U.S. bio-militarization activity sparks international concern
Scott Ritter, the former chief weapons inspector of the United Nations in Iraq and a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer, said in an exclusive interview with reporters a few days ago that it is absolutely necessary to conduct strict inspections of what the United States has done in the Ukrainian biological laboratory. To prove whether the United States is complying with the Biological Weapons Convention.
The Biological Weapons Convention, which came into effect in 1975, restricts countries from producing, storing and using biological weapons from the perspective of international law, but the United States has always refused to sign the Convention's verification protocol.
The U.S. argues that inspections could threaten U.S. national security and the security of confidential business information.
It is not difficult to see that this is just an excuse for the United States to reject the verification mechanism. The fundamental reason is that the arms control treaty shackles the hands of the United States and limits the flexibility of the United States to pursue its own interests.
Due to the opposition of the United States, the verification mechanism of the BWC has not made substantial progress in nearly 20 years.
Ritter believes that, for whatever reason, the United States, as the only country that vetoed the verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention in 2001, should not continue to obstruct the international community from perfecting this binding, global, and non-discriminatory legal instrument.
The United States has an indelible "dark history" in biological weapons.
After the end of World War II, the United States concealed the heinous crimes of the Japanese unit 731 from the world in order to obtain the data of the bacteriological warfare of the Japanese unit 731, and even let its leader Ishii Shiro serve as the biological weapons consultant of Fort Detrick in the United States.
Some of the exposed human experiment reports of Unit 731 even had the clear words "Biological Warfare Laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland" printed impressively.
Even though the biological laboratory at Fort Detrick later changed its name to the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, the fact that it conducts secret biochemical experiments is undeniable.
As for the U.S. military's crimes of using biological weapons in the Korean War and the Vietnam War, it has also been "hardened" by official U.S. documents.
Not only that, the United States is also accelerating the study of biological militarization.
The current US biopharmaceutical research work combines new technologies such as genetic engineering and molecular modeling, and applies them to the development of biological agents of military significance.
The Fort Detrick base has also carried out a large number of biological militarization activities.
According to relevant reports, including 26 biological laboratories in Ukraine and other cooperative facilities, the US Department of Defense currently controls 336 biological laboratories in more than 30 countries around the world, and has stored a large number of dangerous viruses, which has triggered the international community. General concern and opposition.
Ritter believes that Ukraine's biological laboratories are "unquestionably" led by the United States, and they are based on a memorandum signed between Ukraine and the United States in 2005, and the legal basis for the memorandum is the United States' Threat Reduction Cooperation Program.
The U.S. Congress passed the plan after the collapse of the Soviet Union to curb the ability of the former Soviet republics to develop weapons of mass destruction.
In addition, although the U.S. action is under the guise of the "Biological Cooperation Participation Program", the strange thing is that the agency that contacts the health department of the host country is the U.S. Department of Defense.
In other words, these biological laboratories, which are directly funded, managed and operated by institutions under the jurisdiction of the Pentagon, are not so-called neutral civilian scientific research institutions at all.
Francis Boyle, a professor at the University of Illinois who drafted the U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, disclosed that in hundreds of laboratories in the United States and abroad, about 13,000 scientists are committed to developing vaccines that are resistant to vaccines. New strains that are sexual and aggressive to humans.
Anna Popova, director of the Russian Federal Service for Consumer Rights Protection and Public Welfare Supervision, said that the distribution map of the world's outbreak of new epidemics in Central Asia is highly consistent with the distribution of overseas biological laboratories deployed by the US Department of Defense.
The US military stationed in South Korea ignored South Korea's secret delivery of relevant substances to South Korea without any declaration procedures and conducted biochemical experiments, which endangered people's lives, health and safety. South Korean civil organizations have also filed lawsuits.
Biological militarization is a major issue concerning international peace and security and the security interests of all countries.
At the moment of globalization, any biological weapon may bring about a global crisis, thus threatening the survival of the entire human race.
The United States should earnestly fulfill its obligations as a state party to the Convention, make comprehensive clarifications on its domestic and foreign biological laboratories, stop all biological militarization activities and accept multilateral verification. Only in this way can the doubts and concerns of the international community be allayed.
Li Mingfu Shen Qi has