The Ins And Outs Of Securing Chemical Weapons

What it would take to identify, inventory and destroy Syria's chemical weapons? How can the U.S. tell if Syria is lying, and whether this solution bestows an unintended legitimacy to the Assad regime? Host Scott Simon asks Former United Nations weapons inspector Charles Duelfer.

Copyright © 2013 NPR. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

Let's try to explore more now about how to ensure the Bashar al-Assad regime really does get rid of its chemical weapons. We turn to a former U.N. weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer. He led the Iraq survey group that conducted the investigation into Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Duelfer, thanks for being with us.

CHARLES DUELFER: Well, it's good to be with you, Scott.

SIMON: Near as you can tell, is this proposed agreement - is this agreement, I guess, that's real now, practical?

DUELFER: Well, sometimes, Scott, things work and this may be one of those cases. It has all the elements I think in place that are required for a successful disarming operation, bearing in mind we're drawing on lessons from the experience with Iraq in the 1990s.

SIMON: Well, what encourages you?

DUELFER: Well, there's a heavy burden which is levied upon Syria, and the dynamic here is where Syria is intended to declare things and the inspection inspectors are meant to verify. The burden of proof is on Syria. All the heavy lifting is on Syria. They have to provide access, to provide security. They're the ones who will conduct the destruction, if that's the case, in Syria.

The role of the weapons inspectors is to verify. With that dynamic in place, this could work.

SIMON: On the other hand, what about reports that the regime has been moving the weapons around?

DUELFER: Well, this is something that can be tested by the presence of the weapons inspectors. Very early on the requirement is for Syria to provide a declaration. It's very interesting that the Russians and the Americans have come to a common assessment of what they both believe from their intelligence is in the holdings of the Syrian government.

If Syria provides a declaration of its holdings and their locations which appears relatively accurate, then I think we'll get a very early indication that they're serious and, in fact, the process may work out.

SIMON: Mr. Duelfer, what about the fact that, as I've heard some people suggest, the carrots might be there but not the stick, in this agreement?

DUELFER: Well, the stick is implicit even if it isn't explicit. I mean, we've seen what the president did in his speech. He basically said Syria is guilty. He knows what the sentence is - he's defined a military strike. But in essence he's suspended the sentence to see how this political process could play out. So whether or not Foreign Minister Lavrov or the Russian government or others, indeed, agree to have this written up and embedded in U.N. language, Bashar al-Assad will know that the Americans have at ready a military strike, which is the stick.

Interestingly, the incentives are somewhat different than the case of Iraq, where Iraq was under sanctions and their positive incentive was to get out of sanctions. In the case of Bashar al-Assad, presumably, what he sees as a positive assessment or incentive is that he can gain greater international legitimacy.

SIMON: Yeah. Do you think he gains greater international legitimacy by participation in this agreement?

DUELFER: Well, I think that's inevitable. And I think that has to be part of what, you know, Sergei Lavrov was saying to the Syrians. I mean, they've got a tough client there in a case. They've got a, you know, a bad reputation. But the one positive which is perhaps available to him is that, you know, the international community will be dealing with Bashar al-Assad as a government. The rebels are more of a disparate group and, you know, from the Bashar al-Assad perspective they may be losing credibility rather than gaining credibility.

SIMON: So you could have someone who uses chemical weapons and winds up gaining international credibility?

DUELFER: Well, if he can make the case that he's now reformed and he's getting rid of it and, you know, he's already indicated he wants to sign up for the chemical weapons convention, we will see. I mean, it all sounds good now but, you know, there's a timeline here for specific steps, and we'll see hard evidence as it plays out.

SIMON: Former U.N. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer. Thanks very much.

Copyright © 2013 NPR. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to NPR. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.

Comments

 

Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the NPR.org Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.