It is the only right thing for China to highlight and question US involvement in the Biolabs issue in Ukraine and around the world to the world audience. Hopefully more people will become more aware of the issue and the Biological Weapon Convention.
Following is the statement from Zhao Lijian.
Zhao Lijian: You said the US has been stressing that the facilities are for research purposes. I can tell you that the US response so far has been self-contradictory and perplexing. According to the 2005 agreement between the US Department of Defense and the Ukrainian side, representatives of the US Department of Defense have the right to participate in all aspects of related activities at facilities in Ukraine. Information marked or designated by the US side Department of Defense as “sensitive” should be withheld from public disclosure by Ukraine. According to the document the US submitted to the meeting of the state parties to the BWC at the end of 2021, the US has cooperation facilities in Ukraine including 26 labs.
We wonder, whether the US has sent its people? What specifically is the scope of activities? How many cooperation facilities are there? What kind of sensitive information about public health cannot be shared? Does the Ukrainian side know what the US has been working on in Ukraine?
If the information released by the US is self-contradictory and significantly flawed, how can the US convince the international community that it has indeed implemented obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)? Despite the international consensus on ensuring compliance with verification, the US has been standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a BWC verification mechanism. That explains the international community’s suspicion over the bio-military activities of the US.
For decades, the US readily points fingers at others and accuses them of noncompliance, saying that they should accept verification and even resorting to sanctions and military operations. However, when it comes to the US itself, it is refusing verification and trying to muddle through by simply saying “we are in compliance with the convention”. How is that? This is typical double standard. Moreover, given the credibility of the US, it is very difficult for it to win the trust of the international community.
Once again we urge the US to act responsibly, offer a clear account of its biological military activities at home and abroad, and stop standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a BWC verification regime. This will help restore the international community’s confidence in the US’ fulfillment of its international obligations and strengthen global biosecurity.
