russia un report chemical weapons syria

Syria - Damascus - Highway - Airport
Syria - Damascus - Highway - Airport
Advertisment

Russia warns against hasty conclusions in regards of UN report on chemical attack in Syria.

While the Israeli regime has confirmed that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will meet with U.S. President Barack Obama on September 30 in order to discuss the developments and plans in and around Syria, such a meeting between Barack Obama and the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will sure become very interesting – especially in regards of the US-Russian agreement in terms of Syria’s chemical weapons and the readiness of the Syrian government to join the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and to put its chemical weapons stockpiles under an international control.

However, as already mentioned in this article about Barack Obama and his situation in terms of Syria and the usual American ally Israel, the U.S. President has now either an intense task or he will go down. Not to mention that the Israeli regime in Tel-Aviv is currently certainly not really happy about Obama and sure not his best friend.

The long expected UN report about the alleged chemical weapons attack and use in Syria was published in the meantime and it is in principle the report that was to expect. There are several contradictions in the UN report about the chemical weapons attack in suburbs of the Syrian capital Damascus on August 21 and even some UN experts have already said that there could be the situation that the place of attack was manipulated before the inspectors of the United Nations (UN) arrived there. At least, the team of chemical experts saw several individuals travelling to the place of attack, which were known to be under the control of the foreign-backed terrorist groups.

However, while the appendix of the UN report on the chemical weapons attack near Damascus includes some contradictions, the introduction of the report on the investigations and laboratory tests of the samples from the places of attack near Damascus implies that the Syrian government (thus, the Syrian Army) is certainly responsible for the chemical weapons attack. Not to mention the propaganda in advance of the publishing of the UN report.

The propaganda machine, fed by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, has left no doubt that the backers and supporters of the conflict and violence in Syria still blame the Syrian government for the chemical weapons attack (poison gas attack) in suburbs of Damascus on August 21. Of course, these sides have to maintain the propaganda against Syria and to cover the contradictions in the UN report.

Meanwhile, the Russian UN representative Vitaly Churkin said in a new statement in regards of the UN report about the chemical weapons attack of August 21 near Syria’s capital Damascus, that the report of the United Nations (UN) has no “bulletproof data or conclusions” on who has ordered the chemical attack in Syria and who has carried out this poison gas attack in suburbs of Damascus. The situation would be quite funny if it would not have been already to expect and in principle be so sad.

While Russias UN representative Vitaly Churkin said that the newly unveiled UN report on the chemical attack in suburbs of Damascus on August 21 offers no information about the perpetrators behind the poison gas attack or who has ordered this chemical attack near Damascus, the U.S. administration in Washington and the British government are convinced that the UN report confirms that the Syrian government was behind the poison gas attack near Damascus.

However, there is the reasonable and valid question how the United States and Britain come to the result that the UN report would blame the Syrian government for the chemical weapons attack in suburbs of Damascus. While the introduction of the newly unveiled UN report indicates that the government might be to blame for the poison gas attack and this implication comes as no surprise under consideration of the usual one-sided reports and statements of the United States in terms of the Syrian conflict, the appendix of the UN report has some contradictions – and in principle, the statement by Vitaly Churkin is correct: the UN report does not show who was behind the chemical weapons attack in suburbs (e.g. Jobar) of Damascus on August 21.

Thus, the statements by the U.S. administration in Washington and the usual suspects from Britain are nothing else than propaganda, carried out to maintain the previously raised accusations (still no convincing evidence) and to cover the contradictions within the UN report.

Not to mention that France, Britain and the United States certainly also intend to somehow justify their new agreement to boost the support for the terrorist groups fighting in Syria against the secular government of President Bashar al-Assad. However, every statement by the U.S. administration or Britain does not decrease the fact that Vitaly Churkin is correct with his statements about the UN report and that the report by the UN experts does not show who is responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus.

Russia’s UN representative Vitaly Churkin also said that the report by the team of experts from the United Nations (UN) is “diligent but very technical”. He added that the report categorical avoids any judgements and inferences. Of course, Vitaly Churkin also refers to the fact that Moscow still has to study the UN report in detail. However, Russia certainly does it already.

The UN representative of Russia also stated in his statements on the newly unveiled UN report about Syria that everybody is able to draw his own conclusions of the report, but that he hopes that the conclusions “won’t be driven by political motives.” However, the recent statements by the United States and Britain (France will probably follow soon) have certainly already destroyed the hope of Russia’s UN representative.

UN Chemical Report
Ake Sellstrom Hands UN Ban Ki Moon His Report

Not to mention Samantha Power. Her name is program in terms of U.S. propaganda at the United Nations (UN). The American envoy to the UN, Samantha Power, already said that the study of the UN report by Washington proves that “only the Syrian regime” had the capacity to carry out a chemical attack in a suburb of Damascus. Oh yeah.

This is the same assumption and conclusion that was taken as evidence for the claims by Washington the Syrian government is responsible for the chemical weapons attack. However, assumptions are no evidence. Not even in front of a jury or judge. But this is the way how U.S. propaganda works. Samantha Power lies, just like the Foreign Secretary of Britain, William Hague.

The British Foreign Minister William Hague said in regards of the UN report about the chemical weapons attack near Damascus that the “findings were fully consistent” with the previous accusations by Britain against the regime of Bashar al-Assad that they are responsible for the chemical attack in suburbs of the capital, Damascus. However, there are no convincing findings in the UN report which would confirm such a statement by William Hague. The statement is pure propaganda and nothing else.

Advertisment

Comments are closed.