industryterm:chemical weapons attacks

  • Theresa May temporise avant d’envisager des frappes en Syrie sans vote au Parlement
    http://www.lemonde.fr/syrie/article/2018/04/11/theresa-may-temporise-avant-d-envisager-des-frappes-en-syrie-sans-vote-au-pa

    Downing Street l’assure : Theresa May est prête à s’engager en Syrie, même sans attendre un éventuel accord du Parlement. La première ministre britannique, lors de conversations téléphoniques, mardi 10 avril, s’est mise d’accord avec les présidents américain et français sur « la nécessité pour la communauté internationale d’une réponse » aux attaques en Syrie « afin de faire respecter l’interdiction mondiale de l’usage des armes chimiques », détaille un communiqué officiel.

    Les avions Tornado sont prêts à décoller de la base militaire britannique d’Akrotiri (sud de Chypre). Mais Mme May, souvent raillée pour son caractère #excessivement_méthodique et sa lenteur à décider, semble prendre son temps pour réunir les arguments dont elle pourrait avoir besoin si elle se heurtait à des critiques parlementaires. Le communiqué de Downing Street évoque prudemment les « informations à confirmer » faisant état d’une attaque à l’arme chimique à Douma, près de Damas.

    Si même Mme May n’est pas (encore…) convaincue par les preuves… qu’on ne lui a visiblement pas (encore…) présentées, c’est bien à cause de sa pusillanimité bien connue (chicken !, en anglais).

    • Vu par les Britanniques :

      Syria decision looms for May - BBC News
      http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43724946

      But some do say the PM is taking her time. On one level, they say this is just her character, to be cautious and methodical, to play it by the book. She wants to work out what is in the UK national interest, to understand what other countries want to achieve, to assess all the options and consequences

      And yes, that involves assessing the risk of losing a vote in Parliament on this. The scars of David Cameron’s defeat over proposed military action in Syria in 2013 have not entirely healed. This will matter if any military action is not a one-off but a sustained strategy that envisages air strikes the next time Syria drops chemical weapons and the next.

      Crucially, I am told that Mrs May also wants to make sure that the case against Syria is as comprehensive as possible. She wants as much information as possible about the suspected chemical attack on Douma - above all, so she can say who was responsible.

      She wants to make sure she has her ducks and arguments in a row for the potential political flak she could face. The discussions are similar to those over the Salisbury nerve agent attack, namely that Mrs May wants to be able to stand up in Parliament and say there is “no plausible alternative” to Syria being responsible.

      There was a distinct note of caution in the official Downing Street account of the May/Trump phone call. This spoke of “reports” of Syrian chemical weapons attacks which were evidence of President Assad’s brutality “if confirmed”.

      There are signs that the US and the French are also taking their time. Monsieur Macron seems keen to act but even he spoke yesterday of a decision “within days”. French sources tell me they expect another Macron/Trump call “in the next 48 hours”.

    • Theresa May is warned against joining in on a strike against Syria | Daily Mail Online
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5601407/Theresa-warned-against-joining-strike-against-Syria-MPs-say.html

      Theresa May resists US rush to bomb Assad without more evidence the Syrian regime is to blame for ’barbaric’ chemical attack on civilians
      • PM last night warned not to press ahead with a strike on Bashar Al Assad’s troops
      • MPs told Theresa May it would be a ’huge mistake’ for her to bow to pressure 
      • Mrs May and Donald Trump vowed to end to chemical weapon attacks in Syria
      • Though the PM indicated she needed more proof of Assad’s involvement first 
      • There is no legal requirement for Mrs May to consult MPs ahead of air strikes

  • A New Normal: Ongoing Chemical Weapons Attacks in Syria

    Since the conflict in Syria began, there have been numerous and horrific violations of humanitarian and human rights law, including the systematic use of chemical weapons. A New Normal: Ongoing Chemical Weapons Attacks in Syria is a report by the Syrian American Medical Society that documents 161 chemical attacks from the beginning of the conflict through 2015, using reports and first-hand accounts from physicians and health workers in Syria. SAMS compiled another 133 reported chemical attacks that could not be fully substantiated. The 161 documented chemical attacks have led to at least 1,491 deaths and 14,581 injuries from chemical exposure. Out of the 161 attacks, 77% have occurred after the passage of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2118 in September 2013, which created a framework for the destruction of Syria’s declared chemical weapons stockpiles. In 2015, there were 69 chemical weapons attacks, making it the year with the most chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date. At least 58 chlorine attacks, or 36% of the total chemical weapons attacks, occurred after UNSC Resolution 2209 which condemns chlorine gas as a weapon in Syria.

    https://www.sams-usa.net/foundation/images/A%20New%20Normal%20Photo.JPG
    https://www.sams-usa.net/foundation/index.php/component/content/article/2-uncategorised/255-a-new-normal-ongoing-chemical-weapons-attacks-in-syria
    #Syrie #armes_nucléaires #guerre #conflit

  • U.N. Probe Chief Doubtful on Syria Sarin Exposure Claims - Gareth Porter
    http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/u-n-probe-chief-doubtful-on-syria-sarin-exposure-claims

    Sellstrom repeated his doubts about the total number of victims of Sarin intoxication and the numbers of patients said to have been treated in hospitals in a Mar. 11 interview with the website “Syria in Crisis” affiliated with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    The head of the Syria investigation had also investigated the use of chemical weapons by Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war for the U.N. He had been Chief Inspector for UNSCOM, the U.N. Commission on Iraq’s compliance with the ban on weapons of mass destruction, and head of its successor, UNMOVIC.

    He has apparently questioned the larger narrative of Syrian government culpability for the attack as well. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after the release of the December U.N. investigation report, Sellstrom said he believes both sides in the Syrian conflict had the “opportunity” and the “capability” to “carry out chemical weapons attacks.”

    • L’article du WSJ cité par Porter : Russia Blames Rebels for Syria Gas Attack, 16 décembre 2013
      http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304858104579262882620510434

      Ake Sellstrom, a Swedish chemical weapons expert who heads the U.N. inspection team, said in an interview that his teams’ reports were open to be interpreted by anyone. “This is the game of it,” he said. “We get the facts but someone else has to have that discussion... and this is the way it should be.”

      But Mr. Sellstrom said he believed both sides in the conflict had the “opportunity” and the “capability” to carry out chemical weapons attacks.

      Mr. Sellstrom had just arrived in Damascus to negotiate a visit to Khan al-Assal when the Aug. 21 attack occurred. He said one of his earliest reactions to the attack was that the Syrian government had to be stupid to pull it off with U.N. inspectors in town.

  • Iran Today : Rafsanjani Takes A Step Back Over Syria ?
    Published on September 4th, 2013 | by Joanna Paraszczuk

    http://eaworldview.com/2013/09/iran-today-rafsanjani-takes-a-step-back-over-syria

    After causing a stir by going against the official line and blaming the Syrian Government for the August 21 chemical weapons attacks outside Damascus, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani appears to have now taken a step back from that position.

    Fars News, close to the Revolutionary Guards, writes on Tuesday that Rafsanjani told a meeting of the Expediency Council that Tehran’s support for Syria must continue — as well as support for Lebanon — because “these countries are at the front line of resistance against Israel”.

    According to Fars, Rafsanjani now casts suspicion over Washington’s reaction to the August 21 attacks, noting that: “America had prepared everything earlier and they themselves announced that they knew three days earlier that chemical materials were to be used.”

    The U.S. was trying to create “sedition” in the region by going to war, he added, even though “Syria is not America’s problem, and the Middle East is the important matter for the West.”

    While refraining from issuing any specific threats against the U.S. or Israel, Rafsanjani does echo other voices in Iran — notably the Revolutionary Guards — when he warns that “all diplomatic capacities must be used, because if the region heads toward war, all of it will burn in this war’s fire.”

    So can we consider these remarks to be a complete retraction?

    What is notable, however, is that Rafsanjani — at least according to Fars — does not change tack entirely and blame the insurgency for the chemical attacks. Instead, he offers this explanation: “It could be that individuals have penetrated the Syrian Army and they carried out these measures.”

    Whether this is a refusal to completely retract his earlier accusations, a face-saving measure, or merely Fars News spin is unclear.

  • Important: Chorus of Syria leaks bear hallmark of White House’s orchestrated spin
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/31/white-house-syria-orchestrated-spin

    Just as the White House unveiled its dossier of evidence of chemical weapons attacks in Syria on Friday, two senior administration officials were giving a telephone briefing to the media. They were authorised by the administration to attest to the reliability of intelligence suggesting the attacks were carried out by Syria – but only on the condition of anonymity.

    Exactly 24 hours earlier, the White House deputy spokesman Josh Earnest had discouraged reporters from trusting anonymous administration officials, saying they should “place more credibility in on-the-record statements”.