First Recorded Successful Novichok Synthesis was in 2016 – By Iran, in Cooperation with the OPCW 285


The line that novichoks can only be produced by Russia is now proven to be a complete lie. As I previously proved by referencing their publications, in 2013 the OPCW scientific advisory committee note the evidence was sparse that novichoks had ever been successfully produced, and that was still the line being published by Porton Down in 2016. You can find the hard evidence of all that here.

I have now been sent the vital information that in late 2016, Iranian scientists set out to study whether novichoks really could be produced from commercially available ingredients. Iran succeeded in synthesising a number of novichoks. Iran did this in full cooperation with the OPCW and immediately reported the results to the OPCW so they could be added to the chemical weapons database.

This makes complete nonsense of the Theresa May’s “of a type developed by Russia” line, used to parliament and the UN Security Council. This explains why Porton Down have refused to cave in to governmental pressure to say the nerve agent was Russian. If Iran can make a novichok, so can a significant number of states.

While Iran acted absolutely responsibly in cooperating with the OPCW, there are a handful of rogue states operating outwith the rule of international law, like Israel and North Korea, which refuse to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention, join the OPCW or destroy their chemical weapons stocks. Russia has cooperated in the OPCW destruction of all its chemical weapons stocks, completed last year, which included regular OPCW inspection of all the sites alleged to have been in the original “novichok” programme. Why nobody is even looking at the rogue states outwith the OPCW is a genuine puzzle.

Extraordinarily, only yesterday the Guardian was still carrying an article which claimed “only the Russian state” could make a novichok. Despite the lying propaganda regurgitated by virtually every corporate and state “journalist”, in truth is it is now proven beyond dispute that “of a type developed by Russia” has zero evidential value and is a politician’s weasel phrase designed deliberately to mislead the public. The public should ask why.

ty th Che


285 thoughts on “First Recorded Successful Novichok Synthesis was in 2016 – By Iran, in Cooperation with the OPCW

1 2 3 4
  • Chimik

    “The line that novichoks can only be produced by Russia is now proven to be a complete lie.”

    You have created this “line” yourself and successfully dispersed by yourself. Good for you. But looks silly from aside.

    “This makes complete nonsense of the Theresa May’s “of a type developed by Russia” line, used to parliament and the UN Security Council.”

    This make complete sense as there is an evidence that Novichok was developed in USSR (“of a type developed by Russia”) and was produced on manufacturing scale. So iranians just confirmed it would have been possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

    • Radio Jammor

      “The line that novichoks can only be produced by Russia is now proven to be a complete lie.”

      “You have created this “line” yourself and successfully dispersed by yourself. Good for you. But looks silly from aside.”

      Odd, I thought The UK Government created this line when it demanded that Russia explain how the Novichok came to be used on Skripal.

      The evidence that Novichok was successfully synthesised in the Soviet Union is the word of a couple of dissidents or defectors. There is no hard evidence, despite the US reportedly cleaning up Nukus in Uzbekistan of Novichok. It seems it neglected to pass on to the OPCW confirmation of the existence of Novichoks at Nukus, despite going to the site specifically to clear it of such.

      Either the US has been (wilfully?) negligent in failing to apprise the OPCW of its findings – or there was nothing to be found, and the US kept quiet about it, with the Cooperative Threat Reduction program for Nukus having been funded on that basis.

      That it turn raises questions about the validity of claims that Novichok was successfully synthesised by the Soviet Union.

      Seems to me that we should also be asking the US questions about what it did and what it found – or didn’t find – at Nukus.

  • William Bennett

    I reckon the Putin adminiistration are letting this puerile accusation develop responding to minimise any effect upon their World Cup hosting. After the World Cup however Mr. Putin will be making an example of America’s insignificant little yap dog.
    Russia has had enough of this western ad hominem demonisation and the YUK is dumbly offering itself as a singularly attractive retaliatory target. Yo see if I ain’t right ah kid.
    .

  • Al J. Venter

    Not quite correct Ambassador. I was writing about Novichok twenty or so years ago for Jane’s and went on record quite expansively with details about at least one rogue former Soviet scientist who handed over an enormous amount technical information about nerve and other gasses to the Syria. I named him as well as his reasons for doing so (he got on famously with old man Assad and was quite blatantly anti-Semitic). It is no secret that Syria is Iran’s closest ally in the present ongoing civil war (and has been for a long time) It would have been a simple matter to pass some of that detail on to Tehran. Also, the Kremlin being so close to the Iranians, who would know what they gave the mullahs.

    I deal with Novichok quite extensively in my latest book, Nuclear Terror due out at the end of the month from Pen & Sword.

  • ProWorks2013

    One must ask how many times we will be led down this path of Big Lie > Few Facts > Investigation by Independent Analysts > Refutation of Big Lie before we get smart. All media on both sides of the pond are complicit with their governments to propagandize the populace until they choke or run off in a mad fit. Them I am sure, psychiatrists and “counselors” of all sorts will descend upon us to reassure us we are, indeed, crazy. That is, if we let them go that far.

  • RK

    The USA had it own Novichok program in the early 70 as reported by NBC News 1st Tuesday 1973.
    The document is publicly available here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjA0EQPeUGM
    At 27:30 they say “… army is spending 6 million USD to develop a new nerv agent called binary …”
    Iran was not the first country to work nor develop binary nerv gas, it was actually very late to join the club.

    • Karl Frank

      Outstanding. The last paragraph says so much and I quote: “New additions to chemical weapons database

      The authors succeeded in synthesising and obtaining detailed mass spectral data on a series of unusual nerve agents. The data have been added to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’ Central Analytical Database (OCAD). It is important that such databases are as comprehensive as possible so that unusual chemical weapons can be unambiguously detected. The task of ridding the world of all chemical weapons requires a great deal of painstaking work, but the ultimate goal is surely something of which we should all approve.”
      So OPCW could compare the Skirpal sample with their sample.

  • Radio Jammor

    As per another thread: Trying to use the link from here to the Spectroscopy Now article about Iran synthesising Novichok, it seems that the page would not display correctly.

    I therefore made a note of the cached page at http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5utBrBJf9PsJ:www.spectroscopynow.com/details/ezine/1591ca249b2/Iranian-chemists-identify-Russian-chemical-warfare-agents.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&tzcheck=1

    I then archived the cached page at https://archive.is/P4j87, so that it is not lost.

  • Dan Delion

    Just been listening to UK politicians on @bbcwato demonstrating their naive scientific stupidity that Russia is only possibly source of ‘Novichek'[sic] agent when there is abundant reference to Iran as at least one other source. Tory WMD lies?
    !

  • Visual Artist

    “This makes complete nonsense of the Theresa May’s “of a type developed by Russia” line, used to parliament and the UN Security Council. This explains why Porton Down have refused to cave in to governmental pressure to say the nerve agent was Russian. If Iran can make a novichok, so can a significant number of states.”

    The big question is why did our Prime Minister lie about Novichok as you have explained above?
    Was she given bad advice from her remainer civil servants or due to her failing leadership and BREXIT BETRAYAL, does she think she can get the public’s votes and support if a war with Russia or any other country was started by herself?

    If world war 3 was to break out, the public in droves still would not vote for her to stay in power to run down our country!

  • Visual Artist

    Excellent research Mr Murray, and great for citing as supporting evidence to hold our politicians and Prime Ministers to account!

    It is a pity you didn’t discover such lies about Tony Blair and his illegal 2003 Iraq war at the time.

    It is shameful that Tony Blair wants our Prime Minister to start a WAR via air strikes in Syria without a Parliamentary vote and without any CONCRETE EVIDENCE over chemical attacks against the culprits responsible. President Trump has said he wants to send the OPCW to Syria on a FACT FINDING MISSION to ascertain who is responsible for such attacks but Tony Blair is not interested in factual evidence and justice.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/10/tony-blair-says-theresa-may-does-not-need-parliaments-approval/

    10 April 2018

    Tony Blair says Theresa May does not need Parliament’s approval for air strikes against Assad regime
    Tony Blair has backed calls for military intervention in Syria and suggested that Theresa May could avoid seeking Parliament’s approval before taking action against Bashar al-Assad.

    The former prime minister has warned that failure to take action against the Syrian regime and its allies in the wake of a suspected chemical attack in Douma would only make them feel “emboldened to do more”.

    The suspected chemical weapons attack late on Saturday killed at least 60 people, with more than 1,000 injured at several sites in Douma, a city near the capital, Damascus, according to a Syrian aid organisation.

    Lending his support to the possibility of US-led airstrikes against the Assad regime, Mr Blair said that the UK should be “supportive” and that Mrs May should consider exercising the royal prerogative, which would avoid the need for a parliamentary vote.

    “I think it is important provided that our advice about the source of the attack is the same as that of US that we would support US action,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.“If the US are taking action we should be prepared to be alongside them.

    “It’s just important to realise that if we allow it to go unchecked and unanswered then obviously the Assad regime and their outside backers, (and) in Russia and Iran will feel emboldened to do more, so I think it is important that we react.”………….

  • Scott Griffith

    Ok so Iran synthesised Novichok. Can someone explain to me why another rogue state would want to kill a former Russian spy on UK soil? Apportioning blame is not all about means. It is also about motive and opportunity.

  • Ken Underwood

    All in perfect order Craig and thankyou for your help in opposing this insidious media drive, except … where you wrote North Korea I could have sworn you meant North America, which has still not destroyed its CW despite signing the treaty several years ago.
    I don’t think NK qualifies as a beast of the same type as the West at all.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.