Human Rights, Politics

Weapons of mass destruction: Lies, masks and privilege

The issue of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons is not new to the West, which has used this argument to destroy entire populations, as in the case of the invasion of Iraq and the repeated threats of invasion against Syria, despite having surrendered and destroyed its arsenal of chemical weapons.


Javier Alexander Roa


On 8 March 2022, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland, in a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated that there are biological laboratories in Ukraine and that Washington is “working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach”.

The US official’s statement confirmed allegations made (days earlier) by the Chinese and Russian governments that the US was developing biological weapons in Ukraine in violation of international law, notably the Biological Weapons Convention, which prohibits the development, production and stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction.

Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov, prior to Nuland’s statements, had claimed that the US defence department was developing biological weapons in Ukrainian laboratories near the Russian border, but that when Russia launched the ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine, the US hastily destroyed evidence of the biological weapons development project.

He also reported that Russia had received documentation from employees of Ukrainian biolaboratories about the urgent destruction on 24 February of particularly dangerous pathogens of plague, anthrax, tuberculosis, cholera and other deadly diseases, which were intended to infect Russian citizens on a massive scale.

China, too, through Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhao Lijian, had previously asked the US to reveal details of the biological weapons or types of viruses it was developing and stockpiling in Ukrainian laboratories.

These requests and claims made by Russia and China went unnoticed by the world’s media, international bodies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), human rights and environmental organisations. Why?

Nuland’s statement about the development of biological weapons in Ukraine gave Russia a valid argument, within its objectives in the “special military operation”, to make military incursions into Ukraine and destroy the biological and chemical weapons laboratories that endangered the security and survival of the Russian people.

But Russia took on the difficult task of dismantling and destroying the estimated thirty biological and chemical weapons production laboratories on Ukrainian territory, the locations of which have not been disclosed by the United States. Nor has it revealed the beginnings of nuclear weapons production in Ukrainian plants, which Russia is also investigating, despite the obstacles imposed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which does not want Russia to carry out such investigations.

According to them, this is because of security concerns and because they consider that Russian personnel are not the most suitable for handling the work.

The issue of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons is not new to the West, which has used this argument to destroy entire populations, as in the case of the invasion of Iraq and the repeated threats of invasion against Syria, despite having surrendered and destroyed its arsenal of chemical weapons.

Let us remember that in March 2003, the US government, headed by George W. Bush, attacked and invaded Iraq for allegedly developing and stockpiling biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction, which later turned out to be a lie.

The fabricated dossier against Iraq was supported by false evidence and documents. The masterful presentation by US Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN Security Council in February 2003, where he showed a jar of salt to illustrate the biological weapons possessed and developed by Saddam Hussein’s government, was based on a false dossier, which subsequently facilitated the destruction of Iraq.

The US found no biological or chemical weapons production laboratories. However, it filled the Arab country with military bases, imposed a political and economic system and began to manage the large oil fields.

As for Syria, in August 2013, US President Barack Obama held a meeting with his security team to discuss the methods, possibilities and range of military options “to destroy the Syrian Arab Republic’s biological and chemical weapons laboratories and stockpiles”, which a Syrian official had revealed to the media in 2012.

In response to this revelation by the Syrian official, NATO and the US warned the government of Bashar al-Assad that the use of these weapons would be “crossing a red line” and would be met with an immediate response.

As a result of these US threats, mercenaries infiltrated into Syria carried out activities ” similar ” to chemical attacks against the population (which are still being investigated today), in order to pave the way for a military intervention by the US and NATO in Syria.

The Syrian government, through Russia, acted swiftly and agreed to reveal to the UN the locations of the chemical weapons stockpiles, hand them over and destroy them. At the same time it committed itself not to engage in the production of any weapons of mass destruction.

The destruction of all Syrian chemical weapons by Russia and the US, estimated at 1,200 tonnes, which had begun in October 2013, was completed in mid-2014.

The disarmament of Syria’s chemical weapons, which only remained stored in secure sites, were never used, said experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

The cases of Iraq and Syria are two typical examples used by the US and NATO to threaten and invade countries suspected of possessing biological and chemical weapons. However, with the case of the biological laboratories in Ukraine, the treatment is different, international double standards prevail, not allowing the condemnation with sanctions of governments such as the United States, which wage dirty war using third countries, not against the Russian people, but against humanity.

Russia, despite having a tangible record of biological weapons production laboratories, has not used this argument to carry out the “special military operation” in Ukraine. Russia’s main goal, in addition to those mentioned above, is to force the US and NATO to stop the militaristic expansion into Eastern Europe, so that the Russian people can preserve the integration of their sovereignty in the future.

(Traducido por Rene Phelvin – Email: – Photos: Pixabay

Share it / Compartir:

Comments are closed.