DISINFO: OPCW report on Khan Sheikhoun chemical attack ignores data ruling out Assad's involvement
DISINFORMATION CASE DETAILS
  • Outlet: RT English (archived)*
  • Date of publication: August 21, 2019
  • Outlet language(s): English
  • Reported in: Issue 162
  • Countries / regions discussed: Syria
Tags:
OPCW Khan Sheikhoun Propaganda Chemical weapons/attack Syrian War

DISINFO: OPCW report on Khan Sheikhoun chemical attack ignores data ruling out Assad's involvement

SUMMARY

The 2017 OPCW report on the Khan Shaykhoun chemical attack provides an extensive analysis of the incident, but somehow overlooks the fact that the closest any government aircraft came to the settlement that day was 5 km. This effectively rules out the possibility of an airstrike and casts doubt on the version holding Damascus responsible for the attack.

Secondly, the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission’s (FFM) analysis does not explain how some victims of the attack could have been transported to a hospital 125km away from Khan Shaykhoun just 30 minutes after the incident.

RESPONSE

Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative denying the Assad regime's responsibility for chemical attacks in Syria, and questioning the integrity of the OPCW.

Both observations pertaining to the 2017 Khan Shaykhoun attack are taken grossly out of context. The joint OPCW-UN report on the incident does state that "the closest to Khan Shaykhoun that the aircraft had flown has been approximately 5km away" (p. 24, para 28), but immediately goes on to cite a weapons expert as saying that "it would be possible for such an aerial bomb to be dropped on the town from the aforementioned distances" (ibid., para 30).

The JIT analysis also notes "discrepancies" in the timeframes and locations of hospital admissions (p. 31, para 77), but does not consider them "of such a nature as to call into question the aforementioned findings" (p. 10, para 46(i)).

Embed

Related disinfo cases

Disclaimer

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.

    Your opinion matters!

    Data Protection Information *

      Subscribe to the Disinfo Review

      Your weekly update on pro-Kremlin disinformation

      Data Protection Information *

      The Disinformation Review is sent through Mailchimp.com. See Mailchimp’s privacy policy and find out more on how EEAS protects your personal data.