Intelligence Crime 2: ‘Smear,’ or Crimes Committed by ‘Them’

Lint, de; Bart, Willem

doi:10.1007/978-981-16-0352-5_6

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, however, academic engagement with the issue has been minimal with some broadly accepting at face value the probity of OPCW FFM investigations (Aloklah, 2022; Edwards & Cacciatori, 2018; Edwards et al, 2022; Koblentz, 2019). More circumspect or critical accounts of the OPCW and alleged chemical weapon attacks in Syria do not analyze in detail the OPCW FFMs (Boyd‐Barrett, 2022; Cole, 2022; de Lint, 2021). Sellström (2021), a former UN weapons inspector, provides an overview of his activities with the Joint Investigative Mechanism in Syria and does not address the FFMs.…”

Section: The War In Syria Chemical Weapons Allegations and Un/opcw In...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, on April 7, 2018, involved the apparent dropping of chlorine cylinders on a civilian area and the deaths of more than 40 civilians. It was immediately controversial, with the United States, the United Kingdom, and France alleging Syrian guilt and, in response, the Russian Federation and Syrian government accusing opposition groups of having staged the event (Boyd‐Barrett, 2022; de Lint, 2021, pp. 139–169; Gray, 2019; Robinson, 2022).…”

Section: The Case Of the Alleged Chemical Attack In Douma April 2018mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The corrupt politics of chemical weapons

Robinson¹

2023

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a significant component of the global governance structure and considered a gold standard international body with 193 member states and scientific divisions expected to adhere rigorously to objectivity and political neutrality. However, OPCW's reputation has recently been tarnished. Dissenting scientists from within the organization have raised serious questions about the integrity of an OPCW fact‐finding mission (FFM) investigating the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria on April 7, 2018. The OPCW FFMs are tainted in three ways: (1) they rely upon information provided via intermediaries connected to states that are belligerents in the war in Syria; (2) the organizational structure of an FFM excludes scientific and verification divisions of the OPCW; and (3) control of FFMs is held by a bureaucratic office staffed by career diplomats who are from states involved with the Syrian war. Furthermore, officials involved with the Douma FFM investigation report the following anomalies: (a) an original interim report was secretly altered in order to make an unsubstantiated suggestion that an alleged attack had occurred; (b) A U.S. delegation was allowed to brief the FFM, an action prohibited by the Chemical Weapons Convention; and (c) formal attempts by the inspectors to obtain transparency and dialog was rejected by the OPCW. Meanwhile, the United States and its allies have dismissed questions as Russian “disinformation” or as a “conspiracy theory.” Overall, analysis of the alleged Douma attack and the OPCW's FFM supports the thesis that key international organizations have been effectively captured, or at the very least heavily influenced, by particular states that assume their own impartiality. This shortcoming poses a risk to international peace and security.

show abstract