Chemical Weapons in Ukraine?

Possible Chemical Casualties in Ukraine
Possible Chemical Casualties in Ukraine

Unconfirmed reports of a possible Russian chemical weapon attack against Ukrainian troops in the southeastern city of Mariupol were made by the “Azov Battalion“, a Ukrainian right-wing paramilitary group (), and began circulating on social media on Monday.  Certainly not any sort of reliable news sources here, of course, but a concern nonetheless, especially in light of other, confirmed Russian atrocities and war crimes already committed in Ukraine.

This attack is alleged to have involved an unknown “caustic substance” dropped from a Russian drone.  Pentagon officials on Tuesday acknowledged a “host of difficulties” in assessing the allegations, including the lack of access by outsiders to Mariupol, where the reported victims were said to be recovering.

At any rate, the unconfirmed reports were sufficient to prompt chief Pentagon spokesman John Kirby to release a statement that noted the U.S. was aware of the reports but could not confirm their accuracy.

“These reports, if true, are deeply concerning and reflective of concerns that we have had about Russia’s potential to use a variety of ‘riot control agents’ — including tear gas mixed with chemical agents — in Ukraine,” Kirby said late Monday.

Russia joined the United States and 191 other countries in signing the Chemical Weapon Convention of 1993, which outlaws the stockpiling and use of chemical weapons.  Many Western military analysts are simply waiting for these chemical weapons to turn up on the Ukrainian battlefield.

Despite the Chemical Weapon Convention, it is known that Russia still maintains an illegal arsenal of chemical weapons and has a long history of using them covertly in small amounts and under controlled conditions.  For further reading; “A legacy of ‘secrecy and deception’: Why Russia clings to an outlawed chemical arsenal“.

In the past, the Russians and Syrians have attempted to cover up their use of chemical weapons against anti-Syrian rebels in the ongoing Syrian civil war by claiming these were simply ‘riot control agents’.  So, this is an established Russian tactic.

You may recall that in 2012 President Obama declared that any Syrian use of chemical weapons would be a “red line” for U.S. forces.  But then he did nothing when it was confirmed that the Syrian military had, in fact, used chemical weapons against anti-government rebels, with Russian assistance.

And President Biden, just days ago, promised to respond to any Russian use of chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine “in-kind” – meaning with chemical or biological weapons of our own, which would be a violation of the Chemical Weapon Convention!  Of course, that errant comment was immediately walked back by Biden’s handlers in the White House.

My point with bringing up these two instances is to highlight that Democrats, for some reason, believe that empty threats are sufficient to contain madmen like Vladimir Putin of Russia, Bashar al-Assad of Syria, Ali Khamenei of Iran, Xi Jinping of China and Kim Jong-un of North Korea.

Remember that President Biden – right now, right this very minute – has RUSSIA negotiating with IRAN on our behalf for a treaty to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program!  You cannot make this stuff up!

Thus far the United States and NATO have refused to enter the Ukrainian conflict for fear of Russia’s nuclear arsenal.  We’ve stood idly by and watched hundreds (at the very least) of innocent Ukrainian women and children murdered – literally bound and executed by the Russian military and dumped into mass graves.

Reports are now surfacing of Russian mobile crematoriums being used to burn bodies to hide their war crimes.

So why would the use of Russian chemical weapons make any difference now?

My prediction is that we will either somehow be ‘unable to confirm the use of chemical weapons’, or we will confirm their use, but will simply take no action other than to issue yet additional public condemnation of Putin and the Russian military.

More empty threats.  More recoiling from fear.  More enabling of tyrants… leading to more war, destruction, and pestilence.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing” (erroneously attributed to Edmund Burke the 18th century Irish-born British statesman, economist and philosopher, but a true statement nonetheless)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email