BEIRUT, Lebanon — The Syrian government appeared to confirm on Monday that it had stockpiles of chemical weapons, in a statement that said the weapons would never be used in its domestic conflict against Syrian civilians, but could be deployed “in the case of exterior aggression.”
The government’s statement was read at a news conference in Damascus by Jihad Makdissi, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, in answer to mounting international concerns over the security of Syria’s chemical stockpiles, which American officials have said are large and include the nerve agent sarin as well as mustard gas and cyanide.
But Mr. Makdissi later said that his comments had been misinterpreted, and the government said that his references to chemical weapons were only hypothetical in nature.
The information minister, Omran al-Zoubi, told a Damascus radio station that Syria was only discussing the issue because it was being raised abroad. Saying that Syria would not use them against its own people “doesn’t mean that Syria has such weapons in the first place,” Mr. Zoubi said.
Syria is one of eight countries that has refused to sign the international convention eliminating chemical weapons, and it has always been indirect in referring to its capabilities, using the mystery as a deterrent. Western governments and experts have said since the late 1980’s that Syria was manufacturing, stockpiling and testing chemical weapons.
Last week, American officials who monitor intelligence reports said that the Syrian government had begun moving some of the weapons, but it was unclear which specific weapons were being moved, where they were taken or how many were involved. The reports prompted warnings to Syria that using the weapons would cross “a red line,” as well as speculation that Israel or others might intervene in Syria to destroy or secure them.
Looming over the comments was the specter of Iraq, where claims of a stockpile of “weapons of mass destruction” were among the reasons used to justify the March 2003 American-led invasion; no such stockpile was ever found.
Mr. Makdissi said that all the attention that is now focused on Syria’s chemical weapons “aims to justify and prepare the international community’s military intervention in Syria under the false pretext of W.M.D.”
The weapons “will not be used against Syrian civilians,” Mr. Makdissi told the news conference in Damascus, calling the clashes still flaring in Syria’s main cities “gang warfare.”
“They will never be used domestically, no matter how this crisis evolves,” he said. “Those weapons will only be used in the case of exterior aggression.”
Syria’s most senior officials only rarely agree to discuss chemical weapons. In interviews over the years, for example, President Bashar al-Assad has always drawn a distinction between Syria’s complete rejection of nuclear weapons in the region and its attitude toward chemical weapons, saying that Syria had the right to develop such an arsenal.
A United Nations diplomat said that in a meeting with Kofi Annan, the special envoy for Syria earlier in July, President Assad had also assured the former United Nations secretary general that the weapons were stored in a safe place.
Mr. Assad also told Mr. Annan that they would not be used except in the case of foreign invasion, the diplomat said, and that since the weapons were stored in separate components, anyone who captured them would have to know how to combine them before they could be used.
Israel employs a similar ambiguity about its nuclear arsenal, which is believed to have inspired the Syrian stance. But the United States and other regional powers have assumed for years that Israel can deploy them.
The Syrians are believed to have a large stockpile of blister agents in artillery shells, and nerve agents in bombs and missiles. But Michael Eisenstadt, the director of the military and security studies program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, noted that having the precursors to create the weapons is not the same as having the weapons themselves.
Military experts said that leaving the issue ambiguous now was a way to give any foreign powers who might be thinking about invading Syria some pause over the possible consequences. The threat drew swift international condemnation.
At the State Department in Washington, Victoria Nuland said: “Any talk about any use of any kind of a weapon like that in this situation is horrific and chilling. The Syrian regime has a responsibility to the world, has a responsibility first and foremost to its own citizens to protect and safeguard those weapons. And that kind of loose talk just speaks to the kind of regime that we’re talking about.”
Asked at a press conference about the Syrian statement, Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations secretary general, said, “It would be reprehensible if anybody in Syria is contemplating use of such weapons of mass destruction, like chemical weapons.”The statement by the Syrian government came as European Union foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels, voted to toughen sanctions against supporters of the country’s president, Bashar al-Assad, and to obligate the 27 member nations of the union to search any airplane or ship that is suspected of carrying weapons or banned equipment to Syria, where fighting has raged in the country’s main cities for days.
While government troops were involved on Monday mostly in mopping up operations in and around the capital, Damascus, fierce fighting continued in downtown Aleppo.
Activists said government helicopters were firing rockets into one neighborhood, Hanano, where the rebel fighters had captured at least one tank, and that its residents were fleeing in droves.
Hwaida Saad contributed reporting from Beirut, an employee of The New York Times from Damascus, Syria; Kareem Fahim from Jabir, Jordan; and Eric Schmitt from Washington.
The government’s statement was read at a news conference in Damascus by Jihad Makdissi, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, in answer to mounting international concerns over the security of Syria’s chemical stockpiles, which American officials have said are large and include the nerve agent sarin as well as mustard gas and cyanide.
But Mr. Makdissi later said that his comments had been misinterpreted, and the government said that his references to chemical weapons were only hypothetical in nature.
The information minister, Omran al-Zoubi, told a Damascus radio station that Syria was only discussing the issue because it was being raised abroad. Saying that Syria would not use them against its own people “doesn’t mean that Syria has such weapons in the first place,” Mr. Zoubi said.
Syria is one of eight countries that has refused to sign the international convention eliminating chemical weapons, and it has always been indirect in referring to its capabilities, using the mystery as a deterrent. Western governments and experts have said since the late 1980’s that Syria was manufacturing, stockpiling and testing chemical weapons.
Last week, American officials who monitor intelligence reports said that the Syrian government had begun moving some of the weapons, but it was unclear which specific weapons were being moved, where they were taken or how many were involved. The reports prompted warnings to Syria that using the weapons would cross “a red line,” as well as speculation that Israel or others might intervene in Syria to destroy or secure them.
Looming over the comments was the specter of Iraq, where claims of a stockpile of “weapons of mass destruction” were among the reasons used to justify the March 2003 American-led invasion; no such stockpile was ever found.
Mr. Makdissi said that all the attention that is now focused on Syria’s chemical weapons “aims to justify and prepare the international community’s military intervention in Syria under the false pretext of W.M.D.”
The weapons “will not be used against Syrian civilians,” Mr. Makdissi told the news conference in Damascus, calling the clashes still flaring in Syria’s main cities “gang warfare.”
“They will never be used domestically, no matter how this crisis evolves,” he said. “Those weapons will only be used in the case of exterior aggression.”
Syria’s most senior officials only rarely agree to discuss chemical weapons. In interviews over the years, for example, President Bashar al-Assad has always drawn a distinction between Syria’s complete rejection of nuclear weapons in the region and its attitude toward chemical weapons, saying that Syria had the right to develop such an arsenal.
A United Nations diplomat said that in a meeting with Kofi Annan, the special envoy for Syria earlier in July, President Assad had also assured the former United Nations secretary general that the weapons were stored in a safe place.
Mr. Assad also told Mr. Annan that they would not be used except in the case of foreign invasion, the diplomat said, and that since the weapons were stored in separate components, anyone who captured them would have to know how to combine them before they could be used.
Israel employs a similar ambiguity about its nuclear arsenal, which is believed to have inspired the Syrian stance. But the United States and other regional powers have assumed for years that Israel can deploy them.
The Syrians are believed to have a large stockpile of blister agents in artillery shells, and nerve agents in bombs and missiles. But Michael Eisenstadt, the director of the military and security studies program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, noted that having the precursors to create the weapons is not the same as having the weapons themselves.
Military experts said that leaving the issue ambiguous now was a way to give any foreign powers who might be thinking about invading Syria some pause over the possible consequences. The threat drew swift international condemnation.
At the State Department in Washington, Victoria Nuland said: “Any talk about any use of any kind of a weapon like that in this situation is horrific and chilling. The Syrian regime has a responsibility to the world, has a responsibility first and foremost to its own citizens to protect and safeguard those weapons. And that kind of loose talk just speaks to the kind of regime that we’re talking about.”
Asked at a press conference about the Syrian statement, Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations secretary general, said, “It would be reprehensible if anybody in Syria is contemplating use of such weapons of mass destruction, like chemical weapons.”The statement by the Syrian government came as European Union foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels, voted to toughen sanctions against supporters of the country’s president, Bashar al-Assad, and to obligate the 27 member nations of the union to search any airplane or ship that is suspected of carrying weapons or banned equipment to Syria, where fighting has raged in the country’s main cities for days.
While government troops were involved on Monday mostly in mopping up operations in and around the capital, Damascus, fierce fighting continued in downtown Aleppo.
Activists said government helicopters were firing rockets into one neighborhood, Hanano, where the rebel fighters had captured at least one tank, and that its residents were fleeing in droves.
Hwaida Saad contributed reporting from Beirut, an employee of The New York Times from Damascus, Syria; Kareem Fahim from Jabir, Jordan; and Eric Schmitt from Washington.