Analysis
The missile attack came after years of heated debate and deliberation in Washington over intervention in Syria's bloody civil war.
Remember the horrors of the gas attacks east of Damascus in 2013?
Then, as now, the Syrian Government denied responsibility and blamed the rebels.
But under threat of airstrikes by the Obama administration, Syria confirmed the enormous stockpile of chemical weapons it had amassed in a secret program and agreed to dismantle the program and have the chemicals destroyed.
Officials from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons then embarked on a dangerous and difficult mission to do just that and announced they had successfully destroyed all declared stockpiles.
But from early 2014, officials at the OPCW's headquarters, including representatives from the US, Australia and other allies, became aware of evidence that Syria had not declared all of its weapons program.
There were tell-tale chemical traces where they shouldn't be, and other sites were implicated.
As it has at the UN Security Council, Syria's ally Russia blocked substantial action and the Syrians stonewalled with incomplete and inconsistent answers. It's been a little-noticed but alarming dispute.
Now the US alleges Syria still has chemical weapons and used them. The Syrians and the Russians deny they exist.
So what will be done to investigate this claim?
US media reports quote Government officials saying the strikes were carefully targeted to avoid hitting chemical weapons stored at the base.
In Syria there is widespread suffering, dying and desperation, but exposing the horror to the public isn't sparking any change. Philip Williams investigates.
Can there be a repeat of the inspections that followed the 2013 attack?
Do declarations from US officials that this was a "one-off" strike provide leverage for further inspections, or do they undermine that prospect?
As I write this in Beirut, I am less than 150 kilometres from that base, which is less then 40 kilometres from Lebanon's border — just one example of how tightly packed this region is, and how sensitive it is to a strategic threat like chemical weapons and further escalation of the conflict in Syria
If, as the Russians and Syrians claim, rebel groups had these weapons, what do they propose to do about it?
And if, as US President Donald Trump said, the weapons belonged to Syria and the strikes were designed to deter the spread and use of chemical weapons, what now?
Is the follow-on message that it is OK for Mr Assad to possess these weapons, as the US alleges, as long as he doesn't use them?
The chemical weapons incident this week threw the region back into an especially volatile and uncertain zone, bringing doubts about Syria's declarations to a head, and the US strikes on Shayrat air base have not resolved those issues.
Updated
The US cruise missile strikes on Shayrat airbase
raise troubling questions for the international system, the US and
allies including Australia.
For nearly three years they have been
aware of evidence that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may not have
declared all of his chemical weapons stockpiles, and these strikes have highlighted the dilemma about what to do now.Timeline: Path to Syria attack
The missile attack came after years of heated debate and deliberation in Washington over intervention in Syria's bloody civil war.
Remember the horrors of the gas attacks east of Damascus in 2013?
Then, as now, the Syrian Government denied responsibility and blamed the rebels.
But under threat of airstrikes by the Obama administration, Syria confirmed the enormous stockpile of chemical weapons it had amassed in a secret program and agreed to dismantle the program and have the chemicals destroyed.
Officials from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons then embarked on a dangerous and difficult mission to do just that and announced they had successfully destroyed all declared stockpiles.
But from early 2014, officials at the OPCW's headquarters, including representatives from the US, Australia and other allies, became aware of evidence that Syria had not declared all of its weapons program.
There were tell-tale chemical traces where they shouldn't be, and other sites were implicated.
As it has at the UN Security Council, Syria's ally Russia blocked substantial action and the Syrians stonewalled with incomplete and inconsistent answers. It's been a little-noticed but alarming dispute.
What will be done to investigate?
Now the US alleges Syria still has chemical weapons and used them. The Syrians and the Russians deny they exist.
So what will be done to investigate this claim?
US media reports quote Government officials saying the strikes were carefully targeted to avoid hitting chemical weapons stored at the base.
Analysis: Outrage but no change
In Syria there is widespread suffering, dying and desperation, but exposing the horror to the public isn't sparking any change. Philip Williams investigates.
Can there be a repeat of the inspections that followed the 2013 attack?
Do declarations from US officials that this was a "one-off" strike provide leverage for further inspections, or do they undermine that prospect?
As I write this in Beirut, I am less than 150 kilometres from that base, which is less then 40 kilometres from Lebanon's border — just one example of how tightly packed this region is, and how sensitive it is to a strategic threat like chemical weapons and further escalation of the conflict in Syria
If, as the Russians and Syrians claim, rebel groups had these weapons, what do they propose to do about it?
And if, as US President Donald Trump said, the weapons belonged to Syria and the strikes were designed to deter the spread and use of chemical weapons, what now?
Is the follow-on message that it is OK for Mr Assad to possess these weapons, as the US alleges, as long as he doesn't use them?
The chemical weapons incident this week threw the region back into an especially volatile and uncertain zone, bringing doubts about Syria's declarations to a head, and the US strikes on Shayrat air base have not resolved those issues.
How can Australians help people in Syria?
According to the Red Cross, the most efficient way of helping people caught in the crossfire in Syria is with monetary support. Here are some of the organisations helping people in the region:
UNHCR runs camps for people displaced in Syria, has provided shelter, blankets, heating stoves and aid items to more than 2.3 million people. Since conflict began, Australia for UNHCR has raised $10.8 million to close UNHCR's funding gap in Syria
UNICEF has been providing Syria's children shelter, nutrition, clean water and sanitisation, temporary learning spaces and psychosocial services
Red Cross donations reach 5 million Syrians each month with food, water, first aid, hygiene kits, blankets and cash grants
World Vision are providing food, clean water, sanitation, health care and winter essentials directly to people in Syria. It's also helping displaced Syrians in Lebanon and Jordan
In Syria, Save the Children are also providing food, clean water, medicines and shelter. It's supporting schools and teachers to ensure children are able to continue their education
CARE Australia is delivering emergency aid, shelter kits and food parcels in Syria to displaced families in areas under siege
Medecins Sans Frontieres Australia (Doctors Without Borders) operates medical facilities inside Syria, as well as directly supporting more than 150 medical structures throughout the country
- Oxfam is on the ground in Syria and in Jordan and Lebanon providing emergency assistance for Syrians
No comments:
Post a Comment