Germany must offer official apology to Iran
By Abed Akbari
International affairs analyst
June 28 marks the anniversary of the chemical attack carried out by Iraq’s former leader Saddam Hussein against the Iranian city of Sardasht in 1987. This attack resulted in the deaths of 110 civilians and injuries to more than 8,000 others. Although it remains one of the gravest instances of chemical weapons being used against a civilian population, the people of Iran were in fact subjected to more than 3,500 chemical attacks throughout the eight-year Iran-Iraq War (1980-88), leaving over 50,000 people dead or suffering lifelong injuries. More than three decades later, survivors and the Iranian government continue to bear the physical, psychological, and financial consequences of these irreversible and devastating attacks.
While the former Iraqi regime bears direct responsibility as the principal perpetrator of these crimes, an equally important issue concerns the responsibility of those states that indirectly facilitated these atrocities through the supply of chemical materials and technology. In international law, this is commonly referred to as responsibility in connection with the wrongful act of another state.
The International Law Commission's Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001) and the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (2011) recognize the concept of responsibility arising from assistance or aid provided to another actor in committing an internationally wrongful act. According to these provisions, a state incurs international responsibility if: (a) it aids or assists another state in the commission of an internationally wrongful act with knowledge of the circumstances of that act; and (b) the act would have been internationally wrongful if committed by the assisting state itself. A state may argue that it lacked knowledge of the wrongful conduct or that its contribution was not decisive. However, the International Law Commission deliberately set a relatively low threshold for such responsibility.
The Commentary to the relevant article makes clear that it is sufficient for the assistance to make a significant contribution to the commission of the wrongful act; it need not constitute the determining or indispensable factor. Exporting large quantities of chemical precursors and specialized equipment intended for the production of chemical weapons to a state already known to possess and use such weapons clearly satisfies the requirements of both knowledge and substantial contribution.
Page 2