Author : Colonel GG Pamidi,

An Indian Perspective of Possible Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

Background

The future of the regime of the President of Syria, Bashar al Assad has been the subject of endless speculation and events of the last few months seem to indicate that the endgame may be in sight[i]. The military and security apparatus of the regime is under tremendous strain and the ‘rebels’ have intensified fight for the control of key areas such as Damascus and Aleppo. To add to the woes of al Assad, defections of some of his key personnel has given further impetus to the movement determined to oust him from power. Some observers believe there is a real potential for Assad to order chemical strikes on opposition fighters and specific Syrian ethnic groups if he feels his regime is on the verge of collapse as it faces an ever-more capable armed resistance[ii]. Under such circumstances when there are real fears that the Syrian Forces might resort to the use of chemical weapons to quell the opposition, it is imperative that an analysis is made of the possible consequences of such a move by Syria on the world in general and on India, in particular.

Syria and Chemical Weapons

Syria has not declared chemical arsenal nor has it signed the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), an international convention which bans the production, stockpiling, or use of such weapons[iii]. However, that notwithstanding, Syria is understood to possess hundreds of tons of blister and nerve agents that can be fired via missiles, air-dropped munitions and artillery shells. Depots located close to Hama, Aleppo, Homs, and Dair Alzour are understood to hold Scud missiles that can deliver chemical bombs. This chemical stockpile is said to be dispersed and under the control of a dedicated army unit that has a high degree of loyalty to the regime and is commanded by senior Alawites, the sect that Assad belongs to. This unit is said not to have been involved in the nitty-gritty of fighting and that these weapons are secure. However, Syrian opposition forces claim that the Assad regime has been transporting these chemical weapons to the nation's borders. This was almost immediately after Syria warned that it was prepared to use the weapons of mass destruction against foreign aggressors[iv].

Military Consequences of Possible Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

Currently, the US and to a lesser degree, the other western powers appear to be disinclined to take any military action against al Assad. The US thus far has been banking on its policy of no direct military intervention but unremitting political and, to a lesser extent, economic pressure on Syria. It can be surmised that the ongoing deployments of the US Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan seems to have definitely dampened their enthusiasm to get involved militarily unless it becomes absolutely inevitable.

Such an eventuality could well be the use of chemical weapons in Syria. As the US Defense Department spokesman George Little expressed[v]:-

"We would caution them strongly against any intention to use those weapons. That would cross a serious red line."

Several prominent US politicians have said in a collective statement that[vi]:-

"If Assad is transferring chemical weapons from secure sites to the battlefield, it significantly raises the risks that they will be used or that control over these weapons could be compromised. These are unacceptable risks for the United States and the entire international community, and they would threaten our vital national security interests."

So the trigger for the US being compelled into taking a direct military action in Syria or supporting such a move could well be the use of chemical weapons in Syria or even possible threat of loss of these weapons. Israel might take military action under such circumstances to secure the chemical weapons. This has been confirmed by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself^[vii].

International Reactions to the Syrian Situation

The US, Israel, the Arab League and many western countries are in favour of strong measures against Syria. The UN Security Council has been unable to reach a consensus on the issue with the opposition coming in mainly from Russia and China. There have been three double vetoes on this issue in less than a year; in October 2011, February 2012 and the last one in July 2012[viii]. This has been interpreted by many western analysts as being seen as UN Security Council versus Russia and China. However, the positions taken by these nations merit analysis. In brief, these are as under:-

• The Russian Position. Russia does not want to wreck ties with a traditional ally. Russia has maintained close ties with Syria and in the event of Assad’s ouster; the alternatives do not seem very attractive[ix]. Russia maintains that the evolving situation comes down to geo-politics. It opines that the proposed intervention is simply a subterfuge to extend Western power and that it would be used against them[x]. Also Russian analysts feel let down by the Western military action in Libya.
• The Chinese Position. China too opposed the UN Resolutions since it also perceives any enlarged US or western role in Syria to be against its geo-political interests. China is ranked as Syria's third-largest importer in 2010, according to data from the European Commission. According to a 2010 report from The Jamestown Foundation, a Washington-based research and analysis institute, Beijing's renewed interest in Damascus as the traditional terminus node of the ancient Silk Road ... indicates that China sees Syria as an important trading hub[xi].  It is primarily for this vital economic reason that China will be loath to allow any increased western influence in Syria.

Consequences of Loss/Theft of Chemical Weapons

The greatest concern is what happens when the regime of al Assad falls. Increasingly, the opinion seems to be veering around to the view that fall is inevitable and the question now is not if, but when.

The fear is that the large cache of chemical weapons and heavy arms of Syria could be seized by or channelized to terror groups including the Hezbollah. The consensus that appears to be emerging is that such an eventuality would be like the Al-Qaida having chemical weapons.  That is something that Israel is determined to stop if the need arises. The need might indeed arise if there is a regime collapse. However; such a dire situation may not arise if there is a regime change. That’s the crux. Will the transition be possible or will there be a situation of anarchy?

Currently, the events are not encouraging. While the Syrian regime of al Assad has sought to allay the fears of the world that the chemical weapons are safe, their continued safety is a matter of serious concern. Such a volatile situation can be exploited by the terrorist organisations and non-state actors. Fear of the US and Israel is that security around the chemical weapons could be weakened as fighting continues or following a chaotic collapse of the Assad government, potentially providing an opportunity for regional groups such as Hezbollah to seize lethal materials. It is apparent that the US and Israel, amongst others, are keeping a close watch on the chemical stockpile. Unidentified US intelligence officials have said the chemical weapons are being moved away from areas where violence has been highest to make them more secure[xii].

Implications for India

No longer is India insulated entirely from events in West Asia or the Middle-East as it is more commonly referred to. The implications for India flow from the events that are unfolding in West Asia too and these are intimately connected with the scourge of terrorism. The crucial developments that have implications for India are as follows:-

• The fact that Syria possesses chemical weapons has been confirmed by the Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi[xiii]. While currently, they seem to be secure, doubts persist if that will remain so.
• There are many terrorist organisations that are active in South Asia as well as in India in particular, who have connections with the Al Qaeda. It is assessed by western intelligence agencies that any loss of the chemical weapons to the Hezbollah would imply transfer of some of them to the Al Qaeda[xiv].
• Should the Al Qaeda ever gain possession of chemical weapons, the probability that these might find a way into India cannot be ruled out.
• The possible use of chemical weapons on Indian soil will irrevocably change the nature of response to such threats.
• Pragmatism dictates that India do all that it can to keep a close watch on the evolving situation in Syria.

Simultaneously, India needs to be sensitive and pro-active to the changing nature of the terrorist threat so as to ensure that the nation is not caught unawares.