Debate Over Blame For Chemical Attack in Syria Rages in UN Security Council
Who is to blame for the use of chemical weapons in Syria? This question was discussed in the UN again. The UN Security Council submitted a new report on the chemical attacks and once again Damascus is to blame. There's no evidence. Some of the experts didn't even get to the scene. The investigation split the UN Security Council. Russia and China on one side, the West on the other side. Both parties have controversial views about the investigating panel's work. And this throws into question its existence. Valentin Bogdanov-on the split in the UN Security Council.
In the Joint Investigative Mechanism, the key part was faulty. For about a half-year Edmond Mulet's people tried to find out who used chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun this April. But none of them got to the scene. The Head of the panel, who reported the commission's conclusions, could not fail to admit this fact.
Edmond Mulet, Head of UN Joint Investigative Mechanism: "It was too dangerous to visit Khan Shaykhun. It is still a region of combat operations. This area is under the control of Al-Nusra Front, which is marked down by UNSC as a terror group. Special investigative panel found the visit to Khan Shaykhun too risky because of shelling and airstrikes".
However, this had no impact on the final conclusion. It fully agreed with the U.S. report made the next day after the incident. They blamed Damascus and attacked Shayrat airbase with Tomahawk cruise missiles. That's why "the right man" Mulet, as the U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley called him, is likely to work at least two more years. The panel's mandate expires in nine days.
Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the UN: "It' time for the Council to unanimously renew the mandate of the Mechanism so that it could function for at least one more year. Pro arguments are obvious. The last report confirms these findings. The renewal of the mandate is the biggest priority. Anyone who hinders this is aiding and pandering to those who use chemical weapons in Syria".
Russia can't agree with this ultimatum. At least because professional researchers trust their own eyes gathering evidence personally.
Vladimir Safronkov, Russian deputy envoy to the UN: "The mission didn't manage to get material evidence. All the findings are based on inferential evidence. Most of them were provided by the opposition and the completely discredited opposition groups like White Helmets, who are closely linked to the Jabhat Al Nusra terrorists".
Gassed people who got in hospital for some reason before the attack didn't look like someone who really was exposed to sarin. The strange form of the shell crater indicates that it was an explosive demolition, not bombing. Key parts of the bomb itself also were not found. Plus a flight line of a Syrian Su-22 which didn't allow to drop that bomb.
It was detected by American radars. A list of poke holes, which authors of the report tried to slacken but didn't manage to.
Vladimir Safronkov: "A total of blunders of the investigative mechanisms led to the fact that the report published on October 26 and its findings aren't able to withstand even a moment's scrutiny. It's no coincidence that the text, including the analysis of the Khan Shaykhun incident, is full of phrases like "probably", "supposedly", "allegedly", "likely". Dear Mr. Mulet, do you really think that this terminology is acceptable in the report on such a serious issue? Wouldn't it be better to honestly declare that the Investigative Mechanism is unable to conduct an adequate investigation".
However, it couldn't be different. Key posts are occupied by representatives of countries which blame Damascus by default. The UNSC resolution prepared by Russian diplomats aimed at removing such a mismatch. First of all, it suggests that the experts need to head for Khan Shaykhun to conduct an investigation on site. China has already supported the Russian resolution. Valentin Bogdanov, Ivan Utkin. Vesti, New-York.