THE HAGUE: The Syrian government’s chemical weapons stockpile has been linked for the first time by laboratory tests to the largest sarin nerve agent attack of the civil war, diplomats and scientists told Reuters, supporting Western claims that Syrian regime forces were behind the atrocity.
Laboratories working for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) compared samples taken by a UN mission in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta after the Aug. 21, 2013, attack, when hundreds of civilians died of sarin gas poisoning, to chemicals handed over by Damascus for destruction in 2014.
The tests found “markers” in samples taken at Ghouta and at the sites of two other nerve agent attacks, in the towns of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib governorate on April 4, 2017, and Khan Al-Assal, Aleppo, in March 2013, two people involved in the process said.
“We compared Khan Sheikhoun, Khan Al-Assal, Ghouta,” said one source who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the findings. “There were signatures in all three of them that matched.”
The same test results were the basis for a report by the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism in October, which said the Syrian regime was responsible for the Khan Sheikhoun attack, which killed dozens.
The findings on Ghouta, whose details were confirmed to Reuters by two separate diplomatic sources, were not released in the October report to the UN Security Council because they were not part of the team’s mandate.
They will nonetheless bolster claims by the US, Britain and other Western powers that Assad’s regime still possesses and uses banned munitions in violation of several Security Council resolutions and the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The OPCW declined to comment. Syria has repeatedly denied using chemical weapons in the conflict now in its seventh year and has blamed the chemical attacks in the opposition-held territory of Ghouta on the insurgents themselves.
Russia has also denied that Syrian regime forces have carried out chemical attacks and has questioned the reliability of the OCPW inquiries. Officials in Moscow have said the Syrian opposition staged the attacks to discredit the regime and whip up international condemnation.
Under a US-Russian deal after the Ghouta attack in 2013, Damascus joined the OPCW and agreed to permanently eliminate its chemical weapons program, including destroying a 1,300-ton stockpile of industrial precursors that has now been linked to the Ghouta attack.
But inspectors have found proof of an ongoing chemical weapons program in Syria, including the systematic use of chlorine barrel bombs and sarin, which they say was ordered at the highest levels of government.
The sarin attack on Khan Sheikhoun in April last year prompted US President Donald Trump to order a missile strike against the Shayrat air base, from which the Syrian operation is said to have been launched.
Diplomatic and scientific sources said efforts by Syria and Russia to discredit the UN-OPCW tests establishing a connection to Ghouta have so far come up with nothing.
Russia’s blocking of resolutions at the Security Council seeking accountability for war crimes in Syria gained new relevance when Russia stationed its aircraft at Shayrat in 2015.
Washington fired missiles at Shayrat in April 2017, saying the Syrian air force used it to stage the Khan Sheikhoun sarin attack on April 4 a few days earlier, killing more than 80 people.
No Russian military assets are believed to have been hit, but Moscow warned at the time it could have serious consequences.
In June, the Pentagon said it had seen what appeared to be preparations for another chemical attack at the same airfield, prompting Russia to say it would respond proportionately if Washington took pre-emptive measures against Syrian forces there.
The chemical tests were carried out at the request of the UN-OPCW inquiry, which was searching for potential links between the stockpile and samples from Khan Sheikhoun. The analysis results raised the possibility that they would provide a link to other sarin attacks, the source said.
Two compounds in the Ghouta sample matched those also found in Khan Sheikhoun, one formed from sarin and the stabilizer hexamine and another specific fluorophosphate that appears during sarin production, the tests showed.
“Like in all science, it should be repeated a couple of times, but it was serious matching and serious laboratory work,” the source said.
Independent experts, however, said the findings are the strongest scientific evidence to date that the Syrian government was behind Ghouta, the deadliest chemical weapons attack since the Halabja massacres of 1988 during the Iran-Iraq war.
“A match of samples from the 2013 Ghouta attacks to tests of chemicals in the Syrian stockpile is the equivalent of DNA evidence: Definitive proof,” said Amy Smithson, a US non-proliferation expert.
The hexamine finding “is a particularly significant match,” Smithson said, because it is a chemical identified as a unique hallmark of the Syrian military’s process to make sarin.
“This match adds to the mountain of physical evidence that points conclusively, without a shadow of doubt, to the Syrian government,” she said.
Smithson and other sources familiar with the matter said it would have been virtually impossible for the opposition to carry out a coordinated, large-scale strike with poisonous munitions, even if they had been able to steal the chemicals from the government’s stockpile.
The UN-OPCW inquiry, which was disbanded in November after being blocked by Russia at the UN Security Council, also found that Daesh had used the less toxic blistering agent sulfur mustard gas on a small scale in Syria.
Tests link Assad regime stockpile to largest sarin attack
Tests link Assad regime stockpile to largest sarin attack
US and Iran slide towards conflict as military buildup eclipses nuclear talks
- Washington building up one of its biggest military deployments in the region since the invasion of Iraq in 2003
- Iran is expected to submit a written proposal in the coming days, a US official says
Iran and the United States are sliding rapidly towards military conflict as hopes fade for a diplomatic solution to their standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program, officials on both sides and diplomats across the Gulf and Europe say.
Iran’s Gulf neighbors and its enemy Israel now consider a conflict to be more likely than a settlement, these sources say, with Washington building up one of its biggest military deployments in the region since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Israel’s government believes Tehran and Washington are at an impasse and is making preparations for possible joint military action with the United States, though no decision has been made yet on whether to carry out such an operation, said a source familiar with the planning.
It would be the second time the US and Israel have attacked Iran in less than a year, following US and Israeli airstrikes against military and nuclear facilities last June.
Regional officials say oil-producing Gulf countries are preparing for a possible military confrontation that they fear could spin out of control and destabilize the Middle East.
Two Israeli officials told Reuters they believe the gaps between Washington and Tehran are unbridgeable and that the chances of a near‑term military escalation are high.
Some regional officials say Tehran is dangerously miscalculating by holding out for concessions, with US President Donald Trump boxed in by his own military buildup - unable to scale it back without losing face if there is no firm commitment from Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions.
“Both sides are sticking to their guns,” said Alan Eyre, a former US diplomat and Iran specialist, adding that nothing meaningful can emerge “unless the US and Iran walk back from their red lines - which I don’t think they will.”
“What Trump can’t do is assemble all this military, and then come back with a ‘so‑so’ deal and pull out the military. I think he thinks he’ll lose face,” he said. “If he attacks, it’s going to get ugly quickly.”
Two rounds of Iran-US talks have stalled on core issues, from uranium enrichment to missiles and sanctions relief.
When Omani mediators delivered an envelope from the US side containing missile‑related proposals, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi refused even to open it and returned it, a source familiar with the talks said.
After talks in Geneva on Tuesday, Araghchi said the sides had agreed on “guiding principles,” but the White House said there was still distance between them.
Iran is expected to submit a written proposal in the coming days, a US official said, and Araghchi said on Friday he expected to have a draft counterproposal ready within days.
But Trump, who has sent aircraft carriers, warships and jets to the Middle East, warned Iran on Thursday it must make a deal over its nuclear program or “really bad things” will happen.
He appeared to set a deadline of 10 to 15 days, drawing a threat from Tehran to retaliate against US bases in the region if attacked. The rising tensions have pushed up oil prices.
US officials say Trump has yet to make up his mind about using military force although he acknowledged on Friday that he could order a limited strike to try to force Iran into a deal.
“I guess I can say I am considering that,” he told reporters.
The possible timing of an attack is unclear. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is due to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on February 28 to discuss Iran. A senior US official said it would be mid-March before all US forces were in place.









