SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
the.OPCW complete bias against the perceived enemies of the US and the UK.....Exactly 26 years ago, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) entered into force on April 29, 1997. However, over the years, the watchdog has lost its veneer of impartiality and transparency, becoming a convenient instrument in the West's geopolitical games. "The OPCW was established in 1997 to effectively end the production, the stockpiling, and the transfer of chemical weapons and of course the use of chemical weapons in a war situation and the elimination of any existing stocks of these weapons over time," Vanessa Beeley, an independent investigative journalist who specializes on the Middle East and Syria, told Sputnik. "But in my opinion, what we see with the OPCW, as we see with the International Criminal Court (ICC), is even if these organizations were originally set up with the best intentions, eventually they are infiltrated, they are influenced, and compromised by the powerful countries, particularly among the neocolonialist Western blocs, into following an agenda or providing corroboration of an agenda. And of course, we've seen that on numerous occasions with the OPCW, and more recently with the ICC.”
What is the OPCW? Following the end of the Cold War, the OPCW was created to implement the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), the world’s first multilateral chemical weapons disarmament agreement. The collapse of the USSR and subsequent geopolitical changes saw the international community launch multiple disarmament initiatives as a new post-Cold War world order emerged. Still, it appears the initiative was long overdue, given the destruction prompted by chemical arms. The First World War saw the first massive use of chemical arms by Germany during the Second Battle of Ypres (April 22 – May 25, 1915), in Belgium. The German forces fired more than 150 tons of lethal chlorine gas, which resulted in tens of thousands of casualties. On August 6, 1915, Germany used poisonous gas against Russian troops at Osowiec Fortress. The battle rose to prominence and became known as the Attack of the Dead Men as the surviving soldiers of the Russian infantry regiment managed to counter-attack the Germans despite coughing up blood and bits of their own lungs. By the end of the First World War, around 124,200 tons of chlorine, mustard, and other chemical agents had been released, with over 90,000 soldiers dying in agony due to exposure to them. Despite the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibiting the use of "asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases," global players continued to develop them. During the Second World War, Nazi Germany used poisonous gases to murder millions of people in gas vans or stationary gas chambers.
The War in Vietnam saw yet another massive use of chemical arms. US military forces used Agent Orange, a powerful herbicide, as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, between 1961 and 1971. In addition to huge environmental damage, Operation Ranch Hand caused severe health problems among the Vietnamese population. Over the course of the Cold War, world powers amassed considerable stockpiles of chemical arms, which they agreed to eliminate in 1997, with 192 states supporting the initiative. For instance, Russia completed the full destruction of the 39,967 metric tons of its chemical weapons in September 2017. The US has yet to destroy its chemical stockpiles. In 2013, the OPCW received the Nobel Prize for Peace for extensive efforts in eliminating chemical weapons. However, the Syrian War has exposed the other, darker side of the international organization.
OPCW, Syria War, and Chemical Provocations The Syrian War that saw the West's military assistance and weapons deliveries to jihadi rebels in a bid to oust the nation's legitimate President Bashar al-Assad amid the infamous Arab Spring in the Middle East became a litmus test for the OPCW. Since the beginning of the conflict in 2011, the US government has threatened the legitimate Syrian government with a full-scale attack if it uses chemical arms. Still, there have been no confirmed cases of the Syrian Arab Army's use of any sort of poisonous substances. On March 19, 2013, jihadi rebels used makeshift projectiles containing the sarin nerve agent in Khan al-Assal near Aleppo, killing 28 people and injuring over 130. In August 2013, jihadi opposition carried out another chemical provocation with sarin in Eastern Ghouta, a Damascus suburb. The chemical attacks came in handy for Washington, providing it with a pretext for an invasion. However, Russia intervened. It has been reported that in September 2013, President Barack Obama called off US airstrikes in Syria in a last-minute decision after Moscow and Damascus proposed dismantling Syrian chemical arms stockpiles altogether under the auspices of the UN and OPCW. Between October 2013 and September 2014, a joint OPCW-UN mission together with the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad removed and destroyed all of the nation's chemical weapon stockpiles. "In 2013, the OPCW and Russia effectively collaborated to destroy any stocks of Syrian chemical weapons," said Beeley. "But what the OPCW has never done, in my opinion, is to properly investigate the potential of supplying chemical weapon ingredients to the terrorist groups, including ISIS*, operating in Syria, who are known to have used chemical weapons. Myself, I was present during the use of chlorine gas against civilians in Hama; I think it was in 2019. And that attack, to my knowledge, has never been investigated by the OPCW. So in Syria, what we see is a very clear bias from the OPCW against the Syrian government, against the Syrian government’s allies, which includes Russia."
OPCW and Staged Douma Incident Even though the OPCW confirmed that the Syrian government eliminated its chemical weapons stockpiles in 2013, it immediately sided with the US and its NATO coalition when the Douma chemical incident occurred in 2018. On April 7, 2018, jihadi rebels claimed Syrian government forces had conducted a chemical attack in Douma. The incident was hastily blamed on Damascus by the Trump administration to justify massive US and allied strikes on Syrian government targets before any investigation into the matter could take place. The OPCW backed the US narrative in its 2019 report, but it was soon dented by a WikiLeaks bombshell release as well as OPCW Fact Finding Mission (FFM) whistleblower accounts indicating that the chemical watchdog had suppressed evidence showing that the Douma incident was staged to pin the blame on Damascus as the latter was gaining ground at the time. International investigative journalists and political observers stepped forward busting inconsistencies in the US narrative and the OPCW's apparent cover-up. "The OPCW was really weaponized against Syria," Beeley underscored. "I think it's very clear who benefits from these claims of chemical weapon use by the Syrian government, very much as it was clear who benefited from the idea that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, or that Gaddafi was giving Viagra to his troops in Benghazi to carry out mass rape operations. Who is benefiting? The US, UK, EU countries that have waged the regime change war against Syria since 2011.”
Strange Bedfellows: White Helmets and OPCW The White Helmets, a UK-backed quasi-humanitarian group linked to terrorist elements in Syria, are believed to be the perpetrators of the Douma chemical hoax. Over the past several years, Beeley has conducted her own private investigation into the White Helmets and exposed the group's hypocrisy and ties with terrorist elements in Syria. "The White Helmets were exclusively embedded with the armed groups, including, of course, Al-Qaeda* and ISIS* inside Syria, and they moved everywhere with those armed groups," Beeley said. "In other words, when there was a liberation campaign and amnesty and reconciliation deals were brokered between the armed groups and the Syrian government, the White Helmets never took the amnesty. They always moved with the dominant armed groups, which, as I said, were always Al-Qaeda under whatever rebranding they were given. And they moved with the groups, they partnered the groups, they shared facilities with those groups. Of course, they stand accused by Syrian civilians who lived under the occupation of armed groups of various crimes, including the abduction of children, running organ trafficking rings, theft, murder, torture, detention of civilians, and profiting from the money and the equipment that was coming in to these armed groups who we partnered in the war against Syria.” At the same time, the White Helmets, generously funded by Western governments through a former British intelligence officer who later died under strange circumstances, have had close connections with the OPCW since 2018, according to Beeley. "Indeed, they do have, and in fact since 2018 – so one assumes since the alleged Douma chemical attack, the White Helmets have actually developed their relationship with the OPCW, just as, of course, the OPCW now has the mandate to attribute blame through the inspection teams and investigation teams, which of course, was considered by Russia to be beyond its mandate," she said. "It shouldn't have that mandate. Russia vetoed that. And since they've been basically given the mandate to attribute blame, the reality is that the White Helmets have increased their collaboration with the OPCW. They now have a dedicated employee working directly with the OPCW to provide supposed evidence of chemical weapon use by the Syrian government, in other words, to increase the potential of attributing blame for chemical weapon use against the Syrian government." According to Beeley, this same employee, Radi Saad, writes regular posts on the UK Foreign Office blog. The investigative journalist raises the question: "If the White Helmets are the primary source of evidence for these alleged chemical attacks, and this organization is funded by the British government, amongst others that are funding the war against Syria, and they are now basically in bed with the OPCW that are also being influenced and funded by the same government, one has to raise the question: isn't there a huge conflict of interest here?" Doesn't this mean that the White Helmets are basically being used as a tool to provide the evidence for the OPCW to corroborate what the West needs in order to criminalize Syria and to continue with the sanctions, with the hybrid war pressure against the country?
OPCW's 2023 Douma Report: Repetition of Old Lies The West completely suppressed OPCW whistleblower accounts of the Douma incident: in February 2023, the OPCW presented the results of its "investigation," claiming that the Syrian government was responsible for the use of chemical weapons in Douma in 2018. This is hardly surprising, according to Beeley. "These chemical attack narratives serve to criminalize in Western public perception the Syrian government and its Russian allies in particular, and enable further military intervention by proxy, on occasions for calling for a no-fly zone, for US occupation in the northeast of Syria, and the economic sanctions, some of the most unprecedented, savage sanctions that have been imposed unilaterally against the Syrian people on the basis of these alleged assaults carried out by the Syrian government against the Syrian people," the investigative journalist pointed out. "And of course, in the latest reports from the OPCW regarding the alleged chemical attack in Douma in 2018, we see that their reports have been entirely compromised and are a fraudulent, retrospective corroboration of the US, UK, and French foreign policy and unlawful aggression against Syria without any justification that the Syrian government had carried out the alleged chemical attack," she continued.
'OPCW Lacks Credibility' Last month, Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations Vasily Nebenzia said that "almost any mention of the OPCW has been politicized in an anti-Syrian and anti-Russian spirit." Beeley agrees with this conclusion. "If you go back to the second Iraq War, and this is probably the point at which the OPCW became compromised, when the then-director general, Jose Bustani, was threatened, intimidated by John Bolton when he was trying to procure permission to allow OPCW inspectors to go into Iraq to verify if there were weapons of mass destruction or not," Beeley said. "And, of course, what did that threaten to do? It threatened to derail the US narrative which was allowing them to bomb Iraq." The investigative journalist expressed doubts about the credibility of OPCW reports and investigations given the organization's obvious bias. She argued that "until the OPCW opens its doors to a frank and open discussion with the dissident inspectors who are contesting the findings of the OPCW in Douma in Syria, it has no credibility." Beeley has drawn attention to the fact that the chemical watchdog silences its own inspectors and witnesses and puts obstacles in the way of transparency. Similarly, the OPCW sided with the West in blaming the alleged poisoning of Sergey Skripal on Russia and, likewise, remained mum about the threat of the Kiev regime's chemical provocations in Ukraine and apparent use of poisonous substances by the Ukrainian military. "Why has [OPCW] demonstrated itself to have a complete bias against the perceived enemies of the US and the UK?" the British journalist asked. "You know, in this sense, any organization that has demonstrated obfuscation – and also we have to remember that retrospectively, the OPCW has effectively justified war crimes carried out by the US, UK, and France against Syrian civilians in Damascus, when Damascus was bombed before the OPCW inspectors had even managed to get into Douma to carry out their investigation. So therefore, you know, to a degree, the OPCW has to be considered an accessory to war crimes. And while it is considered an accessory to war crimes, until that is proven or disproven, how can it genuinely be considered to be carrying out an impartial role or adhering to its own mission statement?"
For more of Sputnik's exclusive analysis on the OPCW’s history and bias, check out our Telegram post here .
READ MORE:
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IMAGE AT TOP: "THE TANK" AT THE AGNSW MODERN...
|
User login |
double standard: cui bono?.....
wp. What an absurd theatre we have to endure right now: Amid great media hubbub, a former US president is being indicted on 36 counts. Among other things, he is alleged to have paid hush money to a sex film actress and violated the laws of campaign finance. What a scandal! For the first time in the US history, a former US president is on trial.
Many of his predecessors and their ministers were guilty of various crimes of a completely different calibre, for example e.g. Henry Kissinger: bombing of Cambodia (1969-1973), military coup against Salvador Allende in Chile (covert CIA intervention in 1973); George H.W. Bush: war against Iraq in violation of international law (1991); Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright: war in Yugoslavia in violation of international law (1999); George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice: wars in Afghanistan in violation of international law (2001), in Iraq (2003), Guantánamo detention camp in violation of human rights (since 2002); Colin Powell: lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction as reason for war (2003); Hillary Clinton: CIA involvement in elimination of Muammar al-Gaddafi (2011); Barack Obama: countless assassinations with drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan (2009–2011), airstrike on Kunduz (2009) … With all these war crimes, who called for the International Criminal Court (ICC)? Hardly anyone.
Quite different is the case of Russia and Vladimir Putin: Shortly after the beginning of the war in Ukraine, one-sided reporting and denial of the preceding history led all states that concede the role of the world’s policeman to the US to the pretension that Putin was waging a war of aggression in violation of international law and that he is committing one war crime after another. The true history of this war, for which actors on the other side of the Atlantic are also responsible, must not be/is not allowed to come to light. All wars have a prehistory, only this one is supposed to have none?
In addition, there was the demand that Putin should be brought to justice subito by the ICC. This was done promptly: charges were recently brought. The ICC holds citizens accountable for the following crimes: Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes and Crimes of Aggression. Both the USA and Russia – like Israel and Sudan – have withdrawn their signatures and declared that they will not ratify the treaty. Why do you think?
Something is not right here. The media should not be harnessed for one side or the other, but should illuminate the background and report factually. Readers should remain vigilant, make up their own minds and get involved in ensuring that the truth is revealed and disseminated. •
READ MORE:
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2023/nr-8-18-april-2023/zweierlei-mass-cui-bono
READ FROM TOP.
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.......
solving syria.......
BY Aleksandr SVARANTS
The destabilization of the military-political situation and the provoked civil war in Syria, which has been going on since March 2011, have become another consequence of the US regional policy of reformatting the Middle East region and establishing its own monopoly. The strategy of “controlled chaos” with the use of radical forces and internal political contradictions was a hackneyed product of American diplomacy and intelligence.
The Syrian conflict is an echo of the “Arab Spring” and a reflection of multi-layered ethno-religious contradictions, which, starting with a local civil confrontation, eventually grew into an uprising against the regime of Bashar al-Assad and involved the main countries of the region and world powers. The parties to the conflict receive military and political support from various external players. In particular, Russia and Iran provide support to pro-government forces and Shiite groups, the forces of the motley opposition from Western countries (in particular, the same Kurds), Turkey and the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf (including Turkomans and Sunni Arabs).
The degree of involvement of foreign states in the Syrian crisis has turned out to be so high that experts often characterize it as a proxy war between regional powers. The radicalization of religious contradictions brought international terrorist groups and organizations to the forefront of the Syrian theater, where ISIS (an international terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation) especially showed its cruelty and expansionism. Such a fragmentation of the united Syrian opposition and the turn of events have become the reason for the entry into the conflict of external forces (the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey) in 2014. The war in Syria has spawned a multi-million army of refugees and a migration crisis in Turkey and Europe.
For objective reasons, the countries of the Middle East (primarily Iran, Turkey, the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf and Israel) show special attention to the Syrian conflict. The latter is motivated by considerations of geographical proximity, religious contradictions between Sunnis and Shiites, ethnic differences (especially regarding the fate of the Kurdish issue in the region), possible territorial transformations and the redrawing of borders.
Since the autumn of 2015, Russia has been forced to enter this conflict at the invitation of the Syrian government, because Moscow has traditionally played a stabilizing role in the region and acted as a strategic partner of the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR). The objectives of the Russian peacekeeping operation in Syria were:
– the fight against the forces of international terrorism and the suppression of their activity on the distant approaches to our borders;
– providing friendly assistance to the people of Syria to restore the territorial integrity of the country and political stability in the region;
– preservation of the naval and air base of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the SAR as a guarantor of peace and security.
Taking into account the successes of the Russian peacekeeping mission in Syria, Russia’s authority in the Middle East has significantly increased, Moscow has initiated the formation of a new platform for political negotiations on the Syrian crisis in Astana and Sochi with the participation of interested Middle Eastern players (including Syria, Turkey and Iran).
The drama of the Syrian conflict is aggravated, as you know, by the issues of control of local oil resources and strategic transit communications passing through Syria. War often gives rise to chaotic and uncontrollable processes of plundering the economic resources of the occupied and controlled territory. In addition to this, the Kurdish ethno-political issue, the prospect of the separation of part of the SAR and the formation of a new Kurdish autonomy (or an independent state) in the north and northeast of the country are particularly acute for the countries neighboring Syria (in particular, for Turkey).
Ankara is objectively concerned about such a scenario of the Kurdish question in Syria with the external military and political and financial support of the US and Israel. Turks believe that the Kurdish formations of Syria (in particular, the military alliance “Syrian Democratic Forces” – SDF) are actively cooperating with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party banned in Turkey, which Ankara has listed as an international terrorist organization, and can transfer the flame of local conflict to Anatolia.
It is known that under this very motivation Turkey has conducted four military operations in Syria since 2016 in coordination with Russia (“Euphrates Shield”, “Olive Branch”, “Peace Spring”, “The Claw-Lock”). Ankara’s goal is to form a 30 km buffer zone along the Turkish-Syrian border deep into the Kurdish-populated areas, pushing local groups out and establishing its own control and Turkish-Russian patrolling. As a result, a number of Syrian settlements came under the control of the Turkish military (including Jarablus, El-Bab, Afrin, Ras al-Ain and others).
Turkey, under the guise of contradictions with the US in terms of the prospects of the Kurdish question in Syria is trying to continue to push for new territorial acquisitions and ethnic cleansing in terms of the displacement of Kurds from the border area. At the same time Ankara shows special attention to Turkic-speaking Turkomans and pro-Turkish Sunni groups in order to change the ethnography of the occupied territories in the north of Syria, which fits into the framework of the Turkish doctrine of Neo Pan-Turkism.
However, the fighting resistance of the Kurds, supported partly by the Syrian government and partly by the United States, has created a somewhat different disposition of forces, with the entire northeast actually under the control of the Kurdish SDF group and a large part in the north and northwest controlled jointly by pro-government and Kurdish formations.
Recently, within the framework of the pre-election struggle and radical rhetoric, Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu, who is counted among the supporters of Neo Pan-Turkism, accused the US of supporting the forces of international terrorism and creating a terrorist state with an emphasis on the Kurdish factor in Syria. In this case Soylu, who will run for the parliamentary elections on behalf of the ruling AKP (as you know, President Recep Erdoğan announced that all the ministers in his cabinet would run for the parliament), said that Turkey, continuing the fight against the forces of terrorism, was in fact fighting the United States.
But the day after such a strong accusation against the Americans, President Recep Erdoğan suddenly fell ill for reasons unknown at the moment, had to interrupt a live broadcast on local television and canceled several events the next day related to electoral matters. Erdoğan’s condition, according to official figures from his administration, is stable. Although there were conflicting reports throughout the evening of April 26: some of them claimed that Erdoğan had a slight stomach flu, while other sources made public information about a myocardial infarction and Erdoğan’s urgent hospitalization.
We wish the Turkish president good health and a speedy recovery. In this regard, it is a strange and coincidental coincidence that Erdoğan’s breakdown happened for some reason on the eve of the launch of heavy fuel for Turkey’s first nuclear power plant Akkuyu in Mersin, built by Russia. Isn’t this unexpected attack a consequence of American sabotage against the out-of-control President Recep Erdoğan, whose ministers (e.g., Süleyman Soylu) are already fighting the US and accusing them of terrorism? As a result, two presidents (Erdoğan in Turkey and Putin in Russia) for different reasons (in particular, one due to a slight cold, the other due to a busy work schedule) will take part in this event, which has an important political significance on the eve of the general elections, via an online video link.
Meanwhile, Turkey’s repeated attempts in 2022 to launch a new military operation in Syria (including both air and ground) were localized mainly by the efforts of Russian diplomacy. Thanks to Russia, on April 25 this year in Moscow there were held quadrilateral talks of the defense ministers of Russia, Iran, Syria and Turkey, which were highly appreciated by Turkey’s defense minister Hulusi Akar.
The subject of the Moscow meeting were “practical steps” to strengthen security in Syria, further fight against extremist groups and normalization of the whole complex of Syrian-Turkish relations (including preservation of territorial integrity of Syria and early return of Syrian refugees from Turkey). By recognizing the territorial integrity of Syria, the participants in the Moscow meeting (including Ankara and Damascus) exclude any options for the formation of an independent Kurdish state and the preservation of the ground for terrorism.
The defense ministers meeting can be considered to be just the beginning of a broader Turkish-Syrian dialogue within the Middle East Quartet (Russia, Iran, Syria, Turkey). Similar talks are planned at the level of the heads of foreign intelligence and the Foreign Ministry, which will make it possible to consider the whole range of issues and prepare for a meeting of the heads of states. Such dynamics and intensity of the negotiation process with the Moscow initiative testifies to the success of Russian diplomacy, capable of finding new solutions to the protracted Syrian crisis.
Aleksandr SVARANTS, PhD in political science, professor, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
READ MORE:
https://journal-neo.org/2023/05/08/russia-is-finding-new-solutions-to-the-syrian-crisis/
READ FROM TOP.
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....