BERMUDA may have been "snookered" in the US bases agreement which left the island with environmental damage that will cost tens of millions to clean-up, according to an American military and environmental expert.

Some US contribution towards the clean-up bill has normally been part of the deal when the Americans have previously vacated overseas bases, says Bill Arkin, a military analyst for NBC and the Washington Post and a former director of military research for conservation group Greenpeace International. But in the case of Bermuda, the US effectively washed its hands of responsibility for the multi-million-dollar clean-up operation necessary at its former bases at Morgan's Point and Southside, after a deal agreed by the US and Britain, negotiating on the island's behalf.

At last week's exchange of diplomatic notes in Washington terminating the Bermuda bases agreement, the US agreed to pay $11 million for the maintenance of Longbird Bridge, which had been built and maintained by the Americans and offered some help with Coast Guard operations and training of the Regiment. But there was no contingency for US financial help with clean-up costs.

Works & Engineering Minister Alex Scott said in the House of Assembly last week that the clean-up bill would be met by developers or the UK Government and not necessarily the Bermuda taxpayer.

But Deputy Governor Tim Gurney said yesterday that he would be "very surprised" if an attempt was made to pass on the cost to the UK, since the Bermuda Government had been involved with and aware of the base deal negotiations all along. Washington-based Mr. Arkin said: "Since leaving bases in Germany at the end of the Cold War, an enormous amount of money has been spent on clean-ups.

"One would expect the environmental aspect to be part of the fabric of agreements of settlement. Normally, one would have thought that this would have been recognised. I am a little befuddled as to why it was not an intrinsic part of the settlement in the case of Bermuda.

"There is great precedent for environmental clean-up to be taken into account and that is a built-in part of bases closure practice. So this makes no sense.

"Maybe Bermuda did not push their case strongly enough or maybe they just got snookered. I really couldn't say because I don't know the finer details of the case.

"Normally, cleaning up would be an instrinsic part of of the base withdrawal agreement, but that is not to say that in some parts of the world, it hasn't been controversial. In the Philippines and Panama, that is the case."

In 1985 Mr. Arkin was responsible for revealing Bermuda's role in US global nuclear strategy when he leaked details of the classified US Nuclear Weapons Deployment Plan approved by President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1974.

Dozens of nuclear depth bombs were earmarked to be stored in Bermuda during "times of advanced readiness" during the Cold War stand-off with the Soviet Union.

The American military left thousands of gallons of a toxic soup of raw sewage mixed with leaked oil in caves underneath the old US Naval Annex at Morgan's Point, Southampton when the bases in Bermuda were abandoned in 1995.

And the former Naval Air Station at Southside, St. David's, was left with substantial amounts of asbestos in the buildings and other pollutants. The clean-up bill has been estimated at more than $50 million, although Government believes this could be an over-estimate.

Opposition MPs have criticised the Government for handing over negotiating power to Britain too quickly and for failing to get a better deal and United Bermuda Party leader Dr. Grant Gibbons claimed last week that the clean-up would effectively cost the island $6,000 per family.

Mr. Scott said last week: "The Brits have a responsibility with regard to clean-up of the bases if they didn't negotiate a favourable agreement for Bermuda.

"They saw the environment needed to be cleaned up and surely a case could be made that the UK should be prepared to take responsibility here."

Asked whether it was possible that Bermuda could pass on the clean-up bill to the UK, Mr. Gurney said: "Of course, it's possible, but we'd all be very surprised if they did, because this deal has been negotiated with the full knowledge of the Bermuda Government, which has been involved in and aware of negotiations all along."

Negotiations involved the Bermuda Government, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Government House and the US. Bermuda appears to be the latest recipient of a series of environmental messes left behind by the American Department of Defence (DOD) around the world.

Three years ago, the DOD Inspector General reported "potentially significant liabilities" and pollution at US bases in Canada, Germany, Britain, Greenland, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Panama, South Korea, Spain, Turkey and perhaps most controversially, in the Philippines.

The Clark Air Base, abandoned in 1991, was once the biggest US military base in the world, and another base in the Philippines, the Subic Bay Naval Base, was abandoned a year later.

Pollutants discovered there included mercury, nitrates, propylbenzene (a fuel by-product), the inseciticide dieldrin and lead.

A resultingly poisoned water supply has been blamed on unusually high rates of health problems like cancer and birth defects.

The cost of cleaning up the mess at the two bases is estimated at $1 billion, but the US says its treaties with the Philippines exempt it from clean-up costs.

The Panamanian Government has negotiated long and hard to get the US to clean up after its military in the Central American Country. And it is finally making progress, although limited, according to John Lindsay-Poland of the Fellowship of Reconciliation Panama Campaign.

"At San Jose Island, the US used to carry out chemical warfare testing in the '40s," Mr. Lindsay-Poland told the Mid-Ocean News. "Just last week, the press reported that a US team had removed seven chemical bombs that they had left behind. I think the US is trying to figure out a way to get Panama off its back. They are hoping that Panama will settle for appearance of doing something."

Though he had no more up-to-date figures, in 1998 Lindsay-Poland's group said the US Government had spent $102 million over four years on overseas bases clean-ups compared to $2.13 billion on the clean-up of bases inside the US in 1998 alone. More recently $100 million of American money was spent on cleaning up former bases in Canada.

"In the light of these problems, the US should draft a new overseas clean-up policy that eliminates double standards and is consistent with domestic clean-up requirements," Lindsay-Poland added.

Environmentalist web site safety.com suggests that the DOD is the world's biggest polluter, generating 750,000 tons of hazardous waste per year - more than the five largest US chemical companies combined.

This newspaper left two messages for the environmental spokesperson at the US Department of Defence, but there was no response by press time yesterday.