Dutch intelligence services say Russia has stepped up use of banned chemical weapons in Ukraine
The Netherlands military intelligence and the security service, together with the German intelligence service, found that the use of prohibited chemical weapons by the Russian military had become standardized and commonplace in Ukraine. According to the findings, the Russian military uses chloropicrin and riot control agent CS against sheltering Ukrainian soldiers, who are then forced out into the open and shot. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans called for more sanctions against Moscow and continued military support for Kyiv. Brekelmans, who stayed on in a caretaker role after the Dutch government collapsed last month, said that he doesn't want to see the use of chemical weapons become normalized. 'Lowering the threshold for use is not only dangerous for Ukraine but also for the rest of Europe and the world,' he said in a statement.
Russia has signed the Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the use of chloropicrin and CS as weapons. The convention's watchdog, The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, or OPCW, has found several incidents in Ukraine involving CS, but the group hasn't conducted a full investigation, which must be requested by the member states. The executive committee for the OPCW is holding a regular meeting next week where it's expected to discuss the conflict in Ukraine.
Russian authorities didn't immediately comment on the findings, but they have denied using chemical weapons in the past, instead alleging that Ukraine has used the banned substances. According to Ukraine, Russia has carried out 9,000 chemical weapons attacks in the country since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022. In 2024, the US State Department said that it had recorded the use of chloropicrin against Ukrainian troops.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
36 minutes ago
- Arab News
BRICS nations to denounce Trump tariffs for causing economic uncertainty
RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil: BRICS leaders meeting in Rio de Janeiro from Sunday are expected to decry Donald Trump's hard-line trade policies, but are struggling to bridge divides over crises roiling the Middle East. Emerging nations representing about half the world's population and 40 percent of global economic output are set to unite over what they see as unfair US import tariffs, according to sources familiar with summit negotiations. Since coming to office in January, Trump has threatened allies and rivals alike with a slew of punitive tariffs. His latest salvo comes in the form of letters due to be sent starting Friday informing trading partners of new tariff rates expected next week on July 9. Diplomats from 11 emerging nations, including Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, have been busy drafting a statement condemning the economic uncertainty. Any final summit declaration is not expected to mention the United States or its president by name. But it is expected to be a clear political shot directed at Washington. 'We're anticipating a summit with a cautious tone: it will be difficult to mention the United States by name in the final declaration,' Marta Fernandez, director of the BRICS Policy Center at Rio's Pontifical Catholic University said. This is particularly the case for China, which has only recently negotiated with the US to lower steep tit-for-tat levies. 'This doesn't seem to be the right time to provoke further friction' between the world's two leading economies, Fernandez said. China leader to skip annual meeting Conceived two decades ago as a forum for fast-growing economies, the BRICS have come to be seen as a Chinese-driven counterbalance to Western power. But the summit's political punch will be depleted by the absence of China's Xi Jinping, who is skipping the annual meeting for the first time in his 12 years as president. 'I expect there will be speculation about the reasons for Xi's absence,' said Ryan Hass, a former China director at the US National Security Council who is now with the Brookings Institution think tank. 'The simplest explanation may hold the most explanatory power. Xi recently hosted Lula in Beijing,' said Hass. The Chinese leader will not be the only notable absentee. War crime-indicted Russian President Vladimir Putin is also opting to stay away, but will participate via video link, according to the Kremlin. Hass said Putin's non-attendance and the fact that India's prime minister will be a guest of honor in Brazil could also be factors in Xi's absence. 'Xi does not want to appear upstaged by Modi,' who will receive a state lunch, he said. 'I expect Xi's decision to delegate attendance to Premier Li (Qiang) rests amidst these factors.' Still, the Xi no-show is a blow to host President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who wants Brazil to play a bigger role on the world stage. In the year to November 2025, Brazil will have hosted a G20 summit, a BRICS summit, and COP30 international climate talks, all before heading into fiercely contested presidential elections next year, in which he is expected to run. No consensus on response to Gaza, Iran wars Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian, whose nation is still reeling from a 12-day conflict with Israel is also skipping the meeting. A source familiar with the negotiations said the BRICS countries were still in disagreement over how to respond to the wars in Gaza and between Iran and Israel. Iranian negotiators are pushing for a tougher collective stance that goes beyond referencing the need for the creation of a Palestinian state and for disputes to be resolved peacefully. Artificial intelligence and health will also be on the agenda at the summit. Original members of the bloc Brazil, Russia, India, and China have been joined by South Africa and, more recently, by Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Ethiopia and Indonesia. Analysts say that it has given the grouping more potential international punch. But it has also opened many new fault lines. Brazil hopes that countries can take a common stand at the summit, including on the most sensitive issues. 'BRICS (countries), throughout their history, have managed to speak with one voice on major international issues, and there's no reason why that shouldn't be the case this time on the subject of the Middle East,' Brazil's Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira told AFP.
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Ukraine blames Russian strike for power cut to Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant
VIENNA: All external power lines supplying electricity to the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine were down for several hours on Friday, the UN nuclear watchdog said, but the station's management later said power had been restored. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, acknowledged that power had been restored after 3 1/2 hours. But he added in a statement on X that nuclear safety 'remains extremely precarious in Ukraine.' Ukraine's energy minister blamed Russian shelling for severing the last power line to the plant and its six reactors. The country's power distribution operator said its technicians had taken action to restore it. Europe's biggest nuclear power plant, which is not operating but still requires power to keep its nuclear fuel cool, switched during the outage to running on diesel generators, the IAEA said. The organization has repeatedly warned of the risk of a catastrophic accident at Zaporizhzhia, which is located near the front line in the war in Ukraine. Its reactors are shut down, but the nuclear fuel inside them still needs to be cooled, which requires constant power. The plant's Russia-installed management issued a statement on Telegram saying the high-voltage line to the plant had been restored. The statement said there had been no disruptions to operations at the plant, no violations of security procedures and no rise in background radiation levels beyond normal levels. The IAEA had earlier said that the plant had lost all off-site power for the ninth time during the military conflict and for the first time since late 2023. 'The ZNPP currently relies on power from its emergency diesel generators, underlining (the) extremely precarious nuclear safety situation,' it said. Ukrainian Energy Minister German Galuschenko wrote on Telegram that a Russian strike had cut off the plant. 'The enemy struck the power line connecting the temporarily occupied (Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant) with the integrated power system of Ukraine.' Ukrenergo, the sole operator of high-voltage lines in Ukraine, said its specialists had brought it back into service. 'Ukrenergo specialists have brought back into service the high-voltage line which supplies the temporarily occupied power station,' it said on Telegram. Neither the IAEA nor the plant's Russian-installed management initially cited a cause for the cut-off. Russian forces seized the Zaporizhzhia station in the first weeks of Russia's February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Each side regularly accuses the other of firing or taking other actions that could trigger a nuclear accident.
Arab News
7 hours ago
- Arab News
Pentagon has undermined Trump's goal of Ukraine peace
The US Department of Defense halted deliveries of Patriot air defense systems and other precision weapons to Ukraine last week following an internal assessment of its own stockpiles. Some of these weapons were already in Poland waiting for final transfer. The news came as a shock. While the Trump administration has taken a more nuanced approach to Ukraine and Russia than its predecessor, it had continued the flow of weapons to Kyiv as leverage in its effort to bring Moscow to the negotiating table. The timing could not be worse. Russia has launched some of the most intense aerial bombardments in the history of its invasion, including night-time barrages of more than 400 drones and ballistic missiles at a time. For Ukraine, already stretched thin on ammunition and air defense capabilities, this freeze in support threatens to make a difficult situation even more dire. The decision also undermines President Donald Trump's stated goal of ending the war. On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly emphasized the need to bring Russia and Ukraine to a negotiated settlement and made it a cornerstone of his foreign policy. But six months after he returned to the Oval Office, the war appears no closer to resolution than it was on his first day. There is no doubt the president has been sincere in his desire to bring the two sides to the table. He has called for a ceasefire and for negotiations, and Ukraine has signaled its willingness to work with the White House. The Kremlin, however, has been far more reluctant. Trump has hinted at increasing pressure on Russia to engage more seriously in diplomacy. That's precisely why the Pentagon's decision to halt aid is so surprising — and damaging. Trump appeared to have geopolitical momentum on his side. His bold military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, an action many believed he would never take, restored a sense of American credibility abroad, especially after what many saw as the Biden administration's appeasement of Tehran. Then, at the NATO summit in The Hague, Trump had a major win. He convinced European allies to commit to significantly increased defense spending, including a landmark pledge to reach 5 percent of GDP by 2035 — spending levels not seen even during the Cold War. At that same summit, a Ukrainian journalist asked Trump about the urgent need for air defense systems to protect civilians from Russian missile attacks. The president responded with genuine emotion. He said he would return to Washington and explore the possibility of sending more Patriot missile interceptors to Ukraine. Days later, however, his own Department of Defense contradicted both his words and apparent intent. There is no doubt Trump has been sincere in his desire to bring the two sides to the table. Luke Coffey This is not the first time the Pentagon has acted out of sync with the president. In February, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered a temporary halt to military assistance to Ukraine without coordinating with the White House. That pause lasted only a few days, but it rattled allies and partners across Europe and sent shockwaves through Kyiv. At the time, the White House quietly aired its frustration. Now, it appears the Pentagon may be repeating the same mistake. This latest move underscores a deeper problem: an ideological struggle within the Trump administration over US foreign policy. On one side are the isolationists who believe America should retreat from global commitments and focus exclusively on domestic concerns. They see little value in supporting Ukraine or NATO, or even maintaining a robust defense budget, since their vision of America's role in the world is minimal at best. Opposing them are the so-called prioritizers, who believe the US should focus nearly all of its strategic energy and resources on Asia, and particularly on countering the growing threat from China. In this view, America must prepare for a potential conflict over Taiwan, even if doing so means deprioritizing Europe or the Middle East. Every dollar spent and every missile deployed must serve the Indo-Pacific theater first. Both factions, for different reasons, see Ukraine as a distraction, so when aid is withheld, both are satisfied. As long as this internal tug-of-war continues, behind closed doors and in public, the president will struggle to implement a coherent and effective foreign policy. Trump may be most comfortable dealing with issues such as trade, the economy, and border security, but the reality is that global leadership also requires strategic clarity on defense and diplomacy. To succeed, he needs a team aligned with his vision — not one that undermines it. Now is the time for Trump to reassert control and redouble efforts to end Russia's war in a way that promotes lasting European stability and delivers a fair, just outcome for Ukraine. Achieving this will probably be one of the most difficult foreign policy challenges of his presidency. But he cannot meet that challenge with a divided administration. He needs a unified front — particularly from his Department of Defense. The sooner Trump reverses the Pentagon's decision to halt military aid to Ukraine, the better the prospects for peace. Time is of the essence, and any further delay could cost lives — and squander the strategic gains he has worked hard to achieve.
