Russia must start cooperating with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’ investigation into the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Salisbury, the European Union and the UK have declared at an emergency session of the global watchdog.

“It is imperative that the Russian Federation responds to the British government’s legitimate questions, begins to cooperate with the OPCW secretariat, and provides full and complete disclosure to the OPCW,” the EU said.

Wednesday’s emergency meeting of the 41-strong executive in the Hague was called by Russia, which wants to challenge the way British scientists handled samples in the case and to secure an agreement that Russian scientists should be directly involved in testing them.



Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were attacked with a nerve agent on 4 March, setting off a bitter dispute between Russia and the UK government, which has said the only “plausible explanation” is that Russia is to blame.

Russia has been mounting a diplomatic counter-offensive, demanding that its scientists be involved in investigating the sample. On Wednesday the UK’s acting representative to the OPCW, John Rollo, accused Russia of challenging the impartiality of the OPCW secretariat. “There is no requirement in the chemical weapons convention for a victim to engage a likely perpetrator in a joint investigation,” he said. “To do so would be perverse”.

In a powerfully worded statement, Rollo said the insistence that Russian experts participate in the inquiry suggested Russia was nervous about what the results would show. Its response to legitimate British inquiries about what had happened in Salisbury had been characterised by disdain, contempt and sarcasm, he added.

On Tuesday the chief executive of the government’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), Gary Aitkenhead, said British scientists had identified the nerve agent used as novichok but were not able to identify the precise source.

Aitkenhead also said it had not been DSTL’s role to identify the source of the nerve agent, which was seized on by Russia, which demanded an apology from the British and said a vital part of its evidence had been undermined. Russia’s spymaster Sergei Naryshkin described the poisoning as a “grotesque provocation crudely staged by the British and US intelligence agencies”.

UK officials, thrown on the defensive by the way Aitkenhead’s statement appeared, said it was not just science but UK intelligence sources that led the government to ascribe responsibility to Russia.

Britain will have been buoyed by the EU’s strong statement of support at the OPCW. The EU said it had full confidence in the British investigation and lauded the UK’s collaboration with the OPCW technical secretariat. It said it still believed it was highly likely Russia was responsible for the poison attack and that there was no other plausible explanation.

The UK has built a strong diplomatic alliance against Russia, and British officials will be relieved that it appeared only a quarter of the OPCW executive were willing to back Russia’s demand for involvement.



Nevertheless, the UK foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, was facing embarrassing questions over a direct reference he made to Russia producing the nerve agent, after it emerged that the Foreign Office had deleted a tweet blaming Moscow for the attack.

He was already under pressure over his remarks to a German broadcaster that a Porton Down scientist had been “absolutely categorical” that the novichok had originated in Russia. It emerged on Wednesday that the Foreign Office had earlier deleted a tweet claiming British scientists had concluded that the nerve agent was “produced in Russia”.

The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said Johnson “seems to have completely exceeded the information that he had been given”, while the shadow home secretary, Diane Abbott, said she hoped Labour would get some credit for taking a careful view of Russia’s responsibility.

The OPCW is the internationally recognised body responsible for overseeing the 1997 chemical weapons convention, and has been testing samples provided by British scientists and taken from the Skripals.



Skripals poisoned from front door of Salisbury home, police say Read more

Britain sent the OPCW samples of the nerve agent within days of the attack, and results of the organisation’s tests are expected within days. Alexander Shulgin, Russia’s permanent representative to the OPCW, has complained that Russian scientists have been barred from being involved in the tests after British objections.

The OPCW is not able to ascribe responsibility for the attack, but identification of the nerve agent as novichok by the OPCW, the premier relevant multilateral body, would shore up the UK’s position – backed by an international diplomatic alliance – that Russian state forces were involved in the attack. Russia insists it destroyed its entire chemical weapons stock.

If the dispute over the nature of the Salisbury nerve agent reaches deadlock, Russia could withdraw from the OPCW, which would be a severe blow to global efforts to control chemical weapons.

Russia has already challenged OPCW findings about Syrian government responsibility for chemical weapons attacks on Syrian civilians.

Despite the political battle, the eventual OPCW report on the samples will be largely technical in nature, confirming the agent used and possibly establishing what method of synthesis was used, how the material was administered or disseminated and what kind of chemical signatures were involved.