Time for oversight

November 16, 2005

Congress should hold hearings on the Army's dumping of chemical weapons in oceans around the world - and it shouldn't make those hearings contingent on anything the Army does.

The dumping has commanded attention in Washington - and New Zealand and Moscow and many other places - as a result of a recent Daily Press investigative series, "Special report: The deadliness below." Reporter John M.R. Bull detailed the Army's dumping of rockets, bombs, mines, shells and at least 64 million pounds of chemical warfare agents into waters off the United States, Europe and Asia.

Following that series, a member of the House Armed Services Committee threatened to hold hearings if the Army doesn't voluntarily reveal all it knows about its history of dumping - once a standard procedure for getting rid of unneeded chemical and other weapons - and offer proof that it won't cause an environmental catastrophe.

But Congress should step forward regardless of what the Army does. The issue warrants further scrutiny, and the armed forces' track record makes it clear that oversight and accountability beyond the chain of command are needed. Left to its own devices, the Army has failed to track where it dumped deadly material, monitor the sites or warn those who might be at risk.

Dumping was relied on after World War II to dispose of weapons left over or confiscated from the enemy, and it continued until 1970. The Navy got rid of surplus ships and million of pounds of high-explosive ordnance with similar disregard for marine environments: throwing munitions overboard or loading them onto ships and then blowing them up or sinking them.

While such disposal methods may have been regarded as acceptable decades ago, they are seen now for what they truly are: irresponsible. "We didn't know" simply doesn't cut it as an excuse. When dealing with substances as deadly as mustard and nerve gas and radioactive material, it is indefensible that the armed forces did not make it its business to know the implications of putting them into oceans.

"We didn't keep track" is even more appalling. The Army has records on only about half the dumpsites off U.S. shores. There is no good excuse for the failure to maintain records of activities that had foreseeable, long-term, lethal risks.

"We didn't tell" is bound to tarnish our already battered international reputation. Even friendly New Zealand is asking for information about dumps off its coasts - after discovering that, like other countries, it was never informed of potential dangers.

The nation's obligation now is to locate, monitor and, where feasible, clean up the dumpsites, although that is compromised by the depth and condition of some sites. At a minimum, it has an obligation to inform the countries involved and maritime interests.

Congress has the authority and an obligation to seize the gavel and take charge of the inquiry - and any follow-up that comes of it. There may well be investigations by outside bodies, driven, perhaps, by skepticism of the nation's willingness to keep partisan interests and a penchant for self-protection from getting in the way of full disclosure and meaningful action. In that environment, it is essential that Congress step up with resolve and approach the job with the intent of uncovering the full scope of the matter, crafting a plan to deal with whatever is discovered, and mobilizing the oversight to make sure that plan is implemented.