The toxic regime« Back
The EU Council at its meeting in Luxembourg approved a new regime of sanctions against individuals and legal entities responsible for the use and distribution of chemical weapons. This mechanism was proposed by Britain and France "after the attacks in Syria and Salisbury", in which, according to London, Russia is allegedly directly or indirectly to blame.
The development of measures Brussels initiated at the EU summit in late June. On the eve of this, an emergency meeting of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons took place, at which the leading Western countries, bypassing the UN Security Council, "pushed through" the provision of OPCW the right to name those responsible for chemical attack. Now the new mechanism will allow the EU to impose sanctions on those who, according to Brussels, are involved in the development and use of chemical weapons, regardless of the country of residence. In particular, one is talking about freezing the assets of the leaders of intelligence agencies and politicians who are suspected of being involved in the use of chemical weapons by Europeans, and about the ban on entry to the EU countries for them.
Obviously, the sanctions are largely symbolic, but the fact of their introduction will say that chemical weapons are increasingly serving as an instrument of pressure from the West. This happened for the first time in August 2013, when, according to the same West, the Syrian army launched rocket attacks using chemical weapons on the Damascus suburb of Eastern Guta, which at that time was controlled by the armed opposition. It was alleged that 330-mm (presumably Syrian-made) and 140-mm Soviet ground-to-ground missiles were allegedly used to deliver nerve gas of the sarin type. UN inspectors on chemical weapons, who investigated this incident, only confirmed the fact of chemical attack and found out some technical details: the quantity and type of toxic agent, the method of delivery. But this organization did not yet have the task of identifying those responsible for the chemical attack, since it is the direct responsibility of the UN Security Council.
In such conditions, the so-called independent Western organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, which on September 10, 2013 published an extremely controversial report “Attack on Guta: an analysis of the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria”, showed themselves.
Something similar is happening now, when the investigation of the so-called incident in Salisbury with Sergey and Yulia Skripal, who have already been discharged from the hospital (probably the first ever case of such a dubious military use of chemical weapons), joined the Bellingcat research team. But this time its representatives did not even attempt to conduct their own investigation, but merely provided data from British intelligence. Previously, they did this in relation to the tragedy with a passenger plane Boeing 777 of Malaysia Airlines, which crashed on July 17, 2014 in the Donetsk region. Bellingcat announced the Russian origin of the "shot down MH 17 "Buk".
Given such “serious” analytical organizations, the United States and Europe can probably refuse to use their own intelligence structures. After all, the so-called independent structures are capable of giving an exhaustive, and most importantly - “correct”, answer to any question on the international agenda. And the most curious thing is that they will not bear any responsibility for this, which is extremely convenient for some overly active Western states. If suddenly they find some mistakes in the "evidence", then the countries will not have to justify themselves - independent organizations are independent, the government is not accountable, although their "conclusions" are somehow amazing and coincide with the "state" versions.
By the way, according to some data (in particular, the American journalist Seymour Hersh), the 2013 incident with the use of chemical weapons in Eastern Guta was carried out precisely by British intelligence, which notified the United States CIA in advance.
Now, the EU is actually introducing new - “chemical sanctions” against Russia. Moreover, this initiative largely belongs to London, which is very keen to create the greatest possible problems for Moscow before the inevitable withdrawal of Great Britain from the EU in the spring of next year. Of course, in the rest of Europe there are supporters of equally decisive actions. But this not only discredits the OPCW and other structures of international security, but also harms the EU itself, where, for many reasons, terrorist activity will increase. First of all, because of the refusal to cooperate with the Russian special services, this could help to protect Europeans from real, rather than mythical threats.