Full OPCW report summary (which does not say Novichok)

opcw tar.png

The OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) executive summary of the findings of its ‘technical assistance visit’ to Salisbury and subsequent analysis of the toxin is now available and can be downloaded below.

The document is carefully worded not to say that the substance analysed was a ‘Novichok’, in spite of media spin to the contrary – because the government’s Porton Down chemical weapons research facility also did not say it’s a Novichok.

The OPCW report does say it agrees with Porton Down’s findings on the substance – but Porton Down said it was a Novichok or something else like one:

judicial novichok

Porton Down also said – contradicting Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who falsely claimed it had – that it had not been able to identify a source for the chemical.

So that’s what the OPCW is prepared to admit to in its public summary – that it agrees with Porton Down’s analysis, which said the substance something similar to a Novichok, with no source identified.

Note that Porton Down has also not said that the substance could only have been made at a state laboratory – which is as well for Porton Down’s scientific credibility, since chemical experts in the US and UK have said that’s untrue.

Which again contradicts the statements of Theresa May, Boris Johnson and numerous other Establishment or pro-Establishment ‘talking heads’.

The OPCW has said what it has said – but the ‘MSM’ will try to stretch that to fit a narrative rather than the facts.

The OPCW has said it is communicating the identity of the exact chemical found only to ‘States Parties’ – that is, the countries that have signed up to its protocol.

That means the UK, US, Russia, France, Germany and others will know by now exactly what it is.

The fact that the UK and others are not going on the record to crow explicitly that it is a Novichok (or one of the four known variants), rather than a ‘related compound’ is not conclusive, but may suggest that the Salisbury substance is, in fact, a ‘related compound’ rather than a Novichok.

Download the full two-page executive summary here.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Channel 4 reporter and radio news (12/4/18) say report confirms it was Novichok?

  2. 17. i) has only two sentences, both of which say the same thing. Why?
    The second sentence differs only in its inclusion of the word, “Novichok” – if I were asked to ‘sex up’ a document I’d probably flag up that fact in a similar way.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: