According to the United Nations, chemical weapons had been used in the Ghouta attacks on 21 August 2013. The Syrian government blamed rebels for the attack and for all other chemical weapons attacks in Syria. In response to the Ghouta events, a coalition of countries led by the United States and France,[1] blamed the Syrian government for the attack and threatened air strikes on Syria as punishment. Russia maintained its opposition to any military action in Syria and blocked Western-led efforts at the United Nations Security Council for UN-sanctioned military intervention.[2][3]
During the G20 summit on 6 September, Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Barack Obama discussed the idea of putting Syria's chemical weapons under international control.[4]
On 9 September 2013, U.S. Secretary of StateJohn Kerry suggested that the air strikes could be averted if Syria turned over "every single bit" of its chemical weapons stockpiles within a week, but State Department officials stressed that Kerry's statement and its one-week deadline were rhetorical in light of the unlikelihood of Syria turning over its chemical weapons.[5][6] However, hours after Kerry's statement, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov announced that Russia had suggested to Syria that it relinquish its chemical weapons[7] and Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem immediately welcomed the proposal.[7][8] This then led to the Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons. After Syria ratified the treaty to join the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and turned over a preliminary set of documents in regard to its chemical weapons stockpile to the OPCW, more discussions and Russian claims that the West was seeking to ensure air strikes would remain an option if the chemical weapons were not turned over, the United Nations Security Council passed resolution 2118.[9]
Prior to the vote, the Executive Council of the OPCW adopted a blueprint with a timeline of verification, removal and destruction of Syria's arsenal of sarin and other chemical weapons by mid-2014 in an "accelerated" programme compared to the regular destruction deadlines under the Chemical Weapons Convention. Director-General Ahmet Üzümcü said: "This decision sends an unmistakable message that the international community is coming together to work for peace in Syria, beginning with the elimination of chemical weapons in that country."[10]
After recalling United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1540, 2042 and 2043, the resolution reaffirmed the Security Council′s "strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic", reaffirmed "that the proliferation of chemical weapons, as well as their means of delivery, constitutes a threat to international peace and security", recalled that Syria had on 22 November 1968 acceded to the 1925 Geneva Protocol, condemned "any use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic, in particular the attack on 21 August 2013, in violation of international law", and bound Syria to the implementation plan presented in a decision of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW): Syria had until 30 June 2014 to complete the destruction of its chemical weapons.
The resolution also calls for a "transitional governing body exercising full executive powers, which could include members of the present Government and the opposition and other groups and shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent;" while still claiming the process is "for the Syrian people to determine the future of the country. All groups and segments of society in the Syrian Arab Republic must be enabled to participate in a national dialogue process. That process must be not only inclusive but also meaningful." The steps in this regard include
a review of the constitutional order and the legal system. The result of constitutional drafting would be subject to popular approval; upon establishment of the new constitutional order, it will be necessary to prepare for and conduct free and fair multiparty elections for the new institutions and offices that have been established; women must be fully represented in all aspects of the transition.
It further noted the difficulty of a transition and mentioned that such a transition should be peaceable.[11]
Issues
While enforcement of the resolution was an issue, another problem that arose was dealing with the chemical weapons, as only the U.S. and Russia have the industrial-scale capacity to store and dispose of the chemical weapons. As such Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov announced two days before the resolution that Russia would be willing to offer its assistance in securing the chemical-weapons sites, it would not take possession of any part of the arsenal; since the U.S. bans the importation and transportation of such munitions, the inspectors would have to work inside Syria amid the civil war. Boston University professor William Keylor wrote to Bloomberg:
It is hard to imagine chemical-weapons inspectors, protected by Russian or other troops, engaging in the complicated task of destroying the stockpiles of chemical weapons in the midst of a civil war. If the inspectors or their protectors come under fire from either side, what will the response of the international community be?[10]
For many months, I have said that the confirmed use of chemical weapons in Syria required a firm, united and decisive response. Tonight, the international community has delivered. A red light for one form of weapons does not mean a green light for others. This is not a license to kill with conventional weapons. All the violence must stop. All the guns must fall silent.[10]
Supranational bodies
The OPCW Executive Council Decision indicated that it would start inspections no later than 1 October and that a plan was approved to eliminate all of Syria's chemical weapons by mid-2014.[12][13]
States
Domestic
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said: "We will commit because we are determined to go forward in the respect of [the agreement of] destroying the chemical weapons."[12] Ambassador to the United Nations Bashar Jaafari also hailed the resolution[10] and added that Syria was "fully committed" to attending the proposed peace conference and that the resolution answered the concerns of Syria and those who supported the opposition - Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France and the US - should also abide by it.[12] However, the partisan opposition leader, Ahmad al-Jarba, said that the accord will not "end the suffering in Syria."[10]
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi applauded the unanimous resolution and welcomed peace initiatives for the conflict, saying:
This is the first time that the Security Council has taken a joint major action on the Syrian issue in more than one year. In dealing with the Syrian issue, the Security Council must bear in mind the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, act with a sense of responsibility to the Syrian people, the world and history, and ensure that any decision it takes can stand the test of history. We hope that the relevant parties will stay in close cooperation, fulfil their respective responsibilities and implement the OPCW decision and Security Council resolution in a comprehensive and accurate manner so as to eventually achieve a proper settlement of the issue of chemical weapons in Syria.[15]
He added that neither Syria not the region could afford another war.[15]
France's Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Syria's cooperation "must be unconditional and fully transparent. This resolution is not our final goal, but only a first step. We must now implement it. One cannot trust a regime, which, until recently, denied possessing such weapons."[10]
Russia's Sergey Lavrov said of the resolution that it "does not allow for any automatic use of force or measures of enforcement" for compliance failures and that the UN Security Council would then have to "carefully" consider any decisions on enforcement.[10] He, however, also said: "The United Nations Security Council ... will stand ready to take action under Chapter VII of the charter, quite clearly."[12]
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called on the Syrian government to "give unfettered access" to its stocks of chemical weapons and would face repercussions for its failure to do so. He added:
This resolution makes clear that those responsible for this heinous act must be held accountable. We are here because actions have consequences and now, should the regime fail to act, there will be consequences... Our original objective was to degrade and deter Syria's chemical-weapons capability [and a U.S. attack] could have achieved that. Tonight's resolution accomplishes even more [by moving to eliminate] one of the largest chemical-weapons stockpiles on earth.[10]
His call for access was echoed by British Foreign Secretary William Hague.[10] U.S. Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power said: "This resolution breaks new ground. The Security Council is establishing a new international norm;" while the National Security Advisor Susan Rice said called it "a strong, binding and enforceable UNSC resolution."[16] Skepticism came from Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham who issued a join statement that read the accord does not change the "reality on the ground" and added: "This resolution is another triumph of hope over reality. It contains no meaningful or immediate enforcement mechanisms, let alone a threat of the use of force for the Assad regime's noncompliance. The whole question of enforcement has been deferred." Prior to the vote the head of the Senate Foreign Relations CommitteeRobert Menendez was concerned that the vote would shift focus from ending "the barbarism and wanton violence of the Assad regime" [sic] to removing one method of war.[10]
Others
The editor of Russia in Global Affairs, Fyodr Lukyanov, said of the deal that "it was the compromise version;" while the director for Eurasia and the Middle East at the Eurasia Group, Cliff Kupchan, said: "It was predictable in the best way it could be. We're very clear-eyed about this."[16] The associate director of New York University's Center on International Cooperation wrote: "The language of the resolution is less important than Russia's willingness to make Assad [sic] comply. The whole deal still pivots on Moscow's commitment to making it work."[10]
Follow-up
The UN Security Council issued an Australia and Luxembourg-drafted non-binding statement on 2 October seeking to enhance aid access. The statement called on Syria to
take immediate steps to facilitate the expansion of humanitarian relief operations, and lift bureaucratic impediments and other obstacles. [Including] promptly facilitating safe and unhindered humanitarian access to people in need, through the most effective ways, including across conflict lines and, where appropriate, across borders from neighbouring countries.
It also urged all sides in the conflict to "immediately demilitarise medical facilities, schools and water stations, refrain from targeting civilian objects, and agree on the modalities to implement humanitarian pauses, as well as key routes to enable promptly...the safe and unhindered passage of humanitarian convoys." At the time of writing, Syria had approved 12 international aid groups but their aid struggled to meet demand and faced delays as they had to negotiate with many government and opposition checkpoints.[17]
Mission
The UN sent in inspectors to carry out the removal and destruction of Syria's arsenal. Their mission was praised by the U.S. and Russia, while Kerry said that he was pleased with the government's cooperation,[18] which was also commended by the inspectors,[19] and the "record time" of the progress made.[20] Ban Ki-moon suggested basing the unit in Cyprus and establishing an OPCW - UN Joint Mission in this regard that would "seek to conduct an operation the likes of which, quite simply, have never been tried before"[citation needed] and that the mission was "dangerous and volatile". He suggested there would be composed of 100 people, including inspectors and support staff.[21] In regard to its work commencing in Syria, the OPCW was awarded the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize.[22] The inspectors also faced security problems such as the Four Seasons Hotel Damascus they were residing at in Damascus was near the site of mortar shelling.[23]
On 31 October, the OPCW reported that the declared production and mixing facilities had been destroyed a day before the deadline. It said that it had inspected 21 out of 23 chemical weapons sites across the country, though two other sides were too dangerous to inspect but the chemical equipment had been moved to other sites which had been inspected. A statement from the organization read: "The OPCW is satisfied it has verified, and seen destroyed, all declared critical production, mixing, filling equipment from all 23 sites."[24] By early November the search of disclosed sites was nearly over.[25]
Albania confirmed that it was requested by the U.S. to destroy the chemical weapons on its soil. However, parliamentary Speaker Ilir Meta said:
We were contacted by the United States, but no decision has been made yet. Any decision will be made transparently and will take into account the interest of the country. I do not think that Albania has the capacity, even other much bigger and more developed countries do not accept to do it.
This was despite protests against having any such weapons on the country's sovereign soil.[26] In response to protests in Tirana and elsewhere, Prime Minister Edi Rama said of the request to destroy the arsenal that "it is impossible for Albania to get involved in this operation."[27]NATO Deputy Secretary General Alexander Vershbow said that the destruction of the chemical weapons was discussed between NATO and Russian defence ministers in Brussels in October. He added that the head of the UN-OPCW mission, Sigrid Kaag, would notify NATO and Russian officials of its work.[28]
The OPCW said that the "most critical" will be removed from the country by the end of 2013 and all the other chemicals except isopropanol would be taken out by 5 February. It added that "sequenced destruction" will start on 15 December and that "priority weapons" will be destroyed by the end of March 2014 with the entire arsenal being cleansed by the end of June 2014. However, it did not say where the destructions would appear. France and Belgium were possible locations, while Norway agreed to provide a merchant ship and an escorting warship to transport the material. The OPCW had, by November 2013, also said that it had neutralised 60 percent of Syria's declared unfilled munitions.[29]
Due to a lack of states willing to host the chemical weapons for its destruction, the OPCW's head, Ahmet Uzümcü, said that the 798 tonnes of chemicals and 7.7million litres of effluent to be transported and disposed off could be done at sea (international waters). "...all measures, in fact, will be taken appropriately either during the transportation of those substances by ship and also during the destruction." He added that he expected the U.S. to "take the lead" in the process as "there are already some facilities manufactured by the U.S. that can be installed easily on a ship or on land."[30] The U.S. later offered to destroy 500 tonnes of "priority" chemicals on one its ships.[31] The OPCW announced an international plan to destroy the weapons. Russian armoured trucks would carry the munitions (including mustard gas, sarin and VX nerve gas) out of the country, tracked by U.S. satellite equipment and Chinese surveillance cameras. However, the 31 December date was pushed back till 31 March 2014 for the most dangerous weapons. Finland will provide chemical weapons emergency-response capabilities and Russia will also provide the sailors and naval vessels to secure cargo operations at Latakia, while the U.S. will adapt naval vessels for the destruction.[32] Additionally, the British Foreign Office promised to help transport and dispose of 150 tonnes of industrial-grade stockpiled chemicals.[33] Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu commented in the last week of 2013, it had sent 25 armored trucks and 50 other vehicles to help transport the toxic munitions out of the country.[34]
Though the 31 December deadline was missed due to the ongoing conflict, in early January 2014 the first batch of chemicals were taken out of the country for destructions. The OPCW-UN mission reported that those materials had been moved from two unnamed sites to Latakia before being loaded onto a Danish commercial vessel with maritime security for the cargo being provided by China, Denmark, Norway and Russia while moving the shipment to the U.S. naval vessel. Uzumcu said: "This is an important step commencing the transportation of these materials as part of the plan to complete their disposal outside the territory of Syria. I encourage the Syrian government to maintain the momentum to remove the remaining priority chemicals, in a safe and timely manner, so that they can be destroyed outside of Syria as quickly as possible." The coordinator of the mission, Sigrid Kaag, said of this activity that "it is first in a series of moves that the Syrian authorities are expected to undertake to ensure that all chemical agents will be taken out of the country." U.S. State Department spokeswomen Jen Psaki said: "Much more needs to be done. We have no reason to believe that the regime has gone back on any aspect of their promise."[35]
In late January 2014, the U.S. criticised what it said was a slowing pace of removal of the priority one and two chemicals that were declared. Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel expressed "concern" on a visit to Poland over the delay and added "I do not know what the Syrian government's motives are - if this is incompetence - or why they are behind in delivering these materials. They need to fix this." U.S. Ambassador Robert Mikulak also criticised the alleged inaction in a statement to the OPCW. "The effort to remove chemical agent and key precursor chemicals from Syria has seriously languished and stalled."[36] In response, Russian diplomat Mikhail Ulyanov said that "the Syrians are approaching the fulfilment of their obligations seriously and in good faith."[37] Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov then added that the 1 March deadline will be met and that "the Syrians announced that the removal of a large shipment of chemical substances is planned in February."[38]
After missing the 5 February deadline to remove its declared munitions out of the country, Syria proposed a 100-day plan. The OPCW-UN mission met in the Hague to discuss these proposals. An unnamed UN diplomat suggested it could still be removed by March and that Syria's proposed end May deadline would not leave enough time for all munitions to be destroyed by the end of June.[39] In early March, the OPCW confirmed that a third of Syrian chemical weapons, including mustard gas, were shipped for destruction abroad; it added that six consignments of toxic agents it had declared were handed over and that two more shipments were headed for Latakia to be transferred to the U.S. navy ship MV Cape Ray and other commercial destruction facilities in the U.K. and Germany. Syria also submitted a revised plan to remove all its chemical weapons by the end of April 2014, which was under negotiation at an executive council meeting at the OPCW.[40] On 27 March, the OPCW announced that 49% of the raw materials used for poison gas and nerve agents were sent abroad for destruction and that 53.6% of the chemicals were either removed or already destroyed inside the country.[41]
The OPCW mission head, Sigrid Kaag, said that Syria could meet the 27 April deadline to remove all its chemical agents from the country to be destroyed by 30 June. Syria had, however, suspended some transfers for security reasons, but would resume them in the "coming days." Kaag also warned the UNSC that further delays would make it "increasingly challenging" to adhere to the deadline. "I have repeated to Syrian authorities the need for a swift resumption of the removal operation. Operations have to restart immediately." Kaag added that 72 containers filled with chemical weapons were ready to be transferred to Latakia for shipment out of the country and that this would now account for 90 percent of the country's stockpile. In total the OPCW had said by the end of March 2014 that the total chemicals to be removed or destroyed was 53.6% and that Syria had pledged to remove all its chemicals by 13 April, except for those that were in areas "that are presently inaccessible," for which a further two weeks was given.[42] On 20 April, Kaag said that 80% of the declared material has been shipped out and that Syria was on course to meet the 27 April deadline.[43]
On 27 April, Kaag said that despite the security challenges the government was required to meet the 30 June deadline to destroy all toxic chemicals. She added that 7.5-8% of the declared material remained in the country at "one particular site. "However, 92.5 percent of chemical weapons material removed or destroyed is significant progress. A small percentage is to be destroyed, regardless, in-country. That can be done. It's a matter of accessing the site." Another dispute was whether Syria would be mandated to destroy 12 remaining chemical weapons production sites. Syria planned to seal them as they had been rendered unusable, but Western countries called for them to be destroyed because it may be able to be reopened in the future.[44]
The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is an intergovernmental organisation and the implementing body for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which entered into force on 29 April 1997. The OPCW, with its 193 member states, has its seat in The Hague, Netherlands; it oversees the global endeavour for the permanent and verifiable elimination of chemical weapons.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), officially the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, is an arms control treaty administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), an intergovernmental organization based in The Hague, The Netherlands. The treaty entered into force on 29 April 1997. It prohibits the use of chemical weapons, and also prohibits large-scale development, production, stockpiling, or transfer of chemical weapons or their precursors, except for very limited purposes. The main obligation of member states under the convention is to effect this prohibition, as well as the destruction of all current chemical weapons. All destruction activities must take place under OPCW verification.
The Iraq disarmament crisis was claimed as one of primary issues that led to the multinational invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions. It provided a justification for the subsequent US invasion of Iraq.
In March 2003 the United States government announced that "diplomacy has failed" and that it would proceed with a "coalition of the willing" to rid Iraq under Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction the US and UK claimed it possessed. The 2003 invasion of Iraq began a few days later. Prior to this decision, there had been much diplomacy and debate amongst the members of the United Nations Security Council over how to deal with the situation. This article examines the positions of these states as they changed during 2002–2003.
José Maurício de Figueiredo Bustani is a Brazilian diplomat who was the first director-general of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons until he was ousted after pressure from the US government in April 2002 over disagreements about how to address Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.
Many nations continue to research and/or stockpile chemical weapon agents despite numerous efforts to reduce or eliminate them. Most states have joined the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which required the destruction of all chemical weapons by 2012. Twelve nations have declared chemical weapons production facilities and six nations have declared stockpiles of chemical weapons. All of the declared production facilities have been destroyed or converted to civilian use after the treaty went into force.
Syria and weapons of mass destruction deals with the research, manufacture, stockpiling and alleged use by Syria of weapons of mass destruction, which include chemical and nuclear weapons.
The 2013 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons for their "extensive work to eliminate chemical weapons". The award citation indicated the organization was awarded the prize, because they "have defined the use of chemical weapons as taboo under international law. Recent events in Syria, where chemical weapons have again been put to use, have underlined the need to enhance the efforts to do away with such weapons." The committee criticized Russia and the United States for not meeting the extended deadline for destruction of its chemical weapons, and noted that certain countries "are still not members". The OPCW was the 22nd organization to be awarded the prize.
There have been numerous reports of chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian Civil War, beginning in 2012, and corroborated by national governments, the United Nations (UN), the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and media organizations. The attacks occurred in different areas of Syria, including Khan al-Assal, Jobar, Saraqib, Ashrafiyat Sahnaya, Kafr Zita, Talmenes, Sarmin and Douma. The deadliest attacks were the August 2013 sarin attack in Ghouta, the April 2017 sarin attack in Khan Shaykhun and April 2018 Douma chemical attacks. The most common agent used is chlorine, with sarin and sulphur mustard also reported. Almost half of the attacks between 2014 and 2018 were delivered via aircraft and less than a quarter were delivered from the ground, with the remaining attacks having an undetermined method of delivery. Since the start of uprisings across Syria in 2011, Syrian Arab Armed Forces and pro-Assad paramilitary forces have been implicated in more than 300 chemical attacks in Syria.
The Khan al-Assal chemical attack was a chemical attack in Khan al-Assal, Aleppo, Syria on 19 March 2013, which according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights resulted in at least 26 fatalities including 16 government soldiers and 10 civilians, and more than 86 injuries. Immediately after the incident, the Syrian government and opposition accused each other of carrying out the attack, but neither side presented clear documentation. The Syrian government asked the United Nations to investigate the incident, but disputes over the scope of that investigation led to lengthy delays. In the interim, the Syrian government invited Russia to send specialists to investigate the incident. Samples taken at the site led them to conclude that the attack involved the use of sarin, which matched the assessment made by the United States. Russia held the opposition responsible for the attack, while the US held the government responsible. UN investigators finally arrived on the ground in Syria in August, but their arrival coincided with the much larger-scale 2013 Ghouta attacks which took place on 21 August, pushing the Khan al-Assal investigation "onto the backburner" according to a UN spokesman. The UN report, which was completed on 12 December, found "likely use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Assal" and assessed that organophosphate poisoning was the cause of the "mass intoxication".
International reactions to the Ghouta chemical attack of 21 August 2013 were widespread. The Ghouta chemical attack was a chemical weapons attack in Damascus, Syria during the Syrian Civil War. United States President Barack Obama said that the U.S. military should strike targets in Syria in retaliation for the government's purported use of chemical weapons—a proposal supported by French President François Hollande but opposed by the Syrian government's closest allies, Iran and Russia. Although the Arab League said it would support military action against Syria in the event of U.N. support, league members Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria opposed intervention. On 14 September the U.S. and Russia announced an agreement on the Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons to destroy the Syria stockpile of chemical weapons and its production facilities, and Syria agreed to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention. The United Nations Security Council also passed Resolution 2118.
Syria's chemical weapons program began in the 1970s with weapons and training from Egypt and the Soviet Union, with production of chemical weapons in Syria beginning in the mid-1980s. For some time, Syria was believed to have the world's third-largest stockpile of chemical weapons, after the United States and Russia. Prior to September 2013 Syria had not publicly admitted to possessing chemical weapons, although Western intelligence services believed it to hold one of the world's largest stockpiles. In September 2013, French intelligence put the Syrian stockpile at 1,000 tonnes, including Yperite, VX and "several hundred tonnes of sarin". At the time, Syria was one of a handful of states which had not ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention. In September 2013, Syria joined the CWC, and agreed to the destruction of its weapons, to be supervised by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), as required by the convention. A joint OPCW-United Nations mission was established to oversee the destruction process. Syria joined OPCW after international condemnation of the August 2013 Ghouta chemical attack, for which Western states held the Syrian government responsible and agreed to the prompt destruction of its chemical weapons, resulting in U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry declaring on 20 July 2014: "we struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out." The destruction of Syria's chemical weapons that the Assad government had declared was completed by August 2014, yet further disclosures, incomplete documentation, and allegations of withholding part of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile since mean that serious concerns regarding chemical weapons and related sites in Syria remain. On 5 April 2017, the government of Syria allegedly unleashed a chemical attack that killed 70 civilians. A suspected chemical attack on Douma on 9 April 2018 that killed at least 49 civilians has been blamed on the Syrian Government.
The destruction of Syria's chemical weapons began on 14 September 2013 after Syria entered into several international agreements which called for the elimination of Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles and set a destruction deadline of 30 June 2014. Also on 14 September 2013, Syria acceded to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and agreed to its provisional application pending its entry into force on 14 October. Having acceded to the CWC, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Executive Council on 27 September approved a detailed implementation plan that required Syria to assume responsibility for and follow a timeline for the destruction of Syrian chemical weapons and Syrian chemical weapon production facilities. Following the signing of the Framework Agreement on 14 September 2013 and after the OPCW implementation plan, on 27 September the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2118 which bound Syria to the timetable set out in the OPCW implementation plan. The joint OPCW-UN mission was established to oversee the implementation of the destruction program.
The Day of Remembrance for All Victims of Chemical Warfare is an annual event held November 30 as a "tribute to the victims of chemical warfare, as well as to reaffirm the commitment of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to the elimination of the threat of chemical weapons, thereby promoting the goals of peace, security, and multilateralism." It is officially recognised by the United Nations (UN) and has been celebrated since 2005. On the 2013 observance day, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gave a speech where he stated:
On this Remembrance Day, I urge the international community to intensify efforts to rid the world of chemical weapons, along with all other weapons of mass destruction. Let us work together to bring all States under the Convention and promote its full implementation. This is how we can best honour past victims and liberate future generations from the threat of chemical weapons.
The OPCW-UN Joint Mission in Syria was jointly established on 16 October 2013 by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the United Nations (UN) to oversee the elimination of the Syrian chemical weapons program. The Joint Mission continued the work of the OPCW-UN advance team that had arrived in Damascus on 1 October 2013.
The OPCW Fact-Finding Mission in Syria is a mission of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to investigate some possible cases of the use of toxic chemicals in Syria during the civil war, including chlorine. The 21 August 2013 Ghouta chemical attack used sarin. The OPCW-Director General Ahmet Üzümcü announced the creation of the mission on 29 April 2014. This initial mission was headed by Malik Ellahi. The Syrian Government agreed to the Mission.
The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack took place on 4 April 2017 on the town of Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate of Syria. The town was reported to have been struck by an airstrike by government forces followed by massive civilian chemical poisoning. The release of a toxic gas, which included sarin, or a similar substance, killed at least 89 people and injured more than 541, according to the opposition Idlib Health Directorate. The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war since the Ghouta chemical attack in 2013.
On 7 April 2018, a chemical warfare attack was carried out by forces of the government of Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian city of Douma. Medics and witnesses reported that it caused the deaths of between 40 and 50 people and injuries to possibly well over 100. The attack was attributed to the Syrian Army by rebel forces in Douma, and by the United States, British, and French governments. A two-year long investigation by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Investigation and Identification Team (IIT) concluded in January 2023 that the Syrian Air Force perpetrated the chemical attacks during its military campaign in Douma. On 14 April 2018, the United States, France and the United Kingdom carried out a series of military strikes against multiple government sites in Syria.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
