On 16 March 1988, Iraqi forces attacked Halabja with chemical weapons during the Iran–Iraq War. Thousands of people were killed, and survivors were left with injuries, bereavement and disrupted lives. The attack became one of the most widely remembered crimes committed against Kurdish civilians under Saddam Hussein's government. Understanding Halabja requires attention both to what happened that day and to the wider campaign of persecution surrounding it. Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons: The Fires Project; Human Rights Watch: Genocide in Iraq.

What happened at Halabja?

Halabja had fallen to Iranian forces and Kurdish guerrillas before Iraqi forces launched the chemical attack. The OPCW's account identifies the use of multiple chemical agents, including mustard gas and nerve agents. Civilian residents were exposed in their own town. Some survivors received treatment abroad, while many continued to live with physical and psychological consequences long after the war ended. OPCW account and survivor documentary.

The death toll is commonly given as about 5,000, but the evidence should not be presented as an exact final count. Human Rights Watch reported a documented figure of approximately 3,200 deaths and noted that the actual total might exceed 5,000. These estimates describe a mass atrocity; uncertainty about the final number does not change the scale of the civilian loss. Human Rights Watch: Justice for Iraq.

Halabja and the Anfal campaign

The attack occurred during a broader assault on Kurdish communities. In its investigation of Anfal, Human Rights Watch documented village destruction, forced displacement, detention and mass killing. Its account describes eight formally designated military operations between February and September 1988. It also makes an important distinction: the Halabja attack was separate from those named Anfal operations, although it belongs within the history of the Iraqi government's violence against the Kurds. HRW: The Anfal operations; HRW: Halabja and the operational distinction.

Keeping that distinction helps explain the history accurately. “Halabja” identifies a particular attack and its victims. “Anfal” identifies a wider, organised campaign with its own sequence of operations. Remembering the relationship between them should also preserve the individual experiences of communities attacked elsewhere.

How was responsibility documented?

Survivor accounts are essential to the historical record, alongside records produced by the institutions responsible for the violence. In its 1994 study of captured Iraqi documents, Human Rights Watch examined state orders and communications and found evidence supporting Iraqi responsibility for Halabja and genocidal intent in the campaign against Kurdish communities. Such documentation matters because it connects individual experiences to decisions and structures of command. Human Rights Watch: Bureaucracy of Repression.

For students and researchers, a useful method is to compare testimony, documentary evidence and later investigations while noting what each source can establish. An eyewitness can describe their own experience; an official record may reveal an order, a transfer or an institution's role. Reading these forms of evidence together gives a fuller account than relying on a single photograph or repeated statistic.

The consequences for survivors

The effects of Halabja did not end with the immediate deaths. A qualitative study published in 2019 interviewed sixteen civilian survivors with long-term respiratory symptoms following sulfur-mustard exposure. Participants described breathing difficulties and other health concerns, alongside restrictions on work, family life and social participation. Because this was a small, selected interview study, its findings illuminate lived experience rather than establish rates for every survivor. PLOS ONE: Health perspectives among Halabja survivors.

A separate study published in JAMA Network Open in 2023 interviewed 143 survivors. Approximately half met the study's screening thresholds for probable post-traumatic stress disorder or depression. The researchers also examined the relationship between trauma, perceived recognition by family and community, and mental-health symptoms. These were observational findings from a recruited sample, not a diagnosis of an entire city or proof that one factor alone caused later illness. Neldner and colleagues: Social acknowledgment and mental health.

Remembrance and prevention

Each 16 March, remembrance brings attention back to the people killed and those still living with the consequences. In its 2026 commemoration, the OPCW connected respect for Halabja's victims with the continuing rejection of chemical weapons. It also recalled the significance of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which entered into force in 1997. OPCW: Commemoration of the 1988 attack.

For an educational account, remembrance also means preserving names, testimony and reliable records, explaining uncertainty honestly, and recognising survivors as people with continuing lives and needs. Halabja should be studied with that care: as a documented atrocity, a profound loss for Kurdish society, and a continuing responsibility to listen, record and prevent repetition.