Chemical Attack on Sardasht 1987

Chemical Attack on Sardasht 1987

Sardasht Chemical Attack – 1987, the regime targeted the border city of Sardasht in Eastern Kurdistan, as well as the nearby village of Rasheh Hermeh, with prohibited chemical weapons, particularly mustard gas. This attack was one of the major crimes committed by the Ba’ath regime during the Iran–Iraq War and is regarded as the first chemical attack against a civilian city inside Iranian territory.

Before the chemical bombing of Sardasht, the Ba’ath regime had already targeted dozens of civilian villages and areas in Southern Kurdistan, including Sheikh Wasan, Balisan, and many other areas in the governorates of Erbil, Sulaymaniyah, and Duhok. Those attacks led to the killing, injury, disappearance, and long-term suffering of hundreds of civilians.

Human Losses and Long-Term Effects

In the first hours after the chemical attack on Sardasht, 10 people lost their lives and more than 650 others were severely injured. More than 8,000 residents of the area were exposed to toxic gas. Over time, the number of deaths reached 130, of whom 109 were civilians and 21 were military personnel.

Among the victims, 39 were under the age of 18, and 11 children were under the age of five. In addition, 34 women and girls were among those killed. These figures show that the attack was not merely a military assault but a direct attack against civilian life, families, children, and an unprotected community.

The mustard gas used in the attack caused severe injuries to the skin, eyes, and respiratory system. Its effects did not end at the moment of the attack; they have continued in the form of long-term illnesses, including respiratory problems, eye damage, cancer, infertility, weakened immune systems, and lasting psychological suffering. Many survivors of Sardasht still live with the consequences of this crime, without adequate medical treatment and without full health and legal support.

Judicial Efforts and Obstacles to Justice

After the chemical bombing of Sardasht, judicial efforts at the domestic, regional, and international levels remained limited and incomplete. One of these efforts appeared in 2004 in Iranian courts, when the Public Court of Tehran, in connection with the damages caused by the chemical attacks of the Iraqi Ba’ath regime, held the United States responsible for supporting Saddam Hussein’s government and for assisting the military and chemical capabilities of the Ba’ath regime.

According to news reports, the Tehran court ordered the United States to pay 600 million dollars in compensation to the victims of the chemical attacks. The ruling was issued within the framework of the allegation that the United States had politically, militarily, and technically supported Saddam Hussein’s regime at a time when that regime was using chemical weapons against civilians and military personnel. The ruling was also communicated to the American side through the Swiss Embassy in Tehran, which represented U.S. interests in Iran.

At the international level, the case of Frans van Anraat before the court in The Hague, the Netherlands, had particular importance. Van Anraat was a Dutch businessman who, during the Iran–Iraq War, sold chemical materials and precursors to Saddam Hussein’s government. Those materials were later used in the production of chemical weapons, particularly mustard gas. Dutch courts convicted him of complicity in war crimes because those materials had been used in the Iraqi regime’s chemical attacks against civilians and military personnel in Iran and Kurdistan.

The importance of this case lies in the fact that, in one of the rare examples, a businessman and supplier of chemical materials—not a government or military official—was punished by a European court for participation in war crimes. This demonstrates that responsibility for chemical weapons does not rest only on those who give the order to attack; it also extends to the commercial, technical, and international networks that enabled the Ba’ath regime to commit such crimes.

During the trial of Van Anraat, victims and survivors of chemical attacks played an important role through their evidence and testimonies. Among them was Qader Mawlanpour, known as Mam Qader, a survivor of the chemical bombing of Sardasht, who appeared before the court as a witness and recounted his experience and the tragedy of losing his family in the attack. His testimony, along with similar testimonies, showed that the chemical bombing of Sardasht was not merely a domestic or border incident, but part of a broader policy of chemical-weapons use by the Ba’ath regime.

Although the Van Anraat case was legally significant, it could not provide full justice for all victims and survivors of Sardasht. The case mainly brought one supplier of chemical materials before the court, while the responsibility of the state, commanders, military institutions, and the wider international network that facilitated chemical weapons for the Ba’ath regime was never fully prosecuted.

After the fall of the Ba’ath regime and the establishment of the Iraqi High Tribunal, the survivors of Sardasht attempted to submit their case to that court. However, the Iraqi High Tribunal, established under Law No. 10 of 2005 to investigate and try the crimes of the Ba’ath regime, rejected the Sardasht case on the grounds that the attack took place outside Iraqi territory and therefore fell outside the jurisdiction of the court.

For the survivors and the families of the victims, this rejection was not merely a legal obstacle; it was a continuation of injustice. The attack had been carried out by the Iraqi Ba’ath regime, using prohibited chemical weapons against civilians, and  was directly connected to the Iraqi state’s policy of chemical-weapons use during the Ba’ath era.

Forgotten Justice and Continuing Suffering

Although estimates indicate that nearly 8,000 people in Sardasht and its surrounding areas were exposed to chemical gas and injured, only around 1,500 people have so far been officially registered as chemical victims. This major gap between the number of those exposed and the number officially registered reflects a deep administrative, legal, and humanitarian problem.

Reports and survivors’ testimonies speak of corruption, disorder, discrimination, and incompleteness in the process of registration and official recognition of victims. While the anniversary of the chemical bombing of Sardasht is commemorated every year and symbolic sympathy is expressed, that sympathy has not been transformed into legal justice, practical compensation, sustained medical treatment, or full and official recognition for all victims.

Conclusion

The chemical bombing of Sardasht was a war crime and a crime against humanity, a crime committed by the Iraqi Ba’ath regime, through the use of prohibited chemical weapons, against civilians. This crime has still not received full justice at the domestic or international level. Although the testimony of Sardasht survivors in the Frans van Anraat trial in The Hague had historical and legal importance, it alone could not bring full justice to the victims and their families.

To this day, many chemically injured survivors of Sardasht continue to suffer physically and psychologically. Courts, human rights institutions, states, and the international community have failed to assume full responsibility and provide justice for the victims and survivors.

The chemical bombing of Sardasht remains a living testimony to the brutality of the Ba’ath regime and its use of chemical weapons against Kurds. This crime is not merely a matter of the past; it is a continuing call for recognition, justice, compensation, treatment for survivors, and prevention of the recurrence of crimes against humanity.

References

[1]: Kurdistan Genocide National Archive – KGNA (https://kgna.krd/ku/12644)

[2]: Sardasht Chemical Victims Research Center – Urmia University of Medical Sciences

[3]: WHO Report on Long-term Effects of Sulfur Mustard, 2009

[4]: Tehran Public Court Ruling, published via Payvand News Archive, 2004

[5]: Iraqi High Criminal Court – Law No. 10 of 2005

[6]: Frans van Anraat Trial, Netherlands – Hearing on 1 December 2005

[7]: Martyrs Foundation & Iranian Parliamentary Research Center Report, 2020