Original Articles

Who is Using Chemical Weapons in Syria? by A Z

syriaThe reality is Syrian conflict is ‘bad guys’ against ‘bad guys’. There are no good guys in this battlefield.

Assad’s regime is unscrupulously murderous to Stalinesque proportions, but it would make no sense for them to use chemical weapons. Why on earth would Assad pointlessly attack civilians in a city he controls rather than targeting militants in Aleppo?

The game is simple. The priority for Syrian foreign policy for the past two-and-a-half years has been to avoid foreign military intervention on behalf of the rebels. By the same token, the opposition has tried by every means to secure armed intervention by the US and its allies sufficient to win the war.

The action by the Syrian government most likely to push an unwilling White House into military involvement has been the open use of chemical weapons against civilians. Damascus has furiously denied in the past that it had done so and proof has been lacking. Rebel accusations have been fabricated and claims by Western governments were tainted by propaganda. Remember WMD?

It is difficult to think of any action by the Damascus government more self-destructive than the Syrian army launching a massive chemical-weapons attack on rebel-held districts in its own capital. So why would Assad –the butcher he may be- do it now when he has regained the upper hand in the war. Why do this when Assad is winning? Who is to benefit? Why do it in an area where his Sunni troops are? Why do it within 10 miles of where the UN are located for which it took so long to agree a framework for their investigation in the first place? Why not use chemical weapons in the north where there is no SAA presence? And what about the Russian satellite pictures which the Russians were so quick to deliver to the UNSC?

For all the wringing of hands in Washington and Western Europe about the human tragedy, the present situation exactly suits their interests. Syria, so long the heart of opposition to the West and Israel in the Arab world, is, for now, fragmented and weak. Hence they have no incentive for a clear-cut action to end the war.

Are we really to believe what the NATO media are trying to peddle? What are we to take from this enthusiasm? And does not the US have satellites in space as well? What did the US offer to counter this? I will tell you what we can derive from this. The US could not counter it and that’s why the UN resolution for the investigation has been amended only to ascertain whether chemical weapons have been used not who used them. It’s not because Assad or the Russians are afraid. It’s the West trying to cover their bases and not release to the world this information which completely undermines their narrative. The Americans are continually putting out statements about their interests in the region and any notion of humanitarian concern has been well and truly scotched by their own rhetoric. Remember, the slaughter of people in Vietnam followed a pack of lies about a North Vietnamese attack on a US ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. The destruction, and hundreds of thousands of deaths, in Iraq started after Blair and Bush & his cronies mislead the public about WMD. The US & UK misled the world about their reasons for the invasion of Afghanistan and their bombing of Libya.

However, this time the evidence is piling up that the chemical weapons have been used in the form of poison gas which killed hundreds of people in the east of the city. So who did it? Does the rabid, cannibal, extremist opposition have the resources to carry out this attack? Third party covert agents, from the Gulf monarchies, have been documented as committing atrocities against both sides for over a year. They have the resources and have previously launched false flag operations.

Let’s hope the suffering of innocent Syrians comes to an end soon.

Meanwhile, it is good to have Moscow back as a world power that cannot be ignored or intimidated. Some equilibrium in power keeps the world safer.


The U.S. government may be 
considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America’s military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq’s war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran#.UhsqXf-wqW4.twitter



About the author

Asif Zaidi


Click here to post a comment
  • The US doesn’t seem to be interested in proving with credible evidence that who carried out the chemical attach in Syria. It’s illogical to think the Syrian Government would commit such a fatal mistake when the UN inspectors were in the country. Moreover, the government forces were able to successfully drive out the rebels from their strongholds.Less than 10% fatal rate indicates local made weapon

  • After the farce surrounding WMD before the 2003 Iraq war, can we believe evidence cited by western governments in similar cases? Especially as the use of chemical weapons has been stated by the US administration as a “red line”, the crossing of which would trigger US military action. And why would the Assad regime commit such an atrocity ?
    But who if not them?

  • http://www.revolutionobserver.com/2013/08/will-us-attack-syrian-regime.html
    The Assad regime has secured US interests for the last 43 years. The US still needs the Assad regime; since it has been very difficult to find an ally within the Syrian rebels that can secure its interests as a replacement for the Assad regime. This fact was clearly pronounced by Gen. Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, when he stated: “It is my belief that the [rebel] side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor. Today, they are not.”

  • this article must not go unnoticed on Syria http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2013/08/27/Chemical-warfare-in-Syria-who-and-why-.html

    “ast Tuesday I was in Amman participating in a three-day conference organized by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Academy for Islamic Thought and King Abdullah II took the opportunity to speak to participants. They were predominantly Islamic scholars and Muslim intellectuals from all parts of the Muslim world – at a luncheon he hosted. Now, until recently, Jordan has quietly and discreetly provided support for some of the rebel forces, particularly defectors from the Syrian Army which is good for the rebels and better than having jihadist, extreme Sunni sectarians or warlord types.

    The speech was a surprise due to the level of uncertainty (rather than enthusiasm) it highlighted for the rebel cause. The King stressed that religious scholars –be they Sunni, or Shia, or Sufi or Salafi or Alawitte, I repeat “Alawitte,” must sit down together and do everything to end the sectarian motivated conflict with a negotiated settlement.

    That speech must have made headlines throughout the Arab world or at the very least resonated in the chambers of al-Assad’s power. And yet, the next day the Sarin gas attack took place. Go figure.”

  • Rebels and the foreign intelligence agencies backing them have the capacity, resources and interest to carry out the chemical attacks. It is no rocket science to conclude that they did it. Any NATO action against Syria would be against humanity and not Syria, as was the military action against Iraq where 3 million Iraqis are killed, millions made refugees, thousands of women raped etc, etc. NATO and US have already destroyed millions of people in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc (the list other countries they know but can’t be proved against them, including Egypt), we do not need any more of their help for the humanity. The world is far better without the US and NATO concerns for the humanity. Could somebody explain it to them???