Chemical Weapons In Syria Research Articles

Chemical Weapons Violations in Syria's Civil War: an International Law Perspective

The use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war is a grave violation of international law, as it violates the prohibition on using chemical weapons under customary international law. The war has erupted since Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad responded violently to the peaceful opposition toward the regime. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has confirmed two occasions of using chemical weapons in Syria in 2015 and 2016. However, until recently, there were no necessary measures to protect civilians in Syria from using chemical weapons and prevent any future use of Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons. The study aims to analyze the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war, the violation of the CWC in the Syrian civil war, and the legal protection of Syrian civilians. The study used a normative legal research methodology. The data sources in the study were secondary data obtained from the statutory, analytical, legal, conceptual, and fact approaches. The study's result showed that the Syrian government violated the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (CWC) and should respond with the action, categorized as an infringement of the international legal norm.

MEDICAL PROTECTION OF TROOPS AND POPULATION IN THE USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS (LITERATURE REVIEW)

In the war with Ukraine, Russia will probably use chemical weapons, resorting to surgery «under someone else’s flag». This can happen in the form of fake attacks or «exposing» chemical ammunition or Ukrainian agents who «plan» an attack by chemical weapons. Given the reasoned evidence of the use of chemical weapons in Syria and Ukraine and experts, it is appropriate to conclude that chemical weapons are expensive and unpredictable, it is not very effective tools during hostilities, but it belongs to the weapon losses among civilians and troops. Objective: In the conditions of war to offer the personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the peaceful population an algorithm of actions for medical protection when the enemy uses chemical weapons. Research materials: The research is based on analysis of sources of scientific information, normative-legal documents, scientific publications, materials of scientific-practical conferences on organization of medical support of liquidation of consequences of application of chemical ammunition in combat conditions. Methods of research: Analytical, bibliographic, historical, logical, system analysis. Results: The algorithm of actions on home medical care and medical protection of the personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the civilian population in case of threat and use of chemical weapons in wartime is proposed. Conclusions: Experience shows that early, mutually agreed planning of measures to protect troops and the population, the implementation of the algorithm of actions for home care and medical protection in the event of the threat and use of chemical weapons, significantly reduces irreversible and sanitary losses in war. Key words: medical protection, chemical weapons, fighting.

International Efforts Against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

Abstract This article examines international developments in the investigation of incidents involving the use of chemical weapons (CWs) in Syria between 2012 and 2021. Specifically, it analyses the measures adopted by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in cooperation with the United Nations, and the progress in eliminating the Syrian chemical weapons programme. The article further addresses the international community’s responses to the use of CWs in Syria from the perspective of international law, and its inability to hold those responsible accountable and to offer redress the victims. Such inability is illustrated by the somewhat weak action following two reports of the Investigation and Identification Team of the OPCW, which clearly indicated that the authorities of the Syrian Arab Republic are behind a number of CW attacks in Syria. The article argues that the lack of international justice, despite clear evidence of blatant violations, is rooted in the fundamental differences between major powers within the Security Council, as well as in the existing gaps in the law.

Penalizing Atrocities

AbstractThe Syrian Civil War that began in 2011 killed more than 400,000 civilians. Could a limited intervention motivated by humanitarian concerns have reduced the death toll at an acceptable cost to the intervenors? I distinguish between two approaches to intervention:penalizing atrocities, by raising the cost and lowering the benefit of killing civilians; andfostering a balance of power, to convince the two sides that they cannot win on the battlefield and so must negotiate an end to the war. I show, using a game-theoretic model, that fostering a balance of power causes the government to commit more atrocities and prolongs the war. Penalizing atrocities, while it increases the likelihood of war, can reduce the expected level of atrocities. The model helps account for the failure of US efforts to promote negotiations by aiding Syrian rebels, and the success of efforts to deter Syrian chemical weapons use through threats and limited strikes.

When the pigeons refuse to fly: Legal perpesctives on the deployment of chemical weapons in Syria

In recent times, several hostilities have taken place all over the world. However, these hostilities have been non-international in character and outlook, with the attendant gory effects more pronounced in the 20th and 21st Century warfare. The type of weaponry engaged in such hostilities have been in the spotlight in International Humanitarian Law (IHL). The deployment of chemical weapons in the Syrian war and its adverse effect on the civilian population have become a global concern. The effectiveness of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development and Production, Stockpiling and use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, and other legal instruments relating to the protection of victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, have been questioned. Although, scholars had in times past advocated for the restriction and prohibition of the use of chemical weapons in armed conflicts, the Syrian situation has again exposed the need to devote urgent attention to providing more effective sanctions for perpetrators of this heinous crime. This paper seeks to explore the legal implications of the deployment of Chemical Weapons in Syria, by canvassing arguments for more concerted efforts to guard against the use of Chemical Weapons in armed conflicts and ensure more adequate protection for civilians. This will give effect to and promote the core values of IHL.

A textual study of rhetorical tools in Barack Obama's speech on the issue of chemical weapons in Syria

This study is concerned with investigating the rhetorical tools and strategies used by Obama in his speech to the Americans about "chemical weapons" allegedly used in Syria. Here, it tries to answer the following questions: a. What are the rhetorical tools that Obama employed in his speech to the nation? b- What are the functions of rhetorical questions in his speech? c. How did he use rhetorical aspects in his speech? The study assumes that Obama used many rhetorical tools to influence public opinion about the reality of what happened in Syria. Furthermore,

ARE THE IMPROVISED CHEMICAL WEAPONS AS EFFICIENT AS MEDIA CLAIMS THEY ARE? CASE STUDY: THE SYRIAN WAR

It is reported by various media sources that, since the beginning of the Syrian war in 2011, more than 11.5% of Syria’s population has been wounded or killed. The scarcity of war resources forced the belligerents of the Syrian civil war to use many improvised weapons among which the chemical barrel bombs hold the headlines. Although the exact number of casualties produced by chemical weapons in Syria is unknown, reportedly a few thousand were killed or intoxicated. This article seeks to determine the efficiency of improvised chemical weapons used in Syria and compare them with the specially designed ones. For comparison, the military standards are to be used and the conclusion will show if the media is exaggerating or the humanity faces a new type of chemical warfare.

The Obama Administration’s Response to the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria: An Exchange

The Obama Administration’s Response to the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria: An Exchange

ARMELE CHIMICE IMPROVIZATE ÎNTRE EFICIENÞA TACTICÃ ªI PROPAGANDA MEDIA STUDIU DE CAZ: RÃZBOIUL SIRIAN

It is reported by various media sources that, since the beginning of the Syrian war in 2011, more than 11.5% of Syria’s population has been wounded or killed. The scarcity of war resources forced the belligerents of the Syrian civil war to use many improvised weapons among which the chemical barrel bombs hold the headlines. Although the exact number of casualties produced by chemical weapons in Syria is unknown, reportedly a few thousand were killed or intoxicated. This article seeks to determine the efficiency of improvised chemical weapons used in Syria and compare them with the specially designed ones. For comparison, the military standards are to be used and the conclusion will show if the media is exaggerating or the humanity faces a new type of chemical warfare.

Maintenance of News Frames: How US, British and Russian News Made Sense of Unfolding Events in the Syrian Chemical Weapons Crisis

ABSTRACT Frames are indispensable tools for journalists to make sense of unfolding events, but they also constrain their perspective to most readily see what they expect to see. In this study, we examine how pre-established news frames continue to inform journalists’ framing practices despite the ongoing arrival of novel, often contravening information. Specifically, we argue that dominant frames rooted in pre-existing cultural perceptions and strategic elite frame building have the capacity to overpower an open-minded appraisal of available information. In a qualitative, diachronic analysis of US, British and Russian news coverage of the 2013 Syrian Chemical Weapons crisis, we analyze journalists’ strategies for negotiating between pre-established news frames and novel, discrepant claims and observations. We find that most claims that directly contravened existing frames were either ignored or discounted by questioning the credibility of sources. By contrast, unforeseen events effectively challenged the predictive validity of dominant frames, necessitating adaptations with often far-reaching consequences for the frame. Observed patterns were consistent across outlets, despite the different journalistic cultures and embedding media systems and political settings. Our findings illuminate the important role of journalists’ pre-established ideas, which shape their news selection and framing practices, contributing to the maintenance of existing news narratives.

The Obama Administration and Syrian Chemical Weapons: Deterrence, Compellence, and the Limits of the “Resolve plus Bombs” Formula

This article examines responses to the Syrian government’s possession and eventual use of chemical weapons (CW) in that country’s civil war from 2012 to 2013. During this time, the United States and other outside powers applied coercive strategies, in both deterrent and compellent modes. Outcomes varied: compellence in the form of coercive diplomacy achieved a partial success, getting Syria to give up much of its chemical stockpile, but there were multiple deterrence failures, culminating in a large-scale sarin gas attack in August 2013. We examine this record to draw lessons about factors associated with the effectiveness of coercion. Our analysis draws on insights from existing research on both deterrence and coercive diplomacy to develop an integrated analytical framework involving the interplay of three factors: credibility, motivations, and assurance. We find the typical default approach to coercion, based on demonstrating toughness and threatening to impose costs using airpower—an approach we call the “resolve plus bombs” formula—was not sufficient to change Syria’s calculations regarding chemical use.

Syria, Sarin and Cyprus: An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

ABSTRACTThis is an updated version of an open letter, dated 9 May 2018, which was originally addressed to Theresa May MP, the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (‘UK’). The author composed the original version after a joint US, UK and French operation completed in Syria on 14 April 2018. Each version highlights various dangers presented to the Republic of Cyprus (‘RoC’) and to the adjacent British Sovereign Base Areas (‘SBAs’) by the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria, the Joint Operation in response and other factors, including the emerging phenomenon of poor air quality. An Addendum supplements this updated version. This pinpoints five salient developments since 9 May 2018. Each reinforces the author’s call—in his open letter—for the British Prime Minister to instigate an independent public inquiry with two main aims. One is to investigate how, why and with what consequences the atmosphere of the RoC and the SBAs has been adversely affected by toxic dust clouds and other sources of poor air quality since 2001. The other is to assess what can be done to address these matters, together with any other natural or man-made environmental threats, to the RoC and SBAs.

Dynamics of norm contestation in the Chemical Weapons Convention: The case of ‘non-lethal agents’

In this article, we use an adapted version of Wayne Sandholtz’s cycle of normative change to examine the dynamics of contestation of norms against incapacitating chemical agents and riot control agents, often imprecisely grouped together under the term ‘non-lethal chemical weapons’. We draw on a concept-driven analysis of statements and in-depth interviews with individual stakeholders to track the gradual development of the issue towards norm change within the Chemical Weapons Convention. Our findings highlight several key factors conducive to normative change, particularly the role of the Dubrovka incident as the ‘deviant event’, discursive decoupling of the two classes of chemicals, and new framing and ‘rebranding’ of incapacitating chemical agents as ‘CNS-acting chemicals’. At the same time, we also examine factors that significantly slowed down attempts by norm entrepreneurs to attract attention to the issue, such as the saliency of the use of chemical weapons in Syria, which effectively sidelined the problem of ‘non-lethal’ agents in the overall debate.

The United States, Russia, and Syria’s chemical weapons: a tale of cooperation and its unravelling

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the drivers of US–Russian cooperation in the disarmament of Syria’s declared chemical weapons (CW) in 2013–14, emphasizing the primary importance of credible coercion vis-à-vis the Syrian government. It identifies additional significant drivers—including the resonance of institutional memory of cooperation through the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs; continued interest alignment for Russia through consensus on a hybrid disarmament framework; and constructive relationships among senior officials on both sides—while also showing the relevance of Russian sensitivities to status, the prospects of a new round of Syria peace talks planned at the time (“Geneva II”), and expectations of positive “spillover” from narrow cooperation on Syrian CW into other areas of US–Russian relations. The article further traces and explains the unravelling of internal consensus within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on the Syrian CW file between 2014 and the present day, analyzing growing frictions over the Fact-Finding Mission, the Joint Investigative Mechanism, and the Investigation and Identification Team. Disagreements within the OPCW over these issues became increasingly viewed as inextricably linked to the broader geopolitical Russia–West confrontation. Finally, the article probes the resultant implications for prospects of universalizing the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention and making progress toward a weapons-of-mass-destruction-free zone in the Middle East.

Lessons in deterrence: Evaluating coercive diplomacy in Syria, 2012–2019

ABSTRACT This paper assesses deterrence efforts against the use of chemical weapons in Syria through the framework of rational deterrence theory (RDT). Deterrence succeeds and fails over stages and across time. In Syria, periodic deterrence breakdowns were linked to insufficient (or weakening) US commitment and resolve, which undermined US credibility. More broadly, the Syria case demonstrates the continued relevance of RDT, as well as the difficulties associated with establishing – and maintaining – successful deterrence. Policymakers must approach coercive diplomacy systematically, specifying the purpose of their strategy and weighing the goals of deterrence against alternative and additional political and/or military considerations.

Exploring the UN and OPCW Partnership in Syrian Chemical Weapons Disarmament

Abstract After reviewing recent literature on international organizations’ autonomy and cooperation, this article explores the unprecedented partnership between the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons—implementing body for the Chemical Weapons Convention—and the UN Secretariat during the 2013–2014 chemical weapons disarmament in Syria. The article explores how this collaboration, embodied on the ground through the creation of a Joint Mission, evolved from hesitant, bureaucratic rivalry to an increasingly intense relationship in the aftermath of a large-scale attack near Damascus in August 2013. The research is based on wide-ranging interviews with senior OPCW and UN staff, and relevant state officials. The article shows how international shocks, high-level support from key Member States, and leadership at the Secretariat level produced requisite intra- and interorganizational consensus to mitigate turf wars. Relative autonomy of mission staff and bureaucratic flexibility further allowed skilled boundary spanners to build trust and increase the mission’s leeway, allowing it to navigate complex political challenges.

INTERNATIONAL PEACE INITIATIVES TO RESOLVE THE CONFLICT IN SYRIA

The article „ International peace initiatives to resolve the conflict in Syria” reveals the international efforts to bring the conflict to an end and start a meaningful peace process that would reconcile the conflicting parties and engage them in a series of negotiations aiming to initiate a National Dialogue, draft a mutually acceptable Constitution and prepare free and fair elections that would decide the issue of political power in the country. The article outlines the peace endeavors of the United Nations Security Council, which adopted several resolutions to support the efforts to prevent the use of chemical weapons in Syria, authorize a mechanism to conduct humanitarian operations and establish cease-fire conditions. Furthermore, the article describes in detail the so called Geneva Peace Process as the framework, which started negotiating the establishment of transitional power architecture with a transitional governing body possessing full executive powers, comprised of representatives of the Syrian regime and the opposition. The article goes on to highlight the guidelines and principles of the political transition and the results of the subsequent rounds of political talks, which didn’t yield a conclusive outcome because of the unfavorable conditions on the ground and the ongoing offensive of the government forces against the opposition groups. Then, the article analyzes the peace efforts undertaken under the leadership of the countries engaged to the greatest extent with the events on the ground – Russia, Turkey and Iran, and summarizes the results achieved at the meetings held in Astana in order to negotiate conditions for the cessation of military operations and the launch of a peace dialogue between the regime and the opposition. The article emphasizes upon the meeting of 3-4 May 2017, when a memorandum was signed on creating four De-escalation Zones in the territories controlled by the opposition, and underlines the importance of the next meeting, when decisions were made to establish a trilateral coordination centre for combined operations in the zones and to convene a Syrian Congress of the National Dialogue in January 2018 in Sochi. Finally, the article concludes that the political settlement requires a balance between the geopolitical objectives of the outside factors involved and the power ambitions of the internal players and argues that the outcome of the negotiations depends mainly on the situation on the ground .

Negative Representation of Assad’s Regime in CNN Online Articles

This research article discusses the use of chemical weapons in Syria. This study discusses the representation of Assad’s regime in two CNN articles since there is an assumption that Assad’s regime and its alliances are the responsible ones for the chemical weapon issue in Syria. The data is analyzed through Critical Discourse Analysis by Van Dijk as the grand theory so that it is examined by using macro and micro level analysis. This study shows that these articles present the negative representation of Assad’s regime. It can be seen from the negative lexical choices which are used by the writers to describe Assad’s regime and it also can be seen from the writers attempts to present the US’s arguments by trying to legitimize it by frequently using verbal reaction in schematic analysis and the writers of the articles also struggle to hide another version of truth which stated that the responsible one for the use of chemical weapon in Syria is the rebels groups

Identifying the Perpetrators of Chemical Attacks in Syria

Abstract In June 2018, the Conference of States Parties of the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) decided to create an Investigation and Identification Team. This is a new mechanism within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Technical Secretariat ‘to identify the perpetrators of the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic’. This article analyses the background and main features of this decision and draws some preliminary conclusions on the role of the Investigation and Identification Team and its potential impact for the investigation and prosecution of crimes linked to the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Thus, after describing the events surrounding various fact-finding missions in Syria under the auspices of the OPCW and the United Nations, it considers the legal basis to interpret the Chemical Weapons Convention as enabling the OPCW to put in place arrangements to identify the perpetrators of the use of chemical weapons in Syria and elsewhere.

Uniting for Peace Not Aggression: Responding to Chemical Weapons in Syria Without Breaking the Law

In April 2018 in response to a chemical weapons attack in Syria, the USA, UK and France attacked Syrian chemical weapons facilities without Security Council authorisation. The intervention was illegal but widely supported. The events epitomised a declining respect for the international rules on the use of force and for the international institutions charged with implementing those rules-a trend that has correlated with an escalation in violent conflict throughout the world. In other words, the credibility of international law and institutions is declining just as we need them most. This article describes the chemical weapons attack in Syria in April 2018, the retaliatory strikes, and the justifications and reactions that followed. It then describes the applicable legal framework (the UN Charter, humanitarian intervention, the responsibility to protect and the Chemical Weapons Convention), and the normative implications of the strikes. It is argued that international law recognises neither a right of humanitarian intervention nor a right to use force to prevent the use of chemical weapons. What international law does recognise, as articulated in the General Assembly's Uniting for Peace Resolution, is the residual responsibility of the General Assembly to maintain international peace and security when the Security Council fails. It is argued that where the Security Council has clearly failed to exercise its responsibility, it is incumbent upon the Council through procedural vote to refer the situation to the General Assembly, and it is then incumbent upon the Assembly to act on its secondary responsibility. This is an under-utilised procedure that allows concerned States to respond to atrocities such as those in Syria without breaking the law.