Agent Orange: America's Forgotten Responsibility

Agent Orange is a deadly dioxin that was sprayed by the US across 2 million acres of Vietnamese land during the Vietnam War of 1955. Not only has this dioxin caused detrimental damage to the environment, but also to decades of human life. The dioxin has affected generations of Vietnamese people and children born with various illnesses and disabilities. Although the U.S has never accepted accountability for the damage caused by Agent Orange (AO), the utilization of the chemical is widely recognized by scholars as chemical warfare. The U.S has enjoyed "forgotten responsibility" for too long concerning the crime of chemical warfare…Accepting accountability and providing symbolic reparations would bolster the US to accept legal liability for victims' reparations concerning Vietnamese victims of AO. Furthermore, the complexities of victimhood should be analyzed concerning reparations schemes as women victims of AO suffer complex forms of stigma and marginalization. Thus, women victims need urgent socio-economic empowerment in Vietnam. Reparation schemes should aim to achieve transformative justice and better the lives of Agent Orange victims in Vietnam, rather than providing one-off funds. Although justice can never fully be achieved for the suffering caused by AO- the acceptance of liability, women's socio-economic empowerment, and transformative mechanisms of justice are reparations that the US should provide to Vietnamese victims…

Background

The Vietnam War tells the harrowing tale of a dioxin that has affected millions of lives and generations of people and children to this day. For ten years spanning from 1961-1971, the United States of America sprayed nearly 20 million gallons of chemical substance over more than two million acres of Vietnam land, to defoliate the landscape and prevent food supplies from reaching the Vietnamese veterans (Martini, 2012). The chemicals sprayed consisted of Agent Orange- a substance that to this day is considered to be one of deadliest toxins in existence. Martini (2012) states that ever since the world has come to know of the utilization of Agent Orange as a weapon of war, veterans, people, and scientists around the world have strived to understand the implications of Agent Orange and how it has affected people even long after the end of the war. However, despite the efforts sought in understanding this deadly dioxin, the chemical has continued to plague the world with questions, rather than definite answers. As stated by Martini (2012, p. 1), "Despite decades of study, questions of exposure, causality, compensation , and justice remain at the forefront of scientific, legal, political, and diplomatic debates over the legacies of the chemical war"...

The US has never taken responsibility or accountability for Agent Orange. Dung (2022) stated that Agent Orange was not deployed to inflict harm or death on human beings, and therefore it was a "tactical defoliant, not a chemical weapon (para, 1). However, the article acknowledges that the dioxin has been linked to various health problems and illnesses such as diabetes, cancer, and various other illnesses and birth defects. Martini (2012) sheds light on one of the many orphanages in Vietnam, the Phu My Orphanage for disabled children who are considered to be third and fourth generation victims of Agent Orange. Furthermore, according to estimations made by the Vietnam Red Cross, 3 million people in Vietnam (also counting over 150 000 children) are affected by Agent Orange (Dung, 2022). Research also acknowledges the unique stigma faced by women victims of Agent Orange who bear disabled children, are infertile or who are disabled themselves and therefore cannot participate in traditional gender roles (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). Thus, the forms of victimhood and damage caused by the dioxin have been extensive.

The utilization of the dioxin was banned in 1971 after the Nixon administration was forced to disclose the detrimental effects of the dioxin that had been discovered through government sponsored research (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). The US government's reports found significantly higher levels of the Agent Orange dioxin in the blood of Vietnamese civilians residing in the South of Vietnam (where the dioxin was sprayed heavily) compared to Vietnamese residents in the North. "In the US, the National Academy of Sciences has enlisted diseases found to have ‘sufficient’ or ‘suggestive’ evidence of an association with AO. In 2000, sufficient evidence exists of soft-tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin’s disease and chloracne; and suggestive evidence of respiratory cancers (lung, bronchus, larynx, trachea), prostate cancer, multiple myeloma, acute and subacute transient peripheral neuropathy, porphyria cutanea tarda, type 2 diabetes, spina bifida and acute myelogenous in the children of veterans" (Palmer, 2004, p. 2). Therefore, there is sufficient evidence and correlations suggesting an unignorable link between exposure to the dioxin and various diseases and disabilities that have resulted afterward…

Thus, the question remains...Why won't the US take direct accountability for the suffering that has been caused by Agent Orange? When referring to transitional justice and the rules of war, the utilization of heavily poisonous agents has been condemned due to violations they pose to principles of war. According to Palmer (2004), this primarily refers to "the principles of unnecessary suffering and discrimination between combatant and non-combatant" (p. 2). The aforementioned author acknowledges the tension between international law that deals with protecting war victims, and international law that aims at preserving state sovereignty. Palmer (2004) states that there is a voluntary obligation to prosecute violators that have inflicted harm. Prosecution is also based on the perceived responsibility of fault for a particular crime (and in the case of Agent Orange, the US has not acknowledged responsibility for the human suffering caused by the dioxin). Furthermore, the author simultaneously emphasizes the constrained capacity of Vietnamese Agent Orange victims to demand compensation from the US. "This has translated into a few responsible persons being brought to justice and the reparation of victims of war reduced to diplomatic negotiations between states and various other supports such as non- governmental or intergovernmental organizations" (Palmer, 2004, p. 2). This indicates that state sovereignty is privileged over the acknowledgment of war crimes resulting from Agent Orange. U.S sovereignty has allowed the state to choose what they bear responsibility for, and in the case of Agent Orange the US has only chosen to bear mild accountability for environmental damage (not human suffering). However, the term "ecocide" created by professor Galston of Yale University indicated that any purposeful harm inflicted on the environment must be seen as eventually leading to inevitable human suffering (Dung, 2022, para 5). Although the full effects of Agent Orange are unknown, the dioxin's ability to persist in future generations of victims means that the moral responsibility for the US to accept accountability should not diminish over time...and victims of war should be defined with acknowledgement of the unique and multifaceted forms of discrimination faced by certain victims such as women. Furthermore, the US should work towards providing sustainable reparations that seek to achieve justice that is as distributive and transformative as possible.

U.S Accountability

At present, the US has still refused to accept accountability for the human suffering caused by Agent Orange in Vietnam. Despite the little and seemingly insignificant monetary compensation provided by the US government to Vietnam, material reparations alone are not enough. The US should take accountability for their actions which have inflicted grave suffering on generations of innocent people in Vietnam due to the use of war chemicals. To admit accountability should be the first step in providing a valuable symbolic reparation to the Victims of Vietnam who face not just economic challenges but also harsh forms of stigma due to the disabilities that hinder Vietnamese victims' socio-economic opportunities. Furthermore, the lack of accountability by the US shows grave insensitivity to the suffering that they inflicted upon generations during and long after the war. The defense used by the US government continuously reverts to the fact that there has been no definite connection made between the dioxin sprayed by the US across parts of Vietnam, and the various illnesses that have been linked to Agent Orange (Dung, 2022). However, existing evidence is abundant, which makes the continued denial of the US morally illogical.

Ngyuen and Hughes (2017) touch on the overwhelming evidence regarding illnesses associated with Vietnamese soldiers' exposure to Agent Orange. Despite having healthy children before entering the war, children conceived after the war in areas heavily sprayed with Agent Orange have reportedly high birth-deformity rates (Ngyuen and Hughes, 2017). Furthermore, Ngyuen and Hughes reflect on the fact that the US government has done more to acknowledge and support its own veterans by allocating $13.3 billion to cover diseases that the Secretary of Veterans affairs has deemed related to the dioxin. However, when it comes to the damage done to the Vietnamese, congress donated a mere $12 million- from which only a little was allocated for health (Ngyuen and Hughes, 2017). As suggested by Ngyuen and Hughes (2017), the US prefers to focus only on taking responsibility for the damage caused to the environment, and providing monetary compensation for environmental remediation rather than health. The US government later provided $35 million a year for ten years for health purposes related to the AO dioxin, however, the $350 million is nothing compared to the monstrous amount of money spent to produce, transport, and spray Agent Orange in Vietnam (Ngyuen and Hughes, 2017). Yet, there seems to be a reluctance to provide monetary reparations for victims of Agent Orange specifically as this may be an indirect indicator that the US does recognize the responsibility they hold for the life shattering chemical that they dumped in Vietnam with such abandon…

U.S Reasons For Not Taking Accountability

One of the questions that may be pondered by the international community is why the U.S still refuses to take accountability for Agent Orange despite the overwhelming evidence that links AO to illnesses and disabilities. Ngyuen and Hughes (2017) believe that the reason for U.S reluctance is not due to a significant gap in scientific evidence, but rather the indifference that American policymakers choose to have concerning Vietnamese people. Vietnamese victims are evocative of a horrific war, and therefore these victims tend to be removed from the American public (Ngyuen and Hughes, 2017). It is true that images of Vietnamese victims and children born with illnesses and various disabilities are hard to stomach because of how these visuals represent the consequences of the Vietnam war. Therefore, it would be easier for Americans to keep a distance and not look at all...

Furthermore, as stated previously, the inefficient monetary compensation provided by the US government may be due to the inextricable link between monetary compensation and accountability. According to Jemima (2016), acknowledging the need for reparations and creating reparations schemes requires governments to acknowledge that somebody or a collective group has been horribly wronged. Admitting this would be harmful for the U.S's reputation as they have denied any legal responsibility towards Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange for years now.

Jemima (2016) sheds light on the two types of victims' reparations, namely symbolic reparations and material reparations. If the U.S were to accept accountability and provide a public apology for the deployment of Agent Orange, this would be a powerful symbolic reparation. Of course, as Jemima (2016) states, both forms of victim reparations are important. In the same way that material reparations such as monetary compensation without any symbolic reparation would be insensitive towards the tragedies faced by the victims, symbolic reparations alone could be considered as empty words incapable of reversing any of the harmful damage done to human life....However, this paper argues that if the U.S were to accept accountability for Agent Orange and the health damages it has causes, and if they were to provide a public apology...there would possibly be more pressure from the international community and human rights activists for the U.S to create an annual budget and reparation scheme that would provide monetary compensation that aims to be more transformative than one-off donations towards certain victims. This paper is thus in agreement with Jemima (2016)'s statement suggesting that reparations provided should seek to achieve transitional justice which is transformative by helping victims to improve their lives rather than returning victims to their original circumstances prior to the deployment of Agent Orange. Socio-economic empowerment is one of the transformative goals of transitional justice that Jemima (2016) suggests. In this case, accepting responsibility and providing annual funding for socio-economic empowerment and opportunity creation for victims, training programs, job creation etc, as well as funds for epigenetic research about hereditary impacts of Agent Orange are some of the ways that social stigma towards victims may be deconstructed and positive futures for victims can be created…

Constrained Ability to Seek Address

There are international laws that deal with reparation of war crimes. There is an almost universal jurisdiction that exists which states that victims of war crimes must be provided with the necessary reparations. However, if a state is morally incapable of punishing perpetrators of human rights violations, then it is also likely that there will be a lack of willingness to ensure necessary compensation for victims (Palmer, 2004). Furthermore, according to international law there is no clear legal compulsion that forces the guilty state to provide victim reparations. Palmer (2004) states that "while the link between individual accountability and compensation for individual victims is long mandated in international law, in practice individuals are themselves constrained in their ability to seek redress for war crimes" (p. 3). Thus, victims are oftentimes required to claim their human rights, when no one else is willing to fight for them. This is why the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange are referred to as "the forgotten". The victims' lack of ability to seek address seems to further the U.S habit of being indifferent to accountability concerning Agent Orange. Furthermore, there seems to be a lack of push by the international community for more transformative reparations to be provided by the U.S government. Thus, the road to justice for Agent Orange victims is clearly shaky and further hindered by the U.S government's decision to continuously turn a blind eye towards their detrimental decisions during the Vietnam War of 1955...

Stigma Faced by Women Victims

There seems to be a gap in research regarding the unique and diverse forms of stigma and discrimination that women victims of Agent Orange face in Vietnam, as well as a gap in specific reparations that can counter the gendered-stigma that exists. While stigma is felt by all victims, women are further marginalized due to traditional gender roles that have existed for centuries. According to d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton (2012), there is very little escape from stigma for women whose lives have been hindered by the dioxin in some way. Women who are born with disabilities face discrimination for not being able to participate in normalized gendered roles such as wifehood and motherhood etc ( (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). Furthermore, the authors also note that stigma is felt by women without disabilities who should still be considered as victims because of how the dioxin has personally affected their lives. Infertile women, women who give birth to disabled children, women who give up their children, as well as women who choose to have abortions are all victims of harsh social stigma and marginalization (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). Therefore, the marginalization faced by women victims is complex and extremely hard to escape as women's worth in society is measured by familial conditions and motherhood. Due to this, "women face economic, political, and social burdens when bearing children with disabilities connected to agent orange, forcing them to make controversial decisions for the future of their families" (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012, p. 46). Oftentimes these controversial decisions refer to the abandoning of children born with disabilities. Reports suggested that 90% of children born with disabilities in the year 2012 were abandoned (d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). This proves that women victims are in dire need of socio-economic empowerment...

While there has been no definite proof that Agent Orange is the sole cause for generations of children born with disabilities in Vietnam, there is proof that women exposed to the dioxin are biologically affected by Agent Orange. Tuyet and Johansson (2001)'s reports found that the Agent Orange dioxin can accumulate in women's breast milk. Babies may absorb more than 90% of the dioxin when they drink milk from women who've been exposed to the dioxin. "Evaluations of the impact of elevated dioxin levels in mothers’ blood and breastmilk show that the most adverse associations are found within utero-exposure through the umbilical cord, including neurological effects, low birthweight and intrauterine growth retardation" (Tuyet and Johansson, 2001, p. 157). Thus, the authors view the utilization of Agent Orange as chemical warfare, and furthermore state the highly toxic dioxin does have a destructive effect on women's reproductive systems (Tuyet and Johansson, 2001, p. 157). Despite the evidence that presents itself, the US has yet to provide sufficient reparations that specifically focuses on the grievances of women victims. d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton (2012) note that the US wants scientific evidence linking individual deformities and illnesses to Agent Orange. Consequently, the effects of Agent Orange on reproductive systems and the effect it has on being able to give birth to healthy children is a long-term issue that is difficult to investigate and also is too expensive for victims ( d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton, 2012). This ties in with the issue of responsibility and redress- women victims are not socio-economically empowered enough to seek redress and this aids in U.S indifference to appropriate reparations for victims. As such, justice for victims tends to stay at a stalemate…

Defining Victims

It is clear that women victims of Agent Orange face unprecedented and unique forms of stigma by Vietnamese society. Oftentimes women do not have the tools to seek redress as victims, and d'Aquino, d'Aquino and Sutton (2012) note that economic disparity and poverty are closely linked to Agent Orange victims and the sustained marginalization of women victims specifically. "Even 30 years later, relatively resource-poor young females who belong to ethnic minorities in areas that have been contaminated by Agent Orange still live with the legacy of the war in a way that is often unrecognized" (Yamishita and Tringh, 2022). Seeking justice is hindered by the poverty often faced by women in regions where the presence of the dioxin is still heavily felt. The above paragraphs have indicated various situational circumstances where women are stigmatized - infertility, disabilities, bearing children with disabilities, those who have chosen to have abortions etc...Thus it is clear that unique reparation schemes that have a specialized women's inquiry regarding the specific and gendered grievances of women should be created- and it should emphasize the role that the U.S government should accept in creating such mechanisms as the responsible party for Agent Orange. In order to create an effective reparations scheme, Jemima (2016) believes that it is first essential to identify victims based on their victimhood (the type of suffering they have faced). Using Jemima (2016)'s ideas, in the case of women, one can note that Agent Orange has caused significant personal suffering (damage to body, liberty, and life etc), as well intangible suffering referring to the loss of opportunities for women with disabilities as well as those who have children with illnesses and disabilities linked to Agent Orange. As the author states, it is also important to note that victims have probably suffered multiple forms of human rights violations- which broadens the scale of victim identification as well as the type of reparations they need. Furthermore, mothers with disabled children linked to Agent Orange should be considered as beneficiaries of reparations programs. The operating definition of victim is therefore complex and there does exist a significant research gap when concerning reparations for women victims of AO...However, it is certain that women victims are in urgent need of socio-economic empowerment, and a mixture of symbolic and material reparations should be provided to achieve transformative empowerment.

Suggested Forms of Socio-Economic Empowerment for Women

Despite the US still refusing to accept legal liability to provide strict reparations for raging chemical warfare during the Vietnam War, it is worth noting existing efforts and suggestions for socio-economic empowerment that the US government should help foster and sustain in Vietnam. Dinh (2019) specifically talks about necropolitics and the stigma faced by Vietnamese societies. The author notes that mere macroscale monetary compensations fail to address the irreversibility of damage that Agent Orange has had on Vietnamese peoples anatomies and communities for decades. Dinh (2019) refers to the US deployment of Agent Orange as "slow violence" due to its long term effects (para, 8). The author initially strongly suggests the role of education in providing priceless local support by creating awareness to local communities about the effects that toxin exposure has had on people with disabilities. Dinh (2019) hopes that education will be a key instrument in unraveling the decades of stigma that people and women specifically have faced as victims of Agent Orange. Education can unpack the truth of what Agent Orange is, how it was deployed and how it has affected thousands of lives. Annual funding of community education programs could be a way that the US can help deconstruct the stigma faced by women victims in Vietnam while simultaneously bearing accountability for their role as the perpetrators of chemical warfare.

Furthermore, creation and annual funding of community-level projects such as the Friendship Village is a great way of fostering socio-economic empowerment for women victims in Vietnam. George Mizo, the creator of Friendship Village was an American Veteran who was also exposed to Agent Orange. His goal through the creation of this project was to foster reconciliation, peace, and hope (Schultz, 2011). "Friendship Village’s stated goal of self-sufficiency empowers Vietnamese locals to teach skills or provide work opportunities that can translate into a sustainable resource, especially in impoverished areas" (Dinh, 2019, para 19). Projects such as Friendship Village thus work at deconstructing social exclusion and allowing transformative opportunities to be created for people with disabilities.

Friendship Village is a place where more than 100 disabled children can live and receive job training, rehabilitation, and medical treatment for 2-4 years ( (Schultz, 2011). Furthermore, the project has done a great job of empowering young women victims by providing young girls and boys with embroidery training, vocational training, fishing skills through the creation of the Friendship Villages own sustainable fish farm, as well as various other self-empowerment skills and opportunities (Schultz, 2011). Thus, the project works at justice that is transformative for young women victims as well, as it provides women with opportunities that empower them while simultaneously disempowering social exclusion and gendered-stigma. This also helps the mothers of these children to some extent by alleviating the financial struggles they may have due to the likely possibility of having to provide care for their disabled children throughout their entire lives. Thus, other community-level projects such as The Friendship Village should be created and funded by the US government as a reparations mechanism that aims at providing transformative justice.

However, despite these suggestions, there still exists significant gaps in research about how women victims of Agent Orange specifically can be empowered economically and socially in such impoverished environments. Furthermore, the US still refuses to accept legal liability for victims in Vietnam...Thus any meaningful US reparations for Vietnamese women victims is hard to materialize into reality...The chemical warfare inflicted by the US has resulted in a legacy of damage that has affected women victims in unprecedented ways. This is why a specific women's inquiry that investigates the victimhood of female Agent Orange victims may be necessary, and perhaps the international community needs to play a more stringent role in ensuring that AO victims receive reparations that are more proportional to what they have suffered (although nothing can truly fully restore what has been lost) and can also help them build better futures for themselves.

Discussion

Despite there being implications for compensation for those who have suffered war crimes at the hands of any state, international law lacks the capacity to force perpetrating states to ensure necessary reparations for those that have been harmed. While victims' reparations have long been a mandate of international law, oftentimes victims are constrained in their capacity to seek justice for the crimes they have suffered. Ideally, the U.S should've accepted accountability for Agent Orange decades ago, and should have provided transformative forms of reparations for generational victims of Agent Orange in Vietnam. However, since the reality of the U.S accepting accountability has been dim thus far, alternative forms of redress should be discussed. A more realistic reparations scheme that may deal with redistributive concerns would be the creation of an international donor fund. As suggested by Palmer (2004), "A fund could be administered with strict qualification criteria to disburse damages as per appropriate compensation calculations that better reflect the socio-economic loss incurred by victims" (p. 11). Although state persecution of U.S crimes would be a valuable symbolic reparation for Vietnam victims, this reality is thwarted by a lack of political will...Therefore, Palmer (2004) suggests that the "Vietnam Red Cross Society Fund" be utilized as an international donor fund, that will seek to accumulate donations that directly strive to benefit Vietnamese people affected by Agent Orange. The hope of such a mechanism would be to boost compensation from any willing donors from the international community. Furthermore, the international donor fund should deal with various consequences of Agent Orange victimhood- "welfare loss in terms of loss of earnings, medical expenses, social costs such as lower education, and pain and suffering" (Palmer, 2004, p. 11). Analyzing victimhood should be an important function of an international donor fund. Recognizing victimhood will help ensure that women victim's specific socio-economic needs are grappled with as the stigma women face is complex as victims. For larger damages to health that concern victims who are unable to work and learn, Palmer (2004) recommends funds for the creation of specialized schools that train and empower victims with severe disabilities- for eg. "Mr. Tran Duyen Hai’s workshop in Hanoi. At Hai’s workshop, AO affected persons learn skills of tailoring, embroidery and electrical appliance repair and are assisted in finding jobs after their course" (p. 11). Such projects would bolster the voices of third and fourth generation victims of AO and give them a chance for self-empowerment. Furthermore, an international fund would bolster awareness in the international community regarding the damage caused by AO and how this damage can be combated. Thus, hopefully an international donor fund will help transformative justice to be achieved for Agent Orange victims.

Conclusion

The suffering inflicted by AO can never completely be undone. Families of third and fourth-generation victims will never know what their lives would be like had chemical warfare never been waged on Vietnam in 1961. Despite the complications of proving that the dioxin is the sole reason for illnesses and disabilities borne by Vietnamese children in AO affected areas, an alarming amount of evidence connects generations of victims to the harmful dioxin. Despite this, the U.S has still enjoyed impunity for far too long, and time has blurred the continued suffering caused by AO third and fourth generation victims in Vietnam. The importance of accepting accountability is emphasized as this simultaneously places legal liability on the US to provide victims reparations. Furthermore, various forms of socio-economic empowerment for Vietnamese women victims (through education programs and community projects) should be bolstered by the U.S to combat gendered stigma. Community projects have been a great example of how social exclusion and opportunity creation can help foster transformative justice as it helps victims to live self-empowered lives. Despite such evaluations, there exists a lack of U.S political will which is further aided by victims' lack of capacity to seek reparations. Thus, the certainty of the U.S's role in taking on transformative reparations schemes is uncertain. A more realistic goal would be the creation of an international donor fund to boost compensation from the international community that would be used to bolster distributive justice and self-empowerment opportunities for victims. The issues concerning justice are clearly complex- the lack of politics keeps the US from accepting accountability and providing reparations for victims' health, and a lack of reparations keeps victims in poverty and socio-economic despair which prevents victims from being able to seek address as subjects of international law. In consequence, although the Vietnam war has long ended, the deadly legacy of the war has not...Therefore, US responsibility should not be forgotten…

References

d'Aquino, A, d'Aquino, A, & Sutton, L. (2012) "Agent Orange and Narratives of Suffering," Occam's Razor, 2(5), 36-64. Retrieved from https://cedar.wwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1008 context=orwwu

Dinh, D. N. (2019). "The Aftermath of Agent Orange: Combating Slow Violence, Necropolitics, and Stigma in Vietnamese Communities." Inquiries Journal, 11(12). Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1774

Dung, P, X. (2022). Agent Orange in Vietnam: Legality and US Insensitivity. The Diplomat. Accessed from https://thediplomat.com/2022/04/agent-orange-in-vietnam-legality- and-us-insensitivity/

García-Godos, Jemima (2016). Reparations, In Olivera Simic (ed.), An Introduction to Transitional Justice. Routledge. ISBN 978-1138943216. Chapter 9.

Le Thi Nham Tuyet & Annika Johansson (2001) Impact of chemical warfare with agent orange on women's reproductive lives in Vietnam: A pilot study, Reproductive Health Matters, 9:18, 156-164, DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(01)90102-8

Martini, E.A. (2012). Agent Orange: History, Science, and the Politics of Uncertainty. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.

Michael G. Palmer (2004) Compensation for Vietnam's Agent Orange victims. The International Journal of Human Rights, 8(1), 1-15. DOI: 10.1080/1364298042000212510

Michael G. Palmer (2004) Compensation for Vietnam's Agent Orange victims. The International Journal of Human Rights, 8(1), 1-15. DOI: 10.1080/1364298042000212510

Ngyuen, V. T, & Hughes, R. The Forgotten Victims of Agent Orange. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/15/opinion/agent -orange-vietnam-effects.html

Schultz, C. (2011, March 21). Friendship Village provides support to people affected by Agent Orange. Vietnam Reporting Project. Retrieved from https://vietnamreportingproject.org/2011/05/friendship-village-provides-support-to-people-affected-by-agent-orange/

Wilcox, Fred. (1983). Waiting for an army to die : the tragedy of Agent Orange. New York : Random House

Yamishita, N & Tringh, T. (2022). Long-Term Effects of the Vietnam War: Agent Orange and the Health of Vietnamese People After 30 Years. Asian Economic Journal, 36 (2), 180–202. Retrieved from doi: 10.1111/asej.12265