Over the weekend, the UN and the Red Cross both reported a number of Mosul civilians were being treated for exposure to a likely “blister agent,” and that there was evidence of a possible chemical weapons attack being involved. Noteworthy, they said they were unsure if it was ISIS or Iraq’s military who carried out the attack.
This seemed a strange addendum at the time, as ISIS is known to have chemical weapons, and Iraq’s military seemingly is known not to. Yet today, it was Iraq’s government that was quick to try to kill the investigation, saying they believe no evidence exists of any attacks at all.
The UN was quick to express concern about “possible ISIS attacks” and British Ambassador Matthew Rycroft called for an investigation by Iraq that would end with the conclusion that it was ISIS’ fault.
This appeared an easy out for Iraq irrespective of the circumstances, and the fact that Iraq, which once had a chemical weapons arsenal, is being so deliberately evasive is noteworthy, and raises doubts over whether there isn’t more to these attacks than first meets the eye.