In the News March 25

Behind U.S. Refusal to Speak Clearly about Its Biolabs in Ukraine

U.S. Mockery of UN Security Council Meetings
on Ukraine Biolabs

On March 11 and again on March 18, the Russian Federation called meetings of the UN Security Council (UNSC) to address concerns about biological laboratories in Ukraine and the role of the U.S., especially the Pentagon, in them.

Official media in Canada and the U.S. dismissed the concerns raised by Russia. They repeated derisive arguments presented by the United States writing, “Russia alleged that the United States is funding research to create bioweapons in Ukraine. Both the United States and Ukraine denied these allegations by saying that this is a sign that Moscow could soon use the weapons itself.”

The Russian Federation’s permanent representative at the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said his delegation had called for the meetings because of facts discovered during Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine. “The Russian Federation Ministry of Defence has documents which confirm that Ukraine has a network of at least 30 biological laboratories in which very dangerous biological experiments were being conducted, aimed at strengthening the pathogenic qualities of the plague, anthrax and cholera and other lethal diseases, using synthetic biology. This work is being done and funded and supervised by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency of the United States, ” he said.

Also on March 11, the Russian representative raised that experiments were being done concerning “the possibility of spreading infections using migratory birds” and bats. Calling on his European colleagues to consider the uncontrolled spread of biological agents from Ukraine a “very real biological danger,” he warned that the risks are real.

The United Nations High Representative of Disarmament Affairs said she was not aware of any biological weapons programs in Ukraine. Izumi Nakamitsu told the Security Council that “Situations such as this demonstrate the need to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention.” She encouraged States parties to the Convention, which include the U.S., Russia and Ukraine to consider making use of the available procedures to resolve related issues. She did not speak to the fact that the U.S. has long refused to support and submit to multilateral verification of its claims.

At the March 11 meeting U.S. representative Linda Thomas-Greenfield said, “Ukraine does not have biological programs. There are no Ukrainian biological weapons laboratories supported by the United States — not near Russia’s border or anywhere.” She then contradicted herself saying, “Ukraine owns and operates its own public health laboratory infrastructure, which make it possible to detect and diagnose diseases,” and that “the United States has provided assistance to do this safely. It has nothing to do with biological weapons.”

Nothing was said to address why the Pentagon is involved and is funding these “public health” activities. Furthermore, by any definition, health laboratories working with pathogens certainly are a biological program.

On March 18, additional documentation was provided and similar comments made. The Russian ambassador said research done by the U.S. at Ukraine labs “included studies into Crimean-Congo Fever, leptospirosis and other dangerous pathogens,” whose use could be easily dressed up as “naturally occurring.” He again emphasized that “a dangerous biological operation was being carried out.”

The documents gave evidence that the U.S. is involved in experiments in Ukraine through the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency. During the experiments, six families of viruses were chosen, including coronaviruses and three kinds of pathogenic bacteria — pathogens of plague, brucellosis and leptospirosis. The Russian ambassador said these were chosen because they have natural foci both on the territory of Ukraine and in Russia, and their use can be disguised as natural outbreaks of diseases. Again, the Russian representative asked for full information concerning these matters.

At both UNSC meetings, the U.S., Britain, France and others that echo U.S. views, did not address the concerns raised about biological pathogens, if they are safely secured, the role of the Pentagon’s Threat Reduction Agency and the need for the U.S. to provide information concerning just what has been produced and what is still being researched, including experiments.

Instead, they dismissed the concerns raised, calling them “utter nonsense” and “unfounded,” and have then proceeded to make a mockery of Russia’s concerns saying they are fake news, or spreading fears that Russia itself intends to use them.

This was accompanied by another threat to the Russian Federation: “You will be held to account for your actions. We will not let atrocities slide.”

China’s representative at both meetings, Zhang Jun, stressed that any concern about biological weapons should trigger the Council’s attention. The Russian Federation’s concerns about biological operations and potential weapons must be addressed adequately, with the provision of comprehensive clarification and verification.

On March 18, China reiterated that the U.S. should “respond to questions and offer timely, comprehensive clarifications to remove the international community’s doubts.” China’s representative, cautioning against the use of any double standards, said “We do not consider it too much to ask.”

He shared the desire of the international community to achieve a ceasefire as soon as possible, adding that China’s position on weapons of mass destruction is clear — it stands for their complete prohibition and destruction. China opposes the development, possession and use of any such weapons by any country, and he urged those that have yet to do so to destroy their stockpiles. Zhang Jun called for early negotiations of the Biological Weapons Convention verification regime, adding that China has been a victim of biological and chemical weapons use.

Among other state representatives who addressed the Security Council on March 18, Brazil, India and Ghana spoke to the need for an independent, multilateral verification of the concerns raised by the Russian Federation. Brazil’s Ronaldo Costa Filho said fifty years ago, Brazil adopted the Biological Weapons Convention, determined to exclude the possibility of such agents and toxins from being used as weapons. It took that important step convinced that such use would be repugnant to the conscience of humankind. Today, for the second time in a week, the Council has gathered to discuss alleged development, production and stockpiling of such abhorrent weapons. Accusations of this gravity must be thoroughly substantiated by solid evidence, which must be presented to and confirmed by an independent and impartial authority as foreseen in the Convention’s Article VI. Brazil has long supported the creation of a multilateral verification protocol to the Convention, with measures to guarantee protection and security against emerging threats. The situation today only reinforces the need to establish such a mechanism.

Ravindra Raguttahalli of India stressed that his country attaches high importance to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention as a key global and non-discriminatory disarmament instrument, prohibiting an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. Any matter relating to obligations under the Convention should be addressed as per its provisions and through consultations and cooperation between the parties concerned. Expressing deep concern at the progressively deteriorating situation in Ukraine, he welcomed the latest round of diplomatic talks between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, stressing that immediate cessation of hostilities and diligently pursuing the path of dialogue and diplomacy is the only way forward.

Khalilah Hackman of Ghana reaffirmed that a conclusive determination of Ukraine’s biological program can only be made after assessments by internationally credited bodies. The weaponization of chemical or biological agents would be unconscionable and should not be contemplated. The international community must forge consensus towards the creation of a verification regime for the Biological Weapons Convention, given recent global developments, she said, stressing that the possession of weapons of mass destruction neither assures international peace nor national security.

The U.S. alone, of the 183 countries that have signed the Biological Weapons Convention, has systematically refused to negotiate a verification program. Accusing Russia of what the U.S. is doing has become the stock-in-trade of the disinformation, lies and warmongering to encircle, isolate and “crush” Russia.

For far too long the U.S. imperialists have used the spectre of weapons of mass destruction to threaten the peoples of the world. Disinformation includes having everyone speculating about who controls what, who can trigger a third world war, the use of nuclear or biological weapons and the like.

To respond to this it is of utmost importance to recognize that this is a rare historical juncture where the productive powers of this world have developed beyond anything devised by humans in terms of bringing them under control.

Within this situation, the demand for the U.S. to submit to proper verification of its biolabs in Ukraine is a just demand. At a time the entire world has in mind the consequences of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, which is still ongoing, is not a good time for the U.S. to declare it does not need to be held to account.

TML Daily, posted March 25, 2022.