In its first official stance at this level, the United States said that the Sudanese army used chemical weapons, and demanded that the Port Sudan authority submit a comprehensive declaration of its chemical program, allow international field verification and inspection operations without restrictions, and implicitly hinted at the ineligibility of Sudan to continue its membership in the organization's Executive Council as long as it is not complying with its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

This came in a speech delivered by the United States before the 112th session of the organization's Executive Council, held in The Hague, Netherlands, under the item titled 'Addressing the Threat Posed by the Use of Chemical Weapons (Sudan).'

Washington said its independent national technical assessments, based on 'rigorous and independent technical analysis,' concluded that the Sudanese army used chemical weapons during 2024 and remained in non-compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention during 2025, affirming that the prohibition on the use of these weapons is 'absolute and non-negotiable' under Article I of the Convention.

In a notable escalation, the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Nicole Shampine, stated in the U.S. national statement before the same session that the Sudanese army used 'chlorine as a chemical weapon,' marking the first official U.S. statement publicly specifying the type of chemical substance Washington accuses the Sudanese army of using.

The United States demanded that the Port Sudan authority begin procedures to return to compliance by submitting a comprehensive and accurate declaration to the OPCW Technical Secretariat, including all information related to chemical facilities and weapons in Sudan, followed by allowing immediate, transparent, and unimpeded access for OPCW teams to conduct a comprehensive field verification process.

Washington rejected considering the National Technical Committee formed by the Port Sudan authority as a substitute for international verification mechanisms, stressing that internal mechanisms do not replace compliance with the Convention or independent verification.

It also clarified that it did not send any personnel to Sudan to conduct independent investigations, nor did it supervise or direct any internal investigation carried out by the Sudanese committee, noting that it merely informed the authorities in Sudan of its assessment results and urged them to fulfill their international obligations.

The United States affirmed that the continued failure of the army-dominated Port Sudan authority to return to compliance has resulted in new punitive measures, noting that it has already imposed a second round of sanctions under U.S. law due to Port Sudan's failure to meet required conditions.

At the same time, it affirmed that it remains ready to work with them to resolve this issue, but stressed that compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention is not an option but a legal international obligation.

In the sharpest part of the speech, the United States considered that the credibility of the OPCW is at stake, and said that a state party that has used chemical weapons and failed to return to compliance should not continue its membership in the organization's Executive Council.

Related news

It also called on member states to uphold the integrity of the Chemical Weapons Convention and protect the credibility of the international treaty system, demanding that the selection of Executive Council members be limited to states that fully and verifiably comply with all their obligations under the Convention, in a direct reference to Sudan's current membership held de facto by the Port Sudan authority in the OPCW Executive Council.

This statement is among the harshest U.S. positions towards the Port Sudan authority regarding accusations of chemical weapons use, which Washington asserts and which are also documented by several human rights reports and international journalistic investigations stating that the Sudanese army used them in its war against the Rapid Support Forces. The statement not only renewed the accusation of the Sudanese army using chemical weapons but also included the first official U.S. identification of the chemical substance used, chlorine, and linked continued non-compliance with the state's eligibility to participate in the organization's governance, in a diplomatic escalation reflecting Washington's insistence on subjecting the Port Sudan authority to an independent international investigation and full verification of its compliance with its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.