France Issues Verdict Against President al-Assad: Unveiling the Motives Behind Paris' Baseless Accusations

By: N. Daneshvar

The French judicial system, in its persistent anti-Syrian stance, has issued an international arrest warrant against President Bashar al-Assad for his alleged complicity in crimes against humanity, specifically relating to the chemical attacks that transpired in Syria during the summer of 2013. France contends that one of the primary factors influencing this verdict, which encompasses the apprehension of Maher al-Assad, the brother of Bashar al-Assad, along with two prominent Syrian army generals, Ghassan Abbas and Bassam al-Hassan, was intelligence received from the United States. However, the veracity of this information remains subject to dispute, lacking any comprehensive verification.

According to the reports, an autonomous unit within the Paris Court, entrusted with investigating crimes against humanity, has been investigating the chemical attacks since 2021. Notably, the investigation was initiated following a legal complaint filed by non-profit and non-governmental pro-Israeli organizations, namely the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM), the Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI), and the Syrian Archives. Despite assertions made by Western circles and international organizations under their tutelage, Syria has consistently refuted allegations of chemical weapon usage. It is crucial to recognize that in recent years, numerous war crimes have been perpetrated by the Syrian opposition in a full-fledged military rebellion fueled by the support of Western governments, rendering them challenging to quantify.

On April 25, 2013, the United States accused the Syrian government of employing chemical weapons, particularly sarin gas, in a fabricated intelligence evaluation. This baseless accusation was swiftly met with a vehement response from Syria, categorically denying any involvement on the part of the central government. However, on April 29, 2013, reports emerged of another chemical attack in Saraqeb, resulting in the loss of two lives and injuring thirteen others, who were subsequently transferred to Turkey for further examination. On May 5, 2013, Turkish medical professionals declared that no traces of sarin were detected in the victims' bloodstream. Concurrently, Carla Del Ponte, a United Nations human rights inspector and a member of the commission of inquiry, unequivocally declared that it was the Syrian opposition that had employed chemical agents to perpetrate attacks on civilians and soldiers alike.

Furthermore, extensive debates questioning the efficacy of chemical weapons in Syria's military conflict arose, ultimately establishing that such weapons were neither beneficial nor advantageous for al-Assad and Syrian forces. Their usage would only inflict severe harm upon civilians while providing no strategic advantage on the battlefield, thereby gravely impairing Syria's healthcare and treatment infrastructure.

Additionally, the Syrian government harbored the certainty that any employment of chemical weapons would promptly elicit an attack from the United States and its Western allies, possessing both international legitimacy and media support, which gives the Syrian government no rational motivation to carry out such attacks.

In retrospect, it becomes evident that the Syrian government's employment of chemical weapons at that particular juncture not only lacked military utility but also remained implausible. From a political and strategic perspective, such actions would have hastened the Syrian army’s defeat in the war. As further information emerged, the United States, which had contemplated unilateral military intervention without UN Security Council authorization, found itself in a precarious position, eventually relinquishing its plans. Consequently, the aforementioned allegations were archived until France, utilizing the same previously entirely fabricated documents, made another futile controversy, particularly at the time the Israeli regimes murdered over 13,000 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, to distract the world public opinion.

It is crucial to highlight that the baseless accusations leveled against President Assad by the West are unparalleled. The United States Treasury Department's recent imposition of sanctions against six individuals, including close relatives of President al-Assad, under the pretext of their involvement in the production or trafficking of the substance Captagon, a classified dangerous amphetamine, further exemplifies this dubious trend. Last year, a report by the American research institute New Lines, lacking concrete sourcing and relying on uncertainties, alleged the complicity of senior Syrian government officials, including Maher al-Assad, in the production and trade of Captagon. This report faced criticism from the independent Western media, emphasizing that accusations bereft of any concrete evidence merely serve political agendas.

It is imperative to underscore that the Syrian civil war, which began in 2011 following various initiatives by Western forces and their proxies, escalated into a full-fledged conflict against a legitimate Syrian government. This protracted war has resulted in the loss of over half a million lives and has displaced a significant portion of the nation's population, exerting profound ramifications upon both the nation and the government of Syria, even after substantial victories have been achieved.

In conclusion, the complexities surrounding the recent French verdict on Bashar al-Assad underscore the need for comprehensive examination while shedding light on previously unexplored facets of human rights within France itself. It is imperative that allegations against President al-Assad and his associates be scrutinized with the utmost objectivity and verified evidence. By fostering an environment of impartiality, the international community can contribute to the pursuit of justice and a more nuanced understanding of the complexities underlying the Syrian conflict.