Chemical Warfare during the Vietnam War: Riot Control Agents in Combat by D. Hank Ellison (review)

Chemical weaponry (CW) has a sinister reputation. Since the beginning of the modern era of chemical warfare in 1915, it has been demonized for its "inhumane" characteristics. The use of CW in the First World War helped to cement its vile reputation. Poetry and literature characterized the use of gas as horrible and inhumane, which is interesting in light of the effects of other weapons on the human body. The bad reputation of CW, as well as the perception of a lack of advantage because of the preparedness of all major combatants, helped prevent the use of gas in World War II except in relatively limited situations against ill-prepared combatants (Ethiopia and China) and prisoners (Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan). On the other hand, the invention and use of the chemical agent DDT, an insecticide, reduced non-battle sickness and helped ensure victory for the Allies. When and where necessary, out-of-control mobs rioting against conscription were controlled in part through the use of CN (tear gas).

Entering Vietnam, the United States had an extensive arsenal of both lethal and non-lethal chemical (and biological) agents with substantial means of delivery. As D. Hank Ellison points out, however, the United States was initially reluctant to use any agents, lethal or not, because of possible adverse publicity. At first hesitantly and then vigorously the United States used riot-control agents (RCA) in combat.

Although I enjoyed Ellison's book overall, my main reservations are about its readability. The use of both an introduction and a "prelude" seems problematic. The introduction lays out the book's theme and provides a short historical review of CW and international efforts to limit it up to the Vietnam War. The introduction ends with a brief discussion of how U.S. use of RCA in Vietnam provided a case study that could be of use to modern leaders: Did the widespread availability and use of RCA cause the U.S. government to slide down the slippery slope into full lethal CW use? Did U.S. forces use lethal chemical agents? If not, why not? These questions come up again later in the book.

The prelude discusses herbicide use, early use of RCA by South Vietnam, and the military decision-making process. The description of the interactions at the highest levels in the U.S. and South Vietnamese governments in deciding to use RCA in combat is fascinating, even though the decision was ultimately futile. The use of both an introduction and a prelude works reasonably well, but I found myself wishing that the author had put the historical background information into the introduction and referred to it later in the book when appropriate.

The chapters are separated by topic (Operation Stomp, tunnels, etc.), roughly in chronologic order. Operation Stomp showed that, despite the best intentions at the highest levels, actions on the ground can have a strategic impact. U.S. Marines used RCA in combat because they believed that such agents would minimize collateral civilian casualties. The descriptions of combat actions involving RCA are the best part of the book, highlighting the adaptability of soldiers and marines to counterinsurgency operations that attempt to minimize both friendly and civilian casualties. The biggest distraction is the author's willingness to end one chapter in 1968 and start the next back in 1966. Proper transitions would have helped readers immensely.

In the conclusion, Ellison discusses the effectiveness of RCA in the Vietnam conflict and the U.S. government's concern about public perceptions of RCA use, and he returns to questions he posed in the introduction. No solid evidence has emerged that U.S. forces used lethal agents or the incapacitating agent BZ in Vietnam, despite occasional outcries. The toxic legacy of the use of herbicides overshadows the possible damage caused by anything else.

Appendices provide readers with additional information on CW. Appendix A, providing...