OPCW has a very poor Syria record (where it accepted second hand samples from al-Qaeda), and is nonplussed about Russia not receiving a sample as required by the Chemical Weapons Convention which established it
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is supposed to implement provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Its mandate includes conducting “credible and transparent” on-site inspections to verify whether claims about use of CWs is accurate – what it failed to do in Syria after CW attacks by terrorists falsely blamed on Damascus.
Instead it used fabricated information off-site – supplied by al-Qaeda-linked White Helmets and other disreputable anti-Syria sources.
On Monday, its experts will be in London to collect samples of the alleged “Novichok” nerve agent involved in the Skripal incident.
The Russian Federation never produced anything by this name. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said after Soviet Russia dissolved, America, Britain, and other European countries studied Novichok, perhaps with intent to produce it.
Theresa May’s government refused to supply Russia with samples of the alleged Skripal incident toxin as required by the CWC.
Britain can hand OPCW inspectors anything it wishes, including its own produced Novichok, claiming it came from Russia.
Sergey Lavrov explained UK officials refused to send an official request to Moscow with regard to involving the OPCW in evaluating the alleged Skripal nerve agent – violating its legal obligation.
They have no legal justification to proceed this way, he stressed, adding:
“(I)f you appeal to (the OPCW), you must comply with (CWC) provisions…that stipulate filing a request to us, because we are suspected of being a country of origin and even the country which had used this poisoning agent, and, providing us with samples of this agent, so we, together with OPCW experts, can analyze it.”
OPCW analysis of the alleged Skripal nerve agent (supplied by Britain) has no validity without Russia having access to the same samples.
Why then is the organization acting extrajudicially? Why is it going along with Britain’s false flag, complicit with Washington?
When its assessment is made public, it’ll have no validity whatever. It’ll be another black mark against the organization for failing to fulfill its mandate.
Source: Stephen Lendman