Wednesday 30 March 2022

Conflict in Ukraine moves to dangerous rhetoric of chemical weapons

 


With the war in Ukraine entering its second month, several media outlets have started speculating over the possibility of chemical weapons being used in warzones across Ukrainian territory. 

During his official visit to Brussels last week, US President Joe Biden said NATO “would respond” if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine. When asked if the US had evidence that Vladimir Putin is under the possession of chemical weapons, Biden said he wouldn’t comment.

"We are partly concerned because we see the rhetoric and we see that Russia is trying to create some kind of pretext that it could use chemical and biological weapons in Ukraine,” said NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.

Blame game

The concern, however, seems to be weaving on both sides of the battling parts. According to The Telegraph, Russia has accused US President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, of funding biological weapons labs in Ukraine. The paper claims that the accusation has raised fears that the Kremlin is laying the groundwork to use chemical weapons in Ukraine.

On 8 March, the Chinese Foreign Ministry also accused Ukraine of maintaining dangerous biological weapons labs: "The US has 336 labs in 30 countries under its control, including 26 in Ukraine alone. It should give a full account of its biological military activities at home and abroad and subject itself to multilateral verification," said the spokesperson Zhao Lijian. 

US aware of “biological research facilities”

The US responded on 9 March with Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, long in charge of US policy in Ukraine, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Marco Rubio, hoping to debunk growing claims that there are chemical weapons labs in Ukraine, asked Nuland: “Does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?”

Nuland did not deny the claim. With palpable discomfort and halting speech, the US diplomat acknowledged the existence of “biological research facilities” saying the US was concerned they would be used by Russian forces. “We are working with the Ukrainian forces to prevent that these research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach,” said Nuland.

On 15 March, in a short video, Gabbard said there are more than 25 US-funded biological laboratories in Ukraine and called for a ceasefire at the laboratories as they could spread dangerous pathogens. Gabbard urged for the labs to me “shut down immediately” and the pathogens they hold to be destroyed.

“Instead of trying to cover this up, the Biden-Harris Administration need to work with Russia, Ukraine, NATO and the UN to immediately implement a ceasefire for all military action in the vicinity of these labs,” urged Gabbard.

The Republican Senator Mitt Romney accused his ex-House counterpart of spreading “treasonous lies” that amounted to Kremlin propaganda: “Tulsi Gabbard is parroting false Russian propaganda. Her treasonous lies may well cost lives,” tweeted Mitt Romney in response to Tulsi Gabbard’s video post.

Russia speaks

As for Moscow, it maintains that laboratories in Ukraine have been funded by the US military to develop biological weapons components, yet local staff was being kept in the dark about their research. 

The statement was given by Lieutenant-General Igor Kirillov, who commands the Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Forces of Russia. “We believe that components of biological weapons were being made on the territory of Ukraine,” said Kirillov to RT .

On 17 March, Kirillov presented documents and imagery during a briefing with the Russian Defense Ministry, showing why the military has come to such a conclusion: “The documents have the signatures of real officials and are certified by the seals of organizations,” he said adding that “journalists and experts in the West” can “verify their veracity”.

One document, dated March 6, 2015 reportedly confirms the “direct participation of the Pentagon in the financing of military biological projects in Ukraine”, according to Kirillov. 

Kirillov went on saying that the US officially funded the projects through the Ukrainian Ministry of Health, based on the Agreement on Joint Biological Activities. However, the evidence shows that the real recipients of some $32 million in funds were Ukrainian Defense Ministry laboratories in Kyiv, Odessa, Lvov and Kharkov.

Countering bioweapons

As the blame-game goes on, evidence from the Washington Post’s archive dating back to 2005, reveals that, as of that year, the US and Ukraine agreed to work jointly to prevent the spread of biological weapons in Kyiv. The agreement was announced by former Senators Richard G. Lugar and Barack Obama.

One of the labs that received funding, according to the report, was the I.I. Mechnikov Antiplague Scientific and Research Institute, in the Black Sea port city of Odessa. It’s not clear, however, until when the agreement was in place between the US and Ukraine. 

Syria's reminiscences

On April 7, 2018, Douma, Syria, traveled the world after reports of the use of chemical weapons. To this day, what happened in Douma remains to be explained. After the episode, an investigation by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) began. Expert toxicologists have ruled out the possibility that chlorine gas was the cause of the victims' deaths. However, leaked information from Wikileaks exposed how senior OPCW officials had censored the explosive discovery.

In the early days of the OPCW investigation of an alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, toxicology experts ruled out the use of chlorine gas as the cause of death for the more than 40 civilians found at the scene. Instead of publishing this finding, senior OPCW officials withheld it and then launched an investigation into a veteran inspector who questioned OPCW's censorship.

The suppression of toxicologists is among a number of deceptions by the OPCW leadership aimed at corrupting the scientific process of the investigation at Douma, as detailed in The Grayzone’s investigation and the various official documents presented by Wikileaks.  

German toxicologists

In early June 2018, four OPCW staff went to Germany to meet with toxicologists/pharmacologists, all recognized world experts in chemical weapons poisoning. The trip was approved at the highest levels through a Mission Alert Order. The delegation consisted of Dr. Brendan Whelan and Dr. Sami Barrek, both senior members of Douma's investigation team, Dr. Marc Blum, Head of the OPCW Laboratory, and Dr. Soumik Paul, Head of the OPCW Health and Safety Branch.

German experts saw numerous photos and videos of the victims and were told what the alleged witnesses had described to inspectors. Some alleged witnesses claimed a rapid, even immediate onset of severe foaming due to exposure to a toxic chemical (Original Report for 7.82). As the final report revealed: “Victims began arriving [to the hospital known as Site 1] shortly after 7 pm with excessive salivation or foaming at the mouth.” (paragraph 8.56). The alleged attack took place around 7:00 pm (paragraph 8.58).

Within an hour, toxicologists easily confirmed what the OPCW team and other experts already suspected – that such a rapid onset of profuse foam was incompatible with exposure to chlorine. According to the leaked minutes of that meeting, previously published by Wikileaks:

“…experts [toxicologists] were conclusive in their statements that there was no correlation between symptoms and exposure to chlorine. In particular, they stated that the appearance of excessive foam, due to pulmonary edema, observed in photos and reported by witnesses, would not occur in the short period of time between the reported occurrence of the alleged incident and the time when the videos were recorded (approximately 3-4 hours).”
 
The evidence was now overwhelming that the more than 40 victims filmed at Site 2 had not been killed by nerve agents or chlorine gas. But the Douma samples did not reveal any other toxic chemicals that could have caused the rapid foaming. Could it be that the highly toxic chemical had not been detected in the samples? The OPCW team and German toxicologists discussed this possibility, but found it unlikely.

No comments:

Post a Comment