Under pressure, OPCW fails to assign blame for Ghouta chemical attack

Summary

Although many were quick to blame the Assad government for the 2013 chemical attack on Ghouta, questions remain as to who launched the sarin projectiles which killed hundreds of civilians. The OPCW Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) has been tasked to do precisely that, but it has been unsuccessful.

The big question is to what extent the OPCW and the UN have been subjected to external pressure to generate particular findings. It seems that the mission which was established to find out who bears the blame for chemical attacks is quite selective as to which facts to look for.

Disproof

The report advances recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives attempting to acquit the Assad regime of all responsibility for chemical attacks in Syria, and casting doubt on the integrity and independence of the OPCW.

It is true that responsibility for the August 2013 Ghouta attack is yet to be assigned. However, the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission was never meant to either gather evidence pertaining to the attack or apportion blame for it, in large part because the FFM would not exist for another eight months. It was set up on 29 April 2014, was granted a field mandate covering the period between 3 and 31 May 2014, and produced its first summary report on 16 June 2014. Even if the OPCW had been in charge of the probe, it would not have been able to identify the culprits - the organization was only granted the authority to do so in June 2018.

Moreover, the FFM mission was not established to identify the perpetrators of chemical attacks, but to "identify facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals, reportedly chlorine, for hostile purposes in the Syrian Arab Republic”. Assigning blame was originally the responsibility of the UNSC Joint Investigative Mechanism, before its mandate expired in late 2017. In April 2018, Russia vetoed the Security Council resolution to extend its mandate.

The Ghouta attack was investigated by a UN Mission set up by the UN Secretary General, and its findings were contained in a report published in September 2013. The OPCW and the WHO played an important but auxiliary role throughout the process (ibid., p. 4).

The charge that both the OPCW and the UN are subject to "external pressure" is made without evidence. The fact that the statement is framed as "the big question" and left unsupported by facts betrays its real function - to confuse, rather than inform. See here for our list of resources on pro-Kremlin disinformation techniques.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 162
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 21/08/2019
  • Language/target audience: English
  • Country: Russia, Syria
  • Keywords: OPCW, Chemical weapons/attack, Propaganda, Syrian War
  • Outlet: RT News@ RT, time 13:33-19:10
see more

The EU is built on anti-European values, Russia is real Europe

Following the meeting with Vladimir Putin, Emmanuel Macron published a post in Facebook calling Russia “a deeply European country” and hoping to see Europe “extending from Lisbon to Vladivostok.” However Macron’s acceptance of Russia into Europe is not a reason for joy. In fact, present-time Russia is more European than France. It is Moscow who defends European traditions and a high level of European culture, not Paris.

The EU replaced ancient European fundamental traditions with a cocktail of liberalism, feminism, LGBT-activism and anti-European leftist rhetoric.The present-time EU values are not European values but their negation.

The doctrines of tolerance and multiculturalism are also an attack against European heritage. The less valuable aspects of Western culture such as scientific achievements, comfort, and liberalism are triumphing, whereas its core values, that is Christianity, European individualism, the rule of law, intellectual freedom, and high culture are undermined.

Traditionalists and Eurosceptics look at Russia with hope and take Vladimir Putin as Messiah. Therefore, who has to accept whom into Europe is an open question.

Disproof

This message is in line with a recurring pro-Kremlin narrative about the West's moral decay aimed at portraying Russia as superior to the West in terms of values and morals. 'Threatened values' is one of the most common narratives used by pro-Kremlin outlets.

See earlier cases alleging that in contrast to Russia, western Europe is abandoning Christian roots and that unlike Russia, the West is not about fairness or solidarity and it degrades traditional values and endangers societies. Furthermore, all-Russian history is highly moral as opposed to the Western one, which is full of violence and evil, and all high-ranking politicians in the Baltic states are likely implicated in paedophilia.

No proof of Russian meddling in French and European elections

There is no proof of Russian interference in the French and European elections.

 

Disproof

Recurring disinformation narrative that there is no proof of Russian interference in the elections in Western countries - see examples here and here.

In reality, there is plenty of evidence of Russian state actors interfering in electoral processes.

Even Trump and his colleagues don’t argue with the results of the Crimean referendum

Russia saw the US’s intention to establish an American or NATO naval base in Crimea. Russia managed to organise the defence of the Russian-speaking population of the peninsula and a referendum. Even Trump and his colleagues do not argue with the referendum’s results.

 

Disproof

The article contains several recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about the annexation of Crimea.

The claim that NATO or the US was planning to base ships and missiles in Crimea is fiction. The idea has never been proposed, suggested or discussed within NATO.