The Assad government continues to insist that it did not use chemical
weapons in the attack on 21 August. It approved an extension of the UN
inspection team's visit and requested that it investigate three gas
attacks against Syrian soldiers since 21 August.
Lebanon's Daily Star reported on 26 August that at least four Hizballah fighters are
receiving treatment in Beirut after coming into contact with chemical
agents in Syria, a security source said.
The
source said four or five members came into contact with the chemical
agents while searching a group of rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb
of Jobar over the weekend. (The attack on 21 August is being called the
Jobar incident.)
Last
Saturday, Syrian state television said Syrian soldiers found chemical
agents in Jobar and that some had suffocated while entering the tunnels
Comment: The three primary questions about the attack remain unanswered.
- What agent was used?
- How was it delivered?
- By whom?
What
appeared to be a slam dunk on Tuesday has weakened as more information
has emerged about the source of US intelligence and about Syrian rebel
chemical warfare capabilities. A lot of information has emerged, but is
not receiving mainstream coverage in the US.
The agent. All experts agree that some kind of chemical incident
occurred on 21 August east of Damascus. As for the agent, multiple
experts in Feedback claimed it was sarin. An equal number of experts in
Feedback disagreed and claimed it was some other agent. Almost all based
their judgments on symptoms observed in videos posted by rebels or on
second hand reports of medical examinations.
Other
videos posted to the web showed bags of chemicals with the label "made
in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Factory for Chlorine and Alkalis" that were
captured in rebel strongholds. The factory, known as SACHLO, is located
in Riyadh and is hiring at this time.
Still
other videos showed liquids in canisters that the reporter said were
found in rebel tunnels. A third set purported to show a cache of
chemical canisters and rockets that had been captured in a rebel bunker
that could be fired by an artillery piece.
All
the videos are inconclusive. None are dated; the location is never
established; and none have a reliable chain of custody. At best they
establish that both sides have chemicals, have used chemicals at some
time and that more than one agent has been used by one or other side.
The delivery system.
The open source information on instrumentality indicates rockets or
modified artillery shells. Both sides have rockets that can deliver
chemicals. The rebels have posted to the Web that they have such a
capability and showed it to Sky News.
The attacker.
Concerning the attacker, the mainstream media overwhelming claim that
the Syrian government executed the attack. The evidence is not as clear
as this assertion implies.
The
Syrian government denies responsibility and claims its own forces
suffered from a rebel chemical attack. The government is winning the
fight and has no obvious motive to undertake action that would invite US
military intervention that might affect the momentum of its successes.
At least, that is what the Syrian government has said.
The
rebels have strong motives to internationalize their fight and to
manipulate the US into fighting on behalf of Islamists whose colleagues
attacked the US in 2001. Some American officials and experts have
asserted that the rebels have no chemical weapons. Not even the rebels
say that.
What
has not been reported nor evaluated are rebel claims, published by Sky
News in July 2013 for example, that they have a sarin chemical weapons
program and delivery systems.
So
the media tally is the rebels claim they have gas and were gassed. The
Government acknowledges that the rebels have gas and admits it has gas,
but denies it used it. The Government claims that its gas is under
strict control and the US officially has confirmed the Syrian
government's claim. Both sides also have rockets that can deliver gas.
No news service has investigated rebel use of gas on 21 August. Nobody has bothered to ask any questions.
The role of Israeli intelligence.
Finally, there is the question of the intercepted conversations. They
remain classified so no one knows what was said, by whom, in what
language, in what context, obtained by what reliable collection system,
translated by whom, with what periodicity of collection and with what
editing by supervisors. Some reporters claimed the conversations were
between low level people. Others claimed a senior civilian official
talked directly with a chemical unit military commander. That kind of
direct communication is not possible even in the US military.
A
further complication is two US sources assert that Israeli intelligence
intercepted the conversations and passed the content to NSA. This
scenario raises a new set of concerns about the reliability of the
channel. Was the information doctored? Do some Israelis have a motive to
lie to the US regarding events in Syria?
At
this point, there are no answers to the three primary questions based
on open source reporting. The findings of the UN investigators most
likely will be inconclusive as to who executed the attack, but should
help confirm the nature of the agent and the most likely delivery system.
Russia: Interfax
quoted a source in the armed forces' general staff as saying Russia has
decided to deploy to the eastern Mediterranean a missile cruiser from
the Black Sea Fleet, the Moskva, and a large anti-submarine ship from
the Northern Fleet in the "coming days."
Comment:
Earlier this summer, Russian sources stated that the Russian Navy had
established a permanent squadron in the Mediterranean Sea of 16 ships.
Today's announcement said the two new ships would be part of a routine
rotation. That is the language the US uses to increase its naval
presence anywhere through overlapping rotation schedules.
This
deployment does not necessarily mean the Russians will defend Syria. It
does mean the Russians have raised the price and risks of a US attack
on Syria.
UK-US-Syria: For the record.
The British parliament voted against military action against Syria. The
British have fought Muslims and Muslim tribes for nearly 200 years.
This generation has had enough of war against Muslims.