Syria, Chemical Weapons and Red Lines

SYRIA, CHEMICAL
WEAPONS AND RED
LINES
HUMAN RIGHTS
DELL
2019

HUMAN RIGHTS
This essay will analyze the forbearance on the chemical weapon’s usage in the civil wars
then will apply its results on the impacts faced by the ordinary citizens after the wars of Syria.
Use of weapons made up of dangerous chemicals is absolutely banned in the international armed
crash, which is clearly mentioned in “the international humanitarian law and international
criminal law”. This prohibition is not that clear in international armed conflict act, which
suggests the needs of legal reforms that are to be banned firmly upon the usage of these
dangerous weapon in every armed disputes. Further it is observed that Syria itself did not crossed
the red line which was legal for rationalizing the military intervention. Rather, the use of the
chemical weapons are just the components which determines the crises which are existing in the
humanity which requires strong international action.
“A chemical weapon” is a chemical which is toxic in nature and can result in the killing,
causing injury, unable to function normally, and also irritation in the sensory which are done
through the delivery system like an artillery shell, rocket or ballistic missile. They can also be
conceived as a weapon causing mass damages and their usage in the armed disputes is regarded
as a breach of international laws. Its basic form includes nerve agents, choking agent, and blood
agents and these are categorized by its effects on the human body (Price, 2018).
US President Barak Obama called the usage of such dangerous weapons as “a red line for
the world”, and showed the evidence which proved that Assad regime in Syria had used nerve
gas against its own people. Chemical weapons are considered a red line of the world so
necessary actions must be taken to protect and win the race of international progress against the
rapid increase in the usage of chemical weapons. The resident of France Emmanuel Macron
stated in one report that they had evidence against Syria that they had used chemical weapons
against their own citizens (Price, 2018).
1

HUMAN RIGHTS
Some writers such as John Mueller, Nick Gillespie, and John Glaser argued and stated
that conventional weapons are less hurtful to the civilians and the military personal as compared
to that of chemical ones, this was because chemical weapons can without killing any armies
potentially incapacitate them.
In New York it was stated that, the government must strengthen their tools which can
reserve the human rights and the humanitarian groups of the precedents by banning the global
usage of the destructing weapons.
The 1st world war was the occasion when a large scale of chemical weapons were used in
the state of armed conflict, the extreme unpleasant results of these attacks were seen mostly on
the British and German soldiers. This forbearing act gave raise to formation of Geneva Protocol
in the year 1925, which was subsequently signed by 138 nations. This was the formal regulation
which recognized the usage of the weapons made up of chemicals as a red line for all the
communities of the communities and their people. U.S and USSR took another step against
chemical weapon in the year 1989 i.e. the Wyoming Agreement, an agreement made to cease the
production of chemical weapons and setting up an inspection regime, then again in the year 1993
Chemical Weapon convention (CWC) was passed to push the red line and suspended the
production and the uses of the chemical weapon (Naqvi, 2017). After that the Institutions for the
Chemical Weapons prohibition was enforced that declared that 72% of the world’s stockpiles
have been eliminated up to the year 2011. However it has been noticed that with the growth of
these prohibitory regulations, the use of chemical weapon has ceased a lot since 1993.At the time
when the entire world was trying to reduce the usage of the chemical weapon, in Syria and 6
other nations in the world has regularly and actively chose to ignore and refuse the ratifications
2