Workers at the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) denounced the organization’s report alleging the Syrian government’s use of Sarin in the Latamna area of Hama Governorate, and workers criticized its reliance on rumors, sayings, and allegations “scientifically flawed” and the influence of unqualified and secret “experts” allied to the Western-backed (opposition).
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons issued on the eight of last April a report from the newly formed investigation and identification team, a unit ostensibly created to identify alleged perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks in Syria. The IIT investigation examined three alleged incidents in the Syrian town of Latamna in March 2017. It concluded “there are reasonable grounds to believe” that the Syrian army committed the sarin and chlorine attack in two incidents.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo praised the institute’s investigation, describing it as “the latest in a large and growing body of evidence that the Syrian government is using chemical weapons attacks in Syria as part of a deliberate campaign of violence against the Syrian people.” The United States shares the conclusions of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
But missing from Pompeo‘s observations and subsequent US media coverage across the spectrum is the credibility crisis that consumes the OPCW and its senior leadership. The weak conclusion of the IIT report that “there are reasonable grounds to believe” that the official version of the events is very similar to the conclusion of a previous report by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is now a matter of great controversy and ridicule.
Readers can view the original article with the attached link
