syria-un-20170414 5

4/24/2018 Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions at a joint news conference following talks with Foreign Minist… http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2726881 5/6 only investigate the incident in Idlib and saw no reason to go to the airfield. I cannot understand why, especially since the United States demanded access to the airfield and the Syrian government said it would accept the inspection. However, now the OPCW does not want to do this. These discrepancies breed serious suspicions, or more precisely, convince us that not everything is above-board in this case. When we say that inspectors must go to the site of the incident, we are told that the samples had been collected and would be analysed. Who collected these samples, and when? Nobody told us which laboratories would analyse them. In previous cases, when the issue concerned the investigation into the possible use of chemical weapons in territory controlled by the terrorists, we were told that the samples were analysed at a laboratory that was not designated by the OPCW. Taking all this into account, these facts speak in favour of supporting the Russian-Iranian proposal which means that these incidents are investigated not only by the OPCW but also together with a group of independent experts from the regional countries, Russia, the United States and Europe. If our colleagues from the United States and European countries are convinced that their version is correct, they have nothing to fear from such an independent expert group. We have been accused of mistrusting the OPCW, although the establishment of the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) to investigate the reported use of chemical agents in Syria was endorsed by the UN Security Council. It is true that the UN Security Council expressed its support for this mechanism and voiced hope that it would fulfil its obligations. We did sign this document, however we never agreed for this mechanism to work remotely without sending its experts to the actual location and to keep its sample collection methods secret, just as we never agreed that JIM has to be chaired by UK nationals. I hope nobody will take offense at our desire to conduct a transparent investigation of this high-profile incident so as to preclude even the suspicion that somebody may try to conceal something. I am sorry for speaking at such length, but I considered it important to highlight the key points. Question: Did you discuss media reports about UK, US, Jordanian and Israeli plans to open a new front against the Syrian Army in southern Syria? Sergey Lavrov (speaking after Walid Muallem): We have seen these reports and asked to know what they mean. The unofficial reply was that allegedly the idea was to cut communication lines between the ISIS positions in Syria and Iraq. We will continue to monitor this issue, because fighting terrorism is the only use of military force that is acceptable in Syria