E Chemical Weapons Massacre: a Continuation of Practices and a Test for the International Community

�e Chemical Weapons Massacre: a Continuation of Practices and a Test for the International Community

Policy Studies Unit

25 Sep 2016

HARMOON CENTER FOR CONTEMPORARY STUDIES

Harmoon Centre for Contemporary Studies is an independent, nonprofit, research, cultural and media institution. Its main focus is to conduct studies and researches about the Arab region, especially Syria. It also works towards cultural and media development, enhancing the civil society performance, and spreading democratic awareness and values of dialogue, as well as respect for human rights. The Centre also provides consultation and training services in political and media fields to all Syrians on the basis of Syrian national identity. To achieve its objectives, the Centre conducts its activities through five specialized units, (1) Policy Studies Unit, (2) Social Researches Unit, (3) Books Review Unit, (4) Translation and Arabization Unit, and (5) Legal Unit. A set of action programs are also adopted, such as the program for Political Consultations and Initiatives; Program for Services, Media Campaigns, and Public Opinion Making Program; Program for Dialogue Support and Civil and Cultural Development Program; Syria Future Program. The Centre may add new programs depending on the actual needs of Syria and the region. In implementing its programs, the Centre deploys multiple mechanisms, including lectures, workshops, seminars, conferences, training courses, as well as paper and electronic press.

Contents Introduction ...... 2 First: the Crime ...... 2 Second, the regime evades responsibility ...... 4 Third: Russia extends a lifeline ...... 5 Fourth, all the chemical weapons or just some ...... 6 Fifth: No one cares ...... 7 Seventh: Wasting money ...... 11 Eighth: Future Syria and weapons of mass destruction ...... 13

Introduction The chemical massacre committed by the Syrian regime against the Syrian people in Damascus Ghouta, represents a horrendous crime and a painful memory that can never be forgotten because it is not something that can be expunged. The Syrian people are still painfully living in every detail, reaffirming their right for holding the perpetrators accountable for their crimes, and the rightfulness of the revolution against the executioners who did not hesitate to use chemical weapons against them, the executioners who do not have any moral or human values, and do not care about international law or humanitarian values, practicing their crimes and destruction before the whole world to see, with no regard for the international community who stood silently watching the story of one country’s whole population being gradually obliterated.

The major chemical "massacre" of August 2013, is a crime that has crossed all boundaries, and trespassed all the red lines set by President Barack Obama for the Syrian regime, showing that those lines were only a verbal threat, aiming to disarm the Syrian regime of its chemical weapons rather than protect the Syrian people.

First: the Crime The chemical weapons attack on Damascus took place on 21 August 2013, when some rockets were launched from the vicinity of Mount Qassioun just north of the Syrian capital, where there is a concentration of unknown number of military units, majorly troops from the Republican Guards. The area is known to be patrolled by heavy artillery and rocket launchers too, exhausting rural Damascus with daily and non-stopping bombing, for the last five years. This time, the missiles were not the conventional ones, in fact they were carrying chemical heads, causing the deaths of nearly 1,450 people, who were all documented by name and picture, mostly civilians, children and women, from many suburbs; Zamalka, Moadamieh, Kafr Batna, Douma, Jessrin and Arbin. All victims died as a result of suffocation and poisoning resulting from unconventional toxic substances thrown over their heads as they slept.

Reports submitted by Syrian and international organizations, indicated that the area from which the missiles were launched was a military zone on Mount Qasioun, containing a scientific research centre, which is considered a military think tank supervised by the Syrian Ministry of Defence, and included laboratories for developing weapons, conventional and unconventional. Other reports also suggested that at least one missile was launched from the Mezze military airbase, which was used by the regime forces as a huge hub for their military and security operations.

Human Rights Watch organisation confirmed in a detailed report the use of large amounts of (sarin) gas during the attack, and pointed out that the payload of each missile exceeded 55 litres. It also confirmed that the rockets used were distinguished and never been seen outside Syria, and pointed out that it had previous images of this type of missiles which were in the possession of the Syrian army. This confirmed to organization, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the Syrian regime was the one who used those missiles.

The report issued by this international organization, is one of the many other reports, provided by the local Syrian organizations, and other international ones, and even UN agencies, one of which was the Special Investigation committee report which was approved by the United Nations, and submitted last August to the Security Council, who in turn confirmed that " the Syrian government” used chemical weapons in Ghouta, and they used it at least twice in the past two years, in violation of their undertakings to destroy their arsenal of such weapons. The report said that there is sufficient information to indicate that the helicopters of the regime’s forces dropped some devices which later released a poisonous gas on "Telmens" in April 2014 and on "Sermin" in March 2015 in the province of Idlib, and chlorine gas was used in both cases.

The Ghouta chemical "massacre" took place just three days after the arrival of international inspectors mission to Damascus, which indicates the extent of the Syrian regime’s disregard to all international and UN laws, launching sixteen missiles, all SS type, loaded with Sarin toxic 3 gases, to facilitate breaking into these intractable areas, where fighters continued to resist its forces and war. The inspectors of the United Nations report, which was issued on 16 September 2013 did not blame the attack on any party or side, and merely described the attack as a "serious crime", and stressed the need to bring those responsible to justice as soon as possible, pointing out that it was carried out by SS rockets launched between two and five in the morning, claiming the largest possible number of victims, when people were sleeping, especially that the regime used in this attack a certain type of rockets, which does not make a loud noise when exploding, and does not damage building, but only chokes breaths and destroys nerves .

Second, the regime evades responsibility The bizarre statements, and sometimes contradictory, issued by the regime and its officials, increased suspicions around it, and made some observers convinced that the regime was behind the crime, even before any report was issued around this incident. Butheina Shaaban, the political and media adviser of al-Assad, had issued an unbelievable statement, throwing unsubstantiated accusations against the opposition, giving a surreal scenario to evade any accusations to the regime of committing the chemical massacre in the Eastern Ghouta in Damascus, saying: "The Syrian opposition is responsible for this crime, they have abducted children and men and women from villages in Latakia, and brought them to Ghouta in Damascus, placing them in one place, then using chemical weapons on them" in an attempt to suggest that the victims of the massacre were" Alawite sect," who were led by opposition. According to what she said, hundreds of Alawites were transferred from their villages in Latakia, which is more than 400 km away from the Ghouta, and brought to Ghouta, crossing dozens of checkpoints and the security battalions of the system and the Lebanese Hezbollah. This absurd statement proved to many that the regime was involved the crime.

Shaaban’ statement was followed by a similar statement from Mother Agnes Mary, a Christian nun who was pro-regime to the core, giving another account of a surreal story saying

4 that all the display was part of the dramatic films made by the Syrian opposition, and that nothing had happened in Ghouta, she said: "There is a dramatic fabricating of the chemical weapons incident in Rural Damascus, and it is prefabricated " explaining:" there was a selection of images of children that were displayed after a chemical incident, it seems that the parents were not present," she said:" and those appearing in the film didn’t seem to be sad," ignoring entirely the existence of documents naming all the victims, and ignored hundreds of films showing the children being buried in mass graves.

Third: Russia extends a lifeline When Russia sensed that the US threats to bomb the Syrian regime were getting serious, they rushed to find a way out and came out with a format which found a soft spot with the Americans. The Russian initiative on the disarmament of chemical Syrian weapons to avoid military action, came the as a way out for US President Barack Obama from his red line dilemma. But on the other hand, President Obama stressed to "keep the pressure on Assad," while working on the Russian initiative for the disarmament of chemical weapons, which Obama described as "positive development", and stressed that his administration "will take it as seriously as necessary ", pointing out that what was practiced by his administration on the Syrian regime," was to reach such positive developments" with regard to chemical weapons, then he addressed a limp message to the Syrian regime, in which he said: " Assad must stop the use of weapons chemical, and he has to know that what he has done was very dangerous. "

As a result, the Americans agreed on the Russian offer of the Syrian regime surrendering their chemical weapons in exchange for halting a possible military strike, with the US foreign Secretary John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov coming together to announce the acceptance of the Syrian regime to put its arsenal of chemical weapons under the supervision and control of international organizations to be destroyed.

The Americans denied that what happened was a deal out of the red lines dilemma, or that its goal was only to strip the regime of its chemical weapons upon an Israeli request. On the other hand, the Syrian regime announced that it would surrender their chemical weapons because of its commitment to its people, in a bizarre statement which completely contradicted the reality, released by the Syrian Foreign Affairs Minister, Walid al-Moualem, from Moscow in which he said: "the Syrian leadership welcomes the Russian initiative to preserve the lives of our citizens and the security of our country, and our confidence in the Russian leadership who are keen to prevent any aggression on our country!"

In summary, the main and only objective of the deal, which was sponsored by the Russians between the Syrian regime and the Americans, is to spare the regime from the American strike which was about to happen, saving the regime’s head from the American stick.

Fourth, all the chemical weapons or just some During the follow-up of the regime to surrender its chemical weapons, and even before that, when the regime was apprehensive about what it might lose if they gave away their chemical weapons, they kept looking for safe places to put away some of them, in case they are needed in the future. Many media reports were published, endorsed by some Syrian human rights organizations, pointed out that the Syrian regime has stashed some chemical warhead missiles in Hezbollah camps in Lebanon. Some US intelligence reports said: "the Syrian regime has tuck away nerves gas which was more lethal than those which it abandoned", and stressed that these weapons "are currently in the hands of Hezbollah", and criticised the discreetness of the international inspectors and world powers, and the lack of pressure on the regime to get more information, or to validate the data it provided about its stock of chemicals, amid fears that al-Assad would reconsider the global tender to rid Syria of its arsenal of chemical weapons. According to UN reports, the regime has admitted and surrendered around 1300 tons of chemical substances, while reports say that this amount is equivalent to 75 percent of its stock.

The CIA has concluded that the intelligence data has changed, and that there was a growing body of evidence that Assad concealed caches of banned chemicals, and some observers saw that Assad may has concealed some of what he had, and he will use his secret reserves when he needs to defend the strongholds of the regime in cases of maximum necessity, or that it was given to Hezbollah as a gift to keep it as a regional riot power that could not be ignored.

Following the surrendering of the chemical weapons the United Nations, the White House and the Foreign Office announced that the submission process "was a success, even though the regime have put away some deadly chemicals," and some US officials have stressed that the security situation "may be more dangerous today, if this amount of chemicals was not removed." Thomas Countryman, the US Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Security and Non-proliferation, said that: " it is important to maintain the perspective that the most serious of these inhumane weapons are no longer in the hands of this dictator," referring to Assad.

Fifth: No one cares It is unfortunate that the international reaction was weak and lax, starting with the United States, which made it possible for the regime to evade the legal responsibility for its huge and dangerous chemical attack.

The careless reactions of the United States and Europe in general, towards the small chemical attacks before the August 2013 attack, encouraged al-Assad to take a risk – which was carefully deliberated as it was revealed later- to go ahead and use chemical weapons on a larger scale. In reality, the fact that the major chemical massacre has gone unpunished, the regime along with Iran, have got exactly what they wanted which is the direct threat to the Syrian people that there was nothing prohibited in this war, and got what looked like a green light from the US administration to use all types of weapons, including weapons of mass 7 destruction in their war in Syria, hence the Americans could not pretend to be surprised about the chemical attack on Ghouta, because it was not the first time.

Previously, numerous American threats were empty, Obama has said in December 2012 that "the United States would not accept that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime, and there would be consequences for such use," and instead of the regime's commitment to its undertakings not to use these weapons, or being apprehensive of the use of such weapons, the facts indicate an increase in its targeting of civilians and the use of new chemical weapons against the Syrians.

Before the chemical massacre of Ghouta, the possibility of using chemical weapons by the regime was increasing with the steady progress of the forces of the Syrian revolution and the decline of the regime’s forces, the Syrian regime had admitted possessing chemical weapons in the 23 July 2012 by the spokesman of the Syrian Foreign Ministry at the time (Jihad Maqdisi) when he stressed that the regime "would not use any chemical or biological weapons except in the case of exposure to external aggression," this was the first official confession of the existence of the arsenal of chemical weapons it had.

The Syrian regime used chemical weapons in the bombing of several regions and cities in Syria before August 2013, in Damascus (Otaiba, Ein Tarma, Daria, and Altaibah), and Sheikh Maksoud in Aleppo, and Saraqeb in Idlib, and Jobar and the camp of Yarmouk in Damascus. The Syrian Network for Human Rights has documented 33 attack with poisonous gas between 23 December 2012 and 27 September 2013; meaning that the regime has had used chemical weapons at least 30 times before the eyes of the whole world before the ominous August, however, no effort was made to stop it from committing the massacres that came afterwards.

The surge against the regime would have allowed many innovative actions, and non-military ones to deter and punish it, but it never happened, and the effect of the US and Western retreat was disastrous for the Syrians. The gravity of the international attitude after what happened in Ghouta does not evolve around the non-availability of a deterrent international response alone; but that it was allowed to pursue its attacks and invent new methods of destruction and killing, especially the improvised explosive barrels which exceeded one hundred barrels a day, a density of use that makes it no different from weapons of mass destruction. On top of that, the use of poisonous chlorine gas increased too, and this is why the Washington Post would say that Obama “ has given al-Assad a permission to use chemical weapons again."

The US attitude was scandalous, whether from the international law point of view, or from the general humanitarian stance, and even from an international political perspective as well, apart from continuing to prevent the "armed opposition", in all its forms and affiliations, of owning a deterrent weapons system, which have left the Syrian people with disastrous results.

Sixth: A crime that has no statutes of limitation International humanitarian law points out that such crimes have no statues of limitation, and this is what always makes the Syrians ask the international community to bring the perpetrators in Syria to justice, because they were involved in the use of internationally forbidden weapons, also were involved in the killing of more than half a million Syrians since March 2011, as well as the displacement of millions people internally and abroad, in neighbouring countries and the countries of the world. The regime's crimes against civilians began before the chemical attack and continued afterwards, by bombing neighbourhoods and cities with bombs and explosive barrels, wiping out entire neighbourhoods and villages, and making them merely ruins.

Although, the UN Security decision 2209, issued in 2015, indicated that the Syrian government was not allowed to use or develop, produce or possess any chemical weapons, in

9 any way, stockpile or retain or transfer, directly or indirectly, to countries or other entities, and recognizing that the use of any chemical weapons by the regime would be a violation of international laws, and that those who use them should be held accountable; and also despite the resolution’s warning to use Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations to stop these violations, a chapter which allows the use of force to apply the international law, the Syrian regime did not care for all of the above, and continued to use chemical weapons, without batting an eyelid.

The Syrian Network for Human Rights has documented 139 attacks with chemical weapons after the adoption of resolution 2118 on the regime’s disarmament of chemical weapons, which was released by the Security Council on 27 September 2013. It has also documented 33 attacks since the start of the Syrian revolution without any form of punishment or reproach to those responsible. Moreover, the use of chlorine gas is "a violation of resolutions 2118 and 2209 together," and the agreement signed by the regime on 14 September 2013 of not using toxic gases and disposing of them.

All evidence confirms that the Syrian regime had repeatedly violated Security Council resolutions, including Resolution No. 2118, No. 2209 and No. 2235, and Russia has not implemented its pledge to the United States to deter this regime, and that the United States did not do anything against the repeated use of poisonous gases. According to Article V of the International Criminal Court system, which specializes in the prosecution of persons responsible for committing the most serious crimes, that the punishments include the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, which are serious violations of international law, and they have no statute of limitation, regardless of the position of the offender, whether president or commander of a military or civilian. Article 29 of the court system states that “crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court have no statute of limitation whatever the provisions," and all international humanitarian law conventions insist on the accountability of war criminals, whatever their nationality or place of such crimes.

Seventh: Wasting money The Syrian regime has worked, throughout Al-Assad rule of father and son, to dispel Syria's economy and drain it under the pretext of building a military balance with Israel, or what it called as a "strategic balance", which turned out later to be a fib, and that the goal of the regime was to build a huge and dangerous military arsenal to protect itself from the people, and to ensure its survival in power as a holistic sole autocrat, and built its arsenal of chemical and biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction, not to confront Israel, but to kill its own people in broad daylight, fearlessly.

For over four decades, about 70 percent of the state budget was spent on defence, purchasing weapons and amplifying the military arsenal, including conventional weapons such as strategic weapons like ballistic missiles and other, and non-conventional weapons such as chemical and biological weapons, which were done in secret and the Syrian people knew nothing about. These armament deals were accompanied by huge commissions, distributed among the symbols of the regime and its senior officers and associates of the Assad family, exhausting the country’s budget, and lowering the standard of living among the Syrians, where the average annual income in Syria was the lowest in the region, and even lower than the annual income in Lebanon, a country that was out of decades of civil war.

On top of that, the Syrian regime has squandered in the recent war on its people most of Syria's foreign exchange reserves, which was more than $ 18 billion before the start of the Syrian revolution in 2011, in addition to tens of billions of dollars received during the last years from its allies in the form of grants or aid or loans to support its war, in return for guarantees; state buildings were mortgaged and their real estate and public possessions were held as collateral for repayment.

Perhaps the main reason for the survival of the regime in spite of all this economic ruin, was the security structure and repressive converge that would usually determine totalitarian

11 dictatorships, in spite of the sanctions against these regimes, the people are usually the ones who pay for them not the regimes, as was the case with all of these repressive regimes, starting with the Gaddafi’s in Libya to the regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen and elsewhere.

Despite the enormous expenditure to build its chemical arsenal, the regime abandoned it in the end to save its seat in power and its survival as a system serving other projects, Iranian, Russian and others. The regime also burdened the Syrian state with huge debts to finance personal projects, and projects for its own protection. There are legitimate questions about the responsibility of the Syrian people for these debts, and whether they would be wiped out if the regime falls down, or not.

The regime is still using internationally banned weapons, even after handing down the chemical weapons, which was surrendered. In a report submitted to the Security Council at the end of last August, the OPCW has confirmed that the chemical weapons inspectors "have information which indicate that chemicals like chlorine are still being used in the war in Syria against civilians," pointing out that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons and toxic chlorine gas more than once recently, and called for international intervention to hold the regime members who used these weapons accountable for their crimes.

Syrians fear the UN Security Council will not be able to reach an agreement that would impose sanctions on the regime for the use of chemical weapons, due to Russia discrediting the evidence provided by the Independent Commission, which concluded that the government forces were behind at least two chemical attacks.

And despite the fact that Britain and France call for the Security Council to impose sanctions on Syria, Russia has put its whole weight on the subject to prevent any penalty imposed on the regime. In the latest verbal altercation in the Security Council, Russia stated: "it is clear that

12 there is a gun smoke, but there are no fingerprints on the gun, and therefore no one can be subjected to sanctions, because the report did not contain any names or specific facts."

It is worth to mention that the UN Security Council is currently facing a difficult legal and ethical test. The international committee whose mission was to investigate the nine specific attacks where chemical weapons have been used in different parts of Syria, submitted a report which concluded that the regime was responsible for two out of three attacks, while (Daesh) was responsible for one, while they were not able to verify the remaining six attacks because of the prevailing security situation. The question now revolves around the position that the Council would take.

It seems that Russia will put its international responsibilities as a permanent member at stake to save the Syrian regime again; Will Russia and the rest of the permanent members legitimize the use of weapons of mass destruction, where it becomes acceptable to use?

Eighth: Future Syria and weapons of mass destruction If chemical weapons were not being used to protect the state and the nation, and were only used to protect the ruling regime, will the future Syria still need this type of weapons? This is a legitimate question to ask before the scene of what happened in Syria, and before what may happen in the future.

It was thought that chemical weapons, and all weapons of mass destruction, would provide a long-term deterrent against further existential threats, and thus against the threats of a wide conventional attack, or an attack involving the use of nuclear weapons, chemical or biological weapons. However, this weapon, for the Syrian regime, was only dedicated to be used against its own people, not against any external enemy!

From here, it has become necessary more than ever to adopt a future policy which is oriented towards the disarmament of weapons of mass destruction in the region, and the whole world, to preserve the human race and the achievements of its civilizations.

Re-visiting this file today, on the third anniversary of the crime, which was committed against the Syrian people, puts the credibility of the international community at stake, and bring forward the issue of abandonment brought against these people, and the case of a wilful neglect that is taking place. It also question the future credibility, and how the international community can play around with the fate of human beings, if such an incident occurred elsewhere in the world.

Holding the Syrian regime accountable, and all criminals who do the same, is very important, not only on the Syrian level, but on the human level as a whole, because such crimes do not have statute of limitations, and cannot be expunged, and will always be a visible proof in front of everyone of the failure of the world, until justice takes its true course, and punishes the offender and the criminal, whether he/she was a president or an officer or a warlord.

harmoon.org