Syria chemical arms claim pressures Obama

2013-04-25 08:48
US President Barack Obama. (Mandel Ngan, AFP)

US President Barack Obama. (Mandel Ngan, AFP)

Multimedia   ·   User Galleries   ·   News in Pictures Send us your pictures  ·  Send us your stories

Washington - Growing speculation that the Syrian regime is using chemical weapons is turning up the heat on President Barack Obama, who has warned such a move would be a game changer.

The US administration, both in public and in private, says it has not concluded that such arms - of which President Bashar Assad's regime has a large stockpile - have been been employed in the bloody civil war.

But "it's important that we do whatever we can to monitor, investigate and verify any credible allegations, given the enormous consequences for the Syrian people and given the President's clear statement that chemical weapons use is unacceptable," White House spokesperson Jay Carney said on Tuesday.

On 20 March, during a historic visit to Israel, Obama said the use of such weapons would be a "grave and tragic" mistake on Assad's behalf and that it would be a "game changer."

Washington has also warned that any use or transfer of chemical weapons would cross a "red line" and possibly trigger military action.

Recent statements from US allies seem to suggest such arms - illegal under international law - may already have been unleashed.

Low confidence assessments

The latest came Tuesday when Israeli Brigadier General Itai Brun, head of the research and analysis division of military intelligence, alleged Assad's regime had used chemical agents - mostly likely sarin gas - more than once.

"To the best of our professional understanding, the [Assad] regime has made use of deadly chemical weapons against the rebels in a number of incidents in the last few months," Brun told a security conference in Tel Aviv.

His comments come on the heels of similar assessments reported to the United Nations by France and Britain last month.

"The British and French submitted a letter to the UN Secretary General on the 21st March to 'bring attention to recent allegations from various sources that chemical weapons have been used in Syria,'" a senior administration official told AFP.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official added that the use of chemical weapons in an environment like Syria was very difficult to confirm.

"Given the stakes involved, low confidence assessments by foreign governments cannot be the basis for US action," the official said.

‘Inbuilt ambiguity’

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, on a visit to Cairo on Wednesday, said any evidence had to be weighed carefully.

"This is serious business and you want to be as sure as you can be on these kind of things," Hagel said, adding the United States ultimately had to rely "on its own intelligence."

Gregory Koblentz of the Council on Foreign Relations underscored it was important that the evidence was highly reliable, "ideally from two or more independent sources, or types of analyses that can give you that type of confidence."

And that's not currently the case in Syria, where access is tough and evidence transmission chains are weak.

"It's very difficult to make that assessment, unless you have trained experts who are on the ground immediately after an attack, or able to collect samples, interview victims, interview witnesses and move about freely," Koblentz said.

"It's not surprising to me that different countries are coming up with different assessments because the evidence isn't probably as strong and conclusive."

Aram Nerguizian of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies said "it would take a lot more than a low grade assessment from the French and the British to trigger a major escalation here in Washington."

"Does that mean that there's not gonna be pressure to do something? No. There will certainly be pressure in the US, pressure in the Gulf, pressure in Syria, pressure in Europe," he told AFP.

Nerguizian also noted that Obama was cautious in formulating his warnings to Damascus, saying his statement on red lines "has always had some inbuilt ambiguity."

"An ambiguity can be an asset, and it can be a liability, if it's viewed as the ladder to something that puts the administration in a difficult position," Nerguizian said. "And it has to resist the urge for a major and uncalculated response."

Read more on:    bashar assad  |  chuck hagel  |  barack obama  |  jay carney  |  syria  |  us  |  syria conflict

Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.
NEXT ON NEWS24X publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.