Chemical Weapons Experts Urge Urgent Probe Into Alleged Sudanese Military Chlorine Attacks

Chemical weapons experts have called for an international inquiry into allegations that Sudan's military has developed chlorine bombs, following reports of their use in the civil war. Former investigators have told The National that material examined in a media probe appeared consistent with a rudimentary chemical weapons programme. They stressed the urgency for an investigation by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) into allegations that the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) developed and used chlorine-filled munitions.

The allegations were detailed by The Washington Post after it examined videos, documents, photographs and messages, which indicated a secret Sudanese chemical weapons programme, including the manufacture and testing of chlorine bombs. There is also evidence that the SAF, led by Gen Abdel Fattah Al Burhan, used chemical weapons in attacks in 2024 and 2025, dropped by its Su-24 bombers. The civil war erupted in April 2023 during a power struggle between the SAF and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Gen Al Burhan has vowed to continue fighting until the RSF is defeated, rejecting repeated attempts by the US and regional powers to broker a ceasefire. Both forces have been accused of grave abuse during the conflict.

Philip Ingram, who spent 26 years in British military intelligence and was a specialist in chemical and nuclear weapons, said the SAF could have constructed a rudimentary programme. The material it obtained could be made into a weapon relatively easily. “All you need is a canister that can hold the gas under pressure," he said. "Then you just need an explosive device to make it detonate.” Sudanese officials would also know its limitations, particularly in Sudan's hot climate where the toxins would have been rapidly dispersed.

The OPCW has disclosed to The National that several countries have made a formal request “to obtain clarification from Sudan regarding allegations of chemical weapons use”. Dr Gareth Williams, a former senior OPCW official, said the material he had examined was “troubling” and “would warrant further investigation because it looks on the surface like a chemical weapons programme”. “We can see fabrication and adaptation of gas canisters for delivery as munitions,” he told The National. “So that's significant because it's a breach of the Chemical Weapons Convention [CWC] straight away, the manufacture of something intended to disperse a toxic gas.”

Lennie Phillips, a former OPCW investigator who worked on the destruction of Russia's chemical weapons programme after the Cold War, was shown the evidence. “This could quite conceivably be a chemical weapons programme, with the use of chlorine as a chemical weapon, but there was insufficient information as to whether it had actually been used,” he said. Video footage he had seen appeared to show an ability to fill a canister. “We saw these bombs with a mechanism that could be used to break open the canisters,” he said. “It was all consistent with a chemical weapons programme.”

Dr Williams, who worked as a scientist at Britain's renowned Porton Down chemical and biological defence laboratory, said photographs from the reports showed the “characteristic colour of chlorine, which is yellowy-green”. He said there was evidence of what appeared to be a rudimentary cylinder-filling facility, involving the transfer of material from larger barrels into smaller containers. It has been reported that other former OPCW officials spoke to eight witnesses in Nairobi, Kenya, where thousands of Sudanese refugees had fled to escape the continuing war.

Chlorine is a widely available industrial chemical largely used for household water, making it relatively easy to obtain compared to more sophisticated chemical warfare agents. Western intelligence agencies, including the CIA, MI6 and French intelligence service DGSE, would be examining the claims, Mr Ingram said. The allegations now present the OPCW and its member states with a question of whether enough evidence exists to trigger a formal inquiry. Since 1999, Sudan has been signed up to the CWC, which prohibits the development, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons.

Col Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former British Army chemical warfare specialist who worked covertly in Syria to obtain samples from chemical attacks for the International Criminal Court, said the evidence clearly indicated chlorine being weaponised. “Chemical weapons are a poor man's nuclear weapon and they are morbidly effective, dead easy to use,” he said. Chlorine is particularly dangerous against civilians sheltering in enclosed spaces, he added, noting its devastating impact on the respiratory system.