INTRODUCTION

International organizations have regularly condemned warring parties for carrying out indiscriminate warfare in Syria, including by using allegedly indiscriminate weapons. This report seeks to frame the issues courts might consider in evaluating allegations that the use of such weapons violated international humanitarian law in a way that justifies criminal accountability.

Means and methods of warfare used in Syria which some sources have alleged to be indiscriminate include barrel bombs; improvised explosive devices; improvised homemade launchers, such as the “hell cannons” used by some armed groups; chemical weapons; and cluster munitions.

One particularly critical example is barrel bombs. Barrel bombs have reportedly been used by other forces in other conflicts but have been a subject of particular controversy in Syria. SAMS data have identified a total of 84 incidents of barrel bombs have impacted healthcare systems, all allegedly by the Government of Syria

The Security Council has referred to barrel bombs in the context of condemning indiscriminate attacks. The head of the UN’s Commission of Inquiry on Syria has referred to “the use of barrel bombs” as indiscriminate and “amounting to area bombardment.” Commission reports have found barrel bombs “could not be accurately targeted” in urban areas. However, OHCHR has opined “it is unlikely that [barrel bombs] could be classified as being, by their nature, indiscriminate”, concluding that the dispositive issue under IHL is how those bombs are used.

Source: Syrian American Medical Society Foundation