A bit late now, perhaps, but:
1) Assad is winning the war
2) The US said it wasn't going to ally with the rebels anymore
3) Turkey is supposedly the witness and Turkey have close ties to the rebels
4) Russia removed any chemical weapons Syria had in 2013 and there has been no evidence of them acquiring more
It's based on the word of Turkey, who have vested interest in the rebels and somehow were able to get ambulances and equipment safely to and from a warzone
The US wasn't going to aid the rebels anymore so the only people that had a motive for the attack are the rebels themselves to drag USA in
I read these counterpoints after my previous post and decided to research them, since it would color my understanding of, and the validity of, the theory I've proposed.
I started with the fourth, expecting to work my way backwards. It became quite a task, and I'm still on the clock, so I'll have to leave it at point number 4 for now and work my way backwards to 1 over the day.
4) This one operates in two parts. Firstly, the agency of Russia, and secondly, the removal of the weapons.
As Russia is a major player in the current conflict, and a key contributor to and supporter of the UN Security Council resolution to disarm Syria's chemical stockpile in the first place, it would stand to reason that they might see any action counter to that arrangement as a personal besmirch, and therefore act to resolve that as best as possible.
This is why I find it odd that
the only involvement I can find regarding Russia is an offer of military observers to help oversee operations. The evidence of destruction I could find on short notice indicated that the primary burden of destroying its most dangerous agents involved shipping them to facilities in the United States and Europe, or
destroying them aboard the MV Cape Ray, an American vessel deployed in the eastern Mediterranean for that express purpose.
Without Russia's assistance the resolution never would have passed and the destruction likely never implemented, so this is not to discredit them per se. But I would advise crediting them solely, even implicitly. They were far from lone actors.
Also it's worth noting that the resolution did not complete in 2013, though it did pass on September 23rd of that year. In fact, even with
the last of them shipped out for destruction on June 23, 2014, the official OPCW confirmation that the declared stockpile was destroyed
did not occur until January 4, 2015.
And then, in May 2015, a report came out that OPCW inspectors found
traces of precursors necessary to make the sarin and VX nerve agents at a military research site in December 2014 and January 2015. The site was undisclosed to the OPCW at the time.
And it's not a matter of definition or slip of materials, as these precursors are the way those agents are normally stored. Sarin degrades rapidly in highly acidic environments, and production creates hydrofluoric acid or hydrochloric acid depending on the production method. Sarin itself
typically breaks down in a matter of weeks to months, whereas a binary munition made of the precursors
has a shelf life of up to five years. Finally, the primary precursor to sarin, methylphosphonyl difluoride,
is a Schedule I substance to the CWC, whether it's mixed already or not.
This all assumes that Sarin was the chemical used in the attack. It makes no judgement on who pulled the trigger, because at present that is irrelevant. Turkey claims Assad's regime struck with it intentionally. Assad claims he was striking a rebel munitions facility and that there must have been chemicals stored there that he was unaware of when ordering the strike.
But neither denies the aftermath, and
the symptoms and recovery methods are consistent with exposure to sarin, quoting doctors treating the affected in Sarmin Field Hospital, which is supported by the Syrian-American Medical Society in Idlib. Presumably that makes them independent of at least Turkey.
I'm going to be at this for a while, I fear.