Disinfo: The OPCW has a policy of throwing baseless accusations 


Russia may consider withdrawing from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), if the organisation continues its policy of bias against certain countries.

The accusations levelled against the Syrian authorities of using chemical weapons, Moscow and Damascus confirmed that there is no evidence of these accusations.

What happened with the former client, Sergey Skripal, and the activist, Alexei Navalny, also comes in the context of the bias of the organisation that did not base its statements on any facts or evidence.

The OPCW is an important organisation, although it is losing its credibility.


Recurring disinformation narratives attacking the independence and integrity of the OPCW and a disinformation narrative about the Salisbury and Navalny poisonings.

According to the OPCW's Director-General, the organisation has been targeted by a disinformation campaign when it granted new powers to assign blame for chemical attacks. 18 countries issued a joint statement, which called for an end to the unacceptable Russian defamation of the OPCW. Regarding the other allegations in the article:


The OPCW conducts probes into all allegations of chemical weapons' use in Syria, and its findings serve as the basis for publicly available reports and expert notes, and in its last report issued on October 1st concerning Saraqib, the OPCW was clear by stating that it has based its findings on “sample analysis, data examination and witness interviews”, and “materials that were made available by the interviewees, and hospital records… including information provided by the Syrian Arab Republic and others”.


Following the Salisbury attack, the United Kingdom notified the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), invited them to confirm the identity of the substance involved, and briefed members of the Security Council. The OPCW’s independent expert laboratories confirmed the UK’s identification of the Russian produced Novichok nerve agent, while emphasising that the OPCW team “worked independently and was not involved in the national investigation by the UK authorities", to ensure the integrity of the examinations and investigations.


Clinical findings at the Charité hospital indicated that Navalny was poisoned with a chemical nerve agent of the Novichok group.

These findings were later independently corroborated by labs in France and Sweden, and finally confirmed by the OPCW, which stated that [t]he biomarkers of the cholinesterase inhibitor found in Mr Navalny’s blood and urine samples have similar structural characteristics to the toxic chemicals belonging to schedules 1.A.14 and 1.A.15."

The OPCW's supposed complicity in "suppressing" the truth is a standard talking point in pro-Kremlin reporting on Syria. See our previous debunking of this narrative here, here, here, and here.

Read previous disinformation claims alleging that the chemical attacks in Syria have been staged and filmed by the media of the Western countries; that the Navalny poisoning could be a strategy of the West to introduce anti-Russian sanctions, that Russia is accused of poisoning without proof; or that US used Navalny case to block Russian vaccine against COVID-19.


Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

The West is considering a military attack against Russia despite its nuclear capabilities

The West realises that its global positions in economic, military, and political spheres are eroding. Hence it decided to slow down the development of other countries, Russia and China in the first place. The West carries out an information war, prevents Russia from getting foreign investment and new technologies. This is a classic imperialistic war similar to previous global wars. Two World Wars erupted due to controversies among capitalist countries. The West is contained by nuclear arms, but nuclear fear is diminishing. In the end, the western countries can start direct military conflict against Russia notwithstanding its nuclear capabilities.


This publication is consistent with recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about the disintegration of the West and western bodies, imperialist aggressive West aiming to encircle Russia and to destabilise China. It also promotes historical revisionism about WWII by putting the blame on capitalist countries.

The claim about West's and NATO's plans to wage a war against Russia was addressed on NATO's official website: "Any claims that NATO is preparing an attack on Russia are absurd."

Ukraine is a successful Western project against Russia, Belarus may soon become one too

Ukraine is the most successful Western project in the framework of its strategy against Russia. They managed to establish an absolute monopoly and control in this country. They are able to control and to coordinate the activities of state structures aimed at implementing their strategy in relation to Russia. Now, they are trying to do the same with Belarus.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative alleging that Ukraine is under external control and Russophobic.

Ukraine is a sovereign state. Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are respected by almost the whole world, including the EU. The EU and the US work closely with Ukraine and support the democratic development of Ukraine in accordance with the UN Charter’s principles of non-interference into internal affairs and respect towards territorial integrity and political independence.

Euromaidan was an armed coup that resulted in an illegitimate transit of power

There was an armed seizure of state power. People, who would never have received this power honestly and in elections, made a lot of laws for themselves that justified their power and began to plunder. Ukraine was left without a future.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative on Euromaidan depicting the 2013-14 protests in Kyiv as a coup.

There was no armed coup in Ukraine seven years ago. The demonstrations which began in Kyiv in November 2013 – called "Maidan", or "Euromaidan" – were a result of the Ukrainian people's frustration with former President Yanukovych's last minute U-turn when, after seven years of negotiation, he refused to sign the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement and halted progress towards Ukraine's closer relationship with the EU as a result of Russian pressure.