Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons 87th Executive Council session: statement on the Salisbury incident
Statement given yesterday by Peter Wilson, Permanent Representative of the UK to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, on the use of a nerve agent in the UK.
Mr Chair, Director General,
The statement that I deliver this morning is markedly different from our usual statements to the Executive Council. I did not expect to have to brief this Council on the first offensive use of a nerve agent of any sort on European territory since World War II.
On 8 March, the United Kingdom Delegation informed the OPCW Technical Secretariat that 2 people, Sergey and Yulia Skripal, had been taken seriously ill on 4 March in the city of Salisbury following exposure to a nerve agent. The police were treating it as attempted murder, and were investigating the case thoroughly. A UK police officer, one of the first responders, also fell seriously ill. We committed to update the Technical Secretariat and the OPCW Executive Council when more information became available.
My Prime Minister made a statement yesterday evening to the United Kingdom’s Parliament. She said our analysis had confirmed that the substance used was a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia, part of a group of agents known as ‘Novichok’ agents. My Prime Minister set out the United Kingdom’s conclusion that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for this attack.
This conclusion is based on a number of strands of evidence, including:
- the positive identification of the chemical agent by experts at the United Kingdom’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down
- our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so
- Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations; and
- our assessment that Russia views at least some defectors as legitimate targets for assassination
We can see only 2 plausible explanations for the use of such a chemical nerve agent: it was either a direct act by the Russian state against the United Kingdom, or a case where the Russian government had lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.
On 12 March, my Foreign Secretary summoned Russia’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom, and asked him to explain how this Russian-produced nerve agent could have been deployed in Salisbury against Mr Skripal and his daughter. He asked Russia to provide immediate, full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the OPCW. And he asked for Russia to respond within 24 hours – in other words, by the end of today.
My Foreign Secretary spoke to the Director General yesterday to update him on the situation. He also thanked the Director General and the OPCW Technical Secretariat for their offer of technical assistance.
Mr Chair, States Parties to the Convention take on a duty to uphold and enforce its fundamental tenets. We commit not to develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons. We commit not to transfer, directly or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone. We commit never to use chemical weapons. We commit not to engage in any military preparations to use chemical weapons. And we commit not to assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in prohibited activity.
The stark conclusion is that it is highly likely that Russia, a fellow State Party to the Chemical Weapons Convention and fellow member of this Executive Council is implicated in chemical weapons use, whether by failure to control its own materials or by design. And in whichever scenario, Russia has failed, for many years, to declare chemical weapons development programmes dating from the 1970s.
This attempted murder, using a weapons-grade nerve agent in a British city, was not just a crime against the Skripals. It was an indiscriminate and reckless act against the United Kingdom, which put the lives of innocent civilians at risk. This incident has demanded a large scale response from our first responders in the police and medical services, with substantial assistance from our military specialists. The United Kingdom is fortunate enough to have extensive, dedicated and robust capabilities to respond to such an event. Not every country has this. That is why building capacity for effective national implementation of the Convention is so important. We have supported and invested in technical assistance programmes, including through the OPCW, to build capabilities globally to respond to cases of alleged or actual chemical weapons use.
All of us in this room should be aware: if the norm against chemical weapons use continues to be eroded, if we don’t stand up to enforce the fundamental tenets of the Convention, what has happened in the United Kingdom could happen in any one of our countries. Indeed, in the last 13 months alone, chemical weapons attacks have taken place in Syria, in Iraq, in Malaysia and now in the United Kingdom.
Those who have used chemical weapons cannot be immune from the consequences of their actions. We must all do all that we can to bring perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks to justice, whoever they are, and wherever they may be. The United Kingdom was proud to join the International Partnership Against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons. We encourage all States Parties to join it to demonstrate their own commitment to end use of chemical weapons once and for all, to stand together against chemical weapons use, and to take action to hold perpetrators accountable.
Mr Chair, we will keep the Technical Secretariat and this Council informed of developments as soon as our legal processes allow. With your permission, Mr Chair, I will return to this issue later in this Council Session if there are any further updates.
Latest News from
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Investigating crimes and seeking justice for victims in Darfur17/12/2018 15:10:00
Statement given recently (14 December 2018) by Susan Dickson, UK Legal Advisor at the UN, at the Security Council Briefing on the International Criminal Court – Sudan.
Steps towards peace in Yemen17/12/2018 14:25:00
Statement given recently (14 December 2018) by Ambassador Karen Pierce, UK Permanent Representative to the UN, at the Security Council Briefing on Yemen.
Speech by Minister for Asia and the Pacific: disinformation - democracy and social stability at risk?17/12/2018 12:20:00
Mark Field, Minister for Asia and the Pacific, recently (14 December 2018) gave a speech at the Club of Venice second seminar on 'Strategic Communication: Truth, Tech and Trends'.
Preventing further conflict in Cameroon and the Lake Chad Basin14/12/2018 16:20:00
Statement given yesterday by Ambassador Jonathan Allen, UK Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, at the Security Council Briefing on UNOCA.
Foreign Secretary statement on Yemen Peace Talks14/12/2018 14:25:00
On 13th December the Foreign Secretary travelled to Sweden for the final day of UN Yemen peace talks.
Alistair Burt's speech at the UK-Lebanon Business and Investment Forum13/12/2018 16:37:00
The Minister for the Middle East was speaking at the Institution of Engineering and Technology in London on 12 December 2018.
Finding a peaceful resolution to tensions in Haiti13/12/2018 15:25:00
Statement given yesterday by Stephen Hickey, UK Political Coordinator at the UN, at the Security Council Briefing on Haiti.
Participating in the JCPoA and ending Iran's destabilising regional behaviour13/12/2018 14:10:00
Statement given yesterday by Ambassador Karen Pierce, UK Permanent Representative to the UN, at the Security Council Briefing on Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Lord Ahmad Speech at Amnesty International Annual Human Rights Day Reception13/12/2018 12:33:00
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon delivered a speech at the Amnesty International Annual Human Rights Day Reception on 12 December 2018.