The federal education minister has branded a Sydney academic, who believes the US missile strike in Syria is a "false flag" attack, as an apologist for "grievous" crimes against civilians.

But the University of Sydney academic himself has hit back, saying the Turnbull government is guilty of war crimes in Syria last year over a botched coalition bombing raid.

Tim Anderson, a senior lecturer at the university's political economy department, believes there is no credible evidence Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad has ever used chemical weapons against his people.

Read more:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/04/11/academic-accuses-australia...

--------------------------

The Minister is out of line and has no clue of the game being played out. The US wants WAR and troops in Syria. Trump is an idiot who changes his mind like a fool changes heads. He is dangerous megalomaniac. WE ALL SHOULD START TO BANG OUR GRUEL BOWLS in this prison we call Western media. 

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/04/11/academic-accuses-australia...

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The United States seeks to legitimize its attack on a Syrian military airfield late last week by forcing a UN Security Council resolution, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Wednesday.

"Attempts to push through the UN Security Resolution against this backdrop are nothing more than a desire to legitimize the attack," Ryabkov told reporters.

Russia could consider a version of the resolution on Wednesday that condemns Friday's US missile attack on the Sha'irat air base, he said.

"But since such an option is not proceeding, then there is nothing to talk about," Ryabkov stressed.

A Russian mission to the UN official said Tuesday the Security Council vote on a draft resolution submitted by the US, the United Kingdom and France was set for Wednesday afternoon.

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704121052553805-us-resolution-syria-...

Tillerson claimed that the Idlib strike was planned, directed and executed by Syrian government forces. The US diplomat said Damascus has used chlorine bombs and other chemical weapons on more than 50 prior instances, adding that there is a good deal of evidence suggesting that the Assad regime is guilty of war crimes.

Lavrov disputed the validity of Washington's allegations against Assad. On Wednesday, Lavrov said an "unbiased international investigation" into the matter is the only appropriate way forward, reminding reporters that "no proof" has been disclosed that renders Assad culpable for the attack. 

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704121052582896-lavrov-probe-syria-c...

------------

NOW, was it Sarin or chlorine?  who knows. Of course the US, as with Dr Hans Blix before the war in Iraq, does not want a thorough investigation, knowing that there is 95 per cent chances that Assad did not do "the gas his own people" thingy and this would run contrary to the US narrative. Meanwhile we know the rest:

"It would be a fantastic thing if we got along with Putin, with Russia … I would like to get along with everyone," Trump continued. He promised that "by the time I'm finished [the world] will be a much better place."

Referencing fears that may arise across Europe due to US-Russia relations, the US president said he hopes that Europeans will "have to fear nothing … that would be the ideal situation."

Stoltenberg pointed out that the "most important" part about dealing with Russia is "deploying more troops in the eastern part of NATO, increasing defense spending [and] keeping a stable alliance." 

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704121052584804-trump-says-russia-re...

--------------

Here the story is that "WE" are the good guys and everyone should kiss our arse and smell our farts with delight and without protests. What more can one say? See: next frame...

The Syrian military said that this fact proves that terrorists possess chemical weapons.

"The jets of the so-called US-led coalition launched a strike at about 17:30-17:50 [local time, 14:30-14:50 GMT] on a Daesh warehouse where many foreign fighters were present. First a white cloud and then a yellow one appeared at the site of the strike, which points at the presence of a large number of poisonous substances. A fire at the site continued until 22:30 [19:30 GMT]," the Syrian army's command statement obtained by Sputnik said.

According to the Syrian General Staff, the US-led coalition's strike killed several hundred people, including civilians. Hundreds were poisoned as a result of the strike on Daesh's headquarters and depot with chemical weapons.

"This confirms that Daesh and al-Nusra terrorists possess chemical weapons and are capable of using, obtaining and transporting it," the document said.

The Syrian army yet again denied possessing chemical weapons.

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704131052598995-coalition-daesh-ch...

Russia has intelligence from "trusted sources" that chemical weapons provocations are currently being prepared in more regions in Syria, including Damascus, Russian President Vladimir Putin said after talks with Italian counterpart Sergio Mattarella Tuesday.

"We have information from various sources that such provocations — and I cannot call them anything else — are being prepared in other regions of Syria, including in the southern suburbs of Damascus, where they intend to plant some substance and blame the official Syrian authorities for its use," Putin told a briefing.

Russian President Putin announced that Russia will officially turn to the UN in the Hague for an investigation of the chemical weapons' use in Idlib.

"All incidents reminiscent of the 'chemical attacks' that took place in Idlib must be thoroughly investigated," Putin said.

Putin pointed out that the latest US missile strikes in Syria bring to mind the United States' UN Security Council address in 2003 that led to the invasion of Iraq.

"We discussed the situation with President [ of Italy Sergio Mattarella] and I told him that these events strongly resemble the events of 2003," Putin said at a briefing, outlining the prelude to the US intervention in Iraq.

On Thursday night, the United States launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the military airfield in Ash Sha'irat. US President Donald Trump said that the attack was a response to the alleged chemical weapon use in Syria's Idlib province on Tuesday, which resulted in the death of over 80 people.

Following Putin's presser, Russian General Staff released a statement announcing that it has information of militants bringing poisonous substances to areas of Khan Shaykhun, West of Aleppo and Eastern Guta in Syria.

Chief of the Russian General Staff Main Operational Directorate Col. Gen. Sergei Rudskoy said that the militants are trying to provoke new accusations targeted at Syrian government for alleged use of chemical weapons. The militants aim to incite the US to conduct new strikes, Rudskoy warned, adding that such measures are impermissible.

read more:

https://sputniknews.com/military/201704111052527787-chemical-weapons-pro...

Read above (now below):

Russia has intelligence from "trusted sources" that chemical weapons provocations are currently being prepared in more regions in Syria, including Damascus, Russian President Vladimir Putin said after talks with Italian counterpart Sergio Mattarella Tuesday.

"We have information from various sources that such provocations — and I cannot call them anything else — are being prepared in other regions of Syria, including in the southern suburbs of Damascus, where they intend to plant some substance and blame the official Syrian authorities for its use," Putin told a briefing.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201704111052527787-chemical-weapons-pro...

Note the dates of publication... 

From Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to Syrian chemical weapons

by Thierry Meyssan

In a report dated 1 March 2019, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) attests to the fact that were never any prohibited chemical substances in Douma (Syria) during the attack of 7 April 2018. The reprisal tripartite bombing (United States, France, United Kingdom) was therefore unjustified. This scandal is exactly identical to the story of the bogus Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. It will be followed by many other items of fake news as long as the West continues to trust their medias.

The behaviour of Western journalists is particularly strange – they copy the allegations made by their political leaders by treating them a priori as founded in truth, but do not take into account the contrary interpretations offered by many international instances. They reveal themselves to be incapable of questioning the fake news in which they wallow.

The justification for the destruction of Iraq

Thus, in 2003, they unanimously parroted the allegations of George W. Bush, according to which Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Then they copied the lies of Tony Blair, according to which Iraq possessed missile launchers capable of reaching the West in 45 minutes and killing the population by spraying combat gases. And finally, they adopted the fairy tales told by Secretary of State Colin Powell, according to which Iraq was hiding Oussama ben Laden.

However, at the same time, the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) stated that there was no doubt that the allegations of Messrs Bush and Blair were false. This Commission was the only organisation which had been allowed access to Iraqi territory, and had been able to realise all the verifications it wanted. Neither the CIA nor MI6, which contradicted the Commission, had enjoyed such an opportunity.

Let’s remember, by the way, that Jacques Chirac’s France was opposed to the war on Iraq. But it chose to use the argument that « War is always the worst of solutions », and not the argument that the Anglo-Saxon accusations were clearly untrue, as the UNMOVIC had revealed.

Today, we remake History with films and TV series. We agree to admit that we have been tricked. But we pretend that the US and UK Intelligence services were manipulated by their political leaders, and that no-one had any way of knowing. This is untrue, and it is enough to study the Press of that time to see that they were all in league in their attempt to attempt to discredit the Director of the UN Commission, Swedish politician Hans Blix, who dared to stand up to to the greatest world power of that time. That is what the Chilcot Commission was supposed to establish, thirteen years later [1].

Identically, we never mention the accusations hurled by Colin Powell at the UNO Security Council [2], according which Oussama ben Laden was living in Baghdad en 2002, and that his lieutenants still lived there, busy making ricin. Since Iraq, they claimed, they were preparing attacks in France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Germany and Russia. There was therefore a state of emergency.

However, believing this rubbish supposes that one knows nothing about the Ba’ath party in power in Iraq. Thus, rather than admit their ignorance, the Western journalists preferred to forget the episode.

The complicity between the medias has not changed

Nothing has changed since the attack on Baghdad by the United States and their allies – the medias have lied once again, deliberately this time, in order to hide their previous involuntary lie. They all prefer to tell us how they were abused. Not one of them has admitted to professional misconduct by minimising the advice of UN experts.

Historians who have studied war propaganda have shown that those who seek war always build up an incredible quantity of proof and false witness accounts. Although all journalists recognise that « the first victim of war is Truth » (Rudyard Kipling), not one of them has yet tried to develop a method which would protect them from being intoxicated once again. And yet it’s quite simple – it’s enough to keep a cool head, and when everyone else gets excited, do not hesitate to swim against the current and do your job, always remembering to check your sources. This is what we have done, and it has earned us the title of « conspiracy theorists ».

The justification for the war against Syria

So, concerning the war on Syria, everyone continues to believe unquestioningly that the events began as a « revolution against a dictatorship », and that the « régime » had responded by « massacring its own people » using « tortures », « barrel bombs » and « chemical weapons », which forced the population to turn to violence. All of this is either stupid (as was the case of the phoney invitation of Oussama Ben Laden by President Saddam Hussein), or else denied by various international missions (as with the UNMOVIC).

The La « revolution against the dictatorship » has been formally contradicted by the only organisation capable of judging the situation – an international mission by the Arab League which was authorised to travel everywhere in Syria, and which had the personnel numerous enough to cover the whole territory (24 December 2011 to 18 January 2012) [3]. But journalists always prefer to believe Western governments rather than the organisations which have the means of verifying.

The photographs of people who died under « torture », blamed on Syria by the Caesar Report, are in reality photographs of people who died under torture by the jihadists. We only need to think for a moment - Caesar declared he took them for the Syrian Arab Army, but did not know the identity of the dead. What purpose could it serve for Damascus to establish a photographic file with absolutely no information on the victims?

The « barrel bombs » are a legend which is equally stupid – why would the Syrian Arab Army use hand-made bombs when it possesses sophisticated bombs supplied by Russia?

After the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, 

the Syrian chemical weapons

The most interesting point here is the accusation of the use of chemical weapons. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) handed in its report on 1 March 2019. It had been tasked with establishing the truth about the alleged attack of 7 April 2018 in Douma, which was unilaterally sanctioned by the bombing of Syria by the United States, France and the United Kingdom the following week. The OPCW report is a pearl. Although it does not say so explicitly, it confirms point by point that the whole affair is a montage.

Let’s note that after the attack on the Ghouta five years earlier, Syria joined the Chemical Weapons Convention. Its stocks of chemical weapons had been stored under guard, then destroyed by the United States and Russia, under the control of the OPCW. Pretending that Damascus still possessed chemical weapons after this work of destruction is above all contesting the work accomplished by the Hague, Moscow and Washington.

In 2018, the State Department claimed that it had credible proof of the « use of Sarin gas by Syria » against the « democrats », while Russia denounced a spectacle commanded by the United Kingdom. The British Minister for Foreign Affairs, Boris Johnson, played his indignation with a straight face, railing against these « grotesque, bizarre accusations », and this « flagrant lie ».

However, the attack was alleged by three sources, all of them British – the White Helmets (a NGO controlled by MI6), the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (a shopfront for the Muslim Brotherhood with Intelligence by MI6), and the Army of Islam (an armed group founded by Zohran Allouche, whose entire family lived in London in a luxurious residence guarded by the police). The mission of the OPCW, blocked by the Army of Islam, was to count the bodies of the victims and autopsy them. It was not authorised to enter Douma until after they had been « incinerated » - an unbelievable treatment for the bodies of Muslims, and not justified from a sanitary point of view. According to the OPCW, the samples taken attest to the fact that no prohibited chemical substance had been used in Douma. None.

However, the organisation admits that two shells may have been fired on the site of the alleged contamination, and that they may have contained a chlorinated toxic substance. Chlorine disperses in the open air. It can only kill in a confined space. This is why it has never been listed as a prohibited weapon, and is used by everyone as a household cleaning product.

Let’s also note that the Army of Islam (Jaych al-Islam) is the « democratic » organisation which decapitated, with production-line efficiency, « Bachar’s dogs » (meaning the Syrians who refused to vilify the heretic President Bachar el-Assad) [4]). It won celebrity by condemning to death the Syrians found guilty of homosexuality and throwing them off the rooftops. It was the Army of Islam’s chief, Mohamed Allouche, supported by the Western powers, who presided the delegation of the « moderate opposition » at the UNO negotiations in Geneva.

In short, the bombing of Syria by the United States, France and the United Kingdom was not only a violation of international Law, but was also unjustified.

The treatment of the OPCW report by the Press

If the Western Press were honest, it would have published a faithful rendition of the OPCW report. This was not the case. The Anglo-Saxon journalists remained curiously silent, only mentioning the information in passing. Their French counterparts were more specious.

They stated that in the past, a report by the OPCW/UN Joint Mechanism had confirmed the use of chemical weapons by Syria. But they omitted to note that the UN Security Council had rejected this report because the Mechanism had not respected the rules of the OPCW.

Others pretended that the mission had established the use of chlorine in Douma. They forgot to specify that the OPCW considered it probable that a toxic agent containing chlorine was used as a weapon, and was possibly dispersed by two shells. They especially avoided mentioning that in the open air, chlorine is not a lethal poison, but an irritant - the reason it is not classified as a prohibited chemical weapon.

You are probably wondering why these Press articles escaped your notice, and why you have never heard any apologies from Mrs. May and Messrs. Macron and Trump? Simply because the Press is not doing its job of informing the public, and the Western leaders are without honour.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 

Pete Kimberley

Read more:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article205496.html

Read from top.

Interview by Karin Leukefeld with Hans von Sponeck

zf. On 7 April 2018, an alleged chemical weapons attack killing 50 civilians took place in Douma, Syria. Seven days later, on 14 April, a missile attack by US, French and British forces on three targets in Syria followed in response. These were justified on the grounds that the Syrian government was responsible for the alleged attack. However, important information and views of OPCW scientists who were involved in the investigation at the time are still being ignored today. What is more, two of its former scientists have been denounced by the OPCW, and the online network Bellingcat, which is close to NATO, even tried to slander one of the former OPCW scientists. All this despite the fact that factual WikiLeaks and Grayzone documents had since become public (see also Current Concerns No. 5 of 17 March 2020). On 11 March 2021, 27 former diplomats, high-ranking military officers, writers and journalists issued a “Statement of Concern” demanding transparency and accountability from the OPCW in order to restore the credibility and integrity of the organisation (see page 5 of this journal).
  One of the signatories of the declaration is Hans von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary-General and UN Humanitarian Aid Coordinator in Iraq, with whom Middle East correspondent Karin Leukefeld conducted the following interview. 

Karin Leukefeld: Mr von Sponeck, you are an experienced UN diplomat and know the Middle East, especially Iraq, from your own experience. Is the war in Syria comparable to what happened earlier in Iraq?
Hans von Sponeck: No armed conflict in the Middle East is as complex as the current conflict, the war in Syria, which has now been ongoing for ten years. The internal uprising of 2011 quickly became a broad confrontation of groups that had little to do with the internal Syrian conflict, but much to do with national interests of neighbouring countries and those of major powers pursuing their own geopolitical goals.
  Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for observers to identify which of the internal and external parties was responsible for individual attacks. At the same time, the destruction of the country and the aggravation of the suffering of the people increased inexorably. 

Why a “statement of concern”?

You have addressed a “Statement of Concern” to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the OPCW. Why are you concerned?
Today, the public is aware that all adversaries in Syria – the Syrian government, internal opposition groups, self-proclaimed rulers and other states – have most brutally as well as repeatedly violated martial law and international humanitarian law. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), founded in 1997, has – in general terms – the mandate to implement this prohibition and to ensure the destruction of chemical weapons. In cooperation with the United Nations, the OPCW is to do everything possible to prevent actions contrary to international law and the use of chemical weapons. At least, this is what is stipulated in the Chemical Weapons Convention, which has been signed by OPCW member-states or contracting states. The OPCW’s mandate in Syria was just that, to investigate and determine whether chemical weapons were used.
  The “Statement of Concern” is, after all, specifically about the case of Douma, where there was allegedly a chemical weapons attack in April 2018.
  Fifty Syrian citizens were reportedly killed, and, according to the OPCW's final report on Douma, allegedly by a chemical weapons attack. In the meantime, however, there has been an increase in the number of documents, scientific reports and statements by OPCW staff testifying that a false picture was spread about what happened in Douma at the time. This all points to the conclusion that the legitimisation of a certain political and military approach was aimed at. That is why we published the “Statement of Concern”. 

This is a serious accusation.
This is not about speculation or assumptions, but about facts that testify that the OPCW management, in collusion with various governments, built up a false picture of what had happened in Douma. In the process, the OPCW’s commitment specified in the OPCW's self-imposed values to “conduct itself professionally and with integrity at all times” was forgotten. 

Repression against high-ranking British co-signatory

One of your co-signatories, the British Lord West, has been accused by the government in London of engaging in “disinformation and propaganda”. These are big guns brought in to destroy your credibility.
Lord West is a member of the British House of Lords, he is a retired Admiral and was for a time Minister for Security in the UK. As a co-signatory of the “Statement of Concern”, he expressed, to the British government among others, considerable doubt on the claim that chemical weapons were used in Douma. His call for an investigation has led to harsh accusations against him. Behind these is probably the fear that his actions might lead to a criminal prosecution for the manipulations.
  The evidence of wrongdoing within OPCW management is serious and supported by facts. This cannot simply be dismissed by the UK or by other governments as “ideologically coloured” or, say, “simple-minded and naïve”. At least, one would think so. But it is so dismissed, and politics follows.
  Well, these governments are led by interest groups that have been involved in the manipulations and so defend them vehemently. They refuse to accept the facts and are pushing the dangerous confrontation further and further. This harms the Syrian people and prevents a peaceful end to the long war. These groups are not about international law or protecting the integrity of multilateral institutions. 

It is about the truth

The signatories of the “Statement of Concern”, however, are concerned with the truth. It is ridiculous to think that they have anything to do with ideology or that they want to defend a dictator. They are 27 internationally known people who, despite their very different backgrounds, have one demand in common: Scientific knowledge should not be politicised. We call on OPCW Director-General Ariasto abide by this rule. He should do everything possible to fulfil the OPCW’s mandate. The OPCW was created as an impartial world organisation; its duty is to serve the truth.

The hope to be heard

Who else besides the OPCW have you informed about your statement?
The statement was sent to the OPCW Director-General and all 193 OPCW members in mid-February. While an OPCW response is pending [on 24 March 2021, at the time of the interview], several Member States have already clearly expressed their concern about this development. Others have confirmed that they are not prepared to deviate from their policy of false statements. Similar to what happened in Iraq in the 1990s, they seem to be preparing to mislead the public by any means possible, just as they did then. Only in order to maintain their Syria policy. This will have serious consequences.
  The President-in-Office of the UN Security Council, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the President of the UN General Assembly Volkan Bozkin as well as United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres have also received the “Statement of Concern”. We hope to be heard there.

And who is the Berlin Group 21?
We are a small group of people from different countries who, with the help of the signatories of the statement, want to ensure that an investigation into the OPCW's approach to the Douma incident takes place, that the public learns the facts and will remain informed. We have also published background material for this purpose. We will remain in discussion worldwide to defend the right to truth about what happened in Douma. 

Facts ...

Please let us go into more detail. What is the basis of your findings that there is something wrong with the final report on the alleged chemical weapons attack on Douma? What are the facts involved?
One fact is that the original, internal OPCW report on Douma did not include evidence of the use of chemical weapons. It is also a fact that shortly before the planned publication of the first interim report in the summer of 2018, and without the knowledge of several OPCW scientists involved in the Douma investigation, OPCW management wanted to replace the original report with a “revised” one, a manipulated one. This report falsely stated that chlorine gas had been used in Douma. Finally, this “revised” version was not published because the OPCW scientists protested. Nevertheless, the fact remains that a falsification was attempted.
  It is also a fact that the final report on Douma, which was eventually published on 1 March 2019, contained conclusions that had not been made by the original OPCW investigative team. The original report contains no evidence that chlorine gas was used in Douma; this information is missing in the final report.

And what about the 50 people found dead?
Again, the final report made no mention of the fact that toxicologists from the original OPCW team had concluded that the deaths of civilians in Douma could not have been caused by chlorine gas. And it also fails to mention that OPCW engineers on the team had testified that it was ballistically impossible that the gas cylinders found had been dropped from the air onto the affected house. Rather, the scientists thought it likely that these cylinders had been carried into the house and placed at the site to show a false picture of what had happened. The published final report also does not address the fact that there had been considerable tension among the OPCW staff involved, between scientists from the Douma team and those who were called in later.

… and their manipulation

Why should the OPCW have strayed so far from its own standards?
In this context, it is important to mention the timeline of events: On 7 April 2018, the attack on civilians in Douma occurred; one week later, on 14 April 2018, missile strikes were carried out by the US, the UK and France. Aircraft and warships were used in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. The attacks were explained or justified by saying that the Syrian government should be punished for the alleged use of chemical weapons in Douma. The airstrikes were carried out before the OPCW had begun its Douma investigation! In other words, even without the OPCW, it had been “confirmed” that chemical weapons had been used in Douma, and thus the airstrikes were legitimate as punishment. All that remained was for the OPCW’s final report on Douma, published in 2019, to confirm that the dead civilians in Douma were victims of a chemical weapons attack. And the governments had already declared this a “fact” with their attacks a year earlier.

Open Sources: Facts verifiable for everyone

This sounds like a crime story. The governments of three countries that have veto power in the UN Security Council and also possess nuclear weapons are putting pressure on the OPCW to manipulate the report on what happened in Douma in order to legitimise the three countries’ attack on Syria?
The whole thing is without question a very disturbing event, but it is no longer a secret. The documents confirming it are available for inspection. I am referring to the original OPCW draft reports, which have been published and can be read at Wikileaks, by the Courage Foundation and also by the Berlin Group 21. Statements by OPCW staff have confirmed these documents bona fide. Furthermore, it is known that there have been other very serious scientific and procedural irregularities. “Inconvenient” OPCW staff members have been expelled. Just to be clear, these are not assumptions, but facts. 

US pressure on the OPCW – as in Iraq

If the OPCW can be put under pressure like this and still try to hide it, does one have to ask how credible the organisation still is?
Urgent questions must be asked. These include the question: Where was the OPCW’s interest in allowing or even agreeing to neglect its mandate? And the question: was there a mandate from “outside”? The answer to the second question probably explains the OPCW’s behaviour. It has remained no secret that American diplomats made representations to the OPCW to ensure that the report would contain references to the use of chemical weapons in Douma. Details are now known of how the US exerted pressure on the OPCW in Iraq, for example. And although governments involved, such as those of the US, the UK and France, defend the OPCW, the agency has become increasingly discredited. Again, I want to point out that these are facts, not insinuations. 

Germany must take more responsibility, but honestly

How do you assess the attitude of the Federal Government? Germany is – after the USA and Japan – the third largest contributor to the OPCW. That also means taking responsibility.
Germany is an important country in the large multilateral organisations such as the UN and the OPCW. Our government must understand that the world is watching them. Therefore, it should be particularly concerned that Germany respects international law and behaves correctly in its basic attitude. The developments on Douma over the last twelve months must lead the German government to seriously review Germany’s stance on cooperation with the OPCW. It must be examined to what extent corrections in cooperation have become unavoidable, especially in the case of Douma. At the annual Munich Security Conferences, politicians repeatedly emphasise that German foreign and security policy is ready to assume more responsibility. This must be a willingness to defend the integrity and honesty of politics. Many people who follow and think politics show concern about the dangerous and dishonest behaviour in the Douma case. 

As UN Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Aid, you were serving in Iraq and resigned in protest over the UN sanctions at the time. In our dialogue, you repeatedly referred to Iraq. Is it these experiences in Iraq why you are now so committed to the truth about the OPCW report on Douma?
Indeed, it is reminiscent of the damage done to Iraq by the American and British governments during the years of sanctions and in 2003 through the war that was illegal under international law. The impoverishment of a people, the violation of international law and the weakening of the United Nations were based on the falsehood about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that did not exist.
  Disinformation and false-flag propaganda destroy the incorruptible asset of political credibility. Germany and Europe must strengthen and protect this asset. A repetition of military operations in Syria, which was imminent after the publication of the censored OPCW final report on Douma in March 2019, must be prevented. As a member of Berlin Group 21, I wholeheartedly agree with former OPCW Director-General José Bustani. In his statement to the UN Security Council on 5 October 2020, he urged the current Director-General Fernando Arias to invite the inspectors who reject parts of the Douma report with scientific critical concern to a dialogue. This must be done if the OPCW is to restore its credibility. Such a dialogue should lead to the depoliticisation of the Douma Final Report, and governments that have supported and encouraged the OPCW’s approach should contribute to it. The road ahead will be long. 

Thank you for the interview.  •

First published in www.nachdenkseiten.de of 24 March 2021

(Translation Current Concerns)

Read more:

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2021/no-10-11-may-2021/as-an-impartial-world-organisation-the-opcw-must-serve-the-truth.html

Read from top

assange2