~ 6 minutes read
The nature of infectious disease research at a Ukrainian lab is in question following Russia’s statement that the US funded biological weapons labs in Ukraine.
The bottom line: To some, any lab that studies dangerous viruses either is or could easily be turned into a biological weapons lab. To others, studying dangerous viruses can help us prepare for the next pandemic and can’t be equated to bioweapon research.
Below, we break down how different people are interpreting this story, and what values or information inform this perspective. Our goal isn’t to change your mind — it’s to show how rational people can understand this same story so differently.
To the left, there are no US-funded biological weapons labs in Ukraine. Studying dangerous viruses to advance science and medicine is not the same as creating biological weapons.
Claims that there are US-funded biological weapons in Ukraine play into the Russian narrative that the US is just as bad as they are. Russia could use this narrative to try to cover up its own use of chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine.
To the right, the US-funded biolabs in Ukraine contain viruses that could be used as biological weapons, and it’s dangerous to pretend otherwise.
It won’t matter what our intentions for these labs are if Russia captures them and uses dangerous viruses during war. It was irresponsible for the government to fund this research and not own up to it.
To the left…
To the right…
To the left, there are no US-funded biological weapons labs in Ukraine. Studying dangerous viruses to advance science and medicine is not the same as creating biological weapons.
Claims that there are US-funded biological weapons in Ukraine play into the Russian narrative that the US is just as bad as they are. Russia could use this narrative to try to cover up its own use of chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine.
To the right, the US-funded biolabs in Ukraine contain viruses that could be used as biological weapons, and it’s dangerous to pretend otherwise.
It won’t matter what our intentions for these labs are if Russia captures them and uses dangerous viruses during war. It was irresponsible for the government to fund this research and not own up to it.
There are a few things being muddled in this story that leads us to make different assumptions about what’s going on:
To the left, it’s important to study these viruses to be prepared for the next pandemic — and this goal makes the research distinct from bioweapons research. The risk of viruses escaping from these labs is miniscule because there are systems in place to secure research samples and destroy them if needed.
To the right, the risks of studying these viruses might outweigh the benefits — because countries like Russia and China could get their hands on them. There is a significant possibility that COVID-19 escaped from a lab, so it’s not conspiratorial to believe that it could happen again.
To the left, studying dangerous viruses helps us prepare for the next pandemic. Without ongoing infectious disease research, we probably wouldn’t have been able to develop a COVID-19 vaccine and treatments so quickly.
To the right, the government shouldn’t fund (and therefore possess) labs that study dangerous viruses — or at least maintain transparency about it — because of their potential to be used as biological weapons.
To the left, referring to these labs as biological weapons labs — instead of more accurately describing them as infectious disease labs — legitimizes the idea that the US would use biological weapons. If Russia plans to use a biological weapon, they will try to pin it on us, and people who parroted lines about US-funded biological weapons labs are creating an environment where people might believe Russia’s lies.
To the right, it’s harmful to try to cover for the US government’s reckless actions. Our government shouldn’t tell people half-truths — they should admit to the research they fund and own the consequences. Pretending that there is no security risk in funding these projects is disingenuous at best, and a potential war crime at worst.
These questions are rooted in opinion, not fact, and our answers to them will dramatically change how we tell this story. For example: