Skip to main content
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track on the Olympic Games
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track onthe Olympics Games
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //
explainer

A look at Syria's history with chemical weapons and how the international community can help

A crater is seen at the site of an airstrike, after a suspected gas attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun.

Latest incident is reminiscent of a rocket strike near Damascus in 2013, in which the nerve agent sarin was used

The suspected chemical attack in northern Syria this week came more than three years after global outrage following a previous strike using toxic agents had forced the regime of President Bashar al-Assad to agree to eliminate those weapons from his arsenal.

The incident also raises again questions about what the international community can effectively do to stop such horrors from reocurring.

The latest attack

Tuesday's atrocity took place in the town of Khan Sheikhoun, where at least 72 people, many of them children, died after airstrikes. Survivors said victims showed no signs of external injuries but had trouble breathing, suffered convulsion and frothed at the mouth.

Story continues below advertisement

Those symptoms are "signs consistent with exposure to organophosphorus chemicals, a category of chemicals that includes nerve agents," the World Health Organization said, adding that it was shipping from Turkey supplies of atropine, an antidote to nerve agents.

Médecins Sans Frontières, whose doctors treated some of the victims, went further. The medical NGO said that eight of the patients showed symptoms consistent with exposure to nerve agents such as the chemical weapon sarin or similar compounds. But MSF also said that some victims smelled of bleach, suggesting they had been exposed to chlorine.

What happened in 2013

The Khan Sheikhoun attack was reminiscent of a rocket strike in the Ghouta area of Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013, that killed hundreds of people.

A United Nations investigation later concluded that there was "clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used."

Threatened with punitive airstrikes by the United States and pressured by its Russian ally, the Assad government agreed in the fall to participate in an international treaty that would require the dismantling of its chemical arsenal.

The legal framework

Syria was already one of the states that signed the Geneva Protocol of 1925, which prohibits the use of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases in warfare. The only reservation Syria made when it signed the protocol in 1968 was that its ratification did not imply a recognition of another party to the protocol, Israel.

Under diplomatic scrutiny, Syria agreed to become a party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, the international treaty prohibiting the production and use of toxic agent.

Story continues below advertisement

The convention's schedule of banned chemicals include nerve agents such as sarin and tabun. Chlorine is not listed in its schedule because it is a product with other non-lethal purposes, but the convention prohibits the use of any chemicals to cause death, incapacitation or permanent harm.

Syrian children receive treatment on Tuesday at a hospital in Maaret al-Noman after a gas attack in Khan Sheikhoun.

The OPCW

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is the global watchdog policing the application of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Established in 1997, the OPCW is headquartered in the Netherlands. It conducts inspections and verifies the destruction of chemical-weapon stockpiles, in Syria but also in Iraq, Libya, Russia and the U.S..

The Canadian federal government says it is the OPCW's largest voluntary cash donor, contributing $22-million since 2012. Other countries have provided in-kind contributions, such as the chemical-weapon destruction facilities made available by Britain and Germany.

The OPCW's fact-finding mission in Syria has confirmed the use of chlorine and sulfur mustard as chemical weapons.

A Syrian man collects samples from Khan Sheikhun, April 5, 2017.

The upcoming investigation

The OPCW is gathering information about the latest incident.

Story continues below advertisement

It had previously provided a team of experts for the UN investigation into the 2013 Ghouta attack. That probe's methodology highlights how experts will determine what happened this week in Khan Sheikhoun.

Investigators conducted detailed, on-camera interviews with survivors, first-responders and medical personnel.

They collected blood, urine and hair samples from victims.

They also secured weather records (to reconstruct how the chemical agent might have spread) and picked up soil samples, metal fragments, rubble and used solvent-soaked wipes to look for chemical traces on floors, walls, fabric or footwear.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Latest Videos

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies