Burgeoning Asian Bioweapons - Issues4Life · Through their research, the unit developed special...

Burgeoning Asian Bioweaponsthewashingtonstandard.com/burgeoning-asian-bioweapons

The Sharp Edge / February 5, 2020

Most of us know of the atrocities conducted at Auschwitz by Josef Mengele during World War II.However, very few people are aware of the equally horrendous human experimentation conductedsimultaneously by Japan. A clandestine program conducted by the Japanese during World War IIwas responsible for the experimentation and genocide of hundreds of thousands of Chinese citizensas well as others, and ultimately led the Chinese to develop their own robust biological weaponsprogram which is in full swing presently. In this report, we will look back at the Japanese biologicalweapons program that started it all, and fast forward to the burgeoning Chinese biological warfareprogram today, which arose from it.

Special thanks to fellow researcher, The Speaker, for contributions to this report.

Biological Weapons of the Imperial Japanese

Burgeoning Asian Bioweapons - The Washington Standard moz-extension://460be456-dc38-b143-b407-ab080cb3b303/algo.html

1 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

Following World War I, the Japanese imperialist policy of expansion through military and politicaltactics, led to the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, which some scholars site as the origin ofthe Second Sino-Japanese War. This war between the People’s Republic of China and theJapanese Empire transpired amidst the backdrop of World War II. Following the Japanese attack ofPearl Harbor in 1941, the United States declared war on the Japanese and began to aid China intheir efforts. After the devastation of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as theSoviet led invasion of the Japanese stronghold in Manchuria, Japan finally surrendered to the Alliedforces.

It was within this time frame that Imperial Japan conducted covert biological and chemical warfare. The clandestine project was overseen by a special department of the Japanese Imperial Army knownas Unit 731. Other biological and chemical warfare units connected to Unit 731 were founded inmajor Chinese cities, following the Japanese invasion in 1937. At the peak of this operation, theentire network of biological and chemical warfare research units under Japanese Imperial Armycontrol, comprised of approximately 10,000 doctors, professors, and biochemists. This biologicalweapons research and development unit, which masqueraded as, the “Epidemic Prevention andWater Purification Department,” conducted horrendous human experiments, drawing comparisonsbetween Unit 731 to somewhat similar experimentation conducted by Nazi German scientists atAuschwitz.

Shiro Ishii, the Surgeon General and a Japanese microbiologist army medical officer, led the secretresearch group responsible for spreading anthrax, bubonic plague, cholera, small pox, botulism andother deadly pathogens throughout China. A wide range of test subjects were gathered from the


2 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

population, including pregnant women, children, and the elderly, for the purposes of their humanexperimentation. To desensitize the researchers from the horrors of experimentation on live humans,the dehumanized victims were referred to as “logs,” as described by one civilian employee whoworked for the unit. The term originated as an inside joke, as the Unit 731 facility was officiallydescribed to local authorities as a lumber mill. Interestingly, the secret project was internally referredto as, “Holzklotz” (the German word for “log.”) After touring several European laboratories as well asconducting extensive studies on chemical warfare used by the Germans in World War I, Shiro Ishiiformed his theoretical concepts of Japan’s use of biological warfare. The atrocities of chemicalweapons used during World War I led to the Geneva Protocol of 1925, banning the use of chemicaland biological agents in war. Though the Geneva Convention treaty of 1925 was signed by Japan, itwas never ratified by the National Diet of Japan.

The human experiments conducted under Unit 731 included research in the areas of: understandinghow various pathogens affect the human body, development of vaccines and treatments, and theweaponization of pathogens. Human subjects were injected with diseases, often times disguised asvaccines, and then observed in order for researchers to understand the effects. Victims, who wereimprisoned within the confines of the Unit 731 facility, often times underwent vivisection procedures(the dissection of live humans) without anesthetic, in order for the scientists to observe thedeterioration of organs resulting from the pathogens that ravaged their bodies. Some humansubjects were tied to stakes as researchers studied the effects of various bombs and weapons onthem. Others were forced to undergo freezing temperatures in order to understand the effects offrostbite. Female prisoners were often times raped and impregnated in order to understand thetransmission of diseases to the unborn. As a result, many children were born into captivity and werethe subjects of human experimentation as well. Over the course of their operation, at least 3,000men, women and children were held captive for experimentation at the Unit 731 facility – none ofwhom survived.

Through their research, the unit developed special bombs carrying bioweapons, including one thatcarried fleas which was used to spread the bubonic plague. Japanese soldiers poisoned food andwater supplies in China using the biological weapons developed by Unit 731, and were even knownto hand out poisoned candies to unsuspecting children. It is estimated that up to 580,000people were killed from biological warfare and human experimentation conducted through the covertproject.

While Nazi German leaders underwent military tribunals known as the Nuremberg trials, for warcrimes following World War II, members of Unit 731, including their ruthless leader Shiro Ishii,received secret immunity from U.S. authorities in exchange for their biological weapons research.Twelve researchers from the unit were captured by Soviet forces and tried for their war crimes. Members tried by the Soviets received notably light sentencing in comparison to their crimes, leadingresearchers to believe that the Soviets may have also struck a deal with the Japanese for biologicalweapons research. Declassified documents reveal that the United States not only provided membersof Unit 731 with immunity, but payments from the U.S. War Department were made to unnamed


3 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

members of the unit in the amount of 150,000 to 200,000 yen. The documents explain how the U.S.War Department believed that the “information procured will have the greatest value in futuredevelopment of the US BW (bacteriological warfare) program” and the “data on human experimentsmay prove invaluable.” The eagerness for the United States to obtain this information may havebeen in an attempt to supersede the Soviet Union in a biological warfare arms race.

Burgeoning Chinese Biological Weapons

From the context of the Japanese biological warfare program which ravaged the Chinese populationfrom 1933 to 1945, and the presumed emerging biological weapons arms race between the UnitedStates and the USSR, China’s biological warfare program arose.

Though China agreed to the Geneva Protocol in 1952 and the Biological Weapons Convention in1984, by 2005, the U.S. State Department reported that “The United States believes that Chinacontinues to maintain some elements of an offensive BW capability. The issue is whether thiscapability constitutes a violation of the BWC.” The 2005 Compliance report went on to state, “TheUnited States believes that China began its offensive BW program in the 1950s and continued itsprogram throughout the Cold War, even after China acceded to the BWC in 1984. Undoubtedly Chinaperceived a threat from the BW programs of its neighbor, the Soviet Union. There are some reportsthat China may still retain elements of its biological warfare program. Such reports support the UnitedStates continued belief that China has not abandoned its offensive BW program… Facilities in Chinathat may have legitimate public health and commercial uses could also offer access to additional BW-enabling capabilities.”


4 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

The same 2010 Compliance Report found again, that China’s declarations to maintain compliancewith the BWC, “have neither documented the offensive BW program it possessed prior to itsaccession to the BWC in 1984, nor documented that China has eliminated the program or anyremaining biological munitions in accordance with the BWC,” and went on to state that, “Availableinformation indicates China engaged during the reporting period in dual-use activities that included:identifying factors that enhance the virulence, toxicity, or antibiotic resistance of pathogens, includingthrough the use of genetic engineering; identifying, characterizing, and testing numerous new toxins;producing toxins synthetically; and examining advances in research on airborne microbial aerosols.” The 2010 report did not, however, find that the dual-use activities were in violation of the BWC.

Then in July of 2019, U.S. officials expressed concerns over China’s burgeoning biological weaponsprogram during the 2019 CBRN Defense Conference and Exhibition. The Lead Clinical Consultant atthe U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense, Dr. James Madsen, stated that “thereare many deadly and frightening chem-bio threats that are not on many people’s radar. One, whichhe would not name, can infect a person and have a long latency period. ‘When you have symptoms… it’s too late and you deteriorate over a period of months to weeks and you die.’” The ChiefIntelligence Officer at the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological andNuclear Defense explained, “What we’ve seen over the past few years is the norms around chemicaland biological weapon use have been eroded almost completely. The norms surrounding these andthe treaties surrounding these have really taken a hit.”

Compliance concerns were raised once again by the U.S. State Department in their 2019Compliance report, which stated, “Information indicates that the People’s Republic of China (China)engaged during the reporting period in biological activities with potential dual-use applications, whichraises concerns regarding its compliance with the BWC. In addition, the United States does not havesufficient information to determine whether China eliminated its assessed biological warfare (BW)program, as required under Article II of the Convention.” The report went on to explain, “Article I ofthe BWC obligates States Party ‘never in any circumstances to develop, produce, stockpile, orotherwise acquire or retain …[m]microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their origin ormethod of production, of types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective,or other peaceful purposes.’ The United States has compliance concerns with respect to Chinesemilitary medical institutions’ toxin research and development because of the potential dual-useapplications and their potential as a biological threat. In addition, the United States assesses thatChina possessed an offensive BW program from the early 1950s to at least the late 1980s. There isno available information to demonstrate that China took steps to fulfill its treaty obligations underArticle II of the BWC, which requires China to destroy or to divert to peaceful purposes all itemsspecified in Article I of its past offensive BW program.”

Continued defiance by China, to report biological research activities required by the BiologicalWeapons Convention of 1984, are at the crux of growing distrust by the United States and othernations, as to their secretive biological weapons program.


5 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

What Have We Learned From SARS?

An atypical form of pneumonia referred to as severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, began tospread swiftly worldwide in November of 2002, eventually causing the World Health Organization toannounce a worldwide health threat. The first known case of SARS is believed to have occurred inFoshan, China near Guangzhou in Guangdong province, sometime in mid-November of 2002. Whenfirst discovered by mid-December, Chinese medical personnel notified health experts in order todiagnose the disease by early January of 2003. Health experts conducted an investigation of theunknown “strange disease” and submitted a report to the provincial health bureau by January 27 of2003. The report was marked as “top secret,” which only authorized the provincial health officials toopen it. Three days passed before any authorized provincial health officials read the document. Then, once the document was finally read, a bulletin was distributed to hospitals within the province.

In compliance with the State Secrets Law regarding the dissemination of public health information,the public was kept in the dark about the emerging threat. Under the State Secrets Law, anyinfectious diseases were classified as a state secret until the Ministry of Health authorized a publicannouncement. Therefore, any doctors, public officials, or journalists who were to report on theoutbreak prior to authorization by the Ministry of Health, would risk persecution. Consequently, acomplete media blackout of the rapidly developing danger continued until February 11 2003, whenhealth officials finally held a press conference on the matter.

Prior to April of 2003, Chinese authorities shared very little information with the World HealthOrganization. The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention waited until April 3 2003 to

th

th

rd


6 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

issue bulletins to hospitals nationwide. Experts from the World Health Organization were finallypermitted by the Ministry of Health to enter China, but were not allowed access to Guangdong, theepicenter of the outbreak, until 8 days later. Another week went by before WHO officials werepermitted to inspect Beijing military hospitals.

While SARS spread like wildfire throughout Beijing, the public was kept unaware of its scope andseverity by local authorities. Furthermore, reports from local authorities up the chain of command tohigher levels were skewed over fears of being reprimanded by their superiors. All-in-all, the lack oftransparency at every level of the Chinese government, inhibited authorities from assessing thescope and severity of the outbreak, in order to respond in a timely and efficient manner.

The same lack of transparency, accountability, and oversight led to speculation, rumors and panicamong the Chinese population and around the world. By April of 2003, Russian infectious diseaseexperts publicly speculated that SARS may be a man-made biological weapon. The head of Russia’sepidemiological services stated that he believed the virus was a laboratory creation, explaining,“there is no vaccine for this virus, its make-up is unclear, it has not been very widespread and thepopulation is not immune to it”. The Russian official did, however, admit that he had reservations ofthis theory, considering the virus has a relatively minimal mortality rate and is not very easilytransmittable.

The scientific consensus on the origins of the SARS outbreak, which was confirmed by the WorldHealth Organization on April 16 of 2003, attributes the source of this strain of the Coronavirus toanimals. However, on April 17 of 2003, the Director of the U.S. Center for Disease Control statedthat the virus “didn’t look like much of any of the viruses we already had in our reference straincollection.”

In April of 2004, SARS escaped the Chinese Institute of Virology laboratory in Beijing, when tworesearchers who were working on the virus became infected. “We suspect two people, a 26-year-oldfemale postgraduate student and a 31-year-old male postdoc, were both infected, apparently in twoseparate incidents,” stated a World Health Organization spokesperson. In response to the 2004incident which emerged from a Chinese laboratory, an epidemiologist with the Hong Kong University–Pasteur Research Center remarked, “Normally, it’s not possible to contaminate people even underlevel two confinement, if the security rules are obeyed, with the appropriate hoods, and so on,”adding that SARS laboratory work requires level 3 confinement, which “suggests there has beensome mishandling of something.” On May 18 of 2004, the WHO announced that the virus wascontained, after 1 person died and 9 were infected. The WHO went on to state that “biosafetyconcerns remain,” and further investigation by the WHO and Chinese health officials would continuein order to determine the cause of the outbreak.

Years after the 2003 SARS outbreak, which claimed the lives of 774 people, the Taiwan NationalSecurity Bureau Director General informed the legislative committee that Chinese sources suspectedthe 2003 SARS incident to be a result of a biological weapon. The security bureau stated, “In the2003 SARS period, there were deaths and injuries, and in addition China hid the patient count,

th

th

th


7 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

causing panic in people’s hearts…At that time insider information indicated that SARS was abiological weapon.” A Chinese Foreign Ministry official refuted the claims, stating, “These arecompletely groundless and irresponsible comments,” adding, “Could you help me find the originalsource so we can find the scoundrel who spread them?”

Whether the SARS outbreak of 2003 originated from a Chinese laboratory or emerged as a naturaloccurrence, it is clear that the lack of transparency, accountability, and oversight of biologicalresearch conducted in Chinese laboratories, with dual-use applications, has fueled distrust amongnations and their citizens as to Chinese laboratory safety practices, compliance by the Chinesegovernment with BWC regulations, and their ability to effectively prevent future outbreaks that maycause worldwide health threats. A Roundtable convened before the Congressional ExecutiveCommission on China in May of 2003 to discuss what they have learned from the SARS outbreak inChina and how to prevent another epidemic in the future.

Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCoV: Repeating the Past?

The first known case of 2019-nCoV occurred on December 1 , 2019. On December 31, 2019,Chinese authorities notified the World Health Organization of multiple flu-like cases in Wuhan. Thepatients were quarantined, and an investigation as to the source commenced. Then on January1 2020, a seafood market in Wuhan was identified as the potential source of the outbreak. ByJanuary 7 , Chinese authorities ruled out known coronavirus strains such as SARS and MERS,though the new strain is associated with the SARS-CoV group, and diagnosed the new strainas 2019-nCoV. From January 13 to January 21 , cases were reported in Thailand, Japan, South

st

st

th

th st


8 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

Korea, Australia and the United States. A day later, authorities quarantined Wuhan and 2 othercities, banning all travel. By January 31 , the death toll reached 213, with 9,776 reported cases, asmore countries began to report their first cases, including: Mexico, Singapore, Taiwan, Germany,Cambodia, Finland, and India. On the same day, the World Health Organization declared a globalhealth emergency. As of February 2 2020, officials quarantined 17 cities in China and the virusspread to 24 other countries, with the number of confirmed cases reported at 14,549, while thenumber of suspected cases neared 20,000. The death toll as of February 2 climbed to 305.Coincidentally, they have begun treating some patients with HIV drugs, as Corey’s Digs just releasedchapter one of a large book on AIDS potential slush fund of $90B taxpayer dollars.

Though officials quickly determined that the source for the outbreak came from animals (such asbats) served in the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan, the prestigious peer-reviewed medical journal,Lancet, reported a clinical study of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus, which determined that the firstknown case of 2019-nCoV had no direct contact with the Huanan Seafood Market, further statingthat, “None of his family members developed fever or any respiratory symptoms,” and “Noepidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases.” Including the first patient, ofthe original 41 cases, 14 patients had no contact with the Huanan Seafood Market. The Lancet studywent on to state that, “Both SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV were believed to originate in bats, and theseinfections were transmitted directly to humans from market civets and dromedary camels,respectively. Extensive research on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV has driven the discovery of manySARS-like and MERS-like coronaviruses in bats.”

Once the genetic sequence of 2019-nCoV became available, researchers began to investigate itsgenetic make-up in order to understand its origins. From their research, it was determined that the2019-nCoV strain is most closely related to strains found in bats. Shi Zheng-Li is a coronavirusspecialist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, whose research focuses primarily on bats. She led theteam of specialists who determined that this latest strain of coronavirus resembles a bat virus with96.2% similarity and likewise resembles the coronavirus that causes SARS with a 79.5% similarity. Shi Zheng-Li has conducted several studies at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the firstbiocontaminant level 4 laboratory in China’s history, which is capable of handling the world’s mostdeadly diseases, including coronavirus. Her bio page on the Wuhan Institute of Virology site statesthat her “major achievements include the discovery of a number of genetically diverse bat SARS-likecoronaviruses… and the antibodies of Nipah virus and Ebola virus in bats in Southern China.” Furthermore, Shi Zheng-Li is participating in ongoing research projects including the National BasicResearch Program (973 Program), which has supported her research into a study on the “molecularmechanism of cross-species infection and transmission of important viruses” from 2011-2015. TheNational Natural Science Foundation of China has supported her research in the “discovery andisolation and identification of human pathogens carried by bats, distribution characteristics, geneticevolution and their pathogenicity to humans” from 2013-2017. Shi Zheng-Li led a team of experts atWuhan Institute of Virology in the discovery that the “genetic building blocks of SARS” were found ina population of horseshoe bats. The 2017 research paper written by Shi Zheng-Li and her team,which documented the study, stated, “The risk of spillover into people and emergence of a disease

st

nd

nd


9 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

similar to SARS is possible.” The team of researchers isolated approximately 300 bat coronavirussequences for the purposes of monitoring the virus’s evolution.

Just as in the case of the SARS outbreak, speculation as to the true origins of the 2019-nCoV haveemerged. A former Israeli military intelligence officer, who is familiar with the China’s biologicalwarfare program, believes Wuhan Institute of Virology is connected to Beijing’s secret biologicalweapons program, stating “Certain laboratories in the institute [Wuhan Institute of Virology] haveprobably been engaged, in terms of research and development, in Chinese [biological weapons], atleast collaterally, yet not as a principal facility of the Chinese BW alignment.” In 2017, a molecularbiologist at Rutgers University, Richard Ebright, criticized the new BSL-4 lab, stating that theexcessive capacity to study the world’s deadliest pathogens will lead governments to assume thatthere is a potential for the development of bioweapons at the facility, adding “These facilities areinherently dual use.” On January 30 , 2020, U.S. Senator, Tom Cotton addressed the Senate ArmedServices Committee regarding China’s lack of transparency about the 2019-nCoV outbreak, stating,“China is still lying about all of this. They’ve been lying about it from the very beginning, and youdon’t need their history of lying about SARS in 2003, though it is relevant here. You just have to seewhat’s happened over the last 2 months. We now know the first case manifested no later thanDecember 1, even though China didn’t reveal it to the WHO until a month later on December 31 ,when they continued to hide it from their own citizens, and they continued to say that it had beencontained inside of Wuhan. Today it is in every single province in China. They also claimed foralmost 2 months, until earlier this week, that it had originated in a seafood market in Wuhan – thatlocals had contracted it from animals in bat soup or snake tartar. That is not the case. The Lancetpublished study last week demonstrating that of the original 40 cases, 14 of them had no contact withthe seafood market including patient zero. As one epidemiologist said, ‘That virus went into theseafood market before it came out of the seafood market.’ We still don’t know where it originated…Iwould note that Wuhan also has China’s only biosafety level 4 super laboratory that works with theworld’s most deadly pathogens, to include, yes, coronavirus.” The address listed for Professor ShiZheng-Li’s work conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology is just 16 kilometers from the presumedepicenter of the outbreak, Huanan Seafood Market, bolstering these speculations.

Adding to suspicions, a scientist working for the Canadian government at the National MicrobiologyLab, plus her husband and her students from China, were expelled from the laboratory in July of2019, over a possible “policy breach.” The Canadian government has launched an investigation intothe expelled scientists. Xiangguo Qiu, who is an expert in the study of the Ebola virus, made at least5 trips to China from 2017 to 2018, including to the Wuhan Institute of Virology level 4 laboratory, aswell as to meetings with colleagues in Beijing. Xiangguo Qiu also resides on the same VirologicaSinica editorial board from which Shi Zheng-Li, of Wuhan Institute of Virology, is Editor-In-Chief. Furthermore, amidst the 2019-nCoV virus outbreak, indictments were unsealed for a HarvardUniversity professor and 2 Chinese nationals, who were charged in 3 separate China related cases. The indictment against the Harvard professor, Charles Leiber, alleges that the professor “lied abouthis involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan and affiliation with WUT [Wuhan University ofTechnology].” Leiber’s work has focused primarily on nanotechnology and brain science. Yanqing Ye

th

st


10 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

was indicted for falsely identifying as a student “while studying at Boston University’s (BU)Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering from October 2017 to April 2019” andlying “about her ongoing military service at the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT), atop military academy directed by the CCP [Chinese Communist Party].” Zaosong Zheng’s indictmentstates that he “conducted cancer-cell research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Bostonfrom Sept. 4, 2018, to Dec. 9, 2019.” The indictment against Zheng alleges that Zheng “stole 21 vialsof biological research and attempted to smuggle them out of the United States aboard a flightdestined for China.” Though the timing of these indictments, amidst the 2019-nCoV outbreak iscurious, there is no known direct connection between these indictments and the outbreak itself. Therecent events surrounding these investigations and indictments do, however, underscore thepotential for threats against national security.

It is important to note that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence recognizes that,“biological and chemical materials and technologies—almost always dual-use—move easily in theglobalized economy, as do personnel with the scientific expertise to design and use them forlegitimate and illegitimate purposes,” and perceives the increasing worldwide exchange andaccessibility to pose a potential threat to U.S. national security.

Regardless of whether the SARS outbreak of 2003 or the Novel Coronavirus outbreak of 2019 wereman-made or natural occurrences, the lack of transparency, accountability, and oversight by Chineseauthorities as to their burgeoning biological weapons program has fueled speculations. Let us hope,for the sake of the Chinese citizens, who have been devastated the most by these epidemics, as wellas for the global population, that the Chinese government has finally learned from the grave mistakesof decades past.

Article posted with permission from Corey Lynn, originally posted at CoreysDigs.com


11 of 11 2/6/20, 9:08 AM

Burgeoning Asian Bioweapons - Issues4Life · Through their research, the unit developed special...

Documents

Transcript of Burgeoning Asian Bioweapons - Issues4Life · Through their research, the unit developed special...