Now Reading
Former British Ambassador to Syria says OPCW turning into NATO tool for war

Former British Ambassador to Syria says OPCW turning into NATO tool for war

Between the Skripal poisonings and the staged Douma chemical attack, the West has been on a mission to find a solid pretext for ramping up their hysteria against Russia even further, to ever more so isolate it, and for developing a good excuse to escalate the West’s military participation in Syria with an aim of eliminating the Assad government.

The need for support from international organizations towards these efforts has never been greater. However, up until now, they’ve never been able to turn up evidence which conclusively or convincingly pointed the finger at either of these parties, being poorly orchestrated charades as they were. Now, however, they’ve successfully managed to win for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) the power to assign blame for chemical, and other, attacks.

Additionally, suspected members of the US funded White Helmets group, which orchestrated the Douma debacle, have recently been spotted prepping for another such incident. It looks like the stage is being set for another show, and this time, it might just provide the ending that America and its allies have been working so hard to secure, and that is a good excuse to drop some more bombs on Syria and to potentially launch a US-led coalition invasion to take out the Syrian government.

Former British envoy to Syria, Peter Ford, recently described this agenda to the Sputnik News Agency:

OPCW members have passed the UK’s draft extension of the organization’s powers, with the move harshly slammed by Russia, which said the West will be tempted to struggle for greater influence over the OPCW’s decision making. Former British Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford has given his take on the motion.

Sputnik: Has the decision come as a surprise for you?

Peter Ford: Not really, because the British and the Americans have been trying for a number of months to recreate a body that previously existed for Syria called the Joint Investigative Mechanism, which did have a power to attribute responsibility for alleged chemical attacks, and this mechanism expired.

Russia, with some other countries, prevented the renewal of the mandate of this JIM, with the British looking for ways to reverse this decision, and they think they have found this through this extraordinary, in all ways, very extraordinary meeting of the OPCW council. And it’s all about Syria, in my opinion. It’s all about finding a pretext for the next round of the Western war against Syria; an investigation is currently underway into alleged chemical incidents in Douma on the outskirts of Damascus in April.

The Western powers have been failing, so far, in their attempt to pin blame on Damascus; another of these commissions which is inquiring on Syria refused to be pressured by Britain and America into pointing the finger at Syria. So, I think in response, the British went to The Hague, where it’s easier to manipulate decisions.

Sputnik: Earlier Moscow dubbed the UK proposal as politicized. Would you agree with that? What’s your take on that statement?

Peter Ford: 100 percent politicized. In fact, the OPCW, I’m sad to say, is being turned into a branch of NATO, an arm, a tool of NATO. Already, the Western powers have immense influence within the OPCW. The head of it, the director, is a Turk; Turkey is a member of NATO. The staff is mainly from Western countries.

The whole culture of the place is anti-Russian, pro-Western. This latest move is a nail in the coffin of the impartiality of an important international institution. It just diminishes the architecture for control of prohibited weapons. This politicization is very short-sighted and in the long term will backfire on the West.

Sputnik: Some experts have noted that Britain was trying to push this initiative to decrease public interest in the lack of proof of Russia’s involvement in the poisoning of the Skripals. Would you agree with that sentiment?

Peter Ford: No, because I think it’s worse than that, because it’s all about Syria. What’s happening here, and it’s very important to understand this, is the countdown to the next war, to the next round of the war against Syria.

See Also

What this is, it represents a milestone in the British-led (Americans are not far behind) attempt to prepare a pretext to bomb Syria again, as happened in April. Only next time, the bombing is going to be much heavier. What’s happening with this Hague decision is the conditioning of the international opinion, the conditioning of Western public opinion to prepare for the coming strike.

Sputnik: This event that is now happening in terms of the decision, the OPCW has gone against the West; is that now going to ratchet further actions to exacerbate the situation? Is that the way you see it?

Peter Ford: It is exactly. We see that the Western powers have deliberately painted themselves into a corner. After the carefully targeted, calibrated strikes of April, thanks to Russia, which put on enough pressure to ensure that nothing too terrible happened; after that the Western powers threatened that next time, the brakes will be off, no restraint.

They have put themselves under pressure next time to strike much more heavily at President Assad personally: they will try, I expect, to attack, to bomb his residence, the command and control centers of the Syrian army. This is what they were planning to do in April, but were prevented from doing by Russian pressure. […]

It’s quite possible that a new allegation of chemical weapons use, pinned naturally on the Assad regime, could be carried out in Syria, to be investigated by an OPCW which may conduct a politically skewed investigation to assert that it was carried out by Assad’s government, to be followed up with a swift US coalition assault on the Syrian government in Damascus. With the US openly funding the White Helmets, with White Helmets being openly linked to terrorists operating against the Syrian government in Syria, and with the White Helmets being the one making the assertions of the Douma attack, which was utilized as a pretext for a US led coalition airstrike, it’s not absurd to expect that this course of action could become a manifest reality, especially if the main stream media is prepared to sell it to the public.

 

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

10
Leave a Reply

avatar
10 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
my2CentsGeneral KreegCharles Pettibonetomlynettechaplin@virgilio.it Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Well that was rather obvious wasn’t it. No big revelation here.

General Kreeg
Guest
General Kreeg

Sickening!

Charles Pettibone
Guest
Charles Pettibone

There is zero political will for a ground invasion of Syria. It simply will not happen. Assad could murder children on live television while laughing maniacally and gassing Ronald McDonald. There still wouldn’t be a ground invasion of Syria. I could see US and coalition airstrikes- but the last airstrikes were 100% for show (zero casualties and hitting some empty buildings) and I imagine another round would be the same.

tom
Guest
tom

When contemplating the horrible schemes of the British government, I am somewhat reminded of Bertrand Russell’s comment about Ancient Greece. The prevailing tyranny (whether of one man, the few or the many) was mitigated by the inefficiency of the police, which allowed a larger proportion of decent people to survive.

Downing Street and Whitehall contain many ghastly creeps with frightful plans – but luckily for us, they are also immensely incompetent.

lynettechaplin@virgilio.it
Guest

I am hoping that the presence of Russia in Syria will be a deterrent in any attack by british and american terrorists.

dave3200
Guest
dave3200

It seems the entire plan is contingent on another false flag chemical attack which will be presented in videos choreographed by the White Helmets and friends. Since a great deal is known about the pending attack, why don’t Syrian and Russian forces simply wipe out those who are preparing to perform the scam? Destroy the White Helmets, their chemical weapons, their leaders, their vehicles, everything. It will take a long time for them to reconstruct and resume their sneaky little scam. Now is a good time to do it since the U.S. isn’t likely to come to their defense just… Read more »

ColinNZ
Guest
ColinNZ

The SAA+allies+regional powers on the ground have made such sacrifices in the last several years, leading them to the brink of an historic victory of such global significance, that they will simply not now allow a US-driven “invasion” from a coalition that has literally run out of significant boots-on-the-ground. The US knows that, even if it succeeded (and that is a very big ‘IF’) the ‘during’ and ‘after’ would come with such a huge financial, political and casualty price tag as to be beyond any justification. The reason Trump is meeting Putin in July is to negotiate the US withdrawal… Read more »

Erik Skjold
Guest
Erik Skjold

When will the OPCW publish their forensic findings from Douma? Its been 10 weeks, maybe findings only confirm the bluff. In the Skipal incident it took Porton Down only 10 days to pronounce their findings.

Jack
Guest
Jack

The problem is that to pass a true stories from Syria is extremely difficult because midstream media lie and majority of population listening to them and watching news are convinced about this lie as a true story. Personally think that Russia should engage more actively in a combat in Syria and less be involved with diplomatic involvement seeking for stabilisation in Syria only military operations and victorious side that coming out of it can count on frill success.

ourblue
Guest
ourblue

I suspect,like many others will, that I can pre-empt the conclusion for any forthcoming
events involving chemicals that the OPCW will investigate. The level of
credibility in international organisations, for me at least, is so low as to be
a negative percent. Also. Can anyone with sufficient knowledge give me an
explanation how ‘Chlorine bombs’ are so deadly, other than damage caused by
impact?

Copyright DRN Media PLC 2019. RSS: http://theduran.com/feed

Scroll To Top