If international law is to have any meaning then suspected international crimes must be investigated without fear or favour, regardless of who the alleged perpetrators might be. In this context the decision by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) not to investigate Turkey’s suspected use of white phosphorus in its campaign against Kurdish forces in Syria is deeply troubling.
These allegations were first brought to global attention by The Times. We reported how one doctor with extensive experience of burns injuries had identified between 15 and 20 possible victims of white phosphorus burns in a single hospital in northern Syria. Our reporter Anthony Loyd told last week how the screams of a 13-year-old boy who had suffered 70 per cent burns were “unlike anything I have heard in war”. Thanks in part to our reporting, the boy has been transferred to a Paris hospital, where he is fighting for his life.
The OPCW, which had previously said that it was gathering evidence of possible use of white phosphorus for a possible investigation, justifies its decision with the excuse that white phosphorus is not a proscribed chemical. But this is disingenuous. While white phosphorus can be used for smoke-screening it is banned under the Geneva Convention from being deployed as an incendiary weapon against civilians. If Turkey or its affiliates used it in this way it would constitute a war crime.
The suspicion is that the OPCW’s reluctance to investigate reflects western hesitancy to embarrass a Nato member at a time when relations with Turkey are strained. But if the West does not respond to Turkey’s use of banned weapons, as it did not when the Syrian regime used them against its own people in 2013, it will further erode respect for international law, guaranteeing that in future conflicts such weapons will be used with impunity.
