The “chemical play”

                                                 Dr. Fadi Shamia                                 

Umayya Center for Research and Strategic Studie  

The chemical attacks in Syria are so large that there is no accurate census of them after they have exceeded the first 100 and perhaps the second. Therefore, the global media focuses on the “big attacks” of them, which have often been associated with the major battles that the Syrian regime has been waging since 2013 to the present day.
As the Syrian regime and its allies become increasingly aware of a forthcoming battle in northern Syria, this media is increasingly talking about “preparing for a new chemical play.” This claim has two implications:
1 – the absence of a chemical attack originally and thus the absence of victims.
2. The opposition’s responsibility for the preparation and implementation of the ” play.”.

It is remarkable that the Syrian regime and its allies are currently focusing on the two elements, while in the past it focused on the responsibility of the opposition for chemical attacks because it can not deny the existence of victims. Today, in the absence of accountability, it reached the point where the regime swallowed up previous stories accusing the opposition to the attacks, and hence his acceptance of chemical use and the presence of victims, which he withdrew today; asking people to believe the new version of his novel..

The review of the events and attitudes related to the chemical use – which will be presented in this report – proves the use of chemical weapons in Syria, according to the two sides; the regime and its oppositions, and consequently the presence of attacks and casualties. It remains to be seen that the Syrian regime was accusing the opposition of responsibility, when it was approved, every time, by a chemical attack. Moreover, the Syrian regime itself has called on the United Nations to investigate chemical attacks blamed on it by the opposition, which means that the play, whose live protagonists are trying to act to convince people that actors have died during real acting, is a failed act because the director himself has declared his disagreement.

March 2013 witnessed the first major chemical attacks. Paradoxically, the use of sarin gas happened in the town of Khan al-Asal in Aleppo, an area controlled by the Syrian regime, not the opposition (about 26 victims). The Syrian regime accused the armed opposition had stolen the Gas, which was using by scientific research centers. The opposition denied its responsibility. The regime asked the United Nations to investigate the incident, which took place in August 2013, a few days after the famous al-Ghouta massacre, “prompting an investigation into Khan al-‘Asal into the background,” according to a UN spokesman. However, on 12/12/2013 The UN report on Khan al-Asal concluded that “the potential use of chemical weapons is already in place”, without specifying who is responsible. In February 2014, a report by the UN Human Rights Council stated that the chemical materials used in the Khan al-Asal attack bore “the same unique features” as the Al-Ghouta 2013 attacks. However, “in either case, the Commission could not meet the threshold of proof in Concerning the identification of perpetrators of chemical attacks. “.

Returning to the famous al-Ghouta massacre of 21 August 2013 (about 1,200 victims) which is the most tragic – so far. In the beginning, Syrian official media denied the chemical attack, claiming that the talk about the chemical use in Al-Gouta was “a Gulf plot to divert attention from Khan al-Asal’s attack.” He then admitted to the crime, claiming that the opposition was responsible for it, and that “the soldiers entered the tunnels for the opposition fighters and found chemical materials in Jupar(The official Syrian Television on 24/8/2013). “The Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, quoting sources from the regime, provided a more detailed account of two homemade rockets fired by the Islamic Brigade, the same version that it adopted by The Russians later. In contrast, German intelligence provided a report on a liaison between a senior Hezbollah official and the Iranian embassy in Beirut, during which the party official pointed to the responsibility of Bashar al-Assad for the attack and that he was losing his temper. On 3/9/2013 the French newspaper The Guardian published a report based on aerial photographs of the launching of rockets from the positions of the regime forces at the time of the attack, 47 video clips taken by the activists and verified by French doctors, and Human Rights Watch provided evidence of the Syrian regime’s involvement in the attack, about three weeks after it occurred. On 16/9/2013, the report of the United Nations inspection committee, which indicated that the sarin gas was launched by surface-to-surface missiles – missiles that only the Syrian regime owns- that the international verification of the destruction of chemical weapons did not go easy. The inspectors of the organization went to al-Ghouta were targeted by sniper fire, and when they arrived, the Syrian authorities gave them only two hours to meet the witnesses and take samples. On 18/8/2018, the Syrian regime exhumed the graves of those who bombed them with chemical weapons in Zamaleka and moved the bodies to an unknown place, moreover the regime arrested all who objected for this procedure.

After the accession of the regime to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in 2013 and the pledge to dispose of its chemical stockpiles following the massacre – the regime has already denied having a chemical stockpile before the famous al-Ghouta massacre – the Syrian regime informed the international inspectors on 2014-2015 that it used 15 tons of Nerves gas and 70 tons of sulfur mustard for research. According to Reuters, investigators believe those quantities are too large to be needed and have no “scientific credibility”. The destiny of at least 2,000 chemical weapons is unknown; the regime said it had been converted into conventional weapons.

On April 29, 2014, a new major offensive attack took place in the town of Saraqeb, which is controlled by the opposition in Idlib. One day later, the helicopters of the regime threw the chlorine gas cylinders at the village of Kfar Zeita, Hama countryside. International investigators went to the scene but were shot. Unknown gunmen detained some members of the team for 90 minutes, therefore the mission failed.
But a source in the monitoring team later announced that “the Syrian regime used chlorine as a weapon of intimidation, so that it had the upper hand on the battlefield when one of its bases in Kafrzita was threatened with invasions in 2014.” Later, the United Nations considered “observers, Khan al-Asal, al-Ghouta al-Sharqiyah, Jubar and Sahnaya areas where there were attacks with nerve gas.” In October 2014, the United Nations Human Rights Council confirmed the use of chlorine gas through explosive barrels in Kufrzita. It is noted that many other attacks occurred after the attack on Kfar Zeita, all rely on chlorine gas, prompting the United Nations to issue statement No. 2209, which condemns the use of chlorine gas in Syria.

In April 2015, Human Rights Watch again confirmed in a lengthy report that “the Syrian regime is using chemical materials in six new attacks on Idlib..”

By July 2016, after visiting Syria 18 times to inspect sites and meet Syrian officials, the international investigation team announced that it could not “fully verify that Syria had made a declaration that could be considered accurate and up-to-date” of its chemical weapon. Sites for opposition were targeted by toxic gases by air, particularly in the town of Sarakib (30 casualties in August 2016). On October 2016, a UN commission of inquiry concluded that “Syrian government forces used chlorine gas as a chemical weapon in three cases and that the Islamic State Organization’s militants used mustard gas.” The Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons adopted a resolution condemning the Syrian regime and the “Islamic State” for using chemical weapons.

On 4/4/2017, the massacre of Khan Sheikhun occurred in the village of Idlib (more than 100 victims), and as in the massacre of Ghouta in 2013; the regime and its Russian ally presented lies that refute to one another. On 5/4/2015, Moscow announced that Syrian planes bombed ” the terrorists store in Khan Sheikhan, containing chemical materials from Iraq. ” On April 13, 1977, Bashar Assad personally presented a different story: “The chemical attack on Khan Sheikhan is 100% fabricated, and the United States and the West are complicit with the terrorists, and they have fabricated this story.” On 1 May 2017, the Human Rights Watch report states that “Bashar al-Assad’s army has not used chemical once in Khan Sheikhan, but has used nerve gas at least 4 times in recent months. He used to use chlorine as a chemical months ago “We have a report that reveals the use of chlorine gas by the Syrian authorities to restore eastern Aleppo.” On 5/10/2017, the fact-finding mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) officially declared that “sarin gas was used in the April 4 attack on the northern Khan Sheikun area of northern Syria and the committee said it is strongly probably that sarin gas was used in the area of Alatamenah on 30/3/2017, less than a week before the government forces attacked the town of Khan Shikhun, where the report shows similarities between the two attacks “(type of ammunition / method of attack from the air), and carried the” joint investigation mechanism “Bashar al-Assad responsible for this attack, but Russia used the veto in favor of not condemning the Syrian regime..

We reached the chemical attack on Duma on 7/4/2018 (150 victims); according to press reports; the attack occurred with missiles likely to contain chlorine poison gas, and another containing sarin gas. This time, the regime refused to confess the occurrence of a chemical attack, claiming that what was done was a play, claiming that the Syrian Red Crescent asked the people of Duma about the alleged “chemical attack.” The Russian police said they had always entered and “found no trace of chemical use. The Syrian regime, however, went back to contradicting itself by announcing that it had found a chemical manufacturing site belonging to the Army of Islam in Douma. Under international pressure, the representative of the Syrian regime at the United Nations declared “welcoming the Committee of Inspectors of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons”. The inspectors stayed in Damascus still waiting to be allowed to enter for a full week, claiming that “opposition fighters prevent them from entering” (Bogdanov 18/4, although the gunmen and their families had left for Idlib with forced deportation buses). For the manufacture of chemical weapons “(the former Russian novel accuses the British intelligence of the implementation of a play in Duma against the background of the Russian-British dispute). The Syrian regime provided a child to report that he did not “feel the presence of the chemical”, as well as witnesses and doctors who fled to Damascus in the face of witnesses and doctors who fled to northern Syria and confirmed the chemical attack. However, the commission refused to meet any of them.

The foregoing facts clearly indicate:
1. Many chemical attacks and casualties.
2 – The responsibility of the Syrian regime for the vast majority of these attacks.
Although this conclusion seems more than normal in the past years, there is an information machine working today to clean up the collective memory of chemical information, to the extent that all the talk about the chemical from the first to the stage plays by elements of the civil defense of the opposition (Helmets White) with external support. The most recent of them is Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, who announced on August 26, 2018, “the existence of data on the preparation of a new chemical play in Idlib from Before the West, to prevent Syria from completing the liberation of its territory. “


This article expresses the opinion of the writer and not necessarily, the opinion of the site

326 total views, 1 views today

الوسوم: , ,

التنصيف : ARTICLES

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann
Film izle Hd Film izle Online Film izle Tek Parça izle Filmi Full izle Hd Film Sitesi Direk izle Bedava film izle Film Tavsiyeleri Film izleyin hd film siteniz seks izle