The threat came on Monday after Ukraine said it was investigating “unverified” information that Russian troops had used chemical weapons in the besieged southern city of Mariupol.
Read more: Ukraine investigates reports Russia may have used chemical weapons in Mariupol
Contrary to other reports of Russian atrocities in places such as Bucha, which were quickly confirmed by Ukrainian and international authorities, reports of chemical warfare in Mariupol were met with caution and skepticism. This is partly due to the source of the allegations: the far-right, “supranationalist” Azov militia group. Azov leader Andriy Biletsky told the Kyiv Independent newspaper that three people in Mariupol showed “clear signs of chemical poisoning” on April 11 – although Biletsky said there were no “catastrophic consequences” for their health. The story goes on under the ad The unverified accusation triggered an alarm that Russia, already accused of illegal invasion, massacre of civilians and torture, had crossed another line in its increasingly bloody war. But to understand why Azov’s claims are met with greater skepticism, you need to know the history of the constitution – and its role in the information war that is raging in the wake of the Russian invasion.
Who is the Azov Battalion?
Azov was founded in May 2014 as a “volunteer police battalion” according to Anton Shekhovstov, director of the Center for Democratic Integrity in Austria and a researcher for far-right groups in Europe. Their formation was directly influenced by the annexation of the Crimean peninsula by Russia. Russia-Ukraine conflict: UN says poorest nations face food, energy and war crises Russia-Ukraine conflict: UN says poorest nations face food, energy and war crises “The original battalion consisted mainly of football hooligans and members of the Ukrainian far right, and it was the far-right Patriot of Ukraine organization that led the original battalion,” Sehovstov wrote. The story goes on under the ad “Many key figures who were directly involved in the formation of the Azov Order had an extremely dubious history of cooperating not only with pro-Russian forces in Ukraine but also with Russian political spin-doctors. Trending Stories
Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard: Defamation lawsuit gets ugly, fast Warranty review for escort organizer Pat King abruptly postponed
“In addition, neither the Azov nor other battalions carried out the proper control of volunteers, some of whom came from Russia. “All this created a huge security risk for the Russian agents to take control of Azov and turn it into an anti-Ukrainian force.” Sehovstov wrote that some of the far-right elements in the Azov departed to try to take advantage of the military success of the constitution, especially in the liberation of Mariupol. But far-right political parties in Ukraine failed to win electoral ground – according to Sehovstov, the far-right received less than 2.2 percent of the popular vote. But the Azov continues to be a force, both militarily and in terms of propaganda warfare. Russia’s “special military operation” has as one of its stated goals the “de-escalation” of Ukraine. The fact that Azov critics refer to them as extremists with neo-Nazi roots helps in this propaganda campaign.
Read more: US surveillance reports of possible chemical weapons attack on Ukraine by Russia
“But if we look at the real facts, then in the last parliamentary elections in Ukraine, then the far-right forces got less than 3 percent (of the popular vote), which meant that they were not even represented in parliament and on the contrary, by an overwhelming majority, was elected. a Jewish president, “said Andres Kasekamp, a professor at the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto. The story goes on under the ad “And if you think about that 3 percent, if you look around most of the West, specifically in Europe, then most European countries have far-right groups in parliament with a lot more than 3 percent.”
Claims for chemical weapons
According to the Kyiv Independent, Azov claimed that a “poisonous substance” had been “distributed by a drone”. The victims reported shortness of breath and “vestibular ataxia”, a neurological disorder, the constitution said. The Ukrainian government has not confirmed the use of chemical weapons, and the US and UK intelligence services – which have released intelligence reports before and during the Russian invasion – have said they know of the allegations but have not confirmed them.
Read more: Russia uses phosphorus bombs, terrorist tactics in Ukraine, says Zelenskyy
The story goes on under the ad “There is a theory that these could be phosphorus munitions,” Hanna Malyar, Ukraine’s deputy defense minister, said on Tuesday. “The official information will come later.” U.S. officials said last week that they had delivered equipment to protect Ukrainian soldiers from chemical and biological weapons. Russia has denied the use of chemical weapons in Ukraine and accused the Ukrainian government – without evidence – of preparing to use chemical weapons. The Kremlin and its Internet proxies have also been active in spreading conspiracy theories about US bio-laboratories in Ukraine – a pretext, according to some observers, for the use of chemical weapons by Russian forces. But Western intelligence services – including the United States and the United Kingdom – are reluctant to confirm Azov’s report, despite a general willingness to share sensitive information about the Russian invasion. The story goes on under the ad The confirmation would put even more pressure on Western governments to help Ukraine in its struggle. But if Azov’s allegations are refuted or discredited, the Kremlin will have another arrow in its quiver to defame Ukraine’s allegations of atrocities. – with files from Reuters. © 2022 Global News, part of Corus Entertainment Inc.
