Ghouta chemical attack

Ghouta chemical attack
Part of the Syrian civil war
File:Ghouta chemical attack map.svg Map of areas affected by the alleged chemical attack and the location of the UN inspection team's hotel during the attack.
Location	Ghouta, Syria
Date	21 August 2013 (2013-08-21)
Deaths	355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim) 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim) 502 killed (SOHR claim) 588 killed (VDC claim) 635 killed (SRGC claim) 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim) 1,300 killed (SNC claim) 1,338 killed (LCC claim) 1,429 killed (United States estimate) 1,729 killed (FSA claim) note: Death tolls not final Some death tolls are only in bodies collected
Injured	3,600 patients

The 2013 Ghouta attacks were actions involving a chemical weapons bombardment that occurred during the Syrian civil war, on Wednesday, 21 August 2013, allegedly taking place in a short span of time in several opposition-controlled or disputed areas of the Ghouta suburbs of the Rif Dimashq Governorate of Syria. The Syrian government and rebels blamed each other for the attack.Human Rights Watch believe evidence strongly suggests the Syrian government carried out the attack.

Reported death tolls vary from 355 to 1,729, and some sources have reported that none of the victims displayed physical wounds. If the death toll is confirmed, the attack would be the deadliest use of chemical weapons since the Iran–Iraq War.

The attack occurred a few kilometers from recently arrived United Nations investigators. The UN made requests to visit al Ghouta from August 22-24 and the Syrian government agreed to allow UN investigators to visit attack sites on 25 August. On 26 August the inspectors were fired upon, but were able to spend several hours at some sites interviewing witnesses and collecting samples. The UN team worked continuously until their departure from Syria into Lebanon in the early morning of 31 August.

The Syrian government stated that it had no role in carrying out the chemical attack. Officials from a number of Western and Eastern countries, such as the United States and those from the European Union and the Arab League have stated that the Syrian government is responsible for the incident, whether or not Syria President Bashar al-Assad personally ordered the attacks, as well as from several opposed to the Assad government. Officials from Russia and Iran state that the opposition was responsible for the attacks.

Background

Main articles: Syria and weapons of mass destruction § Syrian civil war, Syrian civil war § Chemical weapons, and Khan al-Assal chemical attack

The Ghouta region is composed of densely populated suburbs, which are collectively known as the province of Rif Dimashq, or "Damascus countryside", have been hotbeds of opposition since the start of the uprising against Assad's Regime in March 2011. The opposition have controlled most of the Rif since last year, cutting off Damascus from its hinterland Most of the areas are under siege and have been the scene of continuing clashes for more than a year. and regime forces have launched repeated assaults trying to dislodge them, devastating the area. However, opposition forces have been able to maintain their advance and prevented government forces from storming a number of critical areas in the city. On the day of the attack, the Syrian government launched an offensive to capture opposition-held Damascus suburbs.

The alleged attack came almost exactly one year after U.S. President Barack Obama's "red line" speech, in which he warned that chemical weapons use in Syria, which is one of five non-signatories to the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, would trigger American intervention. Since his speech, and prior to the chemical attacks in Ghouta, chemical weapons were suspected to have been used in at least four attacks in the country.

On 23 April 2013, the New York Times reported that the British and French governments had sent a confidential letter to the United Nations Secretary General, claiming that there was evidence that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons in Aleppo, Homs, and perhaps Damascus. Israel also claimed that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons on 19 March near Aleppo and Damascus. By 25 April the U.S. intelligence assessment was that the Assad government had likely used chemical weapons – specifically sarin gas. However, the White House announced that "much more" work had to be done to verify the intelligence assessments. On 24 April, Syria had refused an investigation team from the UN from entering Syria, though Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary for political affairs, said that a refusal would not prevent an inquiry from being carried out. On 23 March 2013, Syrian government unusually requested the UN send inspectors to investigate, an incident in town of Khan al-Assal, as it said opposition had used chlorine-filled rockets. However, they later refused to extend UN investigation.

On 4 June 2013, a U.N. report stated that there are "reasonable grounds" to believe that limited amounts of chemical weapons have been used in at least four attacks in the civil war, but more evidence is needed to determine the exact chemical agents used or who was responsible. Stating that it has not been possible "to determine the precise chemical agents used, their delivery systems or the perpetrator." On 22 June the head of UN human rights investigation, Paulo Pinheiro, said the UN could not determine who used chemical weapons in Syria after the evidence had been delivered by the United States, Britain and France. However, the commission reported that there were "reasonable grounds to believe that chemical agents have been used as weapons".

After clandestinely spending two months in Jobar, Damascus, several reporters for the French news media Le Monde personally witnessed the Syrian army's use of chemical weapons on civilians.

On 13 June, the United States announced that there is definitive proof that the Assad government has used limited amounts of chemical weapons on multiple occasions on rebel forces, killing 100 to 150 people. Sarin was the agent used with no proof that the opposition had access to such weapons. Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes did not confirm whether this proof showed that Syria had crossed the "red line" established by President Obama by using chemical weapons. Rhodes stated that: "The president has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has." Tests conducted by France confirmed the United States conclusions, according to the French government. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that "the accusations of Damascus using chemical weapons put forth by the USA are not backed by credible facts." Larov stated that it makes no sense for Syrian government to use chemical weapons when the government already maintains a military advantage over the rebel fighters. The White house has stated the evidence against Assad not ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ but passes ‘common-sense test’.

The attacks

Map of the August 2013 Ghouta chemical attacks. Effected neighborhoods: Hammuriyah, Irbin, Saqba, Kafr Batna, Mudamiyah, Harasta, Zamalka, Ain Terma., Jobar.

The attacks reportedly occurred between 02:00 and 05:00 in the morning on 21 August 2013, in the rebel-held and mostly Sunni Ghouta agricultural area, just east of Damascus. The area had been under an Army siege backed by Hezbollah for months. The attacks had affected two separate opposition-controlled districts in Damascus Suburbs, located 16 kilometers apart. According to local residents, the Zamalka neighborhood in Eastern Ghouta was struck by rockets at some time between 2 and 3 a.m., and the Moadamiya neighborhood in Western Ghouta was struck by rockets at about 5 a.m., shortly after the completion of the Muslim morning prayer.

Doctors Without Borders said three hospitals it supports in the eastern Damascus region reported receiving roughly 3,600 patients with "neurotoxic symptoms" over less than three hours on after the morning, when the attack in the eastern Ghouta area took place. Of those, 355 died. The Local Coordination Committees of Syria claimed that of the 1,338 victims, 1,000 were in Zamalka, among which 600 bodies were transferred to medical points in other towns and 400 remained at a Zamalka medical centre. According to a spokesman for the Free Syrian Army, at least six medics died while treating the victims. The deadliness of the attack is believed to have been increased due to Syrians fleeing the regime bombardment by hiding in basements, where the heavier-than-air chemical agents sank to these lower-lying, poorly ventilated areas. Some of the victims died while sleeping.

The day after the alleged chemical attacks, 22 August, the Syrian army bombarded the Ghouta area.

Timing

The BBC News interpreted darkness and prayer calls in videos to be consistent with a pre-dawn timing of the attacks. (There are five daily prayers in Islam, including a dawn prayer, a sunset prayer, and a nighttime prayer.) BBC News considered it significant that the "three main Facebook pages of Syrian opposition groups" reported "fierce clashes between FSA rebels and government forces, as well as shelling by government forces" at 01:15 local time (UTC+3) on 21 August 2013 in the eastern Ghouta areas that were later claimed to have been attacked with chemical weapons.

Abu Sakhr, a paramedic interviewed by the VDC, estimated chemical weapons to have first been delivered by mortars at about 02:00. Another interviewee, Maher, said that Ein Tarma had been hit by chemical weapons before 02:30.

BBC News stated that three Syrian opposition Facebook pages reported the first claims of chemical weapons use within a few minutes of one another. At 02:45 UTC+3, the Ein Tarma Co-ordination Committee stated that "a number of residents died in suffocation cases due to chemical shelling of the al-Zayniya area [in Ein Tarma]." At 02:47, the Sham News Network reported an "urgent" message that Zamalka had been attacked with chemical weapons shells. At 02:55, the LCC made "a similar report." The Los Angeles Times timed the attacks at "about" 03:00.

Evidence

Symptoms

Doctors Without Borders who were operating three hospitals in the eastern Damascus region, which received roughly 3,600 patients over less than three hours on after the attack, reported seeing "large number of patients arriving with symptoms including convulsions, excessive saliva, pinpoint pupils, blurred vision and respiratory distress." Symptoms reported by Ghouta residents and doctors to Human Rights Watch included "suffocation, muscle spasms and frothing at the mouth."

Witness statements to The Guardian about symptoms included "people who were sleeping in their homes [who] died in their beds," headaches and nausea, "foam coming out of [victims'] mouths and noses," a "smell something like vinegar and rotten eggs," suffocation, "bodies [that] were turning blue," a "smell like cooking gas" and redness and itching of the eyes. Richard Spencer of The Telegraph summarised witness statements, stating, "The poison ... may have killed hundreds, but it has left twitching, fainting, confused but compelling survivors."

On 22 August, the Center for Documentation of Violations in Syria published numerous testimonies. It summarised doctors' and paramedics' descriptions of the symptoms as "vomiting, foamy salivation, severe agitation, [pinpoint] pupils, redness of the eyes, dyspnea, neurological convulsions, respiratory and heart failure, blood out of the nose and mouth and, in some cases, hallucinations and memory loss".

Physical arguments

Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior associate for the Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said what the group of doctors in Syria is reporting "is what a textbook would list to say nerve-agent poison." Symptoms like incredibly small pupils help say it is not agents like mustard gas or chlorine gas, but instead more like sarin, soman, VX and taubun.

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Director of Operations Bart Janssens stated that MSF "can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events – characterised by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers – strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent."

Gwyn Winfield, editorial director at the magazine CBRNe World, which reports on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or explosives use, analyzed the videos and wrote on the magazine's site: "Clearly respiratory distress, some nerve spasms and a half-hearted washdown (involving water and bare hands?), but it could equally be a riot control agent as a (chemical warfare agent)." Some analysts speculated that a stockpile of chemical agents may have been hit by shelling, whether controlled by the opposition or the government.

CNN noted that some opposition activists claimed the use of "Agent 15," also known as BZ, in the attacks, for which some experts expressed doubt the Syrian government possesses, and the symptoms caused by said chemical are very different from the symptoms reported in this attack.

An analysis by Richard Guthrie, a chemical weapons specialist formerly with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in Sweden, noted that "the day of the attack was the one day that week when the wind blew from government-held central Damascus towards the rebel-held eastern suburbs." He also noted there were no government troop casualties from the attack.

Syrian human rights lawyer Razan Zaitouneh, present in Eastern Ghouta, stated, "Hours [after the shelling], we started to visit the medical points in Ghouta to where injured were removed, and we couldn't believe our eyes. I haven't seen such death in my whole life. People were lying on the ground in hallways, on roadsides, in hundreds."

Delivery method

Abu Omar of the Free Syrian Army stated to The Guardian that the rockets involved in the attack were unusual because "you could hear the sound of the rocket in the air but you could not hear any sound of explosion" and no obvious damage to buildings occurred. Human Rights Watch's witnesses reported "symptoms and delivery methods consistent with the use of chemical nerve agents." Activists and local residents contacted by The Guardian said that "the remains of 20 rockets [thought to have been carrying neurotoxic gas were] found in the affected areas. Many [remained] mostly intact, suggesting that they did not detonate on impact and potentially dispersed gas before hitting the ground."

According to CBS News, chemical and biological weapons experts have been relatively consistent in their analysis, saying only a military force with access to and knowledge of missile delivery systems and the sarin gas suspected in Ghouta could have carried out an attack capable of killing hundreds of people. Additionally British and U.S. officials stated that there is no credible evidence that any opposition group to conduct a chemical weapons attack on this scale.

According to Human Rights Watch report, two types of projectiles were used in the Chemical attacks. The first was a 330mm rocket "that appears to have a warhead designed to be loaded with and deliver a large payload of liquid chemical agent". The second was a Soviet-produced 140mm rocket that can deliver three possible warheads, one of them specifically designed to carry 2.2kg of sarin. Adding that "Human Rights Watch and arms experts monitoring the use of weapons in Syria have not documented Syrian opposition forces to be in the possession of the 140mm and 330mm rockets used in the attack or their associated launchers."

Video

Murad Abu Bilal, Khaled Naddaf and other VDC and local coordination committee (LCC) media staff went to Zamalka to film and obtain other documentary evidence of the attacks immediately after they were known, early on 21 August. Almost all the journalists died from inhalation of the neurotoxins apart from Murad Abu Bilal, who was the only Zamalka LCC media member to survive. The videos were published on YouTube, attracting world-wide media attention.

Experts who have analysed the first video said it shows the strongest evidence yet consistent with the use of a lethal toxic agent. Visible symptoms reportedly included rolling eyes, foaming at the mouth, and tremors. There was at least one image of a child suffering miosis, the pin-point pupil effect associated with the nerve agent Sarin, a powerful neurotoxin reportedly used before in Syria. Ralph Trapp, a former scientist at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, said the footage showed what a chemical weapons attack on a civilian area would look like, and went on to note "This is one of the first videos I've seen from Syria where the numbers start to make sense. If you have a gas attack you would expect large numbers of people, children and adults, to be affected, particularly if it's in a built-up area."

Some experts, among them Jean Pascal Zanders, initially stated that evidence that sarin was used, as claimed by pro-rebel sources, was still lacking and highlighted the lack of second-hand contaminations typically associated with use of weapons-grade nerve agents: "I remain sceptical that it was a nerve agent like sarin. I would have expected to see more convulsions," he said. "The other thing that seems inconsistent with sarin is that, given the footage of first responders treating victims without proper protective equipment, you would expect to see considerable secondary casualties from contamination – which does not appear to be evident." However, after Zanders saw footage imminently after the attack, he changed his mind, saying: "The video footage and pictures this time are of a far better quality. You can clearly see the typical signs of asphyxiation, including a pinkish blueish tinge to the skin colour. There is one image of an adult woman where you can see the tell-tale blackish mark around her mouth, all of which suggests death from asphyxiation."

According to a report by The Daily Telegraph, "videos uploaded to YouTube by activists showed rows of motionless bodies and medics attending to patients apparently in the grip of seizures. In one piece of footage, a young boy appeared to be foaming at the mouth while convulsing."

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former commander of British Chemical and Biological counterterrorism forces, told BBC that the images were very similar to previous incidents he had witnessed, although he could not verify the footage.

Investigation

Two days before the attack, a U.N. team arrived in Damascus with permission, from the Syrian government, to investigate earlier alleged chemical weapons use by the government. On the day of the attack U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon expressed "the need to investigate [as] soon as possible," hoping for consent from the Syrian government. The next day U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay urged government and opposition forces to allow investigation, and Ban requested the government provide immediate access. On Friday 23 the Syrian military continued to shell Ghouta - U.N inspectors were denied access for a second day to the affected areas of the capital. On 25 August the government agreed to cease hostilities with the presence of U.N. inspectors.

On 26 August he U.N. team visited clinics and makeshift field hospitals in the Ghouta districts, collected samples and conducted interviews with witnesses, survivors and doctors. The team came under sniper fire and was forced to replace their vehicle before continuing their investigation four hours later, leading the U.N. Secretary register a "strong complaint" to government and opposition forces. After returning inspectors spoke with 20 victims of the attacks, took blood and hair samples, soil samples, and samples from domestic animals.

A doctor told The Guardian that on 26 August, the Syrian regime ordered inspectors to leave the site of Mua'adamiyat al-Sham 90 minutes after their arrival, and prevented them from reaching six suspected attack sites. According to the doctor, regime security forces told U.N. inspectors they could not guarantee their safety.

With the investigation still ongoing, special UN envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi said on 28 August that evidence suggests "some kind of substance" was used to kill hundreds of people in Ghouta. He did not say what evidence he was referring to, but he said it did not come from Western intelligence reports and he noted that inspectors gathered samples for analysis two days prior.

United States officials told the The Wall Street Journal that White House "became convinced" that the Syrian government was trying to hide the evidence of chemical weapons use by shelling the sites and delaying their inspection. U.S. secretary of state John Kerry stated that hair samples and blood samples from the attack have tested positive for sarin. At a British laboratory, soil and cloth samples from the attack tested positive for sarin and sarin's immediate breakdown product.

German newspaper Der Spiegel reported that BND leader Gerhald Schindler told them that Germany is now taking the US, Britain and France's stance that the attacks were carried out by Assad based on evidence by the BND. However, they also said the attack may have been an accident. The investigation team also speculated that there was an overdose in chemical weapons used.

Intelligence reports

Intelligence agencies in the United Kingdom, Israel, United States, France, Turkey, and Germany concluded that the Syrian government was most likely responsible for the attacks. Intelligence reports that assessed the government had orchestrated the attack presented suggestions as to why it might have used chemical weapons, focusing on the idea that the Syrian military was concerned about opposition strength in the Damascus suburbs and frustrated with its difficulty in dislodging rebel fighters. The French intelligence included satellite imagery showing the attacks coming from government-controlled areas to the east and west of Damascus and targeting rebel-held zones and observed that 'Assad's forces had since bombed the areas to wipe out evidence'.

Intelligence agencies assesses that Assad Government has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year. British put that number at least 14 occasions from 2012, adding that "A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established". U.S. assess that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons "primarily to gain the upper hand or break a stalemate in areas where it has struggled to seize and hold strategically valuable territory."

Intelligence agencies agree that video evidence is consistent with the use of a nerve agent, such as sarin. And U.S. laboratory tests showed traces of sarin, in blood and hair samples collected from emergency workers who responded to the Aug. 21 attacks. Britain put the number of fatalities at least 350. France confirmed 281 fatalities based according to video footage they studied, acknowledging up to 1,500 total. While American preliminary assessment determined that 1,429 people were killed, including at least 426 children.

Two specific pieces of intelligence were noted by the media. One was a phone call allegedly between Syrian officials which Israel's Unit 8200 was said to have intercepted and passed to the US. The other was a phone call which the German Bundesnachrichtendienst said it had intercepted, between a high-ranking representative of Hezbollah and the Iranian embassy. The Hizbollah representative said that poison gas had been used and that Mr Assad's order to attack with chemical weapons had been a big mistake, adding that Assad "lost his nerve".

According to the Bild newspaper, German intelligence also indicated that elements of the Assad regime, and not renegade rebel groups, were responsible for the attack in the suburb of Ghouta. "high-level national security sources," said that Bashar Assad had not ordered the chemical weapons attack and had rejected their use when his military commanders broached the possibility, and that other elements of the Assad regime were responsible for the attack.

The Russian and Syrian governments both accused the Syrian opposition of responsibility for the attacks. According to the The Guardian, as of 3 September neither had "publicly produced any evidence to support their claims."

The American and European intelligence reports were criticized by the Syrian government and its allies, especially the Russian Federation. On 6 September opinion editorial by U.S. Democratic Party Representative Alan Grayson criticised the US intelligence assessment as insufficient for him to vote for intervention, lacking the actually quotes, clips, phonecall for him to judge for himself if the reports were accurate or not.

The US government position was criticized on 6 September by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), a group of retired intelligence professionals including Ray McGovern and Thomas Andrews Drake which had in 2003 criticized US intelligence on the Iraq war. VIPS released a memorandum stating that "some of our former co-workers are telling us, categorically, that contrary to the claims of your administration, the most reliable intelligence shows that Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed and injured Syrian civilians on August 21", and described "a strong circumstantial case that the August 21 chemical incident was a pre-planned provocation by the Syrian opposition and its Saudi and Turkish supporters".

Legal status

Attacks

Human Rights Watch stated that "Syria is not among the 189 countries that are party to the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling, and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention). Any use of chemical weapons is unconscionable and contradicts the standards set by the Chemical Weapons Convention."

International Criminal Court referral

Human Rights Watch stated that the UN Security Council should refer the Syria situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) "to ensure accountability for all war crimes and crimes against humanity." Amnesty International also said that the Syria situation should be referred to the ICC because "Long term, the best way for the United States to signal its abhorrence for war crimes and crimes against humanity and to promote justice in Syria, would be to reaffirm its support for the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court." In August 2013, Dapo Akande, university lecturer in public international law at St. Peter's College, Oxford University, wrote that "were the Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC, the Court would have jurisdiction to prosecute specifically for use of chemical weapons."

Military strikes

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said that "The use of force is lawful only when in exercise of self-defense, or when the Security Council approves such action." Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations and Arab League Special Envoy to Syria since August 2012, similarly stated "I think international law is clear on this. International law says that military action must be taken after a decision by the Security Council. ... certainly international law is very clear – the Security Council has to be brought in."

Members of the United States Congress, including Lynn Jenkins, stated that United States President Barack Obama required "consent from Congress as prescribed in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973" to carry out military strikes in Syria. Obama announced on 31 August that he would seek congressional approval for military strikes, stating, "While I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization, I know the country will be stronger if we take this course, and our actions will be even more effective. We should have this debate." The United States Congress was on a recess at the time of the announcement, scheduled to return to session on 9 September.

Reactions

Domestic

Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi was quoted by the official state news agency, Syrian Arab News Agency, as saying that "the government did not and would not use such weapons – in the case they did not even exist. Everything that has been said is absurd, primitive, illogical and fabricated. What we say is what we mean: there is no use of such things (chemical weapons) at all, at least not by the Syrian army or the Syrian state, and it's easy to prove and it is not that complicated." SANA called the reports of chemical attacks as "untrue and designed to derail the ongoing UN inquiry." A Syrian military official appeared on state television denouncing the reports as "a desperate opposition attempt to make up for rebel defeats on the ground." Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad declared it a tactic by the rebels to turn around the civil war which he said "they were losing" and that, though the government had admitted to having stocks of chemical weapons, stated they would never be used "inside Syria". Democratic Union Party leader Salih Muslim said he doubted that the Syrian government carried out the chemical attack.

The National Coalition called the attack a "coup de grace that kills all hopes for a political solution in Syria." The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said of the incident that the Syrian armed forces have committed the "most violent military assault" since the beginning of the uprising. Their statement in regards to the incident read that "we assure the world that silence and inaction in the face of such gross and large-scale war crimes, committed in this instance by the Syrian regime, will only embolden the criminals to continue in this path. The international community is thus complicit in these crimes because of its polarisation, silence and inability to work on a settlement that would lead to the end of the daily bloodshed in Syria."

International

The international community condemn the attack. United States President Barack Obama has said the U.S. military should strike targets in Syria to retaliate for the government's purported use of chemical weapons, a proposal possibly supported by French President François Hollande, but opposed by the Syrian government's closest allies, Russia and Iran. The Arab League has stated it would support military action against Syria in the event of U.N. support, though members Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Tunisia and Algeria oppose intervention.

Supranational bodies

• Arab League – The Arab League released a statement on 27 August stating that, while they did find Syria to be responsible for chemical attacks against its citizens, it would not support military interventions of any sort.
• UNASUR – South American condemns violence and use of chemical weapons in Syria, and demanded Bashar al-Assad's government to allow investigations on the opposition's allegations regarding the use of chemical weapons in the attacks.
• United Nations – The United Kingdom called an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council on 21 August. Western nations pushed for a strongly worded resolution which would have asked for the UN to "urgently take the steps necessary for today's attack to be investigated by the UN mission," however, due to objections from Russia and China, the emergent statement was a more reticently-worded demand for "clarity" regarding the incident. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the report of chemical attacks "needs to be investigated without delay". On the day of agreement for UN onsite investigations a senior U.S. official stated that "the belated decision by the regime to grant access to the UN team is too late to be credible," and that "there is very little doubt at this point that a chemical weapon was used by the Syrian regime against civilians in this incident." On 26 August the inspectors reached some of sites, but after an hour and a half were ordered by the Syrian government to return due to safety concerns and the inspectors could not reach the six main sites. According to Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem the reason for this was that when the investigators arrived at the affected regions "they faced gunshots and failed to continue their visit, because the armed groups have not agreed among each other on ensuring the team’s security".

States

• Albania – Outgoing Prime Minister Sali Berisha and Foreign Minister Aldo Bumçi blamed the Syrian government for the attacks and pledged their government's support for any NATO action against Syria.
• Australia – Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said it appeared that chemical weapons were used "in large scale against a civilian population." He said his country, as president of the UN Security Council, will push for UN weapons inspectors to be allowed access to the sites where chemical weapons were purportedly used. He said that "the burden of proof lies with the Syrian regime," while he also voiced caution on possible international action, bringing up the spectre of Australian involvement in the Iraq War on the belief that the Iraqi government was pursuing weapons of mass destruction, he said after speaking with U.S. President Barack Obama on 27 August that the international community has a responsibility to act, comparing the crisis in Syria to the Rwandan Genocide and the Srebrenica massacre.
• Austria – In a statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger called reports that the Syrian Army used chemical weapons "extremely worrying", saying chemical weapons use would constitute a "glaring crime of the Assad regime". Spindelegger also called for a UN investigation into the reports.
• Brazil – Minister of Foreign Affairs Antonio Patriota called for an independent investigation into allegations that chemical weapons were used. He suggested any international action should wait until the chemical attacks are confirmed.
• Canada – On 27 August, Prime Minister Stephen Harper had a telephone conversation with U.S. President Barack Obama in which both agreed that a "firm response" against the Syrian government. Foreign Minister John Baird issued a statement that demanded the Syrian government allow UN weapons inspectors to examine the sites. At the 2013 G-20 Summit, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made it clear that a military strike is necessary against Syria. On 7 September, Prime Minister Harper urged the international community to take military action against Syria citing that the use of chemical weapons sets a dangerous precedent.
• Chile – The Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the attacks and demanded that the Syrian government give UN weapons inspectors access to the sites where chemical attacks were reported.
• China – Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei said that China is firmly opposed to the use of chemical weapons by any party in Syria. He affirmed that China supports the UN Secretariat in carrying out independent, objective, impartial and professional investigation on the alleged use of chemical weapons in accordance with relevant UN resolutions. Lei said China hopes and believes that the team can have full consultation with the Syrian government to ensure smooth investigation. Finally, Lei said that China wants to call on all sides to work together to hold the second Geneva Conference on Syria as soon as possible and launch an inclusive political transition process.
• Colombia – The Government of Colombia, through a Ministry of Foreign Affairs press release, expressed its "profound concern due to the recent situations in the Arab Republic of Syria, energetically condemns the killings of innocent civilians, and makes a call to establish a political dialogue to end the violence and the abuse of human rights." Colombia also was noted by its domestic media that the government does not support a military intervention, in Syria, as Colombia expressed its support to the United Nations' efforts to dialogue an end to the conflict. Colombia in the same context manifested "its most vehement rejection towards the use of chemical weapons, regardless of who used them. Its use constitutes to war crimes, therefore we must assume as an international community the responsibility that this crimes do not go unpunished; we reiterate that there are international courts that must take suit in this role." Colombia, likewise, also recognized "the Mission of Verification of the United Nations, and urges the Security Council to take action according to the results of the mission in order to maintain peace and international security."
• Ecuador – An unnamed government agency expressed rejection to manipulating information on the use of chemical weapons for justifying military action, calling instead for offering facilitations to the UN investigation team to punish the perpetrators of the possible chemical attack.
• France – The Foreign Ministry said it did not have independent confirmation that an attack took place as opposition claimed, but it said those responsible for the chemical weapons attack "will be held accountable." They also called for the investigation of the use of chemical weapons in the attacks. France has also said that the international community should respond to this incident "with force.". On 25 August, France declared it had "no doubt" Damascus was behind chemical attacks. President François Hollande said on 27 August that "France is ready to punish those who took the heinous decision to gas innocents".
• Germany – Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said "Germany will be among those [countries] that consider it right for there to be consequences". An unnamed government agency condemned the attacks and said that the attacks "must be punished" if verified.
• Holy See – Pope Francis referred to the "terrible images" coming out of Syria and called on the international community "to be more sensitive to this tragic situation and make every effort to help the beloved Syrian nation find a solution" to the civil war. The ambassador to the UN Silvano Tomasi urged caution and said: "What immediate interest would the government in Damascus have in causing such a tragedy? ... Who does this inhuman crime really benefit?"
• India – India is waiting for the UN investigation into the chemical attack on 21 August, to better assess the origin of the attack, while describing it as a "grave concern. We stress that the international legal norm against the use of chemical weapons anywhere and by anyone must not be breached."
• Indonesia – Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said the international community "must make sure that perpetrators of such inhumane acts are punished accordingly. If [Syria’s regime] has actually used chemical weapons, it marks the lowest point in the conflict."
• Iran – President Hassan Rouhani condemned the attack without accusing either the government or the opposition of perpetrating it. Rouhani announced on his official Twitter feed that "Iran gives notice to international community to use all its might to prevent use of chemical weapons anywhere in the world, [especially] in Syria". Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the Syrian government had assured Iran that it did not use "such inhumane weapons." He blamed the attack on the opposition, saying: "The international community must show a serious reaction to the use of chemical weapons by the terrorists in Syria and condemn this move." According to Abbas Araqchi from the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Russia submitted proof to the U.N. Security Council showing that chemical weapons were used by the opposition and not by the Administration.

On 1 September former Iranian president Akbar Rafsanjani stated that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people.

• Iraq – In the wake of the alleged chemical attacks, an unnamed government agency has called for continued UN investigation and opposed any further militarisation of the conflict.
• Ireland – The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said that Ireland's position on Syria remained unchanged, reiterating the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Éamon Gilmore's statement in March 2013 that "further militarisation of the crisis must be avoided and a political solution found instead."
  • Opposition parties Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin also opposed military action.
• Israel – Minister of Defense Moshe Ya'alon claimed that the Syrian government has lost control of Syria and is present in only forty percent of the country. Describing the civil war as a life and death struggle between Allawites and Sunnis, Ya'alon said there was no end in sight to the conflict. Minister of Strategic Affairs Yuval Steinitz said Israeli intelligence assessments indicated that "chemical weapons were used, and they were not used for the first time," before adding "nothing practical, significant, has been done in the last two years in order to stop the continuing massacre of civilians carried out by the Assad regime. I think that the investigation of the United Nations is a joke."
• Italy – Foreign Minister Emma Bonino called the attack a "war crime," but that Italy will not participate in international action without authorisation from the United Nations Security Council.
• Japan – According to Japanese sources, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe discussed the conflict in Syria with United States President Barack Obama at the G-20 summit in St. Petersburg on 5 September and said he understands Obama's desire to strike Syria. Abe indicated he agreed with Obama that Assad was behind the attacks.
• Jordan – Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour reiterated that Jordan will not be used to launch a preemptive strike against the Syrian government. Ensour said that the 900 US troops stationed in Jordan are not part of a plan to wage war on Syria, and that the government is against any foreign intervention in Syria.
• Lebanon – Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour said he did not support the idea of strikes on Syria in response to the reported chemical attacks saying that "I don't think this action would serve peace, stability and security in the region."
• Malaysia – Foreign Minister Anifah Aman said that if the attacks did take place, the government condemns them. "Malaysia calls upon those responsible for such irresponsible and inhuman acts to be brought to justice" and that chemical weapons inspectors should be allowed to inspect the sites.
• New Zealand – Prime Minister John Key said the attacks were horrific and urged the UN Security Council to work to resolve the crisis, although he acknowledged the United States and other countries may act outside the UN mandate due to Russian opposition on the Security Council. Key declined to comment on what role, if any, New Zealand may play in any international action unsanctioned by the UN.
• Pakistan – Pakistan has strongly urged the United States and western powers to avoid use of military force in Syria. In a statement, Foreign Office spokesperson Aizaz Chaudhry maintained that Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected. He expressed deep concerns over the ongoing violence and threat of possible American military action looming large over already embattled Syria. Aizaz Ahmed Chaudhry also strongly condemned the alleged use of chemical weapons of Syrian government, "All the engaged parties should adopt course of dialogue instead of violence and peaceful resolution of the conflict should be sought out", the Foreign Office spokesperson quoted. The National Security Adviser, Sartaj Aziz, who was briefing the Parliament over this issue said that: "Pakistan condemns the use of chemical weapons, but it does not support aerial strikes which the U.S. proposes as it will only make the situation "more concerning". Aziz strongly exhorted to the U.S and UK at the Parliament that "We should wait for the UN mission’s report on Syria."
• Qatar – Foreign Minister Khalid bin Mohammad Al Attiyah said he holds the UN Security Council "solely responsible for what happened" while blaming the Syrian government for using "internationally prohibited weaponry" in the attack, which he said "crossed all lines and violated all rights".
• Russia – Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich the attack was a clear "provocation planned in advance. The fact that agenda-driven regional mass media have begun an aggressive attack at once, as if on command, laying all the responsibility on the government, draws attention. The fact that the criminal action near Damascus was carried out just when the mission of UN experts to investigate the statements on possible chemical weapons use there has successfully begun its work in Syria points to this."
• South Korea – The Foreign Ministry said, "our government strongly condemns such brutal acts of crime", denouncing the Syrian government for its alleged use of chemical weapons. South Korea also called for the United States to act strongly against the Assad regime, fearing that failing to respond to an alleged use of chemical weapons will leave bad example and idea for it's enemy, North Korea.
• Sweden – Foreign Minister Carl Bildt said on his blog that it was a gas attack and that a UN team must investigate immediately. "Trying to evaluate the information available, I find it difficult to come to any other conclusion than that a lethal chemical substance has been used in the attack against opposition-controlled territory that was carried out by regime forces during the night between Tuesday and Wednesday." He added that he believes that the Syrian president helped coordinate the attacks.
• Turkey – President Abdullah Gül said that: "Those who have perpetrated these massacres will be remembered with curse forever. Moreover, they will have to pay for their deeds before international law." The Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement that read such an attack "can only be defined as barbarism and atrocity. The people who are responsible for this atrocity are the administrators of the regime and a ravenous group aiming at preserving their power at all costs. These people killing their own people and destroying Syria will answer for their deeds sooner or later. In the face of this massacre, which violates the international law and constitutes a serious crime against humanity. Turkey calls on the UN Security Council to fulfill now its responsibilities stemming from the United Nations Charter."
• United Kingdom – Foreign Secretary William Hague called on the Syrian government to give access to the UN team to investigate the attacks. "I am deeply concerned by reports that hundreds of people, including children, have been killed in airstrikes and a chemical weapons attack on rebel-held areas near Damascus. These reports are uncorroborated and we are urgently seeking more information. But it is clear that if they are verified, it would mark a shocking escalation in the use of chemical weapons in Syria." He added that he believes that the Syrian government carried out the attacks. Hague also later stated that diplomatic pressure on Syria had failed and that the UK, "the United States, [and] many other countries including France, are clear that we can't allow the idea in the 21st Century that chemical weapons can be used with impunity". A proposed 29 August 2013 parliamentary motion claimed that military strikes in response to the chemical weapons attacks would be legal if the strikes constituted humanitarian intervention. This motion failed to pass in the House of Commons 285-272 at a vote held 30 August 2013. William Hague stated on 1 September 2013 that future revotes on military action by the UK were unlikely. However by 3 September, newspapers were reporting that Prime Minister David Cameron was coming under increasing pressue to allow a revote following the publication of more compelling evidence of Syria's culpability.

US Secretary of State John Kerry's remarks on the Ghouta chemical attacks, 26 August

• United States – President Barack Obama referred to the incident as a "big event of grave concern." Secretary of State John Kerry stated on 26 August that it was "undeniable" that an "inexcusable" chemical attack occurred and suggested that the Obama administration believes the Syrian government was behind it. Kerry strongly condemned the attacks as a "moral obscenity" and warned "that this international norm cannot be violated without consequences". Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power wrote on Twitter that "Assad has used [chemical weapons] against civilians in violation of [international] norm."
  • The U.S. stated it was "deeply concerned by reports that chemical weapons were used" and that officials were "working urgently to gather additional information. The United States strongly condemns any and all use of chemical weapons. Those responsible for the use of chemical weapons must be held accountable. Today, we are formally requesting that the United Nations urgently investigate this new allegation." On 22 August, the United States said they were unable to conclusively say that chemical weapons were used in the attack. Obama directed U.S. intelligence agencies to urgently help verify the allegations. On 27 August, U.S. and Israeli officials claimed they intercepted communications from Syrian officials that the government was responsible for the attack.
• Uruguay – The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that called the attacks "an act of barbarism" and reiterated its condemnation of the violence in Syria "by the conflicting parties."
• Venezuela – President Nicolás Maduro warned against possible U.S. intervention in Syria, which he said would break international law and called for peace and negotiations. He publicly doubted claims that the Syrian government carried out the chemical attack and said that the UN should be given time to investigate. "We reject war, we want peace," declared Maduro. He said Venezuela will work with the Union of South American Nations and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States "for the truth of the Syrian and Arab and Islamic peoples".
• Vietnam – Viet Nam is deeply concerned over the use of chemical weapons in Syria and strongly opposes to the action targeting civilians, said Vietnam Foreign Minister Spokesman Luong Thanh Nghi. “We strongly emphasize the necessity to abide by the International Chemical Weapons Convention and call upon related sides to exercise self-restraint and resolve the problem in a subjective and cautious manner, via peaceful solutions and in respect for international laws and the United Nations Charter,” said Mr. Nghi.

Potential military response

On 23 August, U.S. and European security sources made a preliminary assessment that chemical weapons were used by Syrian forces, likely with high-level approval from the government of President Bashar al-Assad. The sources cautioned that, due to the assessment being preliminary, they were still seeking conclusive proof, which could take days, weeks or even longer to gather. On 23 August, U.S. officials claimed that their intelligence detected activity at Syrian chemical weapons sites before the attack on 21 August. Foreign Policy magazine's The Cable, citing unnamed sources, reported that: "US intelligence services" intercepted communications, hours after an attack, between an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defence and the leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike. According to the report, American officials believe that the attacks were the work of Assad's regime based on the content of the calls, although they are unsure who ordered the attacks.

Russian President Vladimir Putin told United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron that there was no evidence that the chemical weapons were used by the Syrian regime. An Iranian Foreign Ministry official claimed that Russia submitted evidence to the U.N. Security Council, including satellite images, purporting to show that chemical weapons were used by the opposition and not by the Administration.

The United States reportedly planned to launch up to 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles against the Syrian army. After several days of voicing public indecision over how to respond to the alleged chemical attacks, President Barack Obama said on 31 August, that he has decided the attacks warrant punitive strikes by the U.S. military, but said he will seek congressional authorisation before approving military action. In responses, the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations approved the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons (S.J.Res 21) on September 4, 2013. If the bill passes, it would allow the president to take direct action for up to 90 days, but it specifically forbids putting "boots on the ground." The government of the United Kingdom was mulling military action, but the House of Commons declined to give its assent, prompting Cameron to abandon plans for involvement in Syria and making him the first ever British prime minister blocked by Parliament from taking military action. France is considering military action, according to President François Hollande, while the government of Turkey has called for a more robust effort to not simply punish the Syrian government for the chemical attacks, but to remove Assad from power altogether.

Iran warned that strikes would be met with retaliation against Israel. French or U.S. action would reportedly be launched without approval from the UN Security Council. Russian officials argued international military action without UN authorisation would violate international law. China also warned against military intervention in Syria, saying that it would have "catastrophic consequences" for the entire region.

Former UN Inspector Hans Blix says in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that no one is going to act militarily and that the UN sanctions are toothless. The Swedish Defence Research Agency Middle East expert Magnus Norell says that "Taking things through the UN Security Council is just an excuse to not do something, because you know that a veto will be passed. ... It's clear that Assad doesn't care about the UN."

Public opinion on intervention

Public opinion polls have consistently shown that most Americans do not support military intervention in Syria. A Huffington Post poll found that U.S. public support for military strikes in Syria increased from 19% to 25% after the attacks in Ghouta. An ABC News poll found that 50% of Americans oppose intervention, while 50% support it if it's described as cruise missiles being launched from a navy ship. A Pew poll finds that Americans oppose rather than support military intervention by a 48% to 29% margin. A NBC poll found the margin to be only 8%. A Reuters-Ipsos poll finds that 56% oppose intervention, while only 19% support it, A Washington Post-ABC poll finds that 59% of Americans oppose action in Syria. A Rasmussen poll finds that 37% of Americans support "increased military assistance to protect the citizens of Syria", while 40% "do not think the United States should get more involved militarily." Separately, most Americans don't know where Syria is, and only a slim majority of those polled at the department of defense know where Syria is.

Polls have found that most British and French also oppose strikes without U.N. approval; a parliamentary motion supporting military intervention failed in the British parliament on 31 August – making David Cameron the first British prime minister in over 150 years to be prevented from going to war by Parliament.

Military deployments in the region

The United States Navy deployed ships to the eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea in the days after the attacks. Initially five Arleigh Burke-class destroyers were deployed to the eastern Mediterranean: USS Barry, USS Stout, USS Ramage, USS Mahan, and USS Gravely. The USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group including the Ticonderoga-class cruisers USS Gettysburg and USS San Jacinto and the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS Bulkeley and USS Mason transited the Suez Canal on 18 August on their way to the Indian Ocean, where they relived the USS Nimitz carrier strike group, which on 1 September moved into the Red Sea, placing them within easy deployment range of the eastern Mediterranean. The other ships in the Nimitz carrier strike group are the Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Princeton and the three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS Shoup, USS Stockdale, and USS William P. Lawrence.

On 29 August the French Navy Horizon-class frigate Chevalier Paul left its homeport of Toulon and set sail for the eastern Mediterranean.

On 29 August the Royal Air Force deployed six Typhoon fighter jets from RAF Coningsby in England to RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus as a precautionary measure. The Typhoon deployment followed the arrival of two Tristar air-to-air refuelling aircraft and one E3D Sentry airborne early warning and control aircraft at Akrotiri two days earlier.

On 30 August the amphibious transport dock USS San Antonio arrived in the eastern Mediterranean to join the five destroyers on station there. The San Antonio carries elements of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit. At the same time, the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge moved to the Red Sea with further elements of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit.

On 3 September the United States Navy Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Mahan left the eastern Mediterranean to return to its homeport Norflok.

On 4 September the Italian Navy Horizon-class frigate Andrea Doria and the Maestrale-class frigate Maestrale left their homeport of Taranto and set sail for the eastern Mediterranean. Furthermore the Italian Navy Durand de la Penne-class destroyer Francesco Mimbelli and the Sauro-class submarine Salvatore Pelosi, along with the Royal Navy Type 23 frigate HMS Westminster, are currently deployed to the Ionian Sea. The HMS Westminster is part of a larger Royal Navy battlegroup currently deployed to the Mediterranean for the annual exercise Cougar 13. The other ships in the battlegroup are the helicopter carrier HMS Illustrious, the amphibious transport dock ship HMS Bulwark, the frigate HMS Montrose and six Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships: RFA Lyme Bay, RFA Mounts Bay, RFA Cardigan Bay, RFA Fort Austin, RFA Fort Victoria and RFA Diligence. HMS Bulwark and the three Bay-class landing ships carry elements of the Royal Marines 3 Commando Brigade.

Russia maintains a permanent naval facility in Tartus. On 5 September, several vessels were on their way to the Mediterranean including amphibious warfare ships Minsk, Novocherkassk and Nikolai Filchenkov; the reconnaissance ship Prirazovye along with the Slava-class cruiser Moskva and the Udaloy-class destroyer Admiral Panteleyev. In addition, the Kashin-class destroyer Smetlivy, the Nanuchka-class corvette Shtil and Tarantul-class corvette Ivanovets are scheduled to arrive by the end of September.

Syrian conflict peace proposals

A pre-Geneva-II preparation meeting planned by senior US and Russian diplomats for 28 August 2013 in The Hague was postponed by the US Department of State because of "ongoing consultations" relating to the 21 August Ghouta attacks. A Department of State representative stated that the US "would work with Russia to reschedule [the] planned meeting and that the alleged chemical weapons attack demonstrated the need for a 'comprehensive and durable political solution'." On 6 September, US president Obama stated that he and Russian president Putin agreed that the "underlying conflict" in Syria could "only be resolved through a political transition as envisioned by the Geneva I and Geneva II process".

Media

The French magazine Le Monde reported in the months before the Ghouta attacks that its journalists embedded among opposition fighters had personally witnessed several chemical attacks on a smaller scale by the Syrian Army against rebel positions. spiegel reported a suspicion by a gas expert that minimal use of chemical weapons was seen by the Assad regime as the best way get the West used to its deployment, triggering an ongoing international dispute over whether nerve gas was being used at all. Saying that at some point, "the commotion over the use of chemical weapons per se" would "have dissipated.". Former US intelligence officer Joseph Holliday wrote in a study that "Assad has been extremely calculating with the use of force", "introducing chemical weapons gradually."

Some have questioned the motive and timing behind the alleged Syrian government involvement in the Ghouta attacks, since the hotel in which the team of United Nations chemical weapons inspectors were staying was just a few miles from the attack. However, the agreement the Syrian government reached with UN inspectors limited their mandate to three specific sites to establish if a chemical attack took place, but not who was responsible, he might simply have launched the attack in an area designated as off-limits. Most Americans do not know where Syria is, and only a slim majority of those polled at the Department of Defense know where Syria is.

A CNN reporter pointed to the fact that government forces did not appear to be in imminent danger of being overrun by opposition in the areas in question, in which a stalemate had set. He questioned why the army would risk such an action that could cause international intervention. The reporter also questioned if the Army would use sarin gas just a few kilometers from the center of Damascus on what was a windy day. However, the day of the attack was the one day that week when the wind blew from government-held central Damascus towards the rebel-held eastern suburbs. While a Huffington Post reporter pointed to the fact that the effected area was with strong opposition leanings, and is a major supply route to the front lines in the fighting in east Damascus. Assad's forces in both Mt Qassioun and in the Mezzeh airport have this area very zeroed in for rocket (typically Grads) and artillery strikes.

Several reporters also pointed to the timing of a purported assassination attempt against Assad earlier in August, suggesting the attack on the rebel enclaves came as a reprisal for the assassination attempt. A former Syrian intelligence officer claimed the attack came due to "internal reasons", to holding the "thinned-out front around Damascus" and "strengthening the morale of the fanatics in their ranks", following weeks of rebel attacks on Assad's home province of Latakia.

A reporter for The Daily Telegraph also pointed to the questionable timing given government forces had recently beaten back opposition in some areas around Damascus and recaptured territory. "Using chemical weapons might make sense when he is losing, but why launch gas attacks when he is winning anyway?" The reporter also questioned why would the attacks happen just three days after the inspectors arrived in Syria. Der Spiegel questioned this analysis, arguing that Assad's forces have been losing ground for several months and may have been motivated to use chemical weapons to forestall rebel advances in the Damascus suburbs.

In contrast to the positions of their governments, polls indicate that most people in the U.S., U.K. and France oppose military intervention in Syria. One poll indicates that 50% of Americans could support military intervention with cruise missiles only, "meant to destroy military units and infrastructure that have been used to carry out chemical attacks." In contrast to their government, most Russians support neither side in the conflict, with less than 10% saying they support Assad.

Yahya Ababneh, a Jordanian freelance reporter working for the conspiracy theory website, 'Shia 'advocacy journalism' Mintpressnews, (a self-styled 'independent' news source, the editor has investors, “retired businesspeople” whom she will not name – unfortunate for a journalism operation fighting alongside people seeking transparency") – claimed to have interviewed both local residents and rebels, in which area rebels stated that they themselves released the chemical agents, of Saudi origin, albeit by accident.

A number of US commentators with known isolationist or non-interventionist views have suggested that the attacks might have been a "false flag" operation designed to give western powers an excuse to intervene. These include Ron Paul, his son Senator Rand Paul, and Pat Buchanan. Conservatives opposed include former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy and Col. Ralph Peters

Columnist and former IDF soldier Jeffrey Goldberg argued that Assad would use chemical weapons because nobody "will do a damn thing to stop him." Syrian human rights lawyer Razan Zaitouneh also argued that the Assad government would launch a chemical attack because "it knows that the international community would not do anything about it, like it did nothing about all the previous crimes." Israeli reporter Ron Ben-Yishai stated that the motive to use chemical weapons could be the "army's inability to seize the rebel's stronghold in Damascus' eastern neighbourhoods," or fear of rebel encroachment into Damascus with tacit civilian support, an argument backed by declassified intelligence reports from the United States.

According to military experts, both sides are locked in a political and military stalemate, and the opposition cannot win without western military intervention or arming them. The pro-Castro news outlet CubaDebate said that NATO plans to intervene militarily and argued that any action would break international law.

The United States' intelligence assessment on the attacks gave a possible motive for the attack based on intercepted communications, saying that it "was a desperate effort to push back rebels from several areas in the capital’s densely packed eastern suburbs – and also suggests that the high civilian death toll surprised and panicked senior Syrian officials, who called off the attack and then tried to cover it up."

The Turkish government's Anadolu Agency published an unconfirmed reported on 30 August, pointing to the Syrian 155th Missile Brigade in Kufeyte and the 4th Armored Division on Qasyoun Mountain, as the peratrators of the two attacks. Involving 15-20 missiles with chemical warheads at around 2.45 am on 21 August, targeting residential areas between Duma-Harasta and Zamalka in East and West Ghouta. It specified that the 155th Missile Brigade had used FROG-7/Luna and/or M600 missiles fired from Kufeyte, while other rockets with a 15-to-70-kilometer range were fired by the 4th Armored Division from Qasyoun. The agency did not explaining its source.

See also

• Chemical attack on Behbahan battalion – a 1986 incident during the Iran–Iraq War
• List of massacres during the Syrian civil war
• Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway – a 1995 terrorist incident
• Syria and weapons of mass destruction