DISINFO: OPCW suppressed key evidence in Douma chemical attack probe
DISINFORMATION CASE DETAILS
  • Outlet: RT English ( archived) *
  • Date of publication: October 23, 2019
  • Outlet language(s): English
  • Countries / regions discussed: Syria

DISINFO: OPCW suppressed key evidence in Douma chemical attack probe

SUMMARY

The OPCW skewed its own investigation of the 2018 chemical weapons incident in Douma, Syria to come to a predetermined decision. The accusation is based on evidence and testimony of an OPCW investigator, who came forward with damning evidence that his own organization had breached its mission. A member of the panel which questioned the whistleblower also reprinted an OPCW engineering assessment leaked in May 2019. The document rejects the claim that chlorine cylinders, which were used for delivery of the toxic gas in Douma, had been dropped from the air, which was used as a key argument in accusing the Syrian army for the attack.

RESPONSE

The story advances a recurring pro-Kremlin narrative seeking to absolve the Assad regime of responsibility for chemical attacks perpetrated in the course of the Syrian civil war, as well as to undermine the credibility and independence of the OPCW. The value of the panel's alleged findings is summarized in the following passage from the story itself: "The panel did not make public the name of the whistleblower or any previously unpublished evidence of the OPCW’s alleged misconduct." It therefore does nothing to challenge the OPCW's conclusions regarding the Douma incident. Rather than present actual proof of OPCW wrongdoing, a member of the panel reprinted - for no apparent reason - a technical note by an OPCW engineer (not an investigator) which was leaked from the organisation in May 2019. Similarly, the note does nothing to disprove the OPCW's published findings. See here for our debunk of this claim.

Embed

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.