Successive statements coming from Paris, London and Washington converge: during the Syrian civil war, weapons of mass destruction have been employed. Cynics or pseudo-realists would be wrong to downplay the significance of this change by saying that numerous catastrophes have happened in this war.
It is a fact that the regime of Bashar al-Assad had fired Scud missiles against its own people. It is a reality that this conflict has already resulted in 100,000 dead. It is a reality that in the ranks of the armed rebels there are jihadist groups. The long decay of the Syrian file has led to this. All diplomatic efforts in the past two years have proved futile. A bloodbath in which images and stories come at regular intervals shock our conscience, but until now, every time, this idea that it was better not to get involved in this conflict had won.
But what now has happened in Syria goes far beyond the scope of this conflict, and even the scope of the Middle East for the use of weapons of mass destruction means that a taboo has been broken. The credibility of Western countries, who had spoken to varying degrees of a ‘red line’, is now questioned…
The Syrian affair has long been a humanitarian scandal where the impotence of the international community negated the concept of ‘responsibility to protect’ civilians. Chemical crime of this magnitude is a game changer, making this case an issue of collective security in the broad sense.
In June, France became the first country to declare its ‘certainty’ that chemical weapons had been used in Syria. At the time France made an analysis of samples, some of which had been brought by Le Monde’s reporters from Syria to France. This revelation of use of chemical weapons in Syria were followed by similar statements from London and Washington, but these statements did not incur any consequence; diplomatic or military. At the time, the international community sufficed in dispatching a UN mission to Syria with a weak mandate to investigate the developments in that country.
Doing nothing would give a blank check to crimes against humanity and destroy the edifice of international standards in high bulwark against the use of weapons of mass destruction. Inaction would send this indirect signal to Iran and North Korea that they are allowed to do as they please. This unprecedented crime by the Syrian regime calls for a clear and specific answer.