Editing Agent Orange (section)

==Legal and diplomatic proceedings==
===International===
The extensive environmental damage that resulted from usage of the herbicide prompted the [[United Nations]] to pass [[United Nations Convention on Environmental Modification|Resolution 31/72]] and ratify the [[Environmental Modification Convention]]. Many states do not regard this as a complete ban on the use of herbicides and defoliants in warfare, but it does require case-by-case consideration.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cpmhuemt/cpmhuemt.html |title=Convention on the Prohibition of the Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques |publisher=Audiovisual Library of International Law |date=December 10, 1976 |access-date=February 1, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191111230644/http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cpmhuemt/cpmhuemt.html |archive-date=November 11, 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule76 |title=Practice Relating to Rule 76. Herbicides |year=2013 |website=Customary IHL Database |publisher=International Committee of the Red Cross |access-date=24 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130922212319/http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule76 |archive-date=22 September 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> Article 2(4) of Protocol III of the [[Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons]] contains the "Jungle Exception", which prohibits states from attacking forests or jungles "except if such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or military objectives or are military objectives themselves".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://geneva-s3.unoda.org/static-unoda-site/pages/templates/the-convention-on-certain-conventional-weapons/PROTOCOL%2BIII.pdf |title=Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons |publisher=United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs
 |date=April 10, 1981}}</ref> This exception voids any protection of any military and civilian personnel from a [[napalm]] attack or something like Agent Orange, and it has been argued that it was clearly designed to cover situations like U.S. tactics in Vietnam.<ref>{{cite book |last=Detter |first= Ingrid |title=The Law of War |publisher=Ashgate |date=2013 |page=255 |isbn=978-1-4094-6495-2}}</ref>

=== Class action lawsuit ===
Since at least 1978, several lawsuits have been filed against the companies which produced Agent Orange, among them [[Dow Chemical Company|Dow Chemical]], [[Monsanto Company|Monsanto]], and [[Diamond Shamrock]].<ref name=EncNatSec>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Agent Orange |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of United States National Security |editor-first=Richard J. |editor-last=Samuel |publisher=SAGE Publications |date=2005 |isbn=978-1-4522-6535-3 |page=6}}</ref> In 1978, army veteran Paul Reutershan sued Dow Chemical for $10 million, after he was diagnosed with terminal cancer that he believed was a result of Agent Orange exposure. After Reutershan died in December 1978, his attorneys added additional plaintiffs and refiled the lawsuit as a class action.<ref name="SCHUCKPH19880315">{{cite book | author-last=Schuck |author-first=Peter H. | date=15 March 1988 | title=Agent Orange on Trial: Mass Toxic Disasters in the Courts | publisher=Belknap Press | url=https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674010260 | isbn=978-0-674-01026-0}}</ref><ref name="SILLSP20140215">{{cite book | author-last=Sills |author-first=Peter | date=15 February 2014 | title=Toxic War: The Story of Agent Orange | publisher=Vanderbilt University Press |doi=10.2307/j.ctv1675571 |jstor=j.ctv1675571 | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1675571 | isbn=978-0-8265-1964-1}}</ref> That lawsuit would eventually represent thousands of veterans, and was considered one of the largest and most complex lawsuits ever brought in the US at that time.{{r|n=BLUMENTHALR19840506|r={{Cite news | author-last=Blumenthal |author-first=Ralph | date=6 May 1984 | newspaper=The New York Times | title=Vietnam Agent Orange Suit By Veterans Is Going To Trial | url=https://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/06/nyregion/vietnam-agent-orange-suit-by-veterans-is-going-to-trial.html | access-date=11 December 2024 | quote=The vast product-liability case, a civil class action embodying potential damage claims in the billions of dollars, is viewed as the biggest and most complicated case of its kind ever undertaken.}}}}

Attorney Hy Mayerson was an early pioneer in Agent Orange litigation, working with [[environmentalism|environmental attorney]] [[Victor Yannacone]] in 1980 on the first [[class-action suit]]s against wartime manufacturers of Agent Orange. In meeting Dr. Ronald A. Codario, one of the first civilian doctors to see affected patients, Mayerson, so impressed by the fact a physician would show so much interest in a Vietnam veteran, forwarded more than a thousand pages of information on Agent Orange and the effects of dioxin on animals and humans to Codario's office the day after he was first contacted by the doctor.{{sfn|Wilcox|1983}} The corporate defendants sought to escape culpability by blaming everything on the U.S. government.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Scott|first=Wilbur J.|title=The Politics of Readjustment: Vietnam Veterans Since the War|publisher=Transaction Publishers|year=1993|isbn=978-0-202-30406-9|page=130|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YLg8rVfYO9EC&pg=PA130|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170228024316/https://books.google.com/books?id=YLg8rVfYO9EC&pg=PA130|archive-date=2017-02-28|url-status=live}}</ref>

In 1980, Mayerson, with Sgt. Charles E. Hartz as their principal client, filed the first U.S. Agent Orange class-action lawsuit in Pennsylvania, for the injuries military personnel in Vietnam suffered through exposure to toxic dioxins in the defoliant.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1347&dat=19800125&id=ZdMSAAAAIBAJ&pg=5065,3012612 |title=Dying Veteran May Speak From Beyond The Grave In Court |work=Lakeland Ledger |date=1980-01-25 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130606050816/http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1347&dat=19800125&id=ZdMSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=0_oDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5065,3012612 |archive-date=2013-06-06 |url-status=live}}</ref> Attorney Mayerson co-wrote the brief that certified the Agent Orange Product Liability action as a class action, the largest ever filed as of its filing.<ref>{{cite news |last=Croft |first=Steve |url=http://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/program.pl?ID=270939 |title=Agent Orange |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120321165559/http://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/program.pl?ID=270939 |archive-date=2012-03-21 |work=CBS Evening News |date=May 7, 1980}}</ref> Hartz's [[Deposition (law)|deposition]] was one of the first ever taken in America, and the first for an Agent Orange trial, for the purpose of preserving [[testimony]] at trial, as it was understood that Hartz would not live to see the trial because of a brain tumor that began to develop while he was a member of [[Tiger Force]], [[special forces]], and [[LRRPs]] in Vietnam.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mayerson.com/html/about.html |title=About the Firm |publisher=The Mayerson Law Offices |access-date=May 4, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090924024336/http://www.mayerson.com/html/about.html |archive-date=September 24, 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref> The firm also located and supplied critical research to the veterans' lead expert, Dr. Codario, including about 100 articles from toxicology journals dating back more than a decade, as well as data about where herbicides had been sprayed, what the effects of dioxin had been on animals and humans, and every accident in factories where herbicides were produced or dioxin was a contaminant of some chemical reaction.{{sfn|Wilcox|1983}}

The chemical companies involved denied that there was a link between Agent Orange and the veterans' medical problems. However, on May 7, 1984, seven chemical companies settled the class-action suit out of court just hours before jury selection was to begin. The companies agreed to pay $180 million as compensation if the veterans dropped all claims against them.<ref>{{Cite book|editor=Stanley, Jay|editor2=Blair, John D.|title=Challenges in military health care: perspectives on health status and the provision of care|publisher=Transaction Publishers|year=1993|isbn=978-1-56000-650-3|page=164|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8k-WIJYwIF4C&pg=PA164|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170228022008/https://books.google.com/books?id=8k-WIJYwIF4C&pg=PA164|archive-date=2017-02-28|url-status=live}}</ref> Slightly over 45% of the sum was ordered to be paid by Monsanto alone.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Harrington|first=John C.|title=The challenge to power: money, investing, and democracy|publisher=Chelsea Green Publisher|year=2005|isbn=978-1-931498-97-5|page=[https://archive.org/details/challengetopower00harr_0/page/260 260]|url=https://archive.org/details/challengetopower00harr_0|url-access=registration}}</ref> Many veterans who were victims of Agent Orange exposure were outraged the case had been settled instead of going to court and felt they had been betrayed by the lawyers. "Fairness Hearings" were held in five major American cities, where veterans and their families discussed their reactions to the settlement and condemned the actions of the lawyers and courts, demanding the case be heard before a jury of their peers. Federal Judge [[Jack B. Weinstein]] refused the appeals, claiming the settlement was "fair and just". By 1989, the veterans' fears were confirmed when it was decided how the money from the settlement would be paid out. A totally disabled Vietnam veteran would receive a maximum of $12,000 spread out over the course of 10 years. Furthermore, by accepting the settlement payments, disabled veterans would become ineligible for many state benefits that provided far more monetary support than the settlement, such as [[Food Stamps|food stamps]], [[public assistance]], and [[government pension]]s. A widow of a Vietnam veteran who died of Agent Orange exposure would receive $3,700.<ref name="oxford-milhist-725">{{Cite encyclopedia |last=Wilcox |first=Fred A. |editor1-last=Chambers |editor1-first=John Whiteclay|editor2-last=Anderson |editor2-first=Fred|encyclopedia=The Oxford companion to American military history|title=Toxic Agents|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1999|isbn=978-0-19-507198-6|page=725|url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00cham/page/725}}</ref>

In 2004, Monsanto spokesman Jill Montgomery said Monsanto should not be liable at all for injuries or deaths caused by Agent Orange, saying: "We are sympathetic with people who believe they have been injured and understand their concern to find the cause, but reliable scientific evidence indicates that Agent Orange is not the cause of serious long-term health effects."<ref>{{Cite news|title=Agent Orange Victims Sue Monsanto|last=Fawthrop|first=Tom|work=CorpWatch|date=November 4, 2004|url=http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11638|access-date=February 1, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180126185411/http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11638|archive-date=January 26, 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>

On 22 August 2024, the Court of Appeal of Paris dismissed an appeal filed by [[Tran To Nga]] against 14 US corporations that supplied Agent Orange for the US army during the war in Vietnam.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-22 |title=French court rejects appeal in Agent Orange lawsuit by French-Vietnamese ex-journalist |url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20240822-french-court-dismisses-appeal-in-agent-orange-case |access-date=2024-08-28 |website=France 24 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-08-22 |title=French court dismisses appeal in Agent Orange case |url=https://www.lemonde.fr/en/police-and-justice/article/2024/08/22/french-court-dismisses-appeal-in-agent-orange-case_6720003_105.html# |access-date=2024-08-28 |language=en}}</ref> The lawyers said that Nga will take her case to France's highest appeals court.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-22 |title=Paris court rejects appeal against chemicals giant over Vietnam War use of Agent Orange |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/paris-court-rejects-agent-orange-appeal-against-bayer-monsanto/ |access-date=2024-08-28 |website=POLITICO |language=en-GB}}</ref> Only military veterans from the United States and its allies in the war have won compensation so far.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-06-17 |title=The Vietnamese octogenarian fighting for Agent Orange victims |url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/06/17/asia-pacific/vietnamese-woman-agent-orange-lawsuits/ |access-date=2024-05-10 |website=The Japan Times |language=en}}</ref> Some of the agrochemical companies in the U.S. have compensated U.S. veterans, but not to Vietnamese victims.<ref name=":2" />

===New Jersey Agent Orange Commission===
In 1980, New Jersey created the New Jersey Agent Orange Commission, the first state commission created to study its effects. The commission's research project in association with [[Rutgers University]] was called "The Pointman Project". It was disbanded by Governor [[Christine Todd Whitman]] in 1996.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Prestin|first1=Terry|title=Agent Orange Panel Closes|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/03/nyregion/new-jersey-daily-briefing-agent-orange-panel-closes.html|access-date=13 September 2014|work=The New York Times|at=Section B; page 1; column 1|date=July 3, 1996|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140913214450/http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/03/nyregion/new-jersey-daily-briefing-agent-orange-panel-closes.html|archive-date=13 September 2014|url-status=live}}</ref> During the first phase of the project, commission researchers devised ways to determine trace dioxin levels in blood. Prior to this, such levels could only be found in the [[adipose tissue|adipose (fat) tissue]]. The project studied dioxin (TCDD) levels in blood as well as in adipose tissue in a small group of Vietnam veterans who had been exposed to Agent Orange and compared them to those of a matched control group; the levels were found to be higher in the exposed group.<ref>{{cite journal |first1=Peter C. |last1=Kahn |first2=Michael |last2=Gochfeld |first3=Martin |last3=Nygren |first4=Marianne |last4=Hansson |first5=Christoffer |last5=Rappe |first6=Henry |last6=Velez |first7=Therese |last7=Ghent-Guenther |first8=Wayne P. |last8=Wilson |title=Dioxins and Dibenzofurans in Blood and Adipose Tissue of Agent Orange—Exposed Vietnam Veterans and Matched Controls |journal=JAMA |volume=259 |issue=11 |date=March 18, 1988 |pages=1661–7 |doi=10.1001/jama.1988.03720110023029|pmid=3343772}}</ref> The second phase of the project continued to examine and compare dioxin levels in various groups of Vietnam veterans, including [[United States Army|Soldiers]], [[United States Marine Corps|Marines]], and [[Brownwater Navy|Brownwater Naval]] personnel.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yyvmcMsNnB4C&q=The+Pointman+Project+rutgers&pg=PA30|title=Encyclopedia of the Veteran in America|last=Pencak|first=William|publisher=ABC-CLIO|year=2009|isbn=978-0-313-08759-2|page=30|access-date=February 11, 2022|archive-date=November 26, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211126071609/https://books.google.com/books?id=yyvmcMsNnB4C&q=The+Pointman+Project+rutgers&pg=PA30|url-status=live}}</ref>

===U.S. Congress===
In 1991, Congress enacted the [[Agent Orange Act of 1991|Agent Orange Act]], giving the [[United States Department of Veterans Affairs|Department of Veterans Affairs]] the authority to declare certain conditions "presumptive" to exposure to Agent Orange/dioxin, making these veterans who served in Vietnam eligible to receive treatment and compensation for these conditions.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/ |author=Office of Public Health and Environmental Hazards |title=Agent Orange |publisher=United States Department of Veterans Affairs |date=2009-11-11 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091101154548/http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/ |archive-date=2009-11-01}}</ref> The same law required the [[National Academy of Sciences]] to periodically review the science on dioxin and herbicides used in Vietnam to inform the [[Secretary of Veterans Affairs]] about the strength of the scientific evidence showing association between exposure to Agent Orange/dioxin and certain conditions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ocga/laws/PL102-4.asp |title=PL 102-4 and The National Academy of Sciences |publisher=The National Academies |date=1981-11-03 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120803022853/http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ocga/laws/PL102-4.asp |archive-date=2012-08-03}}</ref> The authority for the National Academy of Sciences reviews and addition of any new diseases to the presumptive list by the VA expired in 2015 under the sunset clause of the Agent Orange Act of 1991.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/radiation/dir/mstreet/commeet/meet3/brief3.gfr/tab_g/br3g1f.txt |title=Agent Orange Act of 1991 |publisher=[[George Washington University]] |access-date=2017-03-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170201132816/http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/radiation/dir/mstreet/commeet/meet3/brief3.gfr/tab_g/br3g1f.txt |archive-date=2017-02-01}}</ref> Through this process, the list of 'presumptive' conditions has grown since 1991, and currently the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has listed [[prostate cancer]], respiratory cancers, [[multiple myeloma]], [[type II diabetes mellitus]], [[Hodgkin's disease]], [[non-Hodgkin's lymphoma]], soft tissue sarcoma, [[chloracne]], [[porphyria cutanea tarda]], [[peripheral neuropathy]], [[chronic lymphocytic leukemia]], and [[spina bifida]] in children of veterans exposed to Agent Orange as conditions associated with exposure to the herbicide. This list now includes B cell leukemias, such as [[hairy cell leukemia]], [[Parkinson's disease]] and [[ischemic heart disease]], these last three having been added on August 31, 2010. Several highly placed individuals in government are voicing concerns about whether some of the diseases on the list should, in fact, actually have been included.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/08/31/aging_vets_costs_concern_obamas_deficit_co_chair|first=Mike |last=Baker|title=Aging vets' costs concern Obama's deficit co-chair|work=Boston.com|agency=[[Associated Press]]|date=2010-08-31|access-date=2017-03-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170521144122/http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/08/31/aging_vets_costs_concern_obamas_deficit_co_chair/|archive-date=2017-05-21|url-status=live}}</ref>

In 2011, an appraisal of the 20-year long ''Air Force Health Study'' that began in 1982 indicates that the results of the AFHS as they pertain to Agent Orange, do not provide evidence of disease in the Operation Ranch Hand veterans caused by "their elevated levels of exposure to Agent Orange".<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Buffler|first1=Patricia A.|last2=Ginevan|first2=Michael E.|last3=Mandel|first3=Jack S.|last4=Watkins|first4=Deborah K.|date=2011-09-01|title=The Air Force Health Study: An Epidemiologic Retrospective|journal=Annals of Epidemiology|language=en|volume=21|issue=9|pages=673–687|doi=10.1016/j.annepidem.2011.02.001|pmid=21441038|issn=1047-2797}}</ref>

The VA initially denied the applications of post-Vietnam C-123 aircrew veterans because as veterans without "boots on the ground" service in Vietnam, they were not covered under VA's interpretation of "exposed". In June 2015, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs issued an Interim final rule providing presumptive service connection for post-Vietnam C-123 aircrews, maintenance staff and aeromedical evacuation crews. The VA now provides medical care and disability compensation for the recognized list of Agent Orange illnesses.<ref>{{cite press release|url=http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/includes/viewPDF.cfm?id=2714|title=VA Expands Disability Benefits for Air Force Personnel Exposed to Contaminated C-123 Aircraft|publisher=United States Department of Veterans Affairs|date=2015-06-18|access-date=2017-03-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228123649/http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/includes/viewPDF.cfm?id=2714|archive-date=2016-12-28|url-status=live}}</ref>

===U.S.–Vietnamese government negotiations===
In 2002, Vietnam and the U.S. held a joint conference on Human Health and Environmental Impacts of Agent Orange. Following the conference, the U.S. [[National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences]] (NIEHS) began scientific exchanges between the U.S. and Vietnam, and began discussions for a joint research project on the human health impacts of Agent Orange.{{sfn|Young|2009|p=310}} These negotiations broke down in 2005, when neither side could agree on the research protocol and the research project was canceled. More progress has been made on the environmental front. In 2005, the first U.S.-Vietnam workshop on remediation of dioxin was held.{{sfn|Young|2009|p=310}}

Starting in 2005, the EPA began to work with the Vietnamese government to measure the level of dioxin at the Da Nang Air Base. Also in 2005, the Joint Advisory Committee on Agent Orange, made up of representatives of Vietnamese and U.S. government agencies, was established. The committee has been meeting yearly to explore areas of scientific cooperation, technical assistance and [[environmental remediation]] of dioxin.<ref>{{cite press release |url = http://vietnam.usembassy.gov/pr081209.html |title = US, Vietnam to Hold Fourth Joint Advisory Meeting on Agent Orange/Dioxin |publisher=Embassy of the United States, Hanoi |access-date = August 11, 2011|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20111015102640/http://vietnam.usembassy.gov/pr081209.html|archive-date = October 15, 2011}}</ref>

A breakthrough in the diplomatic stalemate on this issue occurred as a result of United States President [[George W. Bush]]'s state visit to Vietnam in November 2006. In the joint statement, President Bush and [[President Triet]] agreed "further joint efforts to address the environmental contamination near former dioxin storage sites would make a valuable contribution to the continued development of their bilateral relationship."<ref>{{Cite press release|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eap/rls/prs/76322.htm|title=Joint Statement Between the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the United States of America |publisher=United States Department of State |access-date=2017-03-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170330081119/https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eap/rls/prs/76322.htm|archive-date=2017-03-30|url-status=live}}</ref> On May 25, 2007, President Bush signed the [[U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007]] into law for the [[Iraq War|wars in Iraq]] and [[War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)|Afghanistan]] that included an earmark of $3 million specifically for funding for programs for the remediation of dioxin 'hotspots' on former U.S. [[military bases]], and for public health programs for the surrounding communities;{{sfn|Martin|2009|p=2}} some authors consider this to be completely inadequate, pointing out that the Da Nang Airbase alone will cost $14 million to clean up, and that three others are estimated to require $60 million for cleanup.<ref name="fawthrop-suffering" /> The appropriation was renewed in the fiscal year 2009 and again in FY 2010. An additional $12 million was appropriated in the fiscal year 2010 in the Supplemental Appropriations Act and a total of $18.5 million appropriated for fiscal year 2011.<ref>{{cite press release |last=Leahy |first=Patrick |url = http://leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=aaea045d-2239-4e5d-bc0e-87575d887daa |title = Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy on the Legacy of Agent Orange |access-date = August 11, 2011 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120325221817/http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=aaea045d-2239-4e5d-bc0e-87575d887daa |archive-date = March 25, 2012 |url-status = live}}</ref>

Secretary of State [[Hillary Clinton]] stated during a visit to Hanoi in October 2010 that the U.S. government would begin work on the clean-up of dioxin contamination at the Da Nang Airbase.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072200713.html|title=In Hanoi, Clinton highlights closer ties with Vietnam, pushes for human rights|last=DeYoung|first=Karen|date=2010-07-22|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=2017-03-29|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170330174330/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072200713.html|archive-date=2017-03-30|url-status=live}}</ref> In June 2011, a ceremony was held at Da Nang airport to mark the start of U.S.-funded decontamination of dioxin hotspots in Vietnam. Thirty-two million dollars has so far been allocated by the U.S. Congress to fund the program.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13808753|title=US helps Vietnam to eradicate deadly Agent Orange|date=2011-06-17|work=BBC News|access-date=2017-03-29|language=en-GB|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170701222125/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13808753|archive-date=2017-07-01|url-status=live}}</ref> A $43 million project began in the summer of 2012, as Vietnam and the U.S. forge closer ties to boost trade and counter China's rising influence in the disputed [[South China Sea]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Ives|first=Mike|title=US starts landmark Agent Orange cleanup in Vietnam|url=https://news.yahoo.com/us-starts-landmark-agent-orange-cleanup-vietnam-100542424.html|work=Yahoo! News|access-date=8 August 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120810080122/http://news.yahoo.com/us-starts-landmark-agent-orange-cleanup-vietnam-100542424.html|archive-date=10 August 2012|url-status=live}}</ref>

===Vietnamese victims class action lawsuit in U.S. courts===
On January 31, 2004, a [[victim's rights group]], the Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange/dioxin (VAVA), filed a lawsuit in the [[United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York]] in [[Brooklyn]], against several U.S. companies for liability in causing personal injury, by developing, and producing the chemical, and claimed that the use of Agent Orange violated the [[Hague Convention of 1907|1907 Hague Convention on Land Warfare]], 1925 [[Geneva Protocol]], and the 1949 [[Geneva Conventions]]. Dow Chemical and Monsanto were the two largest producers of Agent Orange for the U.S. military and were named in the suit, along with the dozens of other companies (Diamond Shamrock, Uniroyal, Thompson Chemicals, Hercules, etc.). On March 10, 2005, Judge [[Jack B. Weinstein]] of the Eastern District – who had presided over the 1984 U.S. veterans class-action lawsuit – dismissed the lawsuit, ruling there was no legal basis for the plaintiffs' claims. He concluded Agent Orange was not considered a poison under [[international humanitarian law]] at the time of its use by the U.S.; the U.S. was not prohibited from using it as a herbicide; and the companies which produced the substance were not liable for the method of its use by the government.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cou_us_rule76|title=United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Practice Relating to Rule 76. Herbicides |website=Customary IHL Database |publisher=International Committee of the Red Cross|access-date=2020-02-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307030911/https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cou_us_rule76|archive-date=2016-03-07|url-status=live}}</ref> In the dismissal statement issued by Weinstein, he wrote "The prohibition extended only to gases deployed for their asphyxiating or toxic effects on man, not to herbicides designed to affect plants that may have unintended harmful side-effects on people."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/10/nyregion/agent-orange-case-for-millions-of-vietnamese-is-dismissed.html|title=Agent Orange Case for Millions of Vietnamese Is Dismissed|date=2005-03-10|work=The New York Times|access-date=2017-03-29|issn=0362-4331|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170420095400/http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/10/nyregion/agent-orange-case-for-millions-of-vietnamese-is-dismissed.html|archive-date=2017-04-20|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite court|url=http://www.vn-agentorange.org/10_03_05_agentorange.pdf |litigants=MDL No. 381 |date=2005 |court=E.D.N.Y. |opinion=No. 04-CV-400 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191014195438/http://www.vn-agentorange.org/10_03_05_agentorange.pdf|archive-date=14 October 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

{{blockquote|The [[U.S. Department of Defense|Department of Defense]]'s [[DARPA|Advanced Research Project Agency]]'s (ARPA) [[Project AGILE]] was instrumental in the United States' development of herbicides as a military weapon, an undertaking inspired by the British use of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T to destroy jungle-grown crops and bushes during the Malayan emergency. The United States considered British precedent in deciding that the use of defoliants was a legally accepted tactic of war. On November 24, 1961, [[U.S. Secretary of State|Secretary of State]] [[Dean Rusk]] advised [[U.S. President|President]] [[John F. Kennedy]] that herbicide use in Vietnam would be lawful, saying that "[t]he use of defoliant does not violate any rule of international law concerning the conduct of chemical warfare and is an accepted tactic of war. Precedent has been established by the British during the emergency in Malaya in their use of helicopters for destroying crops by chemical spraying."<ref>{{cite book |title=The Literary Cold War, 1945 to Vietnam |url=https://archive.org/details/literarycoldwarv00piet |url-access=limited |first=Adam |last=Piette |date=May 25, 2009 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/literarycoldwarv00piet/page/n209 201]–202 |publisher=[[Edinburgh University Press]] |isbn=978-0-7486-3527-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Rusk |first=Dean |url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v01/d275 |section=Memorandum From the Secretary of State to the President |title=Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963 |volume=I, Vietnam, 1961 |publisher=United States Department of State |date=November 24, 1961 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181211050023/https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v01/d275|archive-date=2018-12-11|url-status=live |oclc=220954388}}</ref>}}

Author and activist [[George Jackson (activist)|George Jackson]] had written previously that:<blockquote>If the Americans were guilty of war crimes for using Agent Orange in Vietnam, then the British would be also guilty of war crimes as well since they were the first nation to deploy the use of herbicides and defoliants in warfare and used them on a large scale throughout the Malayan Emergency. Not only was there no outcry by other states in response to the United Kingdom's use, but the U.S. viewed it as establishing a precedent for the use of herbicides and defoliants in [[jungle warfare]].</blockquote>The U.S. government was also not a party in the lawsuit because of [[sovereign immunity]], and the court ruled the chemical companies, as contractors of the U.S. government, shared the same immunity. The case was appealed and heard by the [[Second Circuit Court of Appeals]] in [[Manhattan]] on June 18, 2007. Three judges on the court upheld Weinstein's ruling to dismiss the case. They ruled that, though the herbicides contained a [[Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins|dioxin]] (a known poison), they were not intended to be used as a poison on humans. Therefore, they were not considered a [[chemical weapon]] and thus not a violation of international law. A further review of the case by the entire panel of judges of the Court of Appeals also confirmed this decision. The lawyers for the Vietnamese filed a petition to the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] to hear the case. On March 2, 2009, the Supreme Court denied [[certiorari]] and declined to reconsider the ruling of the Court of Appeals.<ref>{{cite court |url=https://www.asser.nl/upload/documents/DomCLIC/Docs/NLP/US/AgentOrange_AppealsJudgement_22-2-2008.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.asser.nl/upload/documents/DomCLIC/Docs/NLP/US/AgentOrange_AppealsJudgement_22-2-2008.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |litigants=Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin v. Dow Chemical |date=2008 |court=2d Cir. |opinion=No. 05-1953-cv}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/08-470.htm |title=Docket No. 08-470 |date=March 2, 2009 |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |access-date=February 1, 2020 |archive-date=March 8, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308181023/https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=%2Fdocketfiles%2F08-470.htm |url-status=live}}</ref>

===Help for those affected in Vietnam===
To assist those who have been affected by Agent Orange/dioxin, the Vietnamese have established "peace villages", which each host between 50 and 100 victims, giving them medical and psychological help. As of 2006, there were 11 such villages, thus granting some social protection to fewer than a thousand victims. U.S. veterans of the war in Vietnam and individuals who are aware and sympathetic to the impacts of Agent Orange have supported these programs in Vietnam. An international group of veterans from the U.S. and its allies during the Vietnam War working with their former enemy—veterans from the Vietnam Veterans Association—established the Vietnam Friendship Village outside of [[Hanoi]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.vietnamfriendship.org|title=Vietnam Friendship Village Project|access-date=August 18, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080917012142/http://www.vietnamfriendship.org/|archive-date=17 September 2008 |url-status=live}}</ref>

The center provides medical care, rehabilitation and vocational training for children and veterans from Vietnam who have been affected by Agent Orange. In 1998, The [[Vietnam Red Cross]] established the Vietnam Agent Orange Victims Fund to provide direct assistance to families throughout Vietnam that have been affected. In 2003, the Vietnam Association of Victims of Agent Orange (VAVA) was formed. In addition to filing the lawsuit against the chemical companies, VAVA provides medical care, rehabilitation services and financial assistance to those injured by Agent Orange.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://vava.org.vn/|title=Hội Nạn nhân chất độc da cam/dioxin Việt Nam|trans-title=Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin |website=vava.org.vn|language=vi-VN|access-date=2017-03-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170326221003/http://vava.org.vn/|archive-date=2017-03-26|url-status=live}}</ref>

The Vietnamese government provides small monthly stipends to more than 200,000 Vietnamese believed affected by the herbicides; this totaled $40.8 million in 2008. The Vietnam Red Cross has raised more than $22 million to assist the ill or disabled, and several U.S. foundations, United Nations agencies, European governments and nongovernmental organizations have given a total of about $23 million for site cleanup, reforestation, health care and other services to those in need.<ref>{{cite report |author=Ngô Quang Xuân |title=Statement to the United States House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee of Asia, Pacific and Global Environment |date=June 2009 |page=3}}</ref>

Vuong Mo of the Vietnam News Agency described one of the centers:<ref>{{cite web|title=Living with the sufferings|url=https://vietnam.vnanet.vn/english/living-with-the-sufferings/17917.html|website=vietnam.vnanet.vn|date=2005-12-07|access-date=2021-01-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210103181452/https://vietnam.vnanet.vn/english/living-with-the-sufferings/17917.html|archive-date=2021-01-03|url-status=live}}</ref>

<blockquote>May is 13, but she knows nothing, is unable to talk fluently, nor walk with ease due to for her bandy legs. Her father is dead and she has four elder brothers, all mentally retarded&nbsp;... The students are all disabled, retarded and of different ages. Teaching them is a hard job. They are of the 3rd grade but many of them find it hard to do the reading. Only a few of them can. Their pronunciation is distorted due to their twisted lips and their memory is quite short. They easily forget what they've learned&nbsp;... In the Village, it is quite hard to tell the kids' exact ages. Some in their twenties have a physical statures as small as the 7- or 8-years-old. They find it difficult to feed themselves, much less have mental ability or physical capacity for work. No one can hold back the tears when seeing the heads turning round unconsciously, the bandy arms managing to push the spoon of food into the mouths with awful difficulty&nbsp;... Yet they still keep smiling, singing in their great innocence, at the presence of some visitors, craving for something beautiful.</blockquote>

On June 16, 2010, members of [[the U.S.-Vietnam Dialogue Group on Agent Orange/Dioxin]] unveiled a comprehensive 10-year Declaration and Plan of Action to address the toxic legacy of Agent Orange and other herbicides in Vietnam. The Plan of Action was released as an Aspen Institute publication and calls upon the U.S. and Vietnamese governments to join with other governments, foundations, businesses, and nonprofits in a partnership to clean up dioxin "hot spots" in Vietnam and to expand humanitarian services for people with disabilities there.<ref name="chicagotribune.com">{{cite news |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/agentorange/chi-agent-orange-actionplandec08,0,7945266.story |title=Public-private group has plan in the works to resolve issue |work=Chicago Tribune |first=Jason |last=Grotto |date=2009-12-08 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130522082810/http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/agentorange/chi-agent-orange-actionplandec08,0,7945266.story |archive-date=2013-05-22 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Margie |last=Mason |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna37735860 |title=Plan addresses Agent Orange legacy in Vietnam |work=NBC News |date=2010-06-16 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305083530/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/37735860/ |archive-date=2016-03-05 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1001.spc-rep.html |title=Special Report: Agent Orange |magazine=Washington Monthly |date=January–February 2010 |access-date=2012-07-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120901175643/http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1001.spc-rep.html |archive-date=2012-09-01 |pages=22–40}}</ref> On September 16, 2010, Senator [[Patrick Leahy]] acknowledged the work of the Dialogue Group by releasing a statement on the floor of the United States Senate. The statement urges the U.S. government to take the Plan of Action's recommendations into account in developing a multi-year plan of activities to address the Agent Orange/dioxin legacy.<ref>{{cite book |title=Congressional Record—Senate |page=S7168 |date=September 16, 2010 |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2010-09-16/pdf/CREC-2010-09-16-pt1-PgS7168-3.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170312201512/https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2010-09-16/pdf/CREC-2010-09-16-pt1-PgS7168-3.pdf |archive-date=2017-03-12 |publisher=United States Government Publishing Office}}</ref>

{{Clear}}