Chemical Weapons Use in Syria and Decline of International Institutions

Donate

Loading the player...

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Written and produced by SF Team: J.Hawk, Daniel Deiss, Edwin Watson

When it comes to the two verifiable uses of sarin or sarin-like substances in Syria, namely the 2013 Ghouta attack and the 2017 Khan Sheykhoun attack, nearly all the available evidence points to them being used by the rebels. An MIT study of the Ghouta attack that examined the ballistics of the rockets used to deliver chemical agents concluded that they came from areas at the time held by the rebels. When it comes to Khan Sheykhoun, even the photos and videos made available by the rebels put into doubt the claim the munitions were delivered by Syrian aircraft, as there is no evidence of air-delivered munitions and moreover the symptoms displayed by the victims and the behavior of the first responders suggests exposure to a toxic industrial chemical rather than a highly lethal agent like Sarin. And, possibly most importantly, such sporadic use of chemical weapons would represent the worst of both worlds for the government of Syria: on the one hand it would be violating one of the biggest taboos in today’s international politics, and on the other it would not be reaping any tangible military benefits from it. Chemical weapons in order to have significant effect must be used en masse, World War 1 style. Sporadic uses, particularly after recent Western warnings not to use them, make zero political or military sense. Such attacks, however, make perfect sense for various rebel groups whose only hope of victory or even merely survival is in provoking a Western military intervention that would turn the tide of the war. So why is the dominant Western narrative of placing the blame squarely on the Syrian government (and indirectly on Russia), even though no international investigator has set foot in Khan Sheykhoun?

The sad fact is that Western elites, if not Western nations, are for all intents and purposes still at war with Syria and their rhetoric, as well as fawning media coverage, must reflect this preference lest the masses begin to suspect something is amiss. Therefore it is no accident or coincidence that every atrocity or questionable incident not only in Syria but also Ukraine is attributed to Syria or Russia within the first half hour of its occurrence, before anything even remotely resembling an investigation has taken place. On the other hand, atrocities where the evidence overwhelmingly points at Western-backed forces, such as the 2014 massacre in Odessa or the beheading of a young boy by a US-armed “moderate rebels” in Aleppo are suppressed, reported in a distorted fashion, or barefacedly described as a regrettable exception that in no way undermines the motives of the perpetrators. What amounts to Western covering up for the rebel use of chemical weapons in Syria is also reminiscent of how the West turned a blind eye on Saddam Hussein’s use of sarin against Iran and later against the Kurds, as long as he was seen as a useful counterweight to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

While their project to overthrow the Syrian government has demonstrably failed, they have de-facto painted themselves into the corner so thoroughly that they cannot very well change their rhetoric, since doing so would be an admission of having pursued cynical and criminal policies all along.

The Russian government has time and again called for a transparent investigation of these incidents, but its requests are yet to be heeded by Western governments, and unfortunately the supposed investigations of the chemical weapons attacks by international organizations such as UN or OPCW unfortunately bear all the hallmarks of political influence by Western powers. This, too, is not an isolated phenomenon. As a result, these supposed investigations have been conducted without on-site visits and contain passages which display a high degree of ignorance of chemical weapon effects and behavior, but which are necessary in order to arrive at the pre-ordained conclusion. Thus, for example, the recent UN Commission of Inquiry report blaming Syria argued that the Russian claim the toxic agents could have been released by a conventional bomb targeting the rebel chemical stockpile was not backed by evidence, since the conventional explosives would have incinerated the chemicals thus rendering them impotent. However, it is a firmly established fact that conventional explosives do not generate the temperatures necessary to decompose, let alone incinerate, chemical agents.

The deterioration of international organizations is linked to the decline of the West, which is now using every tool at its disposal to avert the emergence of a multipolar world order. International organizations are part of that tool set, in that they legitimize Western political and military dominance. The problem with using them in this fashion is that it threatens to strip the international institutions of whatever veneer of legitimacy they still have. Ironically, this could pave the way for a new set of international institutions more reflective of a world order rebalanced to reflect the growing role of other regions of the planet.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Richard Noel Hedditch

    Pro-Zionist dummy, Trump, is committed to Zionist Wahabbism.

  • bcbingram

    Thank You South Front.

  • FlorianGeyer

    The Truth is there for all to see but ” There are none so blind as those who do not want to see “

  • John Marks

    Excellent summary of what’s gone wrong with the UN and even more so the USA.

  • as

    The elephant in the room. The powerful UNSC (or their impotency).

  • Ronald

    “This could pave the way for a new set of international institutions more reflective …. of other regions of the planet “. Well spoken .
    As Asana helped develop movement towards peace by cutting the US/UK from their control of agenda , etc. in Geneva , so a “BRICS Commission” or a “Belt Inquiry” ?

  • Lupus

    These chemical weapons came from the depots of Saddam Hussein filled with weapons of mass destruction and smuggled into Syria by anti semetic aliens sponsored by Iran

    • Garga

      Very dangerous, these Anti-Semite Aliens…
      .

      .

      http://i68.tinypic.com/29mao3o.jpg

      • Lupus

        😂😂😂

    • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

      The Sarin came from an Israeli company in Georgia, transferred by US contractors to Turkey and then transported by Turkish diplomatic courier to the FSA Commander in Idlib. That’s the most plausible explanation,much better than the one of a high temperatures of heat burning chemical agents. We are smart enough to avoid being downwind of fires at warehouses with chemicals be

  • stringball

    not rebels, “rebels”

  • Jordan Katz

    Well done. You guys should do a video revisiting the 2014 Odessa Massacre in Ukraine. I actually just posted a video about it on a different thread. I’ll try posting it again here.
    https://youtu.be/H4dJRnI-X8Q

  • Bru

    The chemical expatriate engineers who are the OPCW ‘s experts are no permanent civil servants but are employed on the basis of renewable one-year contracts. They all need to have their contract renewed every year, but this happens only if they are entirely obedient to their management: the OPCW is currently led by a Brit who dictates in advance the conclusions of their findings… So their conclusions about Syria are as reliable as the propaganda of our Western regimes and media, or as the fake findings dictated by other Brit re. the doping of Russian athletes.

  • James R

    I think that this report has it’s merits but also that you have made several important mistakes. The most important error in my view is the decision to exclude the Khan al Assal Sarin attacks of March 2013 from the narrative. The UN documented that Syrian Army forces were targeted and killed along with some civilians by Sarin gas attacks conducted by the al Nusra front in Khan al Assal in the Western countryside of Aleppo.
    The final UN report is deliberately opaque but they admit that Sarin was used against Syrian Government forces.
    ““The United Nations Mission collected credible information that
    corroborates the allegations that chemical weapons were used in Khan al
    Assal on 19 March 2013 against soldiers and civilians,” according to the
    final report, which team leader Dr. Åke Sellström handed over to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at UN Headquarters in New York. ”
    http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=46730#.We4DdIhxXIU
    https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/report.pdf
    These findings were also alluded to by UN official Carla Del Ponti in an interview with the BBC before the actual report was released where she affirms that they were shocked to discover that the insurgents were the guilty party.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22424188
    Why is that so important and why should you have included it in this work?
    This incident prompted the Syrian Government to invite the UN to Syria to investigate this event. Un investigators arrived in Damascus on August 19th, two days before the East Ghouta Sarin attack the West tried to blame on the Syrian Government.
    So the narrative around the East Ghouta attack is far more absurd and ridiculous than one would understand from watching your piece, as they are proposing that the Syrian forces were attacked with Sarin by insurgents, invited the UN to investigate and then turned around and attacked on a massive scale two days after they arrived. It is a joke.
    But there is another important connection between the Khan al Assal incident and the East Ghouta event, the attacks used Sarin that was sourced from the same batch, bearing the same chemical fingerprints, enabling us to conclude that the someone supplied the insurgents with Sarin, thinking they would understand the purpose and use it as part of a false flag to frame the Syrian government, but the insurgents were so idiotic that they did not understand this and destroyed the entire plot by moronically using it in plain sight as an offensive weapon in the battle for Khan al Assal.
    https://hyper-db.de/monopedia/wiki/index.php?title=2013_Ghouta_attacks
    The other error is less important but still bears consideration, the visual evidence from the scene strongly indicates that the Khan Sheikhun incident was a pure psychological operation with fake victims responding to a non existent incident. Watch the video where White Helmets are supposedly helping victims of the attack completely lacking any protective clothing or equipment, this is nonsense.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG4hDxOfrXY
    There is no credible footage of the aftermath of any Sarin attack of any kind.
    As far as the supposed soil samples go, the chain of custody is hopelessly compromised, the idea that al Qaeda are a credible source of evidence in Syria is a sick joke.
    We know from Seymour Hersh’s reporting on this that Russia told the US the SAF were going to attack Khan Sheikhun on that day, it is therefore pretty clear that the US informed their allies on the ground enabling them to prepare the staged event in advance.
    https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
    Thanks for your work.

  • James R

    I think that this report has it’s merits but also that you have made several important mistakes. The most important error in my view is the decision to exclude the Khan al Assal Sarin attacks of March 2013 from the narrative. The UN documented that Syrian Army forces were targeted and killed along with some civilians by Sarin gas attacks conducted by the al Nusra front in Khan al Assal in the Western countryside of Aleppo.
    The final UN report is deliberately opaque but they admit that Sarin was used against Syrian Government forces.
    ““The United Nations Mission collected credible information that corroborates the
    allegations that chemical weapons were used in Khan Al Asal on 19 March 2013 against soldiers and civilians,” according to the final report,which team leader Dr. Åke Sellström handed over to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at UN Headquarters in New York.”
    http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=46730#.We4DdIhxXIU
    https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/report.pdf
    These findings were also alluded to by UN official Carla Del Ponte in an interview with the BBC before the actual report was released where she affirms that they were shocked to discover that the insurgents were the guilty party.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22424188
    Why is that so important and why should you have included it in this work?
    The Khan al Assal incident prompted the Syrian Government to invite the UN to Syria to investigate this event. UN investigators arrived in Damascus on August 19th, two days before the East Ghouta Sarin attack.
    So the narrative around the East Ghouta attack is far more absurd and ridiculous than one would understand from watching your piece, as they are proposing that the Syrian forces were attacked with Sarin by insurgents, invited the UN to investigate and then turned around and
    attacked on a massive scale two days after they arrived. It is a joke.
    But there is another important connection between the Khan al Assal incident and the East Ghouta event, the attacks used Sarin that was sourced from the same batch, bearing the same chemical
    fingerprints, enabling us to conclude that the someone supplied the insurgents with Sarin, thinking they would understand the purpose and use it as part of a false flag to frame the Syrian government, but the insurgents were so idiotic that they did not understand this and
    destroyed the entire plot by moronically using it in plain sight as an offensive weapon in the battle for Khan al Assal.
    https://hyper-db.de/monopedia/wiki/index.php?title=2013_Ghouta_attacks
    The other error is less important but still bears consideration, the visual evidence from the scene strongly indicates that the Khan Sheikhun incident was a pure psychological operation with fake
    victims responding to a non existent incident. Watch the video where White Helmets are supposedly helping victims of the attack completely lacking any protective clothing or equipment, this is
    nonsense.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG4hDxOfrXY
    There is no credible footage of the aftermath of any chemical attack of anykind whether deliberate or caused by the inadvertent spread of toxic chemicals by the air strike.
    We know from Seymour Hersh’s reporting on this that Russia told the US the SAF were going to
    attack Khan Sheikhun on that day, it is therefore pretty clear that
    the US informed their allies on the ground enabling them to prepare
    the staged event in advance.
    https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
    Thanks for your work.

  • Attrition47

    Evidence is evidence, not “available evidence”; if it isn’t available is isn’t evidence. Please avoid American illiterat-isms.