Abstract

The norm against chemical weapons (CW) is considered to be a strong and universal restraint against poisonous methods of warfare. Yet the repeated CW attacks during the Syrian civil war have raised questions about the robustness of this international norm. Under what conditions do third parties emphatically sanction violators of the norm? Adopting a historical approach, we analyse the discursive and contextual dynamics characterising the CW attacks since the early twentieth century. Employing process tracing, we consult a variety of rich archival resources including primary language documents to study a number of historical cases including late colonial wars during the interwar period, and Middle Eastern civil wars since the late twentieth century. Building on Judith Butler’s distinction of grievable and ungrievable lives and Didier Fassin’s notion of politics of life, we argue that the anti-CW norm has never had universal status and always remained conditional on a hierarchy of victims. CW attacks targeting certain groups have been more readily justifiable and generated ineffective and inconsistent third-party reactions. Consequently, certain groups, who are implicitly or explicitly perceived to be outside the pale of civilised order, remain more vulnerable to CW attacks than others.

摘要

反对化学武器准则被认为是对有毒战争方法的有力而普遍的限制。然而，在叙利亚内战期间，连续不断的CW袭击使人们对该国际规范的健全性提出了质疑。在什么条件下，第三方应重点制裁违反规范的人？我们采用历史的方法，分析了二十世纪初以来连续波攻击特征的话语和上下文动态。我们使用过程跟踪功能，查阅各种丰富的档案资源，包括主要语言的文献，以研究许多历史案例，包括两次世界大战期间的后期殖民战争和20世纪后期以来的中东内战。在朱迪思·巴特勒（Judith Butler）对悲惨生活和不悲惨生活的区分以及迪迪埃·法森（Didier Fassin）的生活政治概念的基础上，我们认为反CW规范从未具有普遍地位，并且始终以受害者的等级为条件。针对某些群体的CW攻击更容易被证明是合理的，并且产生了无效且不一致的第三方反应。因此，被隐式或显式地认为处于文明秩序之外的某些群体比其他群体更容易受到CW攻击。