Secretary-General's remarks to the Security Council on the report of the United Nations Missions to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons.

Secretary-General's remarks to the Security Council on the report of the United Nations Missions to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons.(UN).

New York, 16 September 2013 - Secretary-General's remarks to the Security Council on the report of the United Nations Missions to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons on the incident that occurred on 21 August 2013 in the Ghouta area of Damascus

It is with a heavy heart that I submit to the Security Council the report of the United Nations Missions to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons on the incident that occurred on 21 August 2013 in the Ghouta area of Damascus.

As I join you here, the President of the General Assembly has been given a copy of the report so that he can inform the Member States.

I wish to express my immense gratitude to the Head of the Mission, Professor Åke Sellström, and his team of scientists and technical experts, for their stellar work.  They performed in battlefield conditions, in record time.  Impartial and independent, they represent the best of the United Nations and I thank them for their contribution.

I am also grateful to the Directors-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the World Health Organization for their indispensable support.

The Mission has concluded that chemical weapons were used on a relatively large scale in the Ghouta area of Damascus in the context of the ongoing conflict in Syria. The attack resulted in numerous casualties, particularly among civilians.

The Mission’s findings are based on the evidence it obtained in the course of its activities in the Ghouta area.  The Mission adhered to the most stringent protocols available for such an investigation, including to ensure the chain of custody for all samples.

The planning for the Mission was complex and highly delicate. Routes of entry into the relevant areas and other crucial elements remained uncertain until the final moments.  The Mission was also the victim of a sniper attack.  Despite these difficulties and dangers, the Mission was able to carry out extensive activities on site in the limited time it had available.

The team interviewed more than 50 survivors, medical personnel and first responders. It applied a rigorous and objective selection process designed to identify survivors who may have been exposed to chemical agents. It assessed these individuals’ symptoms and collected biomedical samples, including from hair, urine and blood.

The Mission also documented and sampled impact sites and munitions, and collected 30 soil and environmental samples – far more than any previous such United Nations investigation.

The statements by survivors offer a vivid account of the events of 21 August.

Survivors reported that following an attack with shelling, they quickly experienced a range of symptoms, including shortness of breath, disorientation, eye irritation, blurred vision, nausea, vomiting and general weakness.  Many eventually lost consciousness.  First responders described seeing a large number of individuals lying on the ground, many of them dead or unconscious.

The Mission also interviewed nine nurses and seven treating physicians, several of whom responded immediately to the incident.  They reported seeing a large number of people lying in the streets without external signs of injury, some with laboured breathing, most of them unconscious.

The weather conditions that morning were conducive to maximizing the potential impact of an attack involving heavy gases, which can stay close to the ground. Weather information showed a falling temperature between 2:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. The downward movement of air would have allowed the gas to easily penetrate the basements and lower levels of buildings and other structures where many people were seeking shelter.

Let me turn now to the handling and analysis of the materials that were collected by the Mission.

The samples were sent for analysis to four laboratories designated by the OPCW. The Mission’s factual findings are as follows.

(a)The environmental and biomedical samples demonstrate the widespread nature of the attacks. Eighty-five per cent of the blood samples tested positive for sarin. Biomedical samples were taken from 34 of the 36 patients selected by the Mission who had signs of poisoning. Almost all tested positive for exposure to sarin.

(b)These results were corroborated by the clinical assessments, which documented symptoms and signs consistent with nerve agent exposure. A number of affected patients were diagnosed with intoxification by an organophosphorous compound, and clearly showed symptoms associated with sarin, including loss of consciousness, shortness of breath, blurred vision, eye inflammation, vomiting and seizures.

(c)A majority of the environmental samples confirmed the use of sarin. The samples were taken from impact sites and surrounding areas – locations where survivors were also found to have been affected by sarin.

(d)The team was also able to examine impacted and exploded surface-to-surface rockets that are capable of carrying a chemical payload. These were carefully measured, photographed and sampled. A majority of the rockets or rocket fragments recovered were found to be carrying sarin.

On the basis of its analysis, the Mission concluded that it – and I quote – “collected clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used in the Ein Tarma, Moadamiyah and Zalmalka in the Ghouta area of Damascus.”

Due to the security situation and other limitations, the Mission was unable to document the full extent of the use of chemical weapons on 21 August or to verify the total number of causalities.

The results are overwhelming and indisputable.  The facts speak for themselves.

I wish to emphasize that the Mission has yet to complete its investigation of the other allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The Mission will return to Syria as soon as practical to complete its investigation of Khan Al Assal and all other pending credible allegations before completing its final report. I will count on the continued resolve of team, as well as the support of Member States. 

The United Nations Mission has now confirmed, unequivocally and objectively, that chemical weapons have been used in Syria.

This is a war crime and a grave violation of the 1925 Protocol and other rules of customary international law.  I trust all can join me in condemning this despicable crime. The international community has a responsibility to hold the perpetrators accountable and to ensure that chemical weapons never re-emerge as an instrument of warfare.

The accession of Syria to the Chemical Weapons Convention and Syria’s belated acknowledgement that it possesses chemical weapons are welcome developments that come with strict obligations.

The Russian Federation and the United States, led by Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Kerry, held intensive consultations in Geneva last week, along with their experts. I welcome the understanding they reached regarding the safeguarding and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles.  I hope the Security Council and the Executive Council of the OPCW can move quickly to consider and implement this plan.  I stand ready to support this plan in every way possible, while also fully realizing the complexities of such an undertaking in the midst of a civil war.

The unity of the Security Council will be crucial. Given the gravity of the situation, I urge the Council to consider ways to ensure enforcement of, and compliance with, the plan through a clear resolution.  In that regard, I draw your attention to a significant element in the agreement reached in Geneva, and I quote:

"The United States and the Russian Federation concur that this UN Security Council resolution should provide for review on a regular basis the implementation in Syria of the decision of the Executive Council of the OPCW, and in the event of non-compliance, including unauthorized transfer, or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in Syria, the UN Security Council should impose measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter."

End quote.  I agree there should be consequences for non-compliance. Any use of chemical weapons by anyone, anywhere, is a crime.

We should not lose sight of the broader perspective of the Syrian crisis.  The terrible loss of life on 21 August was the result of one of many attacks that have collectively killed more than 100,000 people in Syria during the past two and a half years.

The UN Commission of Inquiry has reported that Government and pro-government forces have committed murder, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions, rape and torture against civilians. It has also reported that anti-government armed groups have committed murder, executions, torture and hostage-taking. There has been indiscriminate shelling of civilian neighbourhoods by all sides. Yet arms continue to flow to the country and the region.

As action on chemical weapons moves ahead, the international community, including the United Nations, should also not be blind to the war crimes and crimes against humanity being committed with conventional weapons.  There must be no impunity for these violations, either.

The humanitarian situation is desperate. Food supplies are dangerously low in some places.  We lack access to many people in need.  People are living under siege.  Families face intolerable choices between the risk of remaining in place and the risk of taking flight.  Communities that once lived in relative harmony are now torn with sectarian tension.  One third of the country’s people have fled their homes -- the largest flows of refugees and internally displaced persons in many years, causing instability across the region.

We need to do everything we can to bring the parties to the negotiating table. This is the only path to a durable solution. I stand ready to convene the International Conference on Syria in Geneva as soon as possible.  I look forward to meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary Kerry on 28 September. I hope we will be able to set a date for the conference at that time. I also hope that this Council will provide full support to the efforts of Joint Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi to prepare the ground for its launch.

This is the most significant confirmed use of chemical weapons against civilians since Saddam Hussein used them in Halabja in 1988.  The international community has pledged to prevent any such horror from recurring, yet it has happened again.

This is a matter that truly affects international peace and security.  After two-and-a-half years of tragedy, now is the moment for the Security Council to uphold its political and moral responsibilities and demonstrate the political will to move forward in a decisive manner.

My hope is that this incident will serve as a wake-up call for more determined efforts to resolve the conflict and end the unbearable suffering of the Syrian people.

Thank you, Mr. President.

UN report photo shows confirmation of use of sarin in Syria attack.

UN report photo shows confirmation of use of sarin in Syria attack. (JPost).

UNITED NATIONS, Sept 16 (Reuters) - A UN photograph of chief UN chemical weapons investigator Ake Sellstrom handing over his report on an Aug. 21 gas attack on Damascus suburbs shows that the report confirms use of the deadly nerve agent sarin.

"On the basis of the evidence obtained during the investigation of the Ghouta incident, the conclusion is that chemical weapons have been used in the ongoing conflict between the parties in the Syrian Arab Republic ... against civilians, including children, on a relatively large scale," the report said.

"In particular the environmental, chemical and medical samples we have collected provide clear and convincing evidence that surface to surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used," it said.

The photo released by the United Nations shows Sellstrom giving the report, which will be officially released later on Monday, to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. By zooming in on the photo some of its contents can be clearly read.

Donald Rumsfeld Interview: 'A Leader Should Be Careful about Drawing Red Lines.'

Donald Rumsfeld Interview: 'A Leader Should Be Careful about Drawing Red Lines.' HT: Spiegel.

Donald Rumsfeld is no stranger to intervening abroad. In an interview with SPIEGEL, the former US secretary of defense explains why Obama was right to delay military action in Syria and why the president must be wary of Russian President Putin.

SPIEGEL: You recently published a book called "Rumsfeld's Rules," which contains pearls of wisdom you collected during your five decades of public service and passed on to co-workers and employees. One rule says: "The perfect battle is the one that does not have to be fought." So, President Barack Obama did the right thing by calling off a military strike in Syria?

Rumsfeld: Yes, he did do the right thing. When I look at his current predicament -- Russian President Vladimir Putin lecturing President Obama on American exceptionalism and offering his plan for supervision of Syria's chemical weapons -- I think also of another rule, which says: "Never assume the other fellow will not do something you wouldn't do." Mr. Putin is very clever, and President Obama will need to keep that in mind.
SPIEGEL: Obama has tried to engage in public debate rather than rush into a war. Was it the right decision to ask Congress for permission?
Rumsfeld: Yes it was. Most US presidents since World War II have led military actions without a declaration of war by Congress, though most, if not all, have properly consulted and sought support from Congress. That is the wise thing to do. The president, however, found himself in a difficult position because he brought his proposal before Congress at a time when support of the House of Representatives seemed unlikely and the majority in our country was opposed to his military proposal, according to the polls.
SPIEGEL: So if we understand correctly, you are saying that it was not smart of the president to ask Congress in the first place?
Rumsfeld: That is not what I said. My point is that it is not a wise move if you lack a vision with sufficient clarity to gain majority support in the country and the Congress. As President of the United States, it is unwise to go to Congress to ask for support for the use of force and to be defeated. I believe such an action by the Congress would have been unprecedented. And if a president can't gain support in the US Congress, we should not be surprised that gaining support from the nations of the world would be just as difficult.
SPIEGEL: But a democratically elected president cannot simply govern against the will of his own people. And the American public has made it unmistakably clear that they are tired of wars.
Rumsfeld: That is true. Every country should be tired of going to war. War is a terrible thing, but that is the reason why a leader should be careful about drawing red lines. If I had been in Congress, as much as I would be inclined naturally to be supportive of a president, any president, I would have voted no, had the issue come to a vote.Read the full interview here.

Rumsfeld Criticizes Obama's Syria Policies: ""I think he might have been better off it he had helped some of the non-radical elements among the Syrian rebels early on."

Rumsfeld Criticizes Obama's Syria Policies: ""I think he might have been better off it he had helped some of the non-radical elements among the Syrian rebels early on."(Spiegel).

Former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld isn't happy with the job Barack Obama is doing to address the Syrian civil war. He argues the president hasn't explained what he hopes to accomplish in the country. 

In an interview to be published in the next issue of SPIEGEL, former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has strongly criticized President Barack Obama's Syria policies.
"I believe the reason he has had difficulty gaining support both in the US and from other countries is because he has not explained what he hopes to do, what the mission would be and what he hopes to accomplish," Rumsfeld said. "To gain support in our Congress and from other nations requires clarity, an acceptable mission and an explicit outcome."


Rumsfeld also voiced scepticism about Russia's offer of placing Syrian chemical weapons under the control of the United Nations. "(M)y recollection is that the Soviets or the Russians gave Syria most of their weapons arsenal," he said. "And it is not clear to me that Russia itself has fully complied with all their obligations with respect to chemical weapons. Therefore, a question would be: Might it possibly amount to putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop?"
Rumsfeld said Obama should not have allowed the situation to get as far as it has. "I think he might have been better off it he had helped some of the non-radical elements among the Syrian rebels early on, not with US troops, but with weapons, intelligence and humanitarian support."

The former defense secretary also shared his opinions on the National Security Agency spying scandal, expressing a surprising amount of sympathy for Europeans who have been outraged by the government organization's surveillance practices.

"My impression is there are a lot of people, Republicans and Democrats, in the US, as well as people overseas, who are concerned about the NSA programs. Should people be concerned about their privacy? You bet. Nobody wants to think that everything they do or say is under surveillance."

The full original English text of the interview will be available on SPIEGEL ONLINE International on Monday.

Turkey wants US to ready Syria ‘Plan B’ .

Turkey wants US to ready Syria ‘Plan B’.(HD).

Unable to conceal its skepticism about a Washington-Moscow deal to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons stocks, Ankara is set to ask Washington to prepare a “Plan B” for Syria on concerns that Damascus will abuse the process and continue its alleged attacks on its citizens.

“This process will give more time for [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad [to stay] in power. The deal should have been more open and straight in outlining the possible sanctions to be imposed on Damascus in the event of the regime’s incompliance with the deal,” a Turkish diplomatic source said over the weekend.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu will outline the Turkish government’s position and its concerns with regard to developments in Syria at a meeting in Paris with the participation of foreign ministers from the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia. Davutoğlu was invited to the meeting by John Kerry, with whom he exchanged two phone conversations on Sept. 14 and early yesterday.

Having already described the efforts as “cosmetic,” Davutoğlu bluntly expressed Turkey’s concerns over the deal’s effects on the ongoing civil war in Syria and repeated that the international community should be made well-aware of the potential massacres that could be committed by the Syrian government. Initially slated to be a meeting between the U.S., French and British foreign ministers, the scope of the Paris meetings was expanded in the wake of the Davutoğu-Kerry conversation.

“This deal should not delay the need for an immediate resolution of the ongoing human tragedy in Syria. Al-Assad should not be allowed to continue his massacres. We are concerned that the regime will abuse this deal for the continuation of the human tragedy in Syria,” Davutoğlu reportedly told Kerry over the phone.
Kerry was in Israel on Sunday to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to inform him about the Sept. 14 deal.

Turkey, along with France, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, favor a large-scale punitive military operation into Syria with the purpose of effectively toppling the al-Assad government after nearly 2.5 years of civil war that has claimed the lives of more than 100,000 Syrians. The meeting in Paris will allow the U.S. and its allies to evaluate their next steps in Syria. Davutoğlu is expected to hold bilateral talks with his counterparts in Paris on the sidelines of Kerry’s initiative.

In Paris, the Turkish minister is expected to tell Kerry that al-Assad should not be permitted to abuse the process, arguing that Ankara, Washington and Moscow should accordingly prepare contingency plans with a view to Damascus’ potential incompliance with the terms of the deal.

Although the deal refers to the U.N. Charter’s Article 7, which outlines the measures to be imposed against Syria in the event of non-compliance, Ankara is of the opinion that a more concrete set of sanctions should be announced today.

One other issue Davutoğlu is likely to bring to the table today is the disappointment of Syrian opposition groups who have been fighting against the government since 2011. The Turkish minister will likely ask his counterparts to reinforce the opposition groups both politically and militarily so that they do not lose their positions in the field.

In the meantime, Foreign Minister Davutoğlu held a urgent meeting with top opposition figures late yesterday. Ahmad al-Jarba, head of the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), Ahmad Saleh Touma, head of the interim Syrian government and Salim Idriss, head of the supreme military council were scheduled to meet with Davutoğlu in Ankara.

" GENEVA II " - US-Russia reach landmark deal on destruction of Syria chemical weapons arsenal.

" GENEVA II " - US-Russia reach landmark deal on destruction of Syria chemical weapons arsenal.(BLN).

Russia and the United States reached a deal on a framework that will see the destruction or removal of Syria’s chemical weapons by mid- 2014. Under the plan, the Assad government has one week to hand over an inventory of its chemical weapons arsenal.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his US counterpart John Kerry announced the plan on putting an end to Syria’s chemical weapons program following their third day of negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland.
Kerry outlined several points of the plan, which would see the “rapid assumption of control by the international community” of Syria’s chemical weapons. He further stressed US-Russia commitment to the complete destruction of not only of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, but also its production and refinement capabilities.

Syria will also become a party to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which outlaws their production and use.
Damascus must submit within a week’s time – “and not 30 days” – a complete inventory of related arms, “including names, types, and quantities of its chemical weapons agents, types of munitions, and location and form of storage, production and research and development facilities."

The Syrian government should provide the OPCW, the UN and other supporting personnel “with the immediate and unfettered right to inspect any and all sites in Syria.” Lavrov later said that security for all international inspectors on the ground should be provided for not only by the government, but opposition forces as well.

It remains undecided who will actually be tasked with destroying the stock, although their destruction “outside of Syria" and under “OPWC supervision” would prove to be optimal.
On the timetable, Kerry said UN inspectors must be on the ground no later than November, while the destruction of chemical weapons must be completed by the middle of 2014.

"Providing this framework is fully implemented it can end the threat these weapons pose not only to the Syrian people but also their neighbors," Kerry said adding that Russian and US teams of experts had reached "a shared assessment" of the existing stockpile and that Syria must destroy all of its weapons. It was possible that the Syrian rebels have some chemical weapons, he acknowledged.

If Damascus fails to comply with the plan, a response in accordance with UN Charter Chapter 7 will follow, Kerry said, in a reference to the use of military force. The chapter provides for "action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security" in the event other measures fail.

But Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, said the agreement did not include any potential use of force against Syria. He however said that deviations from the plan, including attacks on UN inspectors, would be brought to the UN Security Council, which would decide on further action.
There is no prior agreement about what form the Security Council’s measures might take if Syria does not comply, Kerry said.
The joint press conference was rather jovial in nature, contrasting sharply with the public barbs which have been traded between Russian and US officials in recent days.
Kerry in fact concluded the press conference by teasing Lavrov that he “could be a senator” after the Russian FM gave a rather voluble reply to a question posed by a Russian journalist.

Kick starting Geneva II.

Meanwhile, both sides reiterated previously stated intentions to meet with Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations and Arab League Special Envoy to Syria, on the margins of the UN General Assembly on September 28.
Speaking alongside Kerry and Lavrov in Geneva on Friday, Brahimi said ongoing work to put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control was a necessary step for convening the Geneva II conference.

The conference, which is intended to hammer out a political solution to the brutal civil war which has embroiled Syria for over two years, could be held in October, Lavrov told reporters.

On Monday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is expected to present a report to the Security Council which sources say contains overwhelming evidence that “chemical weapons were used” in an August 21 attack in a Damascus Suburb which killed between 355 and 1,729 people.

The government of Bashar Assad strongly denied government forces were responsible for the attack, while the West overwhelmingly blamed Damascus, prompting US Barack Obama’s threat of military action.
Obama has threatened to strike Syria unilaterally, prompting Russia’s Saturday’s joint proposal which will see Syria’s chemical weapons brought under international control.
Although President Assad immediately acquiesced to the Russian-backed plan, rebel forces have resisted efforts which have staved off Western intervention in the country.
On Saturday,  the Free Syrian Army rejected a US-Russian deal as a stalling tactic and vowed to continue fighting to topple the Assad government.
"The Russian-American initiative does not concern us. It only seeks to gain time," said Salim Idriss, the chief of the FSA command, said.
"We completely ignore this initiative and will continue to fight to bring down the regime," he told a press conference Saturday in the Turkish city of Istanbul.