Shining a light on China’s biotech activities

Originating in Wuhan, China, the COVID-19 virus rapidly swept across the globe, causing unprecedent disruption to the international community.  

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), to date, over 6.4 million people have died while infected with the virus.

In addition to the devastating health impact, the SARS-COV2 virus has destabilised the world order, crippling supply chains and undermining confidence in long-held trade norms and the general embrace of interdependence.

The pandemic has also exacerbated political tensions, with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) accused of mishandling the crisis in the early stages of the outbreak.

Australia’s criticism of Beijing, for example, contributed to a souring of diplomatic relations between the countries, followed up by trade restrictions imposed by China on Australian imports.  

But accusing China of mismanagement after the fact may be an understatement, with some intelligence suggesting the virus leaked from a biosecurity lab in the heart of Wuhan, known for its experimental work on coronavirus samples.

According to Peter Brookes, senior research fellow, Center for National Defense, the COVID-19 crisis has not dissuaded Beijing from pursuing a risky biotechnology agenda.

VIEW ALL

Brookes says these activities should be cause for concern for the West, given they can be weaponised.

He references the US State Department’s recent report to Congress on arms control, non-proliferation, and disarmament treaties and agreements, which noted concern over China’s compliance with the Biological Weapons Convention.

“While the Biological Weapons Convention allows member states to engage in peaceful research (e.g., vaccine development) to counter and protect against microbial and biological agents and toxins, it prohibits their development, possession, stockpiling, or use for offensive (military) purposes,” Brookes writes in a piece originally published by The Daily Signal. 

Brookes goes on to flag the United States’ lack of “sufficient information” to determine whether China has ceased its assessed historical biological warfare (BW) program, as per Article II of the Convention.

“According to the State Department’s April report, China—which joined the Biological Weapons Convention in 1984—possessed a biological weapons program from the 1950s to the late 1980s that should have been ended, diverted, or destroyed upon joining the convention,” he observes.  

“To this day, Beijing hasn’t acknowledged the existence of or current disposition of that Cold War offensive biological program, which weaponised ‘ricin, botulinum toxins, and the causative agents of anthrax, cholera, plague, and tularemia’.”

Brookes also cites US State Department reports regarding Beijing’s military medical institutions.

The reports have noted “identifying, testing and characterising diverse families of potent toxins with dual-use applications”.

The US State Department also alludes to a “higher classification annex” with troubling evidence of other concerning biotech activities.

Brookes continues: “Equally troubling, Beijing postponed a bilateral, virtual Biological Weapons Convention-related meeting in 2021 with the US and cancelled a similar meeting in early 2022.

“Such actions don’t inspire confidence in the age of COVID-19 and our rivalrous relations with Beijing.”

Further, Brookes points to the US Department of Defense’s annual report to Congress in late 2021, which flagged the continued development of biotechnology infrastructure and China’s pursuit of “scientific cooperation with countries of concern”.

The Pentagon also reported developments in “high-technology”, including biotechnology in the fields of precision medicine, biological warfare, enhanced soldier performance, and human-machine teaming.

According to Brookes, the Pentagon’s warning was echoed by the Director of National Intelligence’s 2022 Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community.

“Rapid advances in dual-use technology, including bioinformatics, synthetic biology, and genomic editing, could enable development of novel biological weapons that complicate detection, attribution, and treatment,” Brookes adds.

“Though specifics from the US government are few in the public sphere—likely due to understandable classification restrictions—the general overview of Chinese military and civilian dual-use efforts and cooperation in the biotech arena is deeply troubling.”

Brookes concludes that the West should be alert to China’s ongoing biotech activities and the potential threat to global peace and security.

“Though incredibly important, it’s not just the lack of transparency from Beijing about COVID-19’s origins in China that should be of concern to us today,” he writes.

“The reported work and potential intent of the Chinese civilian and military biological research and technology enterprise could also be a key part of the growing threat that China poses to the US, its allies, and friends now—and possibly even more so in the future.”

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch with This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..