This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/16/world/middleeast/syria.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Albania Rejects Request to Host Destruction of Syrian Chemical Weapons Albania Won’t Aid in Destruction of Syria’s Chemical Arms
(about 7 hours later)
LONDON — Albania became the second nation after Norway on Friday to turn down an American request to host facilities for the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons, dealing a blow to Washington’s efforts to find a country prepared to undertake the politically sensitive disarmament project. GENEVA — The international chemical weapons watchdog agency approved a plan for the elimination of Syria’s chemical arms on Friday that calls for most of the arsenal to be destroyed outside the country, despite another refusal by one of the countries approached to help with the disposal.
But officials at the international chemical weapons watchdog in The Hague, debating a Syrian blueprint for the destruction of 1,300 tons of toxic munitions, said the decision by the authorities in Tirana, the Albanian capital, would not directly derail their efforts to meet a deadline on Friday to endorse the plan. After daylong discussions at its headquarters in The Hague, the agency, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, approved a plan that required the “most critical” chemicals in Syria’s stockpile of 1,300 metric tons of toxic munitions to be transported out of the country by the end of December and the removal of all but one of the other precursors and chemical substances by Feb. 5.
The twin developments came weeks after Syria offered a proposal for the destruction of chemical weapons to the watchdog, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, under a deal brokered by Russia and the United States to avert an American-led military strike. The approval came on the same day that Albania turned down an American request to help destroy Syria’s chemical weapons, dealing a blow to Washington’s efforts to find a country prepared to undertake the politically sensitive disarmament project. Several weeks earlier, Norway also rejected the request, saying it did not have the equipment or expertise to destroy the weapons on its soil.
“It is impossible for Albania to get involved in this operation,” Prime Minister Edi Rama said Friday in a televised address to the nation, according to Reuters. “We lack the necessary capacities to get involved in this operation.” “It is impossible for Albania to get involved in this operation,” Prime Minister Edi Rama said Friday in a televised address to the nation, according to Reuters. “We lack the necessary capacities.” Demonstrators and opposition lawmakers had shown strong resistance to the use of Albanian soil to dispose of chemical weapons, a process that would create substantial amounts of toxic waste.
Demonstrators and opposition lawmakers had displayed strong resistance to the use of Albanian soil to dispose of chemical weapons — a process that would create substantial amounts of toxic waste. The approval of Syria’s blueprint by the chemical weapons organization takes Syria past another key milestone in carrying out an agreement reached by Russia and the United States in September that calls for the destruction of Syria’s stockpile by the middle of next year.
Protesters outside the Albanian Parliament in Tirana carried placards on Thursday proclaiming “No to chemical weapons in Albania,” Reuters said. The plan avoids some of the security challenges and environmental hazards of destroying highly toxic chemicals in the middle of Syria’s conflict, disarmament experts say. But it raises legal and logistical challenges in finding countries that have the legal framework to allow the import of such chemicals and the facilities to destroy them, they add.
Norway said several weeks ago that it did not have the facilities or the expertise to destroy chemical weapons on its soil. Syria agreed to the plan after President Obama, supported by France, threatened military action after a chemical arms attack on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb killed hundreds of people.
Christian Chartier, a spokesman for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, said the Albanian decision would “absolutely not” affect the body’s efforts to fine-tune its response to the Syrian plan. Members of the body’s 41-nation executive council “were close to a decision” before an adjournment, and “just needed a little more time,” he said in a telephone interview. International chemical weapons inspectors inside Syria said last week that they had verified the destruction of 22 of the 23 sites that the Syrian government declared had been used for the production and mixing of the banned munitions. The inspectors must still verify the destruction of the last remaining declared site. But destroying the weapons and chemicals themselves is far more complex. The arsenal must first be transported through potentially hostile territory inside Syria to a port for shipment overseas.
Russia and the United States want most of the chemical stockpile to be removed from Syria by the end of the year and completely destroyed by mid-2014. But the idea of receiving tons of toxic weapons has raised environmental, political and other concerns in potential host countries. The plan outlined by the organization on Friday foresees the destruction of one chemical, isopropanol, a precursor for sarin gas, in Syria. “That makes perfect sense,” Ralf Trapp, a consultant on chemical weapons disarmament, said in a telephone interview. “You can do it in existing facilities in the military and even in industry. But moving the other precursor chemical for sarin, together with highly toxic sulfur mustard and VX nerve agent, in the middle of a war zone poses a challenge.”
The American Embassy in Tirana said in a statement that Washington still believed it would be able to adhere to the timeline, according to news reports. “The United States will continue to work with Allies and partners as well as the O.P.C.W. and the United Nations to ensure the elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons program,” the embassy said in a statement. Other European countries have facilities for destroying chemical weapons, but some of these are set up to handle older chemicals and might not be suitable for Syria’s arms, Mr. Trapp said. The United States and Russia have the facilities for destroying Syrian weapons, but American law does not permit their import, and experts say Russia, behind schedule in destroying its own chemical arms, has so far offered only technical support.
“We remain confident that we will complete elimination of the program within the timeline agreed upon,” it said.

Nick Cumming-Bruce reported from Geneva, and Alan Cowell from London.

Syria agreed to the plan to destroy its production facilities and stockpile of chemical weapons as President Obama, supported by France, threatened military action after a chemical weapons attack on Aug. 21 in a suburb of Damascus killed hundreds of people.
The United States accused President Bashar al-Assad’s forces of responsibility for the attack and said sarin gas had been used. But the Syrian authorities laid blame for the onslaught on rebels in the civil war that has continued and even intensified in some areas using conventional weapons while diplomats have focused on the destruction of nerve agents and other toxins.
On Oct. 24, Syria presented the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons with “its formal initial declaration covering its chemical weapons program,” the watchdog said at the time.
“Such declarations provide the basis on which plans are devised for a systematic, total and verified destruction of declared chemical weapons and production facilities,” the organization said, adding that the Syrian document included “a general plan of destruction.”
International chemical weapons inspectors inside Syria said last week that they had verified the destruction of 22 of the 23 sites that the Syrian government declared had been used for the production and mixing of the banned munitions.
But the destruction of the stockpile of weapons and chemicals is far more complex. The arsenal, including mustard gas and sarin, must first be transported through potentially hostile territory inside Syria to a port for shipment overseas. The process of destroying the weapons is likely to produce significant amounts of toxic waste, requiring the creation of costly facilities to dispose of it.
Weapons inspectors and diplomats say they are also concerned about ensuring that the chemicals are protected from thieves or militants.