Syria strikes: history of chemical warfare has been foul indeed

Illustration: Eric Lobbecke

The Syrian government’s attack on Jaysh al-Islam fighters in Douma, probably using chlorine gas and a nerve agent, highlighted the temptation to use chemical weapons when other means of military attack are likely less effective.

Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam) is a Saudi-backed coalition of Salafist anti-regime militant groups based in the Douma and Eastern Ghouta regions of the Syrian capital of Damascus. About 4500 to 5500 Jaysh al-Islam insurgents had remained in Douma “to fight to the death” after earlier safe-­conduct evacuations.

Talks between the insurgents, the Assad regime and the Russians (about the insurgents evacuating Douma) broke down the week ­before, leaving the regime with the prospect of having to fight through Douma against an enemy well-­entrenched in buildings and basements, and using civilians and Syrian army prisoners of war as protective shields.

Fighting through an urban area is immensely costly in terms of own-force casualties. In Iraq, the Counter Terrorism Service (Iraq’s special forces) had 50 per cent ­casualties as it fought its way through Mosul against Islamic State insurgents who were similarly entrenched and using civilians as human shields.

In densely-populated West Mosul, the decision was finally made to use artillery and airstrikes against Islamic State-held buildings to reduce the number of own-force casualties. The inevitable result was a large number of ­civilian casualties — by some estimates as many as 20,000 deaths. How many will never be known because of the problem of ­accounting for people buried in the rubble and the dispersal of the Mosul population.

In the case of Syria, and the ­attack on Douma, the main benefit of using chlorine gas comes from it being heavier than air and therefore useful for killing insurgents in basements and tunnels. Another advantage of using chemical weapons is they do not destroy ­infrastructure and can be made water-soluble for easier clean-up afterwards. In Douma, the use of chlorine gas was clearly an effective tactic because, following the chemical strike, the insurgents agreed to evacuate to another rebel-held area.

Bulk chlorine is readily available throughout the region for water purification. This means that it is also readily available for use by non-state actors.

For example, Jaysh al-Islam is reported to have used chlorine gas when fighting against Kurdish fighters in April 2016. According to reports from news outlet Kurdistan 24, the group admitted to its use in a mainly Kurdish populated area in the northern Syria city of Aleppo. Kurdish officials claimed al-Qa’ida affiliated Nusra Front has also used chemical weapons.

In Iraq, various insurgent groups have used vehicle bombs that combined chlorine and explosives, though not very effectively.

Historically, chlorine gas was used widely through wind dispersal in World War I. It hugged the ground and entered trenches. Wind dispersal was supplemented later in the war with artillery shells containing phosgene and lewisite. Chemical agents caused 90,000 deaths and lifelong misery for many subjected to gas attack. A common fate was blindness.

The 1925 Geneva Protocol outlawed the use of chemical weapons, but not their possession.

Today, the main treaty governing chemical weapons is the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) 1997, which bans them and requires destruction within a specified period of time.

The CWC has 192 states as parties, including Australia. Israel has signed but has yet to ratify the convention. Three UN states have neither signed nor ratified the convention (Egypt, North Korea and South Sudan).

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) inspects and monitors CWC states’ facilities and activities to ensure compliance.

As of January last year, 95 per cent of declared global chemical agent stockpiles had been verifiably destroyed and more than 57 per cent of chemical munitions and containers destroyed. Six states — Albania, India, Libya, Russia, South Korea, and Syria — had completed destruction of their declared stockpiles. The US is scheduled to complete destruction by 2023.

It is likely that some CWC states, such as Russia, still have undeclared chemical agents. Israel and North Korea may also have undeclared chemical agents.

The destruction of Syria’s ­declared chemical stocks began in September 2013 after it became a party to the CWC, and destruction was completed in August 2014 under the auspices of the OPCW. It is widely believed that Syria still has some undeclared chemical warfare stocks.

Chlorine, being a common ­industrial chemical, is outside the scope of OPCW destruction; however, its use as a chemical weapon would violate the CWC.

OPCW inspectors deployed to Douma to conduct their investigation into the alleged Syrian use of chemical weapons about the same time as the US, Britain and France struck suspected ­Syrian chemical weapons-related facilities.

There are some questions therefore about the legality of the US-led punitive action against Syria. But US President Donald Trump wanted to follow-up on his tough talk, British Prime Minister Theresa May needed to return a favour for US support over the Skripal incident, while President Emmanuel Macron probably saw it as an opportunity to re-assert France’s role in the region.

While Australia supported the US military action, it does not seem to have been in accordance with the rules-based global order we promote.

Clive Williams is a visiting professor at the ANU’s Centre for Military and Security Law and an adjunct professor at the Australian Defence Force Academy.