Why Wouldnt America Talk About the Lab Leak?
On the world stage, the U.S. prioritizes inoffensiveness above all else. That doesn't bode well for our mounting rivalry with China. Much has been written nowfinallyabout the remarkable groupthink fiasco in which Americas elite institutions sought to throttle any inquiry or even just any curiosity about whether the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated from a laboratory leak in Wuhan, China. Now we know that such a leak remains in fact a very real possibility, and many scientists, editors, and commentators are scrambling to shed their previous know-nothingism on the matter and join the inquiry on what really happened and why (while avoiding, in most instances, any acknowledgement of their earlier folly). But some implications of the sordid tale havent received much attention. Such a nation is not well equipped to parry threats and challenges from other nations or well positioned to ask young men and women to fight and possibly die for the national honor and the national interest. Such questions and musings flow naturally from the months-long frenzy of denial that the coronavirus pandemic could possibly have been connected with the nearby Wuhan Institute of Virology or other nearby labs. A turning point in the saga finally came with publication of Katherine Ebans remarkable Vanity Fair piece, The Lab-Leak Theory: Inside the Fight to Uncover Covid-19s Origin. From Eban and others we learn that the denial was pushed in part by people motivated by fears that a thorough examination of the matter could expose their own gain-of-function researchefforts to make the coronavirus more infectious and more deadly. Eban paints a picture of scientists such as Peter Daszak, who ran a nonprofit outfit that directed U.S. federal grant money to gain-of-function research in China, scrambling to divert attention from any lab-leak possibility. Clearly, many scientists harbored subterranean motives that now, in retrospect, explain their actions. Ebans piece employs such terms as conflict of interest, totally unscientific, and smelled like a cover-up in describing the efforts, at high levels of science and government, to ensure that the lab-leak theory was debunked as morally out of bounds.  But that doesnt explain why the mainstream media, foreswearing any independence of thought or bloodhound instinct, joined in to insist that a negative had been proved and the matter was now closed. It doesnt explain how the media went into complete collective overdrive in assailing any hint that it could be otherwise. The New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC News, CNN, the Guardian, the Daily Beast, the Poynter Institutes PolitiFact, and many more news organizations jumped on the cant-be-true thesis. It seems to be a product of desperate fears on the part of growing numbers of Americans that someone somewhere may be harboring sentiments of racism or xenophobia, as defined with broad abandon by those with such fears. Thus, the lab-leak hypothesis couldnt possibly be right because that might energize underlying anti-Chinese sentiments. The racism trope was widespread during the groupthink frenzy. Charles Cooke of National Review excoriated lab-leak theorists for being addicted to racism and xenophobia. The Washington Posts Leana Wen worried that unproven speculation (which, incidentally, is the starting point of any scientific inquiry) could increase racist attacks[and] fuel anti-Asian hate.  New York Times reporter Apoorva Mandavilli released a tweet (later deleted) that said the COVID lab-leak theory had racist roots. And when some writers, finally taking the lab-leak theory seriously, cited earlier writings by former Times reporter Nicholas Wade, a socialist writer named Andre Damon quickly labeled Wade a racist. Some resisted the tired thinking represented by such citations. Zaid Jilani suggested at Newsweek that Ms. Mandavillis Tweet may have been emblematic of a wider mindset among American journalists, many of whom saw their mission as simply opposing any stance taken by the Trump administrationwhile also burnishing their anti-racist and anti-imperialist credentials by refusing to blame a foreign government for the pandemic.  And writer Glenn Greenwald mischievously asked, Can someone explain to me why its racist to wonder if a virus escaped from a Chinese lab, butnot racist to insist it infected humans because of Chinese wet markets?  But this isnt merely a matter of proper speech and charitable thoughts in the global sphere. The lead headline in the Seattle Times the other day, over an AP story about the recent NATO summit in Brussels, declared: NATO leaders join U.S. in standing up to Russian, Chinese threats. And the Wall Street Journal noted in its summit story that the 79-paragraph NATO communique mentioned China a dozen times, a shift from past [NATO] summits, when Beijing was barely mentioned. The paper quoted from the communique, Chinas growing influence and international policies can present challenges that we need to address. We will engage China with a view to defending the security interests of the alliance.  Tough talk. The NATO communique represents the growing awareness of a geopolitical reality that many foreign policy experts have discerned now for several yearsnamely, that America and China seem to be on a collision course stemming from a Chinese resolve to end Americas East Asian dominance and take on that role itself. It is to be hoped that that course can be obstructed peacefully and the collision averted. But, if not, we can bet that the Chinese people, and certainly their leaders and their elites, wont be worrying about any American hurt feelings stemming from how they characterize us. And the Chinese arent engaged in any internal handwringing these days about regime abuses or historical lapses, though abuses and lapses have been both abundant and at times horrific in Chinas history and even in its present. China is too busy with big-picture ambitions of outstripping America economically, technologically, and militarily, so that it can upend the American-led global system and replace it with one more favorable to China. In this epic geopolitical struggle, China has its head in the game. America doesnt, as reflected in the silly groupthink bungle over the origin of COVID. Robert W. Merry, veteran Washington journalist and publishing executive, is the author of five books on American history and foreign policy.