Chemical Arms Used By Syria in Darfur War

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

Syrian forces killed dozens of people in the troubled Darfur region of Sudan by experimenting on them with chemical weapons, a German newspaper has reported.


Syria, already facing international pressure for its occupation of Lebanon, might be in for more scrutiny after the report in Die Welt, which based its story on unnamed Western security sources as well as eyewitnesses.


The disclosure came as the governments in Khartoum and Damascus were denounced by the Security Council, which demanded that Sudan stop the Darfur carnage and called on Syria to quit its occupation of neighboring Lebanon.


According to the German report, Syrian officers met with Sudanese military officials in a Khartoum suburb in May, discussing a possible military cooperation. The Syrians proposed cooperating on chemical weapons development – a subject of international ban in treaties signed by both countries.


At first, according to the report, the chemical arms were to be tested on rebels of the southern anti-government organization known as Sudan People’s Liberation Army. That group was involved in peace talks, so the Sudanese government proposed testing the arms on civilians in Darfur.


Die Welt cited an Arabic news Web site named ILAF that said in an article posted on August 2 that several frozen bodies arrived suddenly at the Al-Fashr Hospital in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, in June.


Since the Security Council called on Syria to remove all its forces from Lebanon and cease its interference in the country’s politics earlier this month, Damascus was criticized in the Arab press for its failed diplomacy and weak response.


Yesterday, President Mubarak of Egypt visited Damascus, where he and President Assad tried to negotiate a common approach to regional issues.


America and Israel accuse Mr. Assad of hosting and sponsoring Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations that disrupt any attempts for renewal of peace talks. Mr. Mubarak reportedly tried to engage his Syrian host on the eve of an Egyptian-sponsored meeting of all the different terrorist factions, which Cairo hopes will end in a cease-fire declaration.


The two leaders also discussed the Lebanese issue, but Mr. Mubarak’s public statements did not stray too far from a cautious Arab League statement Tuesday, which betrayed more differences among league members than a unified position.


In its Tuesday statement in Cairo, the Arab League vaguely criticized the Security Council resolution, saying that Lebanon has a “sovereign right to practice its political choices within constitutional institutions.”


One day after the U.N. vote, the Lebanese parliament defied the Security Council and quickly approved the Syrian-backed move to change the country’s constitution to provide an additional three-year term for President Lahoud, considered a Damascus puppet.


“There is no room for rejecting any of the decisions of the Security Council,” said Jordan’s foreign minister, Marwan Muasher, betraying the unease among many Arab leaders toward the Syrian presence in Lebanon.


Meanwhile, Prime Minister Sharon told Ha’aretz that his far-reaching plan intended at disengagement from Palestinian Arabs was hatched as result of an American proposal to renew peace talks with Syria. According to the newspaper account, White House envoy Elliott Abrams made the proposal when the two met in Rome in November 2003. At that time, the Bush administration was disillusioned by the prospect of negotiations with Yasser Arafat-controlled officials, and looked for other avenues for regional cooperation.


Mr. Sharon had opposed past attempts by his predecessors Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak to negotiate the return the strategic Golan Heights in exchange for peace promises by Damascus. At the Rome meeting, he surprised Mr. Abrams with the disengagement plan.


As result, Mr. Sharon was quoted by Ha’aretz, the idea that Syria would become a serious negotiation partner “was immediately taken off the agenda and [the Americans are] not raising it any more.”


The New York Sun

© 2025 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

or
By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use