Damascus Targeted by Washington over Chemical Weapons
The U.S. has openly accused Bashar Assad’s regime of resorting to chemical weapons in the conflict with the Syrian rebels.
Moscow, which has continued to stand by its protégé Assad, called the U.S. accusations “unconvincing.” On Thursday, the U.S. openly accused the Syrian regime of having used chemical weapons, including sarin gas, “on a small scale” against the rebels, with a reported death toll of between 100 and 150. The United States president “has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has,” warned Barack Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes.*
Mr. Rhodes explained that in light of the report, President Obama has decided to increase the extent of the nonlethal aid given to the civil opposition at the same time as authorizing an increase in aid to the rebel military set-up. Mr. Rhodes emphasized that no concrete decision had been taken, but in the pipeline now is a potential no-fly zone, demanded by the opposition as a counterweight to the regime’s strike force.
According to The Wall Street Journal, senior figures in the U.S. military have suggested a no-fly zone, approximately 40 kilometers into Syrian territory, that would encompass the rebel training camps and be guarded by planes equipped with air-to-air missiles from neighboring Jordan. However, France considers it unlikely that the U.N. Security Council will approve such a zone, given Russia and China’s support for Mr. Assad.
The U.N.’s Apprehensions
For its part, Syrian President Assad’s regime denied the accusations of the United States and attacked its intention to give military aid to the rebels. “The White House published a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria based on fabricated information” in order to pile pressure on the government, declared an official from the Syrian Foreign Ministry, quoted by the press agency SANA (Syrian Arab News Agency). The same source claimed that the accusations came “after reports affirming that armed terrorist groups active in Syria [the rebels] are in possession of deadly chemical weapons and the technology necessary to make them.”
“The American decision to arm armed terrorist groups demonstrates ... the direct involvement of the United States in the Syrian bloodbath,” the source quoted by SANA went on to insist. This “raises serious questions about their good faith when it comes to finding a political solution in Syria,” he concluded. The Syrian denial came shortly after Moscow’s announcement that it found the United States’ accusations “unconvincing,” and criticized the United States' decision to increase aid to the insurgents.
Russia, in fact, called on Americans to avoid repeating the steps that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Washington’s announcement hasn’t led to unanimity in Europe, either. London, unsurprisingly, said that it shared the analysis of the U.S., but the Swedish minister of foreign affairs, Carl Bildt, believes the country’s promise to provide the rebels with military aid risks provoking “an arms race” and “undermin[ing] the conditions for a political process.”
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who declared yesterday that the delivery of arms to Syria would not help resolve the situation, largely supports the Swedish position. At the same time, he insisted on the necessity of an on-the-ground inquiry to prove the use of chemical weapons. Either way, these developments once again highlight the international divisions on the Syrian conflict — a conflict for which there is still no solution in sight, despite the violence and the atrocities that have led to, according to the U.N., the deaths of more than 93,000 people since March 2011.
*Editor’s note: The official announcement of this news was made by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, not Ben Rhodes.
Moscow, which has continued to stand by its protégé Assad, called the U.S. accusations “unconvincing.” On Thursday, the U.S. openly accused the Syrian regime of having used chemical weapons, including sarin gas, “on a small scale” against the rebels, with a reported death toll of between 100 and 150. The United States president “has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has,” warned Barack Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes.*
Mr. Rhodes explained that in light of the report, President Obama has decided to increase the extent of the nonlethal aid given to the civil opposition at the same time as authorizing an increase in aid to the rebel military set-up. Mr. Rhodes emphasized that no concrete decision had been taken, but in the pipeline now is a potential no-fly zone, demanded by the opposition as a counterweight to the regime’s strike force.
According to The Wall Street Journal, senior figures in the U.S. military have suggested a no-fly zone, approximately 40 kilometers into Syrian territory, that would encompass the rebel training camps and be guarded by planes equipped with air-to-air missiles from neighboring Jordan. However, France considers it unlikely that the U.N. Security Council will approve such a zone, given Russia and China’s support for Mr. Assad.
The U.N.’s Apprehensions
For its part, Syrian President Assad’s regime denied the accusations of the United States and attacked its intention to give military aid to the rebels. “The White House published a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria based on fabricated information” in order to pile pressure on the government, declared an official from the Syrian Foreign Ministry, quoted by the press agency SANA (Syrian Arab News Agency). The same source claimed that the accusations came “after reports affirming that armed terrorist groups active in Syria [the rebels] are in possession of deadly chemical weapons and the technology necessary to make them.”
“The American decision to arm armed terrorist groups demonstrates ... the direct involvement of the United States in the Syrian bloodbath,” the source quoted by SANA went on to insist. This “raises serious questions about their good faith when it comes to finding a political solution in Syria,” he concluded. The Syrian denial came shortly after Moscow’s announcement that it found the United States’ accusations “unconvincing,” and criticized the United States' decision to increase aid to the insurgents.
Russia, in fact, called on Americans to avoid repeating the steps that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Washington’s announcement hasn’t led to unanimity in Europe, either. London, unsurprisingly, said that it shared the analysis of the U.S., but the Swedish minister of foreign affairs, Carl Bildt, believes the country’s promise to provide the rebels with military aid risks provoking “an arms race” and “undermin[ing] the conditions for a political process.”
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who declared yesterday that the delivery of arms to Syria would not help resolve the situation, largely supports the Swedish position. At the same time, he insisted on the necessity of an on-the-ground inquiry to prove the use of chemical weapons. Either way, these developments once again highlight the international divisions on the Syrian conflict — a conflict for which there is still no solution in sight, despite the violence and the atrocities that have led to, according to the U.N., the deaths of more than 93,000 people since March 2011.
*Editor’s note: The official announcement of this news was made by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, not Ben Rhodes.
Next article![]( "The United States and China Are Definitely at War — in Cyberspace")
