The specter of chemical warfare looms over Syria once again as the Assad regime faces an existential threat from advancing Islamist rebels led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Concerns stem from Assad’s past use of chemical weapons, most notably the devastating sarin gas attack in 2013 that killed over a thousand people. With rebel forces rapidly gaining ground and approaching the capital, Damascus, there are fears that Assad, driven by desperation, might resort to such tactics again. International observers and analysts, while acknowledging the possibility, are divided on the likelihood of such a scenario. The regime’s vulnerability coupled with its history of using chemical weapons when cornered raises serious concerns about the safety of Syrian civilians. The international community, particularly organizations like the White Helmets, are voicing their apprehensions and urging the regime to refrain from using these horrific weapons.
The debate surrounding the potential for renewed chemical attacks focuses on several key factors. Assad’s history of using chemical weapons, particularly when facing significant military pressure, underscores the gravity of the situation. The current rebel offensive presents a significant challenge to the regime’s survival, arguably mirroring the circumstances that led to previous chemical attacks. However, the rapidly shifting frontlines and the potential for a swift regime collapse could limit the practicality and opportunity for deploying chemical weapons. The chaotic nature of the conflict raises the possibility of rogue elements within the regime’s military or security apparatus initiating a chemical attack without direct orders from Assad himself. This unpredictable environment adds another layer of complexity to the situation and highlights the urgent need for international vigilance.
The international response to any potential chemical attack is also a significant consideration. While the Trump administration’s previous retaliatory strikes against the Assad regime suggest a potential for military action, the current political transition in the United States introduces an element of uncertainty. The incoming Biden administration’s approach to Syria remains unclear, potentially creating a window of opportunity for the regime to act without fear of immediate repercussions. The tense relationship between the US and Russia further complicates the situation, as any unilateral action could escalate tensions and have unpredictable consequences. The international community’s ability to respond effectively to a chemical attack hinges on the clarity and decisiveness of US foreign policy, a factor that remains uncertain in the current transitional period.
Despite the removal of the majority of Syria’s declared chemical weapons stockpile following the 2013 attack, concerns remain about the regime’s remaining capabilities. While the 2013 agreement, brokered by the UN Security Council, dismantled Syria’s primary chemical weapons production infrastructure and removed a significant portion of its stockpile, it did not completely eliminate the threat. Subsequent investigations by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) have revealed continued use of chlorine gas and even traces of sarin, suggesting the regime retained some capacity for chemical warfare. The regime’s obstruction of OPCW inspections further fuels suspicions about undeclared stockpiles or clandestine production facilities. This lingering capability, coupled with the current instability, raises concerns about the potential for further chemical attacks.
The capture of key military and research facilities by rebel forces, particularly in the Al-Safira area, introduces another dimension to the chemical weapons threat. These facilities, associated with missile production and potentially linked to the regime’s past chemical weapons program, could fall into the hands of HTS or other rebel groups. While there are concerns about the potential for these groups to acquire and use chemical weapons, experts believe it is unlikely. The technical challenges associated with deploying these weapons, coupled with the potential for international backlash, could deter these groups from utilizing them. Furthermore, handing over any captured chemical weapons to international authorities could serve as a valuable public relations move for these groups, potentially bolstering their legitimacy.
The possibility of renewed chemical weapons use in Syria presents a complex and concerning situation with far-reaching implications. The Assad regime’s history of resorting to chemical warfare when under pressure, coupled with the ongoing instability and the potential for rogue actors, creates a real and present danger. The international community’s ability to respond effectively to such an event is hampered by political transitions and strained international relations. The removal of Syria’s declared chemical weapons stockpile in 2013, while a significant achievement, did not completely eliminate the threat, and ongoing investigations by the OPCW suggest the regime may retain some capacity for chemical warfare. The capture of key military installations by rebel forces adds another layer of complexity, raising concerns about the security of remaining chemical weapons and their potential use. The situation demands continued vigilance and a coordinated international response to prevent further atrocities and ensure the safety of the Syrian people.
