to Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange (AO). The companies knew from 1940s that dioxin was a highly toxic chemical and that some of the herbicides they sold the US Government contained high levels of dioxin. They hid this from US Government officials who were responsible for purchasing the herbicides and from the military who ended up using the chemicals.

I think the lawyers for the plaintiffs did a good job by stating the reasons for taking the lawsuit forward. This is a groundbreaking case involving complicated issues of international law that go beyond the question of whether or not the chemical companies are responsible for the damages caused by AO and other herbicides used during the war.

I am optimistic that the judge will rule in favour of the plaintiffs. If he does, the chemical companies will appeal to a higher court, and if he rules otherwise, the victims will also have a chance to appeal. So, the case is a long way from being completed.

In the meantime, we are urging people in United States not to wait for the court’s decision and to act now to help those in Viet Nam who are in need of assistance. The victims and their families cannot wait for the court and require immediate assistance.

People can also contribute funds to any of the groups assisting AO victims; the Viet Nam Red Cross, VAVA and the various friendship villages throughout Viet Nam.

What activities are carried out by the Fund for Reconciliation and Development (FRD) to aid AO victims?

The FRD has worked over the past 20 years to foster better understanding and reconcile the people of the US and Viet Nam. We have addressed the legacies of the American war, including the issue of Agent Orange and land mines. In the US, we educate people about the long-term health and environmental impacts of AO and other chemicals by holding seminars, film screenings and lectures, including the lecture series of Dr Phi Phi held in the US last week.

We co-ordinate activities and raise funds for other organisations such as VAVA and the Viet Nam Red Cross Agent Orange Victims Fund. In Viet Nam, FRD is also the co-ordinator of the NGO Agent Orange Working Group.

We are currently working with Diane Fox, an anthropologist who has done research on the impacts of Agent Orange in Viet Nam, to develop a comprehensive website about the long-term consequences of chemical weapons.

We are planning to hold an exhibition of works by Vietnamese and American artists that portray the effects of Agent Orange in college campuses and cities throughout the US in the fall of 2005.

What are the responsibilities of the American chemical companies to Vietnamese AO victims?

The chemical companies have both a legal and a moral responsibility to AO victims. The companies knew from the beginning that dioxin was highly toxic.

The companies also knew production techniques that would have greatly reduced the level of dioxin in herbicides. Instead, they increased dioxin content by reducing production time which in turn raised the toxin level. Batches of herbicide were produced in 45 minutes, instead of the usual 13 hours.

In my view, the argument of the chemical companies that they were ordered to produce these herbicides by the US Government is feeble.

They were only ordered to produce Agent Orange, Agent Blue, Agent Pink and so on, and not to produce dioxin. Since they were aware of the dangers of dioxin and did nothing to stop its production or use, they should be considered negligent.

The US government is also morally responsible for poisoning the land and the people of Viet Nam. The US Government should treat the legacy of Agent Orange as a humanitarian issue, just as it does with land mines and unexploded ordnance.

If the US can provide assistance to clean up bombs and mines and assist survivors, why can’t it do the same for people affected by Agent Orange?

What are your thoughts on American chemical companies Dow Chemical and Monsanto paying US$180 million in 1984 as compensation to US veterans who served in Viet Nam, but not to Vietnamese AO victims? 

I believe that Vietnamese who were and are still affected by Agent Orange have as much a right as US veterans for compensation from the chemical companies.

However, the decision to rule in favour of the veterans was a political decision to settle the case out of court.

It took a great deal of public pressure to make sure the case was settled within a reasonable amount of time. 

Opinion polls show that the majority of Americans support the Vietnamese in this lawsuit. But we will have to work to put pressure on the chemical companies to settle the case.

In particular, Americans need to know that this is not just a historical issue, but one that is still affecting people today, 30 years since the war ended and more than 40 years since the first herbicides were sprayed in Viet Nam. — VNS