Thread by @sumlenny

#BREAKING Ukrainian army confirmed the case of Russia using tear gas on Ukrainian troops. The rumours about Russia using a combination drone+K51 tear gas canister circulated for a longer time, but now they are officially confirmed. Why is this VERY significant? THREAD 1/x

https://twitter.com/GeneralStaffUA/status/1580160578563100672

Usage of tear gas can look innocent, as it is being used by police against riots worldwide. Some chemicals causing vision irrigation can be even purchased by civilians (pepper spray). Still, in a war situation ist is very different. Tear gas is banned by intl. conventions 2/x

In 1925, in Geneva the "Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare" was signed. Although it did not define the banned gases, "other gases" wording lets to include tear gas into the basket 3/x

For decades, undersigning nations acknowledged, that tear gas was at least meant by some of signing parties. The U.S. for ex. extra defended its right to use tear gas amid wars for the purpose of riot-control (de facto acknowledging that tear gas is included into the protocol)4/x

In 1960s, amid the Vietnam war, the communist countries led by the USSR, demanded in the UN to categorise any usage of tear gas by the U.S. as a usage of chemical warfare. 5/x

In 1969, UN Secretary General Thant recommended to renews the protocol with a clear wording, covering the usage of tear gas and other harassing agents. Most nations supported this broad interpretation as well. 6/x

Well, after this historical reminder, what do we have now? Russia has already used tear gas on civilians in Kherson in early weeks of the invasion. This could be covered by Russians as a "riot control" interpretation (if the question of per se criminal aggression is ignored) 7/x

Now they use tear gas on Ukrainian soldiers in a combat situation. This case exceeds any (debatable) interpretation of the 1925 Protocol. This (if confirmed) is a clear use of chemical warfare. Now we come to the PR trick. In public opinion, "chemical warfare" is smth lethal 8/x

A news like "Russia uses chemical warfare in Ukraine" wakes images of Syria with sarin nerve agent gas, or WWI with chlorine. The initial public outrage will be changed by skepticism "oh, we thought it was REAL chemical warfare, not some police gas". Moreover, Russians use... 9/x

...K-51 tear gas canisters which are designed for drill purpose. In Russian army, conscripts who are trained to use gas masks, can be put into conditions, where K-51 canisters are being activated to let conscripts feel how gas can intrude an improperly worn mask. 10/x

So out of (absolutely true from the perspective of intl law) news "Russians use chemical warfare" a news "Ukrainians exaggerate" comes. I think, this is the real purpose of Russian actions. They try to push the limits of possible. To prepare the ground for a real gas attack. 11/x

Even if they won't use lethal gas, they distort and erase the limits of legality, and enforce their narrative "nothing is true". This development is extremely dangerous and must be observed with all the vigilance. END.

PS Russians can also try to check how good are Ukrainian troops trained in countering chemical attacks.