White phosphorus munitions
White phosphorus munitions are weapons that use one of the common allotropes of the chemical element phosphorus. White phosphorus is used in smoke, illumination, and incendiary munitions, and is commonly the burning element of tracer ammunition. Other common names for white phosphorus munitions include WP and the slang terms Willie Pete and Willie Peter, which are derived from William Peter, the World War II phonetic alphabet rendering of the letters WP, which are military jargon. White phosphorus is pyrophoric (it is ignited by contact with air); burns fiercely; and can ignite cloth, fuel, ammunition, and other combustibles.
In addition to its offensive capabilities, white phosphorus is a highly efficient smoke-producing agent, reacting with air to produce an immediate blanket of phosphorus pentoxide vapour. Smoke-producing white phosphorus munitions are very common, particularly as smoke grenades for infantry, loaded in defensive grenade launchers on tanks and other armoured vehicles, and in the ammunition allotment for artillery and mortars. These create smoke screens to mask friendly forces' movement, position, infrared signatures, and shooting positions. They are often called smoke/marker rounds for their use in marking points of interest, such as a light mortar to designate a target for artillery spotters.
White phosphorus is believed to have been first used by Fenian (Irish nationalist) arsonists in the 19th century, in the form of a solution in carbon disulfide. When the carbon disulfide evaporated, the phosphorus would burst into flames. This mixture was known as "Fenian fire".
In 1916, during an intense struggle over conscription for the First World War, 12 members of the Industrial Workers of the World, a workers union opposed to conscription, were arrested in Sydney, Australia and convicted for using or plotting to use incendiary materials, including phosphorus. It is believed that eight or nine men in this group, known as the Sydney Twelve, had been framed by the police. Most were released in 1920 after an inquiry.
World War I, the inter-war period and World War II
The British Army introduced the first factory-built white phosphorus grenades in late 1916 during the First World War. During the war, white phosphorus mortar bombs, shells, rockets, and grenades were used extensively by American, Commonwealth, and, to a lesser extent, Japanese forces, in both smoke-generating and antipersonnel roles. The Royal Air Force based in Iraq also used white phosphorus bombs in Anbar Province during the Iraqi revolt of 1920.
In the interwar years, the US Army trained using white phosphorus, by artillery shell and air bombardment.
In 1940, when the Nazi invasion of Great Britain seemed imminent, the phosphorus firm of Albright and Wilson suggested that the British government use a material similar to Fenian fire in several expedient incendiary weapons. The only one fielded was the Grenade, No. 76 or Special Incendiary Phosphorus grenade, which consisted of a glass bottle filled with a mixture similar to Fenian fire, plus some latex. It came in two versions, one with a red cap intended to be thrown by hand, and a slightly stronger bottle with a green cap, intended to be launched from the Northover projector, a crude 64 millimetres (2.5 in) launcher using black powder as a propellant. These were improvised anti-tank weapons, hastily fielded in 1940 when the British were awaiting a potential German invasion after losing the bulk of their modern armaments in the Dunkirk evacuation.
At the start of the Normandy campaign, 20% of American 81 mm mortar ammunition consisted of M57 point-detonating bursting smoke rounds using WP filler. At least five American Medal of Honor citations mention their recipients using M15 white phosphorus hand grenades to clear enemy positions, and in the 1944 liberation of Cherbourg alone, a single US mortar battalion, the 87th, fired 11,899 white phosphorus rounds into the city. The US Army and Marines used M2 and M328 WP shells in 107 millimetres (4.2 in) mortars. White phosphorus was widely used by Allied soldiers for breaking up German attacks and creating havoc among enemy troop concentrations during the latter part of the war.
US Sherman tanks carried the M64, a 75mm white phosphorus round intended for screening and artillery spotting, but tank crews found it useful against German tanks such as the Panther that their APC ammunition could not penetrate at long range. Smoke from rounds fired directly at German tanks would be used to blind them, allowing the Shermans to close to a range where their armour-piercing rounds were effective. In addition, due to the turret ventilation systems sucking in fumes, German crews would sometimes be forced to abandon their vehicle: this proved particularly effective against inexperienced crews who, on seeing smoke inside the turret, would assume their tank had caught fire. Smoke was also used for "silhouetting" enemy vehicles, with rounds dropped behind them to produce a better contrast for gunnery.
White phosphorus munitions were used extensively by US forces in Vietnam and by Russian forces in the First Chechen War and Second Chechen War. White phosphorus grenades were used by the US in Vietnam to destroy Viet Cong tunnel complexes as they would burn up all oxygen and suffocate the enemy soldiers sheltering inside. British soldiers also made extensive use of white phosphorus grenades during the Falklands War to clear out Argentine positions as the peaty soil they were constructed on tended to lessen the impact of fragmentation grenades. According to GlobalSecurity.org, during the Battle of Grozny during the First Chechen War in Chechnya, every fourth or fifth Russian artillery or mortar shell fired was a smoke or white phosphorus shell.
Use by US forces in Iraq
In April 2004, during the First Battle of Fallujah, Darrin Mortenson of California's North County Times reported that US forces had used white phosphorus as an incendiary weapon while "never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused". Embedded with the 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, Mortenson described a Marine mortar team using a mixture of white phosphorus and high explosives to shell a cluster of buildings where Iraqi insurgents had been spotted throughout the week. In November 2004, during the Second Battle of Fallujah, Washington Post reporters embedded with Task Force 2-2, Regimental Combat Team 7 stated that they witnessed artillery guns firing white phosphorus projectiles. The March/April 2005 issue of an official Army publication called Field Artillery Magazine reported that "White phosphorus proved to be an effective and versatile munition and a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes. ... We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents using W.P. [white phosphorus] to flush them out and H.E. [high explosives] to take them out".
The US Embassy in Rome denied that US troops had used white phosphorus as a weapon. In November 2005, the US ambassador to the United Kingdom, Robert Tuttle, wrote to The Independent also denying that the United States used white phosphorus as a weapon in Fallujah. However, on 15 November 2005, US Department of Defence spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Barry Venable confirmed to the BBC that US forces had used white phosphorus as an incendiary weapon there. The documentary Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre, produced by RAI TV, said that Iraqi civilians, including women and children, had died of burns caused by white phosphorus during the assault on Fallujah, but this was denied by Venable. Venable also stated "When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on and you wish to get them out of those positions, one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position because the combined effects of the fire and smoke – and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground – will drive them out of the holes so that you can kill them with high explosives."
On 22 November 2005, the Iraqi government stated it would investigate the use of white phosphorus in the battle of Fallujah. On 30 November 2005, General Peter Pace stated that white phosphorus munitions were a "legitimate tool of the military" used to illuminate targets and create smokescreens, saying "It is not a chemical weapon. It is an incendiary. And it is well within the law of war to use those weapons as they're being used, for marking and for screening". Professor Paul Rodgers from the University of Bradford department of Peace and conflict studies said that white phosphorus would probably fall into the category of chemical weapons if it was used directly against people. George Monbiot stated that he believed the firing of white phosphorus by US forces directly at the combatants in Fallujah in order to flush them out so they could then be killed was in contravention of the Chemical Weapons Convention and, therefore, a war crime.
During the 2006 Israel–Lebanon conflict, Israel said that it had used phosphorus shells "against military targets in open ground" in south Lebanon. Israel said that its use of these munitions was permitted under international conventions. However, President of Lebanon Émile Lahoud said that phosphorus shells were used against civilians. The first Lebanese official complaint about the use of phosphorus came from Information Minister Ghazi Aridi.
In its early statements regarding the Gaza War of 2008–2009, the Israeli military denied using WP entirely, saying "The IDF acts only in accordance with what is permitted by international law and does not use white phosphorus." Numerous reports from human rights groups during the war indicated that WP shells were being used by Israeli forces in populated areas.
On 5 January, The Times of London reported that telltale smoke associated with white phosphorus had been seen in the vicinity of Israeli shelling. On 12 January, it was reported that more than 50 patients in Nasser Hospital were being treated for phosphorus burns.
On 15 January, the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in Gaza City was struck by submunitions from Israeli artillery shells, setting fire to pallets of relief materials and igniting several large fuel storage tanks. A UN spokesperson indicated that there were difficulties in extinguishing the fires, stating "You can't put it [white phosphorus] out with traditional methods such as fire extinguishers. You need sand but we do not have any sand in the compound." Senior Israeli defense officials maintain that the shelling was in response to Israeli military personnel being fired upon by Hamas fighters who were in proximity to the UN headquarters, and was used for smoke. The soldiers who ordered the attack were later reprimanded for violating the IDF rules of engagement. The IDF further investigated improper use of WP in the conflict, particularly in one incident in which 20 WP shells were fired in a built-up area of Beit Lahiya.
The Israeli government released a report in July 2009 that confirmed that the IDF used white phosphorus in both exploding munitions and smoke projectiles. The report argues that the use of these munitions was limited to unpopulated areas for marking and signalling and not as an anti-personnel weapon. The Israeli government report further stated that smoke screening projectiles were the majority of the munitions containing white phosphorus employed by the IDF and that these were very effective in that role. The report states that at no time did IDF forces have the objective of inflicting any harm on the civilian population.
Head of the UN Fact Finding Mission Justice Richard Goldstone presented the report of the Mission to the Human Rights Council in Geneva on 29 September 2009. The Goldstone report accepted that white phosphorus is not illegal under international law but did find that the Israelis were "systematically reckless in determining its use in built-up areas". It also called for serious consideration to be given to the banning of its use in built-up areas. The Government of Israel issued an initial response rejecting the findings of the Goldstone report.
The 155mm WP artillery shells used by Israel are typically the American M825A1, a base-ejection shell which deploys an airbursting submunition canister. On detonation of the bursting charge, the canister deploys 116 units 19 millimetres (0.75 in), quarter-circle wedges of felt impregnated with 5.8 kilograms (12.75 lb) of WP, producing a smokescreen lasting 5–10 minutes depending on weather conditions. These submunitions typically land in an elliptical pattern 125–250 meters in diameter, with the size of the effect area depending on the burst height, and produce a smokescreen 10 metres in height.
There are confirmed cases of white phosphorus burns on bodies of civilians wounded during US–Taliban clashes near Bagram. The United States has accused Taliban militants of using white phosphorus weapons illegally on at least 44 occasions. In May 2009, Colonel Gregory Julian, a spokesman for General David McKiernan, the overall commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, confirmed that Western military forces in Afghanistan use white phosphorus in order to illuminate targets or as an incendiary to destroy bunkers and enemy equipment. The Afghan government later launched an investigation into the use of white phosphorus munitions.
2016 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
After the 2016 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict over disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that on 10 May of that year the Armenian military had fired 122mm white phosphorus artillery munitions against Azerbaijani territory. On 11 May, Azerbaijan's Defense Ministry jointly with the Foreign Ministry invited military attaches from 13 countries to visit the territory in the Askipara village where the Defense Ministry sais they had found a white phosphorus munition fired by Armenian forces. The use of phosphorus munition by the Armenian military was also reported by Al Jazeera. The Azerbaijani Military Prosecutor's Office initiated a criminal case upon the finding. NKR foreign ministry and Armenia defence ministry dismiss it as a falsification and distortion of the reality. Armenian media sources disclaimed it as a staged operation by Azerbaijan, citing absence of evidence of the presence of a shell or of a shell being used by Armenians, adding that this was a non-story as there was no evidence of any use.
Syrian Civil War
The Syrian government, the United States the Russian Federation and Turkey reportedly deployed white phosphorus munitions via airstrikes and artillery on different occasions during the Syrian Civil War.
2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war
During the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, on 31 October the Ministry of Defence of the unrecognised Republic of Artsakh stated that the Azerbaijani side had used phosphorus weapons to burn forests near Shusha (Shushi). The next day, Armenia's human rights defender, Arman Tatoyan, stated that civilians were hiding in the forest. Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) found that "large burnt fields resembling burn damage from white phosphorous, or a very chemically similar material, were identified in Armenian-controlled territory." On 22 September 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives passed an amendment, calling for a report on Azerbaijani war crimes during war, including the use of white phosphorus against Armenian civilians.
The Azerbaijani authorities, in turn, accused the Armenian forces of using white phosphorus on civilian areas. Then, on 4 November, Azerbaijan National Agency for Mine Action (ANAMA) found unexploded white phosphorus munitions in Səhləbad, near Tartar, which, according to Azerbaijan, was fired by the Armenian forces. Azerbaijani authorities had also stated that the Armenian forces were transporting white phosphorus into the region. On 20 November, the Prosecutor General's Office of Azerbaijan filed a lawsuit, accusing the Armenian Armed Forces of using phosphorus ammunition in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as in Tartar District.
Weight-for-weight, phosphorus is the most effective smoke-screening agent known, for two reasons: first, it absorbs most of the screening mass from the surrounding atmosphere and secondly, the smoke particles are actually an aerosol, a mist of liquid droplets which are close to the ideal range of sizes for Mie scattering of visible light. This effect has been likened to three dimensional textured privacy glass—the smoke cloud does not obstruct an image, but thoroughly scrambles it. It also absorbs infrared radiation, allowing it to defeat thermal imaging systems.
When phosphorus burns in air, it first forms phosphorus pentoxide (which exists as tetraphosphorus decoxide except at very high temperatures):
- P4 + 5 O2 → P4O10
Since an atom of phosphorus has an atomic mass of 31 but a molecule of phosphoric acid has a molecular mass of 98, the cloud is already 68% by mass derived from the atmosphere (i.e. 3.2 kilograms of smoke for every kilogram of WP); however, it may absorb more because phosphoric acid and its variants are hygroscopic. Given time, the droplets will continue to absorb more water, growing larger and more dilute until they reach equilibrium with the local water vapour pressure. In practice, the droplets quickly reach a range of sizes suitable for scattering visible light and then start to dissipate from wind or convection.
Because of the great weight efficiency of WP smoke, it is particularly suited for applications where weight is highly restricted, such as hand grenades and mortar bombs. An additional advantage for hand smoke grenades—which are more likely to be used in an emergency—is that the WP smoke clouds form in a fraction of a second. Because WP is also pyrophoric, most munitions of this type have a simple burster charge to split open the casing and spray fragments of WP through the air, where they ignite spontaneously and leave a trail of rapidly thickening smoke behind each particle. The appearance of this cloud forming is easily recognised; one sees a shower of burning particles spraying outward, followed closely by distinctive streamers of white smoke, which rapidly coalesce into a fluffy, very pure white cloud (unless illuminated by a coloured light source).
Various disadvantages of WP are discussed below, but one which is particular to smoke-screening is "pillaring". Because the WP smoke is formed from fairly hot combustion, the gasses in the cloud are hot, and tend to rise. Consequently, the smoke screen tends to rise off the ground relatively quickly and form aerial "pillars" of smoke which are of little use for screening. Tactically this may be counteracted by using WP to get a screen quickly, but then following up with emission type screening agents for a more persistent screen. Some countries have begun using red phosphorus instead. Red phosphorus ("RP") burns cooler than WP and eliminates a few other disadvantages as well, but offers exactly the same weight efficiency. Other approaches include WP soaked felt pads (which also burn more slowly, and pose a reduced risk of incendiarism) and PWP, or plasticised white phosphorus.
In addition to direct injuries caused by fragments of their casings, white phosphorus munitions can cause injuries in two main ways: burn injuries and vapour inhalation.
In munitions, white phosphorus burns readily with flames of 800 °C (1,472 °F). Incandescent particles from weapons using powdered white phosphorus as their payload produce extensive partial- and full-thickness burns, as will any attempt to handle burning submunitions without protective equipment. Phosphorus burns carry an increased risk of mortality due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area with prolonged contact, which can result in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure. White phosphorus particles continue to burn until completely consumed or starved of oxygen. In the case of weapons using felt-impregnated submunitions, incomplete combustion may occur resulting in up to 15% of the WP content remaining unburned. Such submunitions can prove hazardous as they are capable of spontaneous re-ignition if crushed by personnel or vehicles. In some cases, injury is limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed.
Due to the pyrophoric nature of WP, penetrating injuries are immediately treated by smothering the wound using water, damp cloth or mud, isolating it from oxygen until fragments can be removed: military forces will typically do so using a bayonet or knife where able. Bicarbonate solution is applied to the wound to neutralise any build-up of phosphoric acid, followed by removal of any remaining visible fragments: these are easily observed as they are luminescent in dark surroundings. Surgical debridement around the wound is used to avoid fragments too small to detect causing later systemic failure, with further treatment proceeding as with a thermal burn.
Burning white phosphorus produces a hot, dense, white smoke consisting mostly of phosphorus pentoxide in aerosol form. Field concentrations are usually harmless, but at high concentrations the smoke can cause temporary irritation to the eyes, mucous membranes of the nose, and respiratory tract. The smoke is more dangerous in enclosed spaces, where it can cause asphyxiation and permanent respiratory damage. The US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has set an acute inhalation Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for white phosphorus smoke of 0.02 mg/m3, the same as fuel-oil fumes. By contrast, the chemical weapon mustard gas is 30 times more potent: 0.0007 mg/m3. The agency cautioned that studies used to determine the MRL were based on extrapolations from animal testing and may not accurately reflect the health risk to humans. There are no documented instances of fatalities from smoke inhalation alone under combat conditions.
While in general white phosphorus is an industrial chemical not subject to restriction, certain uses in weaponry are banned or restricted by general international laws: in particular, those related to incendiary devices.
Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as "any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target". Article 2 of the same protocol prohibits the deliberate use of incendiary weapons against civilian targets (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions), the use of air-delivered incendiary weapons against military targets in civilian areas, and the general use of other types of incendiary weapons against military targets located within "concentrations of civilians" without taking all possible means to minimise casualties.
The convention also exempts certain categories of munitions from its definition of incendiary weapons: specifically, these are munitions which "may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems" and those "designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect."
The use of incendiary and other flame weapons against matériel, including enemy military personnel, is not directly forbidden by any treaty. The United States Military mandates that incendiary weapons, where deployed, not be used "in such a way as to cause unnecessary suffering." The term "unnecessary suffering" is defined through use of a proportionality test, comparing the anticipated military advantage of the weapon's use to the amount of suffering potentially caused.
The Chemical Weapons Convention, sometimes invoked in discussions of WP usage, is meant to prohibit weapons that are "dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare" (Article II, Definitions, 9, "Purposes not Prohibited" c.). The convention defines a "toxic chemical" as a substance "which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals" (CWC, II). An annex lists chemicals that are restricted under the convention, and WP is not listed in the Schedules of chemical weapons or precursors.
In a 2005 interview with RAI, Peter Kaiser, spokesman for the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (an organisation overseeing the CWC and reporting directly to the UN General Assembly), discussed cases where use of WP would potentially fall under the auspices of the CWC:
No it's not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application that does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement.
If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the convention legitimate use.
If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that, of course, is prohibited, because the way the convention is structured or applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons.
- "Pyrotechnics, Explosives, & Fireworks". Archived from the original on 2 January 2004. Retrieved 4 December 2005.
- Paul Reynolds (16 November 2005). "White phosphorus: weapon on the edge". BBC News. Archived from the original on 29 November 2019. Retrieved 16 November 2005.
- Whelehan, Niall (9 August 2012). The Dynamiters: Irish Nationalism and Political Violence in the Wider World, 1867–1900. Cambridge University Press. p. 58. ISBN 9781139560979. Archived from the original on 4 October 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2018.
- Ian Turner (1969). Sydney's Burning – The real conspiracy. Sydney: Alpha Books. Archived from the original on 24 May 2020. Retrieved 24 June 2007.
- Axelrod, Alan (2009). Little-Known Wars of Great and Lasting Impact. Fair Winds Press. p. 246. ISBN 9781616734619. Archived from the original on 19 March 2022. Retrieved 3 March 2018.
- Panzer vs. Sherman: France 1944, Steven J. Zaloga, p.26
- Chemical Warfare Bulletin, Office of the Chief, Chemical Warfare Service, Army Service Forces, January 1942
- The Tunnels of Cu Chi; 2005 Tom Mangold and John Penycate
- Tunnel Rat in Vietnam; 2012 Gordon L Rothman
- When the fighting is over: A personal story of the battle for Tumbledown Mountain and its aftermath by John and Robert Lawerance 1988
- No Picnic; 3 Commando Brigade in the South Atlantic by Julian Thompson 1985
- Joint Staff (1991). "White Phosphorus (WP)". Globalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 27 March 2005. Retrieved 28 March 2005.
- Mortenson, Darrin (11 April 2004). "Violence subsides for Marines in Fallujah". The San Diego Union Tribune. Archived from the original on 23 January 2020. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
- Mortenson, Darrin. "Violence subsides for Marines in Fallujah", North County Times, 10 April 2004. Archived 10 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine
- Spinner, Jackie; Vick, Karl; Fekeiki, Omar (10 November 2004). "U.S. Forces Battle Into Heart of Fallujah". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 8 August 2007. Retrieved 4 December 2005.
- "Pentagon Reverses Position and Admits U.S. Troops Used White Phosphorus Against Iraqis in Fallujah". Democracy Now!. 17 November 2005. Archived from the original on 15 January 2020. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
- Buncombe, Andrew; Hughes, Solomon (15 November 2005). "The fog of war: white phosphorus, Fallujah and some burning questions". The Independent. Archived from the original on 23 October 2019. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
- "US forces used 'chemical weapon' in Iraq". The Independent. 16 November 2005. Archived from the original on 1 March 2020. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
- "U.S. official admits phosphorus used as weapon in Iraq". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. 16 November 2005. Archived from the original on 5 October 2013. Retrieved 19 May 2011.
- "White Phosphorus In Iraq". Archived from the original on 29 September 2007.
- "BBC NEWS: US general defends phosphorus use". BBC News. 30 November 2005. Archived from the original on 20 February 2006. Retrieved 13 December 2005.
- "Israel admits phosphorus bombing". BBC. 22 October 2006. Archived from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 24 October 2006.
- "Israel admits using phosphorus bombs during war Lebanon". Haaretz. 22 October 2006. Archived from the original on 6 February 2007. Retrieved 4 April 2007.
- Jansen, Jaime (17 July 2006). "Lebanon claims Israel using banned weapons against civilians". Paper Chase Newsburst, Jurist Legal News & Research. University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
- Frenkel, Sheera (23 April 2009). "Israel backs down over white phosphorus". The Times. London. Archived from the original on 16 July 2011.
- "UN accuses Israel over phosphorus". BBC News. 15 January 2009. Archived from the original on 18 January 2009. Retrieved 16 January 2009.
- Marquand, Robert; Blanford, Nicholas (24 January 1009). "Gaza: Israel under fire for alleged white phosphorus use". Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on 18 January 2009. Retrieved 14 January 2009.
- "Israel: Stop Unlawful Use of White Phosphorus in Gaza". Human Rights Watch. 10 January 2009. Archived from the original on 18 January 2009. Retrieved 16 January 2009.
- Hider, James; Frenkel, Sheera (24 January 2009). "Israel admits using white phosphorus in attacks on Gaza". The Times. Archived from the original on 11 May 2011. Retrieved 25 August 2014.
- Frenkel, Sheera; Naughton, Philippe (15 January 2009). "UN headquarters in Gaza hit by Israeli 'white phosphorus' shells". Times Online. Archived from the original on 10 October 2011. Retrieved 25 August 2014.
- "UN: Israelis hit our headquarters in Gaza with 'white phosphorus' shells". Belfast Telegraph. 15 January 2009. Archived from the original on 21 January 2009. Retrieved 15 January 2009.
- Katz, Yaakov."Shelled UN building used by Hamas" Archived 1 June 2012 at the Wayback Machine say Israeli defense officials, Jerusalem Post and Associated Press, 15 January 2009
- "Israel reprimands officers over UN compound shelling". BBC. 1 February 2010. Archived from the original on 10 August 2014. Retrieved 25 August 2014.
- Harel, Amos (21 January 2009). "IDF probes improper use of phosphorus shells in Gaza Strip". Haaretz. Archived from the original on 23 January 2009. Retrieved 18 January 2009.
- "THE OPERATION IN GAZA, 27 DECEMBER 2008–18 JANUARY 2009 FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS" (PDF). Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 29 July 2009. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 August 2009. Retrieved 4 October 2009.
- "United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict". UN Human Rights Council. Archived from the original on 7 June 2009. Retrieved 1 September 2014.
- Goldstone, Richard (25 September 2009). Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (Goldstone report) (PDF) (Report). UN Human Rights Council. para. 49. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 September 2018. Retrieved 3 June 2010.
- Initial Response to Report of the Fact Finding Mission on Gaza Archived 1 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- "Israel accused of 'reckless' use of white phosphorus". Independent.co.uk. 26 March 2009. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 4 December 2017.
- "Israeli Chemical 'Atrocities' in Gaza? Not So Fast". Wired.com. 6 January 2009. Archived from the original on 9 November 2020. Retrieved 2 November 2019.
- Globalsecurity.org Archived 31 October 2019 at the Wayback Machine, "M825 155mm Projectile"
- PEO Ammunition Systems Portfolio Book 2017, Picatinny Arsenal, p. 39
- Straziuso, Jason (11 May 2009). "U.S.: Afghan Militants Use White Phosphorus". guardian.co.uk. London. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 6 September 2013. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- "EXCLUSIVE – Afghan girl's burns show horror of chemical strike". Reuters India. 8 May 2009. Archived from the original on 20 May 2010. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- Chivers, C. J. (19 April 2009). "Pinned Down, a Sprint to Escape Taliban Zone". New York Times. Archived from the original on 15 April 2016. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- Synovitz, Ron (13 May 2009). "Investigation Launched Into White Phosphorus Claims In Afghanistan". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Archived from the original on 13 September 2009. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- "Statement on the use of white phosphorus bomb by the armed forces of Armenia against civilians and civilian objects of Azerbaijan". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan. 17 May 2016. Archived from the original on 21 June 2016. Retrieved 11 June 2016.
- "Specialists eliminate white phosphorus shell fired by Armenia on Azerbaijan's Terter". Getty Images / Anadolu Agency. Archived from the original on 11 August 2016. Retrieved 11 June 2016.
- اتهامات أذرية لأرمينيا بقصف مناطق مدنية بالفسفور الأبيض. Al Jazeera Arabic (in Arabic). Archived from the original on 4 October 2020. Retrieved 12 June 2016 – via YouTube.
- "Defense Ministry spokesman responds to Azerbaijani allegations of white phosphorus usage: Azerbaijan is in an ill-mannered delusion". Archived from the original on 6 August 2016. Retrieved 16 November 2016.
- "NKR MFA: Falsification and distortion of reality is integral part of Azerbaijan's foreign policy". Archived from the original on 6 August 2016. Retrieved 16 November 2016.
- "Azerbaijan staged a story about white phosphorus". Archived from the original on 6 August 2016. Retrieved 16 November 2016.
- "VIDEO: Syria regime drops white phosphorus on Idlib's Saraqeb". english.alarabiya.net. 10 April 2017. Archived from the original on 3 July 2019. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
- Barnard, Anne (10 June 2017). "U.S.-Led Forces Said to Have Used White Phosphorus in Syria". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 5 October 2017. Retrieved 29 September 2017.
- "Video shows Russia using 'white phosphorus' bombs in Syria, activists claim". Independent.co.uk. 8 March 2017. Archived from the original on 5 November 2017. Retrieved 4 December 2017.
- "Turkey urges Russia to stop attacks against civilians in Syria". Hürriyet Daily News. Archived from the original on 14 February 2018. Retrieved 13 February 2018.
- "UK sells white phosphorus to Turkey as evidence grows of chemical attacks on Kurds". The Times. 27 October 2019. Archived from the original on 6 November 2019. Retrieved 7 November 2019.
- LLC, Academy Of Development. "Հաղորդագրություն | ԼՂՀ պաշտպանության նախարարության պաշտոնական կայք". nkrmil.am (in Armenian). Archived from the original on 5 November 2020. Retrieved 31 October 2020.
- Arman Tatoyan [@atatoyan] (31 October 2020). "New evidence of using phosphorus munitions with clear chemical elements by #Azerbaijani military in #Artsakh/#Karabakh – against forests & most importantly civilians – civilians are hiding in forests during these days, causing mass destructions #DontBeBlind #terrorism #WarCrimes" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
- Andriukaitis, Lukas (13 November 2020). "Satellite imagery shows environmental damage of reported white phosphorus use in Nagorno Karabakh". @DFRLab: AtlanticCouncil's Digital Forensic Research Lab. Archived from the original on 14 February 2022.
- "AMENDMENT TO RULES COMM. PRINT 117 13 OFFERED BY MR. CARDENAS OF CALIFORNIA" (PDF). Amendments-rules.house.gov. 20 September 2021. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 September 2021. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
- "US Congress demands release of all Armenian POWs in Azerbaijan". News.am. 23 September 2021. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
- "Live updates: Day 35 of Nagorno-Karabakh fighting". OC Media. 31 October 2020. Archived from the original on 20 November 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- Ismayilova, Vafa (3 November 2020). "Armenia actively using phosphorus shells against civilian objects". AzerNews. Archived from the original on 8 December 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- Mammadli, Nargiz (6 November 2020). "Armenia's Army Drops White Phosphorus Bombs On Civilians In Azerbaijan". Caspian News. Archived from the original on 24 November 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- "Armenia uses banned white phosphorous shells against civilian population – PHOTO FACT VIDEO". Azerbaijan State News Agency. 4 November 2020. Archived from the original on 27 November 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- "Armenia, Azerbaijan trade accusations again after new attacks". Al Jazeera. 31 October 2020. Archived from the original on 29 December 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- "Lawsuit on the fact of the use of white phosphorus by Armenians in Karabakh". Turan Information Agency. 20 November 2020. Archived from the original on 10 December 2020. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- Chemical Warfare Agents: Toxicology and Treatment, Timothy T. Marrs, Robert L. Maynard, Frederick Sidell, p. 697
- White Phosphorus Smoke. National Academies Press (US). 1999. Archived from the original on 12 November 2020. Retrieved 10 June 2017.
- Chemical Warfare Agents: Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutics, Second Edition, Brian J. Lukey, James A. Romano Jr., James A. Romano, Harry Salem, Brian J Lukey, p. 480
- Burke, Robert (2013), "Hazardous Materials Chemistry for Emergency Responders, Third Edition", CRC Press: 313
- Khalili, Mustafa; Tait, Michael (19 January 2009). "White phosphorus in Gaza: the victims". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 3 January 2017. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
- Atiyeh, BS; Gunn, SW; Hayek, SN (31 December 2007). "Military and Civilian Burn Injuries During Armed Conflicts". Annals of Burns and Fire Disasters. 20 (4): 203–215. PMC 3188083. PMID 21991098.
- "Q&A: White phosphorus injuries". BBC News. 21 January 2009. Retrieved 9 June 2022.
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). "White Phosphorus: Health Effects" (PDF). Toxicological Profile Information Sheet. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 June 2006. Retrieved 16 June 2006.
- "Smokes, Fuels, and Incendiary Materials" (PDF). J R Army Med Corps. 148 (4): 395–397. 2002. doi:10.1136/jramc-148-04-11. PMID 12703429. S2CID 220149224. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 October 2019. Retrieved 30 October 2019.
- "ATSDR – Minimal Risk Levels for Hazardous Substances (MRLs)". Atsdr.cdc.gov. Archived from the original on 24 February 2008. Retrieved 11 April 2018.
- "TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR WHITE PHOSPHORUS" (PDF). Atsdr.cdc.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2018. Retrieved 10 June 2017.
- "White Phosphorus (WP)". Globalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 21 December 2019. Retrieved 30 October 2019.
- I. J. MacLeod and A. P. V. Rogers. "The Use of White Phosphorus and the Law of War" Archived 20 August 2016 at the Wayback Machine, in Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (2007)
- "Incendiary Weapons – Legal Status". Globalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 3 November 2021. Retrieved 28 November 2021.
- Organisation for the Prohibitions of Chemical Weapons. "Schedules of Chemicals". Archived from the original on 24 May 2008. Retrieved 25 August 2007.
- "Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)". Archived from the original on 28 May 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2007.
- Paul Reynolds (16 November 2005). "White phosphorus: weapon on the edge". BBC News. Archived from the original on 29 November 2019. Retrieved 4 April 2007.
- Makos, Adam (2019). Spearhead (1st ed.). New York: Ballantine Books. pp. 131–32, 135. ISBN 9780804176729. LCCN 2018039460. OL 27342118M.
- The Legality of the Use of White Phosphorus by the United States Military During the 2004 Fallujah Assaults (Roman Reyhani)
- Globalsecurity.org on WP (including use during the Battle of Fallujah and during the December 1994 battle for Grozny during the First Chechen War)