-
September
-
Full breakfast
-
Seamus Heaney
-
Superman
-
2013 Ghouta attacks in Syria
-
Stone paper
-
Look Back in Anger
-
Emmy Award
-
Pun
-
Dolce & Gabbana
-
Russia
-
Stock market bubble
-
Rare earths
-
Sophia Loren
-
Steganography
-
Deindustrialization
-
Subject-auxiliary inversion
-
Phrasal verb
-
Labyrinth
-
Goalkeeper (football)
-
The Decameron
-
Umberto Eco
-
Taser
-
Territorial claims in the Arctic
-
Google Glass
-
Pizza
-
Linux Operating System
-
Augmented reality
-
Charlie Chaplin
-
Lincoln (film)
-
Diwali
|
WIKIMAG n. 10 - Settembre 2013
2013 Ghouta attacks in
Syria
Text is available under the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional
terms may apply. See
Terms of
Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the
Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.
Traduzione
interattiva on/off
- Togli il segno di spunta per disattivarla
2013 Ghouta attacks |
Part of the
Syrian civil war |
Map of areas affected by the alleged chemical attack and the
location of the UN inspection team's hotel during the
attack.
|
Location |
Ghouta,
Syria |
Date |
21 August 2013 |
Deaths |
322 killed (SOHR
claim)[1]
355 killed (MSF
claim)[2]
494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[3]
588 killed (VDC
claim)[4]
635 killed (SRGC
claim)[5]
1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6]
1,300 killed (SNC
claim)[7]
1,338 killed (LCC
claim)[8]
1,429 killed (US Government assessment)[9]
1,729 killed (FSA
claim)[10]
- note: Death tolls not final
- Some death tolls are only in bodies collected
|
Injured (non-fatal) |
3,600[11] |
Perpetrators |
Syrian Army (opposition claim)
Syrian rebels (government claim)[12][13] |
The 2013 Ghouta attacks were a series of alleged
chemical attacks that occurred on Wednesday, 21 August 2013, in the
Ghouta
region of the
Rif Dimashq Governorate of
Syria.
Opposition and medical[2]
sources gave a death toll of 322[1]
to 1,729, and said that none of them had physical wounds.[10]
According to the activist network
Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), which gave the lowest
estimate of 322 killed,[1]
46 of the dead were rebel fighters.[14]
The attacks were launched on opposition-controlled areas, with the
Syrian government and the Syrian rebels blaming each other for the
attack.[15]
If the death toll is confirmed, the attack would be the deadliest
chemical attack since the March/April 1988
Halabja poison gas attack[16][17]
and
Second Battle of al-Faw of the
Iran–Iraq War.[18]
The attacks have so far not been independently confirmed,[19]
and the Syrian government immediately stated that it had no role in
carrying out chemical attacks.[20]
Officials from the United States, France, Israel, Sweden, the United
Kingdom, Turkey, Canada, and the Arab League stated that the Syrian
government was responsible for the attack; officials from Russia and
Iran stated that the perpetrators were the rebels. International
opinions are mixed as to whether or not the attacks warrant foreign
military intervention.
The attacks occurred only a few kilometers from recently arrived
United Nations
investigators.[21]
Initially blocking their access,[21][22]
the Syrian government agreed to allow UN investigators to visit them on
25 August.[23][24]
On 26 August the inspectors reached some sites, but after an hour and a
half, due to apparent safety concerns were requested by the Syrian
government to return and the inspectors subsequently could not reach the
six main sites that day. The inspectors remain in Damascus carrying out
their mission.[25]
Background
The alleged attack came almost exactly one year after U.S. President
Barack Obama's "red
line" speech, in which he warned that chemical weapons use in Syria,
which is one of five non-signatories to the 1997
Chemical Weapons Convention, would trigger American intervention.[26][27]
Since his speech, and prior to the chemical attacks in Ghouta, chemical
weapons were suspected to have been used in at least four attacks in the
country.[28]
On 21 August 2013, the Syrian government launched an offensive to
capture opposition-held
Damascus suburbs.[29]
The attacks
The alleged chemical attacks reportedly occurred around 03:00 in the
morning on 21 August 2013,[20]
in the rebel-held and mostly Sunni[30]
Ghouta agricultural area, just east of Damascus. The area had been under
an Army siege backed by
Hezbollah[31][32]
for months. The towns attacked were: Hammuriyah, Irbin, Saqba, Kafr
Batna, Mudamiyah,[5]
Harasta, Zamalka and Ain Terma.[33]
An attack was also reported in the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Jobar.[34]
Doctors Without Borders said three hospitals it supports in the
eastern Damascus region reported receiving roughly 3,600 patients with
"neurotoxic symptoms" over less than three hours on after the morning,
when the attack in the eastern Ghouta area took place. Of those, 355
died.[35]
The
Local Coordination Committees of Syria claimed that of the 1,338
victims, 1,000 were in Zamalka, among which 600 bodies were transferred
to medical points in other towns and 400 remained at a Zamalka medical
centre.[8]
At least six medics died while treating the victims.[36]
The deadliness of the attack is believed to have been increased due to
Syrians fleeing the regime bombardment by hiding in basements, where the
heavier-than-air chemical agents sank to these lower-lying, poorly
ventilated areas.[37]
Some of the victims died while sleeping.[30]
The day after the alleged chemical attacks, 22 August, the Syrian
army bombarded the Ghouta area.[38]
Timing
The
BBC News interpreted darkness and prayer calls in videos to be
consistent with a pre-dawn timing of the attacks. (There are
five daily prayers in Islam, including a dawn prayer, a sunset
prayer, and a nighttime prayer.) BBC News considered it significant that
the "three main
Facebook pages of Syrian opposition groups" reported "fierce clashes
between
FSA rebels and government forces, as well as shelling by government
forces" at 01:15
local time (UTC+3)
on 21 August 2013 in the eastern Ghouta areas that were later claimed to
have been attacked with chemical weapons.[39]
Abu Sakhr, a paramedic interviewed by the
VDC, estimated chemical weapons to have first been delivered by
mortars at about 02:00. Another interviewee, Maher, said that Ein
Tarma had been hit by chemical weapons before 02:30.[40]
BBC News stated that three Syrian opposition Facebook pages reported
the first claims of chemical weapons use within a few minutes of one
another. At 02:45
UTC+3, the Ein Tarma Co-ordination Committee stated that "a number
of residents died in suffocation cases due to chemical shelling of the
al-Zayniya area [in Ein Tarma]." At 02:47, the
Sham News Network reported an "urgent" message that Zamalka had been
attacked with chemical weapons shells. At 02:55, the
LCC made "a similar report."[39]
The
Los Angeles Times timed the attacks at "about" 03:00.[20]
Evidence
Witness statements
Symptoms
Witness statements to
The Guardian about symptoms included "people who were sleeping
in their homes [who] died in their beds,"
headaches and
nausea,
"foam coming out of [victims'] mouths and noses," a "smell something
like vinegar and rotten eggs,"
suffocation, "bodies [that] were turning blue," a "smell like
cooking gas" and redness and itching of the eyes.[41]
Richard Spencer of
The Telegraph summarised witness statements, stating, "The
poison ... may have killed hundreds, but it has left twitching,
fainting, confused but compelling survivors."[42]
Symptoms reported by Ghouta residents and doctors to
Human Rights Watch included "suffocation, muscle spasms and frothing
at the mouth, which are consistent with
nerve agent poisoning."[21]
On 22 August, the
Center for Documentation of Violations in Syria published numerous
testimonies. It summarised doctors' and paramedics' descriptions of the
symptoms as "vomiting, foamy salivation, severe agitation, [pinpoint]
pupils, redness of the eyes, dyspnea, neurological convulsions,
respiratory and heart failure, blood out of the nose and mouth and, in
some cases, hallucinations and memory loss".[40]
Syrian human rights lawyer
Razan Zaitouneh, present in Eastern Ghouta, stated, "Hours [after
the shelling], we started to visit the medical points in Ghouta to where
injured were removed, and we couldn't believe our eyes. I haven't seen
such death in my whole life. People were lying on the ground in
hallways, on roadsides, in hundreds."[43]
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) stated that in three hospitals in the
area with which it has "a strong and reliable collaboration", about
"3600 patients displaying
neurotoxic symptoms [were received] in less than three hours on the
morning" of 21 August, among which 355 died. Symptoms listed by MSF
included "convulsions, excess saliva, pinpoint pupils, blurred vision
and respiratory distress". MSF Director of Operations Bart Janssens
stated that MSF "can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these
symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the
reported symptoms of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological
pattern of the events—characterised by the massive influx of patients in
a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the
contamination of medical and first aid workers—strongly indicate mass
exposure to a neurotoxic agent."[2]
Delivery method
Abu Omar of the
Free Syrian Army stated to The Guardian that the rockets
involved in the attack were unusual because "you could hear the sound of
the rocket in the air but you could not hear any sound of explosion" and
no obvious damage to buildings occurred.[41]
Human Rights Watch's witnesses reported "symptoms and delivery methods
consistent with the use of chemical
nerve agents."[21]
Activists and local residents contacted by The Guardian said
that "the remains of 20 rockets [thought to have been carrying
neurotoxic gas were] found in the affected areas. Many [remained] mostly
intact, suggesting that they did not detonate on impact and potentially
dispersed gas before hitting the ground."[44]
Investigation
On 24 August, three days after the incident, the
United Nations formally requested that its weapons inspectors should
be permitted to examine the sites of the alleged chemical weapons
attacks. The Syrian government agreed the next day.
According to
The Wall Street Journal, top
United States officials urged the UN to abandon the investigation,
saying the U.S. already had conclusive evidence that the government
carried out chemical attacks. U.S. officials also suggested that the
government was trying to hide the evidence of chemical weapons use by
shelling the sites and delaying their inspection.[45]
Although UN inspectors hoped to head out into the field immediately
upon their arrival in
Damascus on 25 August, Syrian authorities prevented them from doing
so.[45]
On 26th August the inspectors ventured out toward but were forced to
turn back after snipers opened fire on one of their vehicles. The Syrian
government blamed the attack, along with a mortar strike near the
inspectors' hotel earlier that morning, on "terrorists", despite the
fact that a
ceasefire had been declared to allow inspectors to do their work.[46]
The inspectors returned to the site four hours later and spoke with 20
victims of the attacks, taking blood and hair samples as well as soil
samples and potentially contaminated domestic animals. The inspectors
were forced to depart after an hour and a half on orders from the Syrian
government.[47]
A doctor told
The Guardian that inspectors were also prevented from reaching
six key sites of suspected chemical weapons use. "The security force
told the committee if they did not leave now, they could not guarantee
their security," said
Dr. Abu Akram. Akram also told The Guardian that most of the
victims interviewed by the inspectors were civilians.[48]
With the investigation still ongoing, special UN envoy to Syria
Lakhdar Brahimi said on 28 August that evidence suggests "some kind
of substance" was used to kill hundreds of people in Ghouta. He did not
say what evidence he was referring to, but he said it did not come from
Western intelligence reports and he noted that inspectors gathered
samples for analysis two days prior.[49]
Intelligence
reports
On 23 August, US officials stated that American intelligence detected
activity at Syrian chemical weapons sites before the attack on 21
August.[50]
Foreign Policy magazine's The Cable, citing unnamed sources,
reported that: "US intelligence services" intercepted communications,
hours after a attack, between an official at the
Syrian Ministry of Defence and the leader of a chemical weapons
unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike. According to the
report, American officials believe that the attacks were the work of
Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad's regime based on the content of the calls, although
they are unsure who ordered the attacks.[51][52]
Russian
President
Vladimir Putin, an ally of the Syrian government,[53]
told
United Kingdom Prime Minister
David Cameron that there was no evidence that the chemical weapons
were used by the Syrian regime. An
Iranian Foreign Ministry official claimed that Russia submitted
evidence to the U.N. Security Council, including satellite images,
purporting to show that chemical weapons were used by the Syrian rebels
and not by the Administration.[54]
Analysis of videos
Experts who have analysed the first video said it shows the strongest
evidence yet consistent with the use of a lethal toxic agent.[55]
Visible symptoms reportedly included rolling eyes, foaming at the mouth,
and tremors. There was at least one image of a child suffering
miosis,
the pin-point pupil effect associated with the nerve agent
Sarin, a
powerful
neurotoxin reportedly used before in Syria.
Ralph Trapp, a former scientist at the
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, said the
footage showed what a chemical weapons attack on a civilian area would
look like, and went on to note "This is one of the first videos I've
seen from Syria where the numbers start to make sense. If you have a gas
attack you would expect large numbers of people, children and adults, to
be affected, particularly if it's in a built-up area."
However, experts, among them Zanders, emphasised that evidence that
sarin was used, as claimed by pro-rebel sources, was still lacking and
highlighted the lack of second-hand contaminations typically associated
with use of weapons-grade nerve agents: "I remain sceptical that it was
a nerve agent like sarin. I would have expected to see more
convulsions," he said. "The other thing that seems inconsistent with
sarin is that, given the footage of first responders treating victims
without proper protective equipment, you would expect to see
considerable secondary casualties from contamination—which does not
appear to be evident."
[55]
According to a report by
The Daily Telegraph, "videos uploaded to
YouTube
by activists showed rows of motionless bodies and medics attending to
patients apparently in the grip of seizures. In one piece of footage, a
young boy appeared to be foaming at the mouth while convulsing."[56]
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former commander of British Chemical and
Biological
counterterrorism forces, told BBC that the images were very similar
to previous incidents he had witnessed, although he could not verify the
footage.[57]
Legal status
Attacks
Human Rights Watch stated that "Syria is not among the 189 countries
that are party to the 1993
Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production,
Stockpiling, and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction
(Chemical Weapons Convention). Any use of chemical weapons is
unconscionable and contradicts the standards set by the Chemical Weapons
Convention."[58]
A
motion proposed by the
United Kingdom (UK) government for debate by the UK
House of Commons on 29 August 2013 states that "... the use of
chemical weapons is a
war
crime under customary law and a
crime against humanity..."[59]
International Criminal Court referral
Human Rights Watch also stated that the
United Nations Security Council should "refer the Syria situation to
the
International Criminal Court (ICC) to ensure accountability for all
war crimes and crimes against humanity."[58]
Military strikes
Lakhdar Brahimi, the
United Nations and
Arab League
Special Envoy to Syria since August 2012, stated "I think
international law is clear on this. International law says that military
action must be taken after a decision by the
Security Council. ... certainly international law is very clear -
the Security Council has to be brought in."[60]
A proposed 29 August 2013
UK
House of Commons
motion claims that military strikes would be legal if they
constituted
humanitarian intervention.[59]
Members of the
United States Congress, including
Lynn Jenkins, stated that United States President
Barack Obama required "consent from Congress as prescribed in the
Constitution and the
War Powers Resolution of 1973" to carry out military strikes in
Syria.[61]
Analysis, verifiability, doubts and speculations
General
On 22 August, the United States said they were unable to conclusively
say that chemical weapons were used in the attack. U.S. President Barack
Obama directed U.S. intelligence agencies to urgently help verify the
allegations.[62]
On 23 August, American and European security sources made a preliminary
assessment that chemical weapons were used by Syrian forces, likely with
high-level approval from the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The sources cautioned that, due to the assessment being preliminary,
they were still seeking conclusive proof, which could take days, weeks
or even longer to gather.[63]
The UN had not delivered an official request for access to the sites
of incident until August 24, three days after the attack. After Syria
had agreed to allow the team to conclude their search, US officials
pressed on UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to call off the
investigation.[64]
On the day of agreement for UN onsite investigations a senior US
official stated that "the belated decision by the regime to grant access
to the UN team is too late to be credible," and that "there is very
little doubt at this point that a chemical weapon was used by the Syrian
regime against civilians in this incident."
[65]
On 26 August the inspectors reached some of sites, but after an hour
and a half were ordered by the Syrian government to return due to safety
concerns, and the inspectors could not reach the six main sites.[25]
According to the Syrian Foreign Minister the reason for this was that
when the investigators arrived at the affected regions "they faced
gunshots and failed to continue their visit, because the armed groups
have not agreed among each other on ensuring the team’s security".[66]
Physical arguments
The humanitarian organization
Doctors Without Borders operating three hospitals in the eastern
Damascus region, which received roughly 3,600 patients over less than
three hours on after.[67]
Reported seeing "large number of patients arriving with symptoms
including convulsions, excessive saliva, pinpoint pupils, blurred vision
and respiratory distress." Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior associate for the
Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center,
said what the group of doctors in Syria is reporting "is what a textbook
would list to say nerve-agent poison." Symptoms like incredibly small
pupils help say it is not agents like mustard gas or chlorine gas, but
instead more like sarin, soman, VX and taubun..[68]
Independent experts who studied the flood of online videos, which
appeared on the morning of the attacks, were unsure of the cause of the
deaths. Gwyn Winfield, editorial director at the magazine CBRNe World,
which reports on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or
explosives use, analyzed the videos and wrote on the magazine's site:
"Clearly respiratory distress, some nerve spasms and a half-hearted
washdown (involving water and bare hands?), but it could equally be a
riot control agent as a (chemical warfare agent)." Some analysts
speculated that a stockpile of chemical agents may have been hit by
shelling, whether controlled by the rebels or the government.[34]
After an analysis a professor of microbiology, who watched the videos,
concluded with a "best guess" that the videos were indicative of the
aftermath of an attack with some incapacitating chemical agent, but
probably not
sarin gas or a similar weapon, as they would have left signs of
visible blistering.[69]
CNN noted
that some opposition activists claimed the use of "Agent
15," also known as BZ, in the attacks, for which some experts
express doubt the Syrian government possesses, and the symptoms caused
by said chemical are very different from the symptoms reported in this
attack.[34]
On 24 August,
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), working with Syrian doctors, stated
that MSF could not "scientifically confirm the cause" of the medical
symptoms observed but that "the reported symptoms of the patients, in
addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events ... strongly
indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent."[2]
An analysis by Richard Guthrie, a chemical weapons specialist
formerly with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in
Sweden, noted that "the day of the attack was the one day that week when
the wind blew from government-held central Damascus towards the
rebel-held eastern suburbs."[70]
He also noted there were no government troop casualties from the attack.
Motives
Some have questioned the motive and timing behind the alleged Syrian
government involvement, since the hotel in which the team of United
Nations chemical weapons inspectors were staying was just a few miles
from the attack. A CNN reporter pointed to the fact that government
forces did not appear to be in imminent danger of being overrun by
rebels in the areas in question, in which a stalemate had set. He
questioned why the Army would risk such an action that could cause
international intervention. The reporter also questioned if the Army
would use sarin gas just a few kilometers from the center of Damascus on
what was a windy day.[34]
A reporter for The Daily Telegraph also pointed to the questionable
timing given government forces had recently beaten back rebels in some
areas around Damascus and recaptured territory. "Using chemical weapons
might make sense when he is losing, but why launch gas attacks when he
is winning anyway?" The reporter also questioned why would the attacks
happen just three days after the inspectors arrived in Syria.[71]
Columnist
Jeffrey Goldberg argued that the Assad would use chemical weapons
because nobody "will do a damn thing to stop him."[72]
Syrian human rights lawyer
Razan Zaitouneh also argued that the Assad government would launch a
chemical attack because "it knows that the international community would
not do anything about it" as for "previous crimes."[43]
Israeli reporter
Ron Ben-Yishai stated that the motive to use chemical weapons could
be the "army's inability to seize the rebel's stronghold in Damascus'
eastern neighbourhoods," or fear of rebel encroachment into Damascus
with tacit civilian support.[73]
Reactions
Domestic reactions
- Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi was quoted by the
official state
news agency,
Syrian Arab News Agency, as saying that "the government did not
and would not use such weapons—in the case they did not even exist.
Everything that has been said is absurd, primitive, illogical and
fabricated. What we say is what we mean: there is no use of such
things (chemical weapons) at all, at least not by the Syrian army or
the Syrian state, and it's easy to prove and it is not that
complicated."[19]
SANA called the reports of chemical attacks as "untrue and designed
to derail the ongoing UN inquiry." A Syrian military official
appeared on state television denouncing the reports as "a desperate
opposition attempt to make up for rebel defeats on the ground."[20]
- Syria's opposition
National Coalition called the attack a "coup
de grace that kills all hopes for a political solution in
Syria."[74]
- The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported early in the
morning that the Syrian armed forces have committed the most violent
military assault on the eastern and western Ghouta since the
beginning of the uprising. In their statement they said "we assure
the world that silence and inaction in the face of such gross and
large-scale war crimes, committed in this instance by the Syrian
regime, will only embolden the criminals to continue in this path.
The international community is thus complicit in these crimes
because of its polarization, silence and inability to work on a
settlement that would lead to the end of the daily bloodshed in
Syria."[75]
-
Kurdish Democratic Union Party leader
Salih Muslim said he doubted that the Syrian government carried
out the chemical attack. His organization has been a third force in
the Syrian conflict, fighting both the government and rebel
factions.[76]
International
reactions
-
United
Nations – The
United Kingdom called an emergency session of the
United Nations Security Council on 21 August.[77]
Western nations pushed for a strongly worded resolution which would
have asked for the UN to "urgently take the steps necessary for
today's attack to be investigated by the UN mission," however, due
to objections from Russia and China, the emergent statement was a
more reticently-worded demand for "clarity" regarding the incident.[78]
Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon said the report of chemical attacks "needs to be
investigated without delay".[79]
-
Arab
League - The Arab League released a statement on the 27th of
August stating that, while they did find Syria to be responsible for
chemical attacks against it's citizens, it would not support
military interventions of any sort.[80]
-
Albania
– Albanian Prime Minister
Sali Berisha and Foreign Minister
Aldo Bumçi blamed the Syrian government for the attacks and
pledged
Tirana's support for any
NATO action against Syria.[81][82]
-
Australia
– Australian Prime Minister
Kevin Rudd said it appeared that chemical weapons were used "in
large scale against a civilian population." He said his country, as
president of the UN Security Council, will push for UN weapons
inspectors to be allowed access to the sites where chemical weapons
were purportedly used. "The burden of proof lies with the Syrian
regime," Rudd added. While Rudd voiced caution on possible
international action, bringing up the spectre of Australian
involvement in the
Iraq War on the belief that the
Iraqi government was pursuing
weapons of mass destruction,[83]
he said after speaking with
United States President Barack Obama on 27 August that the
international community has a responsibility to act, comparing the
crisis in Syria to the
Rwandan Genocide and the
Srebrenica massacre.[84]
-
Austria
– In a statement issued by the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Foreign Minister
Michael Spindelegger called reports that the Syrian Army used
chemical weapons "extremely worrying", saying chemical weapons use
would constitute a "glaring crime of the Assad regime". Spindelegger
called for a UN investigation into the reports.[85]
-
Brazil
– Brazilian Minister of Foreign Affairs
Antonio Patriota called for an independent investigation into
allegations that chemical weapons were used. He suggested any
international action should wait until the chemical attacks are
confirmed.[86]
-
Canada
– The Canadian government expressed "outrage" over the attack in a
statement issued through Foreign Affairs Minister
John Baird's office. It demanded the Syrian government allow UN
weapons inspectors to examine the sites.[87]
On August 27,
Stephen Harper had a phone chat with U.S. President Barack Obama
in which both agreed that a "firm response" against the government
of al-Assad was needed.
[88]
-
Chile
– The Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the attacks and
demanded that the Syrian government give UN weapons inspectors
access to the sites where chemical attacks were reported.[86]
-
China
– Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei said that China is
firmly opposed to the use of chemical weapons by any party in Syria.
He affirmed that China supports the UN Secretariat in carrying out
independent, objective, impartial and professional investigation on
the alleged use of chemical weapons in accordance with relevant UN
resolutions. Lei said China hopes and believes that the team can
have full consultation with the Syrian government to ensure smooth
investigation. Finally, Lei said that China wants to call on all
sides to work together to hold the second Geneva Conference on Syria
as soon as possible and launch an inclusive political transition
process.
[89]
-
Cuba
– The Cuban government-linked[by
whom?] website
CubaDebate asserted that
NATO
plans to intervene militarily and argued that any action would break
international law.[importance?][90]
-
Ecuador
– Ecuador expressed rejection to manipulating information on the use
of chemical weapons for justifying military action, calling for
offering facilitations to the UN investigation team to punish the
perpetrators of the possible chemical attack.[importance?][91]
-
France
– The French Foreign Ministry said it didn't have independent
confirmation that an attack took place as rebels claimed, but it
said those responsible for the chemical weapons attack "will be held
accountable." They also called for the investigation of the use of
chemical weapons in the attacks.[19]
France has also said that the international community should respond
to this incident "with force.".[92]
On 25 August, France declared it had "no doubt" Damascus was behind
chemical attacks.[93]
President
François Hollande said on 27 August that "France is ready to
punish those who took the heinous decision to gas innocents".[94]
-
Germany
– The German government condemned the attacks. A government
spokesman said the attacks "must be punished" if verified, and
Foreign Minister
Guido Westerwelle said "Germany will be among those [countries]
that consider it right for there to be consequences".[95]
-
India
– India is waiting for the UN investigation into the chemical attack
on August 21, to better assess the origin of the attack, while
describing it as a "grave concern". "We stress that the
international legal norm against the use of chemical weapons
anywhere and by anyone must not be breached."
[5]
-
Indonesia
– The Indonesian government condemned the attacks and backed the
UN's investigation. Foreign Minister
Marty Natalegawa said the international community "must make
sure that perpetrators of such inhumane acts are punished
accordingly". He also said, "If [Syria’s regime] has actually used
chemical weapons, it marks the lowest point in the conflict."[96]
-
Iran
– Iranian Foreign Minister
Mohammad Javad Zarif said
Damascus had assured his government that it did not use "such
inhumane weapons." He blamed the attack on the rebels, saying, "The
international community must show a serious reaction to the use of
chemical weapons by the terrorists in Syria and condemn this move."[97]
President
Hassan Rouhani condemned the attack without accusing either the
government or the rebels of perpetrating it.[98]
Rouhani announced on his official
Twitter feed that "Iran gives notice to international community
to use all its might to prevent use of chemical weapons anywhere in
the world, [especially] in Syria".[99]
According to Abbas Araqchi from the
Iranian Foreign Ministry, Russia submitted proof to the U.N.
Security Council showing that chemical weapons were used by the
Syrian rebels and not by the Administration.[100]
-
Iraq
– In the wake of the alleged chemical attacks, the Iraqi government
has called for continued UN investigation and opposed any further
militarization of the conflict. Iraq opposing strike on Syria
highlights region’s complexity.[101]
-
Ireland
– The
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said that Ireland's
position on Syria remained unchanged, reiterating the
Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade
Éamon Gilmore's statement in March 2013 that "further
militarisation of the crisis must be avoided and a political
solution found instead." Opposition parties
Fianna Fáil and
Sinn Féin also opposed military action.[102]
-
Israel
–
Yuval Steinitz, Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs, said
Israeli intelligence assessments indicated that "chemical weapons
were used, and they were not used for the first time," before adding
"Nothing practical, significant, has been done in the last two years
in order to stop the continuing massacre of civilians carried out by
the Assad regime," he said. "I think that the investigation of the
United Nations is a joke."[103]
Minister of Defense
Moshe Ya'alon said the Assad regime has lost control of Syria,
and is present in only forty percent of the country. Describing the
civil war as a life and death struggle between Allawites and Sunnis,
Ya'alon said there was no end in sight to the conflict.[104]
-
Italy
– The Italian government urged caution, although Foreign Minister
Emma Bonino called the attack a "war crime". Bonino said Italy
will not participate in international action without authorization
from the
United Nations Security Council.[105]
-
Jordan
– Jordanian Prime Minister
Abdullah Ensour and other top officials reiterated that Jordan
will not be used to launch a preemptive strike against the Syrian
government. Ensour said that the 900 US troops stationed in Jordan
are not part of a plan to wage war on Syria, and that
Amman is against any foreign intervention in Syria.[106]
-
Lebanon
– Lebanese Foreign Minister
Adana Mansour said he did not support the idea of strikes on
Syria in response to the reported chemical attacks, saying, "I don't
think this action would serve peace, stability and security in the
region."[107]
-
Malaysia
– Malaysian Foreign Minister
Anifah Aman said that if the attacks did take place,
Kuala Lumpur condemns them. "Malaysia calls upon those
responsible for such irresponsible and inhuman acts to be brought to
justice," Anifah said, adding that chemical weapons inspectors
should be allowed to inspect the sites.[108]
-
New
Zealand – New Zealand Prime Minister
John Key said the attacks were horrific and urged the UN
Security Council to work to resolve the crisis, although he
acknowledged the
United States and other countries may act outside the UN mandate
due to
Russian opposition on the Security Council. Key declined to
comment on what role, if any, New Zealand may play in any
international action unsanctioned by the UN.[109]
-
Qatar
– Qatari Foreign Minister
Khalid bin Mohammad Al Attiyah said he holds the UN Security
Council "solely responsible for what happened" while blaming the
Syrian government for using "internationally prohibited weaponry" in
the attack, which he said "crossed all lines and violated all
rights".[110]
-
Russian
Federation – Russian authorities said that the chemical weapons
attack was a clear "provocation planned in advance."
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich stated
that "The fact that agenda-driven regional mass media have begun an
aggressive attack at once, as if on command, laying all the
responsibility on the government, draws attention. The fact that the
criminal action near Damascus was carried out just when the mission
of UN experts to investigate the statements on possible chemical
weapons use there has successfully begun its work in Syria points to
this."[19]
-
Sweden
– The Swedish Foreign Minister
Carl Bildt said on his blog that it was a gas attack and that a
UN team must investigate immediately. "Trying to evaluate the
information available, I find it difficult to come to any other
conclusion than that a lethal chemical substance has been used in
the attack against opposition-controlled territory that was carried
out by regime forces during the night between Tuesday and
Wednesday."
[111] Former UN Inspector
Hans Blix says in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that no one
is going to act militarily and that the UN sanctions are toothless.[112]
The Swedish Defence Research Agency Middle East expert Magnus Norell
says that "Taking things through the
UN Security Council is just an excuse to not do something,
because you know that a veto will be passed. ... It's clear that
Assad doesn't care about the UN."
[113] Bildt said he believes that the Syrian president
helped coordinate the attacks, though the UN has not been allowed
into Ghouta yet.[114]
-
Turkey
– The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkey stated that, such an
attack can only be defined as
barbarism and
atrocity. The people who are responsible for this atrocity are
the administrators of the regime and a ravenous group aiming at
preserving their power at all costs. These people killing their own
people and destroying
Syria
will answer for their deeds sooner or later. In the face of this
massacre, which violates the international law and constitutes a
serious crime against humanity.
Turkey
calls on the UN Security Council to fulfill now its responsibilities
stemming from the
United Nations Charter.[115]
Also, President
Abdullah Gül said that, " Those who have perpetrated these
massacres will be remembered with curse forever. Moreover, they will
have to pay for their deeds before
international law."
[116]
-
United
Kingdom – British Foreign Secretary
William Hague called on the Syrian government to give access to
the UN team to investigate the attacks. "I am deeply concerned by
reports that hundreds of people, including children, have been
killed in airstrikes and a chemical weapons attack on rebel-held
areas near Damascus," he said. "These reports are uncorroborated and
we are urgently seeking more information. But it is clear that if
they are verified, it would mark a shocking escalation in the use of
chemical weapons in Syria."[19]
While the UN awaits on if investigation of the incident is allowed,
Hague, along with Bildt, said he believes that Assad carried out the
attacks. Hague also later stated that diplomatic pressure on Syria
had failed and that the UK, "the United States, [and] many other
countries including France, are clear that we can't allow the idea
in the 21st Century that chemical weapons can be used with
impunity".[117]
A proposed 29 August 2013 UK parliamentary motion claims that
military strikes in response to the chemical weapons attacks would
be legal if the strikes constituted
humanitarian intervention. The motion states that the UK House
of Commons "... Recalls the importance of upholding the worldwide
prohibition on the use of chemical weapons under international law;
Agrees that a strong humanitarian response is required from the
international community and that this may, if necessary, require
military action that is legal, proportionate and focused on savings
lives by preventing and deterring further use of Syria’s chemical
weapons; ... and that the principle of humanitarian intervention
provides a sound legal basis for taking action; ..."[59]
US Secretary of State
John Kerry's remarks on the Ghouta chemical attacks, 26
August
-
United
States – The U.S. stated it was "deeply concerned by reports
that chemical weapons were used" and that officials were "working
urgently to gather additional information." "The United States
strongly condemns any and all use of chemical weapons. Those
responsible for the use of chemical weapons must be held
accountable. Today, we are formally requesting that the United
Nations urgently investigate this new allegation."[19]
President Barack Obama referred to the incident as a "big event of
grave concern."[118]
Secretary of State
John Kerry stated on 26 August that it was "undeniable" that an
"inexcusable" chemical attack occurred and suggested that the Obama
administration believes the Syrian government was behind it. Kerry
strongly condemned the attacks as a "moral obscenity" and warned
"that this international norm cannot be violated without
consequences".[119]
Obama's ambassador to the UN,
Samantha Power, said on
Twitter that "Assad has used [chemical weapons] against
civilians in violation of [international] norm."[120]
On August 27, American and Israeli officials stated they intercepted
communications from Syrian officials that Assad was responsible for
the attack.[121]
-
Uruguay
– The Uruguayan government called the attacks "an act of barbarism"
and reiterated its condemnation of the violence in Syria "by the
conflicting parties" in a statement issued through its Ministry of
Foreign Affairs.[86]
-
Vatican
City – The Vatican's permanent observer at the UN,
Silvano Tomasi, urged caution. Tomasi appeared to consider the
Syrian government's claim that it was not responsible for the
attacks, asking, "What immediate interest would the government in
Damascus have in causing such a tragedy? ... Who does this inhuman
crime really benefit?"[122]
Pope Francis referred to the "terrible images" coming out of
Syria and called on the international community "to be more
sensitive to this tragic situation and make every effort to help the
beloved Syrian nation find a solution" to the civil war.[123]
-
Venezuela
– Venezuelan President
Nicolás Maduro warned against possible U.S. intervention in
Syria, which he said would break international law, and called for
peace and negotiations. He publicly doubted claims that the Syrian
government carried out the chemical attack and said that the UN
should be given time to investigate. "We reject war, we want peace,"
declared Maduro. He said Venezuela will work with the
Union of South American Nations and the
Community of Latin American and Caribbean States "for the truth
of the Syrian and Arab and Islamic peoples".[124]
Threat of
missile strikes
The US planned to launch up to 100
Tomahawk cruise missiles against Syria.[125]
Iran warned that strikes would be met with retaliation on
Israel.[126]
US missile strikes would be launched without the approval from the
UN Security Council, seeing 'no avenue forward, given continued
Russian opposition, to any meaningful council action on Syria'.
According to Russia, this action would be a "very grave violation of
international law."[127]
Russia and China warned against military intervention in Syria, saying
that it would have "catastrophic consequences" for the entire region.
[128]
See also
|
|
DA INGLESE A ITALIANO
Inserire
nella casella Traduci la parola
INGLESE e cliccare
Go.
DA ITALIANO A INGLESE
Impostare INGLESE anziché italiano e
ripetere la procedura descritta.
|
|