This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
Salisbury poisoning: UK experts cannot prove novichok nerve agent used on Skripals came from Russia, say MoD
Salisbury poisoning: UK experts cannot prove novichok nerve agent used on Skripals came from Russia, say MoD
(about 1 hour later)
British scientists cannot prove that the novichok nerve agent used to poison ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter was made in Russia, the military laboratory which tested it has said.
Accusations and recriminations between Britain and Russia are set to escalate with the news that scientists at the Porton Down military research facility have been unable to establish exactly where the novichok nerve agent used to carry out the Skripal attack was manufactured.
Experts at the Porton Down research laboratory were unable to establish “the precise source” of the chemical weapon, the chief executive of the Ministry of Defence facility told Sky News. He added the government had used “a number of other sources to piece together” the conclusion that the Kremlin was responsible.
The admission comes the day before Moscow has convened an emergency meeting of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague in which it is expected to demand access to samples from the Salisbury poisoning for analysis by Russian scientists.
The admission comes after Russia demanded the UK present “every possible element of evidence” that it was responsible for the suspected assassination attempt that has triggered a global diplomatic row and plunged Moscow’s relationship with many western nations to lows not seen since the Cold War.
The development also comes after Russia’s veteran foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, suggested that British intelligence services carried out the attempted assassination of the former MI6 agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia and claimed that it had proved “beneficial” in distracting attention from Theresa May’s government having to make major concessions to the European Union on Brexit.
The Kremlin denies any involvement in the 4 March attack, which left Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia fighting for life, but the British government has said there is “no other plausible explanation”.
The OPCW is due to present its own conclusions on the nerve agent in the near future. It remains to be seen whether it will be able to provide definite proof that the novichok came from a Russian government facility or basically echo the Porton Down position.
Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down science park near Salisbury, Wiltshire, said the nerve agent required “extremely sophisticated methods to create, something only in the capabilities of a state actor”.
Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, Wiltshire, stated in an interview with Sky News that the substance required “extremely sophisticated methods to create something only in the capabilities of a state actor. We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent”.
But he added scientists could not say if the chemical was produced in Russia and that verifying its origin required “other inputs”, some of them intelligence-based, that the government has access to.
Mr Aitkenhead went on to say: “We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to the government who have then used a number of other sources,” some of them intelligence based.
Mr Aitkenhead said: “We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent.
The head of Porton Down wanted to refute claims that his research centre had been connected in any way with a “false flag” operation or that the novichok used may have come from it. “There is no way that anything like that would ever have come from us or leave the walls of our facilities,” he said. “We deal with a number of very toxic substances as part of the work that we do.”
“We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions you have come to.
There has been no immediate reaction from the Kremlin on the Porton Down assessment, but there is little doubt that it will be used to support its claims that UK has no real evidence to back up the accusation of Russian state culpability in the attack.
“It is our job to provide the scientific evidence of what this particular nerve agent is, we identified that it is from this particular family and that it is a military grade, but it is not our job to say where it was manufactured.”
Speaking of the OPCW emergency meeting, Yury Filatov, the Russian ambassador to Ireland, said: “We hope to discuss the whole matter and call on Britain to provide every possible element of element of evidence they might have on their hands. Russia is interested in establishing the whole truth of the matter and we hope certainly that this meeting will help to return to at least the realm of normality within the realm of international law and decency in international matters.”
His comments are likely to be seized upon by the Kremlin, which has denied the existence of a nerve agent programme and whose foreign minister on Monday claimed it would have been “beneficial to the British government” to poison Mr Skripal.
A British government spokesperson insisted that the Porton Down assessment was “only part of the intelligence picture”. He continued: "As the Prime Minister has set out in a number of statements to the Commons since 12 March, this includes our knowledge that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichoks, Russia's record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and our assessment that Russia views former intelligence officers as targets.
However, the Government insisted the interview did not undermine its previous statements about Russian culpability, because it had never been for Porton Down to determine the origin of the novichok used.
“This is only one part of the intelligence picture,” a spokesperson said.
“As the Prime Minister has set out in a number of statements to the Commons since 12 March, this includes our knowledge that, within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination – and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of novichoks; Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations; and our assessment that Russia views former intelligence officers as targets.
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen an reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
Novichoks are a group of powerful nerve agents first developed in secret by the Soviet Union in the 1970s.
Some experts have suggested other countries may have developed stock of the chemicals in order to defend against it, while there are also fears small amounts may have been smuggled out of Russian facilities following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992.
Mr Aitkenhead would not comment on whether his laboratory kept supples of novichoks, but dismissed the suggestion the agent used in the Salisbury attack could have come from Porton Down.
“There is no way anything like that could have come from us or left the four walls of our facility,” he said.
The UK government said its scientific analysis of the nerve agent used in Salisbury was “only one part of the intelligence picture” that pointed to Russian involvement in the attack.
“We have been clear from the very beginning that our world-leading experts at Porton Down identified the substance used in Salisbury as a novichok, a military grade nerve agent,” a spokesman said.
“This is only one part of the intelligence picture. As the Prime Minister has set out in a number of statements to the Commons since 12 March, this includes our knowledge that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination – and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichoks; Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations; and our assessment that Russia views former intelligence officers as targets.
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
The international chemical weapons watchdog is to hold an extraordinary session on Wednesday to discuss the Salisbury poisoning and Russia’s alleged involvement.
Twenty-nine countries and Nato carried out a mass expulsion of almost 150 Russians working under diplomatic credentials after Britain provided information which pointed to Vladimir Putin’s government as responsible for Salisbury attack.
“We hope to discuss the whole matter and call on Britain to provide every possible element of evidence they might have in their hands,” said Yury Filatov, Moscow’s ambassador to Ireland, ahead of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons meeting in The Hague.
“Unprecedented levels of intelligence” had been divulged to convince these states, said senior government officials, including conclusions of Porton Down and an explanation of how this was obtained.
He added: “Russia is interested in establishing the whole truth of the matter and we hope certainly that this meeting will help to return to at least the realm of normality within the realm of international law and, let’s put it, decency in international relations.”
However, in addition, highly classified information, which is normally shared only between the “Five Eyes” countries – UK, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – was supplied to close allies with the National Security Advisor, Sir Mark Sedwill, taking it to the European Union and the North Atlantic Council. Other countries were given differing levels of intelligence.
Britain and its allies have expelled from than 150 Russian diplomats over the poisoning, prompting the Kremlin to banish foreign envoys from Moscow in a tit-for-tat response.
The development came as a former Russian general warned the response to the Salisbury the attack could trigger “the last war in the history of mankind”.
Mr Filatov claimed many European governments did not trust the UK’s version of events.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Evgeny Buzhinsky said the West was “cornering Russia and to corner Russia is a very dangerous thing".
“Even countries which took part in solidarity demands have doubts,” he said. ”They acted, as we know, on grounds which have nothing to do with Salisbury but mainly to do with some other agenda bilaterally or multilaterally.”
He added: “If the situation develops in the way it is now, it will end up in a very bad outcome."
The ambassador’s comments as a former Russian general warned the response to the Salisbury the attack could trigger “the last war in the history of mankind”.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Evgeny Buzhinsky said the West was “cornering Russia and to corner Russia is a very dangerous thing.”
He added: “If the situation develops in the way it is now, it will end up in a very bad outcome.”
