Russia's Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and On
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in Ukraine began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and yet enduring have been those accusing the U.S. of operating clandestine biological research programs
Russia's Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and On
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in Ukraine began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and yet enduring haveThe NYT's lying (as usual). Russian officials (and non-officials)
been those accusing the U.S. of operating clandestine biological research programs
long before the Ukraine case pointed to the facts. The Ukraine added
some new evidence to this topic.
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202010/1205140.shtml> <https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1223843.shtml>
And Chinese were/are also concerned.
On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 7:19:59 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Russia's Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and On
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in UkraineThe NYT's lying (as usual). Russian officials (and non-officials)
began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and yet enduring have
been those accusing the U.S. of operating clandestine biological research programs
long before the Ukraine case pointed to the facts. The Ukraine added
some new evidence to this topic.
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202010/1205140.shtml> <https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1223843.shtml>To be fair, the veracity of accusations on secret U.S. Bioweapons, as well hacking, and
And Chinese were/are also concerned.
being hacked is not average readers and posters to discussion groups can decide one
way or other. In general, domestic accusations carry more weight than foreign accusations.
And there had been accusations that the US government had outsourced such research
to foreign labs.
But then, the question is: Would US military outsource deadly bio-weapon research to other
nations? Of course not.
But this kind of thinking depends on one issue: When is a bio-weapon a bio-weapon?
Let me use an analogy to explain my point.
What if one seeks help in translating a book written in a foreign language but wants to keep
the content of the book in secret?
One simple solution: He cut up the book as much as possible. He then asked many people each
with a tiny portion of the book. He collects and put all the pieces in right places afterward
to learn the content of the book.
Of course, US bio-weapon research would similarly be done in foreign labs to 1) reduce the risk of deadly microbes escaping from US lab, and
2) strong denial. The end result from each foreign lab is not any
kind of bio-weapon.
On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 7:19:59 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Russia's Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and On
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in
Ukraine began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and
yet enduring have been those accusing the U.S. of operating
clandestine biological research programs
The NYT's lying (as usual). Russian officials (and non-officials)
long before the Ukraine case pointed to the facts. The Ukraine added
some new evidence to this topic.
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202010/1205140.shtml>
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1223843.shtml>
And Chinese were/are also concerned.
To be fair, the veracity of accusations on secret U.S. Bioweapons, as well hacking, and being hacked is not average readers and posters to discussion groups can decide one way or other. In general, domestic accusations
carry more weight than foreign accusations.
And there had been accusations that the US government had outsourced such research to foreign labs.
But then, the question is: Would US military outsource deadly bio-weapon research to other nations? Of course not.
But this kind of thinking depends on one issue: When is a bio-weapon a bio-weapon? Let me use an analogy to explain my point.
What if one seeks help in translating a book written in a foreign language but wants to keep the content of the book in secret?
One simple solution: He cut up the book as much as possible. He then asked many people each with a tiny portion of the book. He collects and put all the pieces in right places afterward to learn the content of the book.
Of course, US bio-weapon research would similarly be done in foreign labs
to
1) reduce the risk of deadly microbes escaping from US lab, and
2) strong denial. The end result from each foreign lab is not any
kind of bio-weapon.
Russia’s Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and Onaround the globe.
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in Ukraine began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and yet enduring have been those accusing the U.S. of operating clandestine biological research programs to wreak havoc
The U.S. and others have dismissed the accusations as preposterous, and Russia has offered no proof. Yet the claims continue to circulate. Backed at times by China’s diplomats and state media, they have ebbed and flowed in international news reports,fueling conspiracy theories that linger online.
In Geneva this week, Russia has commanded an international forum to air its unsupported assertions again. The Biological Weapons Convention, the international treaty that since 1975 has barred the development and use of weapons made of biologicaltoxins or pathogens, gives member nations the authority to request a formal hearing of violations, and Russia has invoked the first one in a quarter-century.
“This is the military biological Pandora’s box, which the U.S. has opened and filled more than once,” Irina A. Yarovaya, the deputy chair of Russia’s lower house of Parliament, the State Duma, said last month. She is leading a parliamentarycommittee that was formed to “investigate” American support for biological research labs in Ukraine and elsewhere.
Virtually no Western officials or experts expect Russia to produce, during the weeklong gathering, facts that corroborate the accusations. If the past is any guide, that will not stop Russia from making them. Experts say Russia is likely to use themere existence of the investigative session, much of which will take place behind closed doors, to give its claims a patina of legitimacy.
Russia’s propaganda campaign has sought to justify the invasion ordered by Putin, who in April cited a “network of Western bioweapons labs” as one of the threats that forced Russia to act. More broadly, though, the flurry of accusations hassought to discredit the U.S. and its allies — Ukraine’s most powerful supporters and, increasingly, the source of arms being used to fight Russian forces.
Even when unsupported by fact, the accusations have played into pre-existing attitudes toward American dominance in foreign affairs. The consequence has been to sow division and doubt — not necessarily to build support for Russia’s invasion, but todeflect some of the blame to the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The notoriety of Russia’s accusations about secret weapons production could also erode confidence in genuine biological research, much as the debate over the origins of Covid-19 has.significantly undermine global biosafety and biosecurity efforts, so it does have consequences.”
“The message is constantly about these labs, and that will erode confidence in that infrastructure and the work that’s being performed,” said Filippa Lentzos, an expert on biological threats and security at King’s College London. “And it will
Russia added the outbreak of monkeypox to its list of American transgressions in April. Gen. Igor A. Kirillov, the head of the Russian Army’s radiological, chemical and biological defense force, insinuated that the United States had started thelatest outbreak because it supported four research laboratories in Nigeria where the epidemic began to spread.
In the months after the general’s comments, there were nearly 4,000 articles in Russian media, many of them shared on Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms, according to research conducted by Zignal Labs for The New York Times.would contain a new pandemic, posited a hypothetical monkeypox outbreak that began in a fictional country called Brinia and caused 270 million deaths.
For evidence of a conspiracy, some of the Russian reports pointed to a simulation in 2021 at the Munich Security Conference, an annual gathering of defense officials and experts from around the world. The simulation, intended to test how well countries
The Russian reports circulated so widely that the advocacy group that designed the exercise, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, put out a statement in May trying to tamp down any misconception.the current outbreak has the potential to spread as rapidly as the fictional, engineered pathogen in our scenario or to cause such a high case fatality rate.”
“We have no reason to believe that the current outbreak involves an engineered pathogen, as we have not seen any compelling evidence that would support such a hypothesis,” the organization, based in Washington, wrote. “We also do not believe that
Russia’s accusations have appeared in news reports in many countries, especially in Africa and the Middle East, regions that have become diplomatic battlegrounds between the United States, Russia and China.alternative point of view.
The state media in China routinely amplifies Russian claims about the war with Ukraine and about secret biological weapons research, as part of its own information battle with the U.S. that began with the debate over the spread of Covid-19.
China’s heavily censored internet, which aggressively stifles unwelcome political opinions, has also freely circulated conspiracy theories about a possible American role in the spread of monkeypox, as Bloomberg reported.
Russia’s efforts to push the claims about biological weapons come from an old Russia propaganda playbook, adapted to the age of social media.
Researchers at the RAND Corporation called the Russian strategy a “fire hose of falsehood,” inundating the public with huge numbers of claims that are designed to deflect attention and cause confusion and distrust as much as to provide an
The strategy has roots reaching back to the Cold War.Scholars’ Digital Archive.
In 1983, the K.G.B. planted an anonymous letter in an Indian newspaper alleging that the United States manufactured the virus that causes AIDS in an experiment at Fort Detrick, Md., according to documents at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for
The false claim spread extensively in the years that followed, even appearing at one point on “CBS Evening News With Dan Rather.” The campaign ended only in 1987 when the Reagan administration warned the last Soviet leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev,who died on Tuesday, that it would hurt newly warming relations with the West.
Russia’s propaganda model today has been adapted to take advantage of “technology and available media in ways that would have been inconceivable during the Cold War,” according to the RAND study.said in an interview.
Despite “a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions” and a disregard of consistency, the strategy can often be persuasive to some, especially those who have preconceived biases, one of the authors, Christopher Paul,
“There are still people who believe the C.I.A. caused AIDS in Africa, even though that idea has been thoroughly debunked,” Mr. Paul said. “Not many, but some.”after the Cold War, including in Ukraine. It has expanded to focus on supporting biological research laboratories that are crucial to monitor and prevent diseases from spreading.
Like many disinformation campaigns, Russia’s accusations on occasion have a passing relationship to facts.
Even before the war in Ukraine, Russia raised alarms about U.S. efforts to establish closer defense and research ties with several of Russia’s neighbors, including other former republics of the Soviet Union.
The United States has poured millions of dollars of assistance into those countries, under the Biological Threat Reduction Program. The initiative was originally intended to dismantle the remnants of Soviet-era nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
Russia previously made unsubstantiated claims about an American-financed lab in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, which Russia invaded in 2008.evidence of any biological weapons programs in Ukraine.
The State Department, in a response to questions, said Russia’s accusations were intended to justify and distract from its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
Since the war began, Russia has already raised its accusations before the United Nations Security Council. Izumi Nakamitsu, the U.N. under secretary general and high representative for disarmament affairs, twice told the Council that there was no
Although Russian officials repeatedly promised to provide proof of the secret weapons research in Ukraine, they have not yet done so.verification or enforcement provisions, there will be no official ruling on Russia’s claims, but on Friday nations can state their positions.
On Monday, Russia will make a presentation before representatives of the 184 nations that have signed the Biological Weapons Convention. The United States, Ukraine and other countries will be able to respond later in the week. Because the treaty has no
Dr. Lentzos of King’s College London said that because of the format — and geopolitics — many countries might be unwilling to publicly contradict Russia or its biggest backer, China.Hungary, Japan, the Netherlands and New Zealand — concluded there was no link. China and Vietnam said it was impossible to determine. (Russia submitted no response.)
The only other time a member nation of the Biological Weapons Convention invoked a special session was in 1997, when Cuba accused the United States of spraying a plume of insects over the country’s crops, causing a devastating infestation.
The proceedings were not public, but several nations later submitted written observations about Cuba’s claims and the United States’ rebuttal. Only North Korea supported Cuba’s claim. Eight countries — Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany,
“There’s a big silent majority that just wants to sit on the fence,” Dr. Lentzos said. “They don’t really want to take a side because it could hurt their interests either way. And so the big question is not ‘Do these guys believe it, or not?’ It’s to what extent are they motivated to act on it and speak out.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/04/technology/russia-bioweapons-geneva.html
ltlee1, <news:0b975966-445c-4c77...@googlegroups.com>
On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 7:19:59 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
Russia's Unfounded Claims of Secret U.S. Bioweapons Linger On and On
By Steven Lee Myers, Sept. 4, 2022, NY Times
Of the many falsehoods that the Kremlin has spread since the war in
Ukraine began over six months ago, some of the most outlandish and
yet enduring have been those accusing the U.S. of operating
clandestine biological research programs
The NYT's lying (as usual). Russian officials (and non-officials)
long before the Ukraine case pointed to the facts. The Ukraine added
some new evidence to this topic.
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202010/1205140.shtml>
<https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1223843.shtml>
And Chinese were/are also concerned.
To be fair, the veracity of accusations on secret U.S. Bioweapons, as well hacking, and being hacked is not average readers and posters to discussion groups can decide one way or other. In general, domestic accusations
carry more weight than foreign accusations.
And there had been accusations that the US government had outsourced such research to foreign labs.
But then, the question is: Would US military outsource deadly bio-weapon research to other nations? Of course not.
But this kind of thinking depends on one issue: When is a bio-weapon a bio-weapon? Let me use an analogy to explain my point.
What if one seeks help in translating a book written in a foreign language but wants to keep the content of the book in secret?
One simple solution: He cut up the book as much as possible. He then asked many people each with a tiny portion of the book. He collects and put all the pieces in right places afterward to learn the content of the book.
Of course, US bio-weapon research would similarly be done in foreign labs toI agree with your considerations, they seem well relevant.
1) reduce the risk of deadly microbes escaping from US lab, and
2) strong denial. The end result from each foreign lab is not any
kind of bio-weapon.
And, just the very fact these American extra-territorial bio-labs are numerous, their operations are obscure, and it's funded, at least in
part, and supervised by the US DoD, gives a valid reason for concerns.
If the Americans claim it's solely for humanitarian / medical needs,
then why not invite qualified representatives from concerned countries
to take part in and / or observe these researches. In 2000s, American representatives were more direct about these labs, they plainly said
it's linked with bio-weapons, but as a development of defense against bio-weapons. However, development of a defense against a weapon often
implies the developers somehow deal with the very weapon, so there's
no clear distinction between development of a weapon and development
of a defense against the weapon.
On Russia part, an issue is that among the commentators that are many
in Russia, some tend to make too certain claims, including some silly
claims that are easy to refute and ridicule. It gives a pretext to the American propaganda to claim that "the Russian propaganda" promotes conspiracy theories. However the fact that some people make inaccurate
claims does not alleviate legitimate concerns about real purpose of
these untransparent bioresearch facilities (in close to Russia areas).
And such concerns were expressed since the 2000s, i.e. long before the
time when the Ukraine case became a hot topic, while the NYT's article misrepresents it so as if it has spread since recently.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 483 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 154:34:33 |
Calls: | 9,592 |
Calls today: | 6 |
Files: | 13,676 |
Messages: | 6,148,758 |
Posted today: | 3 |