There’s a brief but informative slide show presentation on chemical weapons use in the Syrian civil war at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that’s worth the five minutes of your time it will take to view it. IMO the greatest likelihood is that the Syrian government is using CS and CN, two riot-control agents, against its citizens.
If that rises to the level of the intolerable use of chemical weapons, we’d better be ready to attack a lot of countries since they’re used all over the world, notably in Egypt and Bahrain but also in Russia and China.
Unless I missed it, the piece left me with a big question. If White Phosphorus is not considered a chemical weapon under any treaty, what is the status of CS?
Just from googling the first law review article that mentions CS, it appears that its status is ambiguous. CS ( and presumably CN) are considered “riot control agents” (RCA) that are prohibited by international treaty for military use, but not for law enforcement purposes. The difference btw/ law enforcement and military use was not defined in order to gain wider acceptance of the treaty.
The U.S., through the Senate ratification process and Executive Order, adopted narrow constructions of the RCA limitations in the treaty. Specfically The Senate ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention with the understanding that “the United States is not restricted by the Convention in its use of riot control agents, including use against combatants who are parties to a conflict†in three cases: (1) where the U.S. is not a party to the conflict, (2) consensual Chapter VI peacekeeping operations and (3) Chapter VII peacekeeping operations.â€
Furthermore, the Senate referenced, and essentially made mandatory, Executive Order 11850, which President Ford had previously issued, which authorized the military to use RCA in four circumstances:
“(a) Use of riot control agents in areas under direct and distinct U.S
military control, to include controlling rioting prisoners of war.
(b) Use of riot control agents in situations in which civilians are used to mask or screen attacks and civilian casualties can be reduced or avoided.
(c) Use of riot control agents in rescue missions in remotely isolated
areas of downed aircrews and passengers, and escaping prisoners.
(d) Use of riot control agents in rear echelon areas outside the zone of immediate combat to protect convoys from civil disturbances, terrorists and paramilitary organizations”
Syria is not a party to the CWC, but its quite possible that if it were and if it had used a RCA, it might not have violated the convention, or not have violated the US understanding of the convention. Basically, we need to know the chemical and the context.
(Also, interesting that opponents of the US understanding argue that use of RCA would encourage escalation to more deadly chemical weapons, while defenders respond that its quite easy to distinguish RCA from more toxic chemical agents)
Use of riot agents in closed spaces is more likely to cause real problems. I guess I just dont see the motivation for Syria to use Sarin.
Steve
British Intelligence assessment:
“Extensive video footage attributed to the attack in eastern Damascus (which we assess would be very difficult to falsify) is consistent with the use of a nerve agent, such as sarin, and is not consistent with the use of blister or riot control agents.”
. . .
“The Syrian regime has now announced that it will allow access to the sites by UN inspectors.
“There is no immediate time limit over which environmental or physiological samples would have degraded beyond usefulness. However, the longer it takes inspectors to gain access to the affected sites, the more difficult it will be to establish the chain of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/235094/Jp_115_JD_PM_Syria_Reported_Chemical_Weapon_Use_with_annex.pdf
I’ve seen a video of a British chemical weapons expert state that the video footage would be consistent with a wide variety of chemical agents that would cause respiratory and eye injuries, including RCAs, though I think he thought that might be less probable than some hereto-unknown use of industrial process chemicals.