LONDON: International relief agencies are completely unprepared to deal with the consequences of a chemical or biological attack on a civilian population in Iraq, experts from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine warned on Friday.

Without prohibitively expensive detection devices, aid agencies are unable to rapidly detect whether chemical or biological agents have been used. Nor do they have practical means of protecting themselves, and they have no experience in decontamination, quarantine or barrier nursing to stem an epidemic.

A paper produced jointly by the school and Merlin, the British-based charity, warned that humanitarian organisations preparing for a conflict in Iraq had stark choices to face.

They either had to develop their own capacity to respond to the consequences of weapons of mass destruction, which would be free from military control, or they had to work with the military, thus compromising long-standing rules of impartiality and neutrality. The alternative was that humanitarian aid could not be delivered safely when these weapons are involved.

The paper revealed that contingency planning had been taking place in Geneva and New York “for several months”, but behind closed doors.

“Although contingency planning has been taking place in Geneva and New York for some months, it has been discreet and in camera for fear of suggesting lack of confidence in the arms inspection process,” the paper said. “A critical window for creating what may be life-saving preparedness among all parties is being lost.” Health experts raised a number of reasons why the British or US armies might not want to share their knowledge.

Military commanders may not reveal the nature of the agents used because they fear that by revealing evidence they could be made personally liable for a war crimes investigation by the international criminal court.

Battlefield use of weapons of mass destruction created problems for the protection of aid workers themselves. Performing anything but the most simple tasks in chemical suits is almost impossible without extensive training, while all vaccines except smallpox require more than a single dose to provide adequate protection. In the case of anthrax, seven months of vaccination is required to build advance immunity, while bubonic plague takes four months.

There was also a huge need for training. Russian medical teams responding to the gas attack that ended the Moscow theatre siege had no training and no access to treatment protocols. As a result, most deaths of liberated hostages occurred either outside the theatre or en route to hospital. Similar problems occurred in the Japanese response to the 1995 sarin nerve gas attack in the Tokyo metro.

Aid agencies have no capacity to intubate and give oxygen in the battlefield. Both would save lives in the event of a chemical attack.

One of the authors of the report, Egbert Sondorp, said: “The reality is that expert knowledge in protection from and response to weapons of mass destruction currently lies almost solely with the military.”

Geoff Prescott, the chief executive officer of Merlin, said: “NGOs need to retain their neutrality and impartiality while developing the knowledge and capacity to respond to weapons of mass destruction.”

The paper called for aid agencies to be included in the planning of disaster relief in the aftermath of an attack, for agencies to set up an independent capacity to respond to chemical and biological warfare, and for effective channels of communication to be established with the army. —Dawn/The Guardian News Service.