The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has completed its fact-finding mission to the Syrian town of Douma, site of an alleged – but disputed – chemical weapon attack in March.
The OPCW issued a statement advising it will take around a month weeks to complete its analysis – but warning it cannot yet say how long it will be before it is ready to publish its report:
THE HAGUE, Netherlands — 4 May 2018
The initial deployment of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) to gather facts in Douma, Syrian Arab Republic is complete. The Director-General thanked the FFM team members for their courage and professionalism.
Samples were brought to the OPCW Laboratory where they will be split and then dispatched to the OPCW designated laboratories. The analysis of the samples may take at least three to four weeks.
Meanwhile, the FFM will continue its work to collect more information and material. At this time, it is not possible to give a timeframe for when the Douma report will be issued to States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
It’s to be hoped the report will be more specific and informative than its recent report on the Salisbury toxin.
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.
month/weeks?
a month weeks?
I’d assumed a mobile lab would have been flown there and that anything more than trace contamination would have been found very quickly.
Haven’t watched CSI in years though so I may not be completely up to date with current methodology 🙂
I forecast that,like the report into flight MH17 shot down in Ukraine,the report will never surface.
The chief of inspections at the UN nuclear watchdog has resigned suddenly, the agency said on Friday without giving a reason.
The departure of Tero Varjoranta comes at a sensitive time, three days after the U.S. announced it was quitting world powers’ nuclear accord with Iran, raising questions as to whether Tehran will continue to comply with it.
Is this ‘resignation’ the prelude to the USA going to war with Iran. This scenario is remarkably similar to what happened with the head of the IPCW just before the invasion of Iraq
The chief of inspections at the UN nuclear watchdog has resigned suddenly, the agency said on Friday without giving a reason.
The departure of Tero Varjoranta comes at a sensitive time, three days after the U.S. announced it was quitting world powers’ nuclear accord with Iran, raising questions as to whether Tehran will continue to comply with it.
Is this ‘resignation’ the prelude to the USA going to war with Iran. This scenario is remarkably similar to what happened with the head of the IPCW just before the invasion of Iraq
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_for_the_Prohibition_of_Chemical_Weapons#Relations_with_the_United_Nations
The first Director-General only served about one year of his second term, after which he was removed from office on grounds of lack of confidence by the member states.[29][30] Some suspect that Director-General Bustani was forced out by the U.S. government because Bustani wanted international chemical weapons monitors inside Iraq and thus was seen as impeding the U.S. push for war against IraqThe first Director-General only served about one year of his second term, after which he was removed from office on grounds of lack of confidence by the member states.[29][30] Some suspect that Director-General Bustani was forced out by the U.S. government because Bustani wanted international chemical weapons monitors inside Iraq and thus was seen as impeding the U.S. push for war against Iraq
My apologies for the repetition of the first couple of paragraphs.