Will the origins of coronavirus remain buried forever in secrets and lies?

The streets thronged with families, buildings were lit up in crimson, balloons in bright colours rose to the skies lit up by spotlights, and there was huge cheers as the clock struck midnight. The lavish celebrations in Wuhan were very different from the subdued way most of the world marked the new year in the time of coronavirus.

China’s president gave an exultant speech bringing in the new decade. Declaring victory against Covid in a televised speech, he called for the nation to rally further behind the ruling Communist Party. “I am proud of our great motherland and people as well as the unyielding national spirit. With solidarity and resilience, we wrote the epic of our fight against the pandemic,” said XI Jinping.  There was just one line of sympathy for “all the unfortunate ones infected with the coronavirus”, in the 12-minute speech.  

The Party mouthpiece, Global Times newspaper, proclaimed on the same day: “From Wuhan to Beijing, Dalian to Urumqi, China has managed to stop the viral spread in the fastest speed to ensure people's health; from city-wide lockdowns to precise prevention strategies, the central government has found ways to minimally disrupt people's lives while fighting the virus…”  

There was also celebration in the government media over the forecast that China will overtake the US as the world’s largest economy by 2028, five years earlier than previous studies had shown. The economy grew in 2020  by 2.3 per cent, the only major economy to show  growth. While other countries were hampered by resurgent virus outbreaks and lockdowns, Chinese firms were in a position to take advantage of the standstill.

The accusation levelled against the Chinese government is that it hid the origins of coronavirus from the rest of the world for a critical period; a fatal delay which allowed the disease to spread outside the country and around the world with devastating consequences.  It is also claimed that the virus did not originate in the wet fish markets of Wuhan as had been originally thought. But that it had accidentally escaped from a laboratory, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where experiments with the virus were being carried out, and that the Chinese authorities had been trying to eliminate the evidence of this.  

After a flurry of interest in the origins or Coronavirus last year, public and media attention quickly switched in the West to the havoc being wrought by the pandemic and the failure of many government to deal with it. Then there were other issues of great importance in the news, the Black Lives Matters protests, Brexit, the US presidential election and its extraordinary and violent aftermath.  

While international focus was on the storming of the Capitol in Washington, it emerged that the Chinese authorities had blocked a World Health Organisation team due to begin investigating the origins of the pandemic, saying their visas had not been approved. The visit had only been agreed after strenuous resistance from Beijing; it eventually confirmed the visit could go ahead as demand continued to grow internationally.  

The WHO visit had been organised after months of negotiations and the last-minute refusal of entry was seen by many as Beijing being obstructive. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the organisation’s director general, said he was “very disappointed with this news, given that two members have already begun their journeys, and others were not able to travel at the last minute”.  

This was not exactly a ringing condemnation, but it was the first time Ghebreyesus had ever made any criticism of China over the pandemic. The Ethiopian WHO chief had been accused  of being complicit in Beijing’s subterfuge at the start of the disease. He had, instead, been fulsome in his praise of Beijing  for its supposed “openness in sharing information” and for “setting a new standard for outbreak control”.

Last week, on the anniversary of the lockdown in Wuhan, an international independent review panel criticised Chinese officials for not putting in place public health measures when Covid-19 first appeared, and WHO for failing to declare an international emergency on time. The panel, led by former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark and former Liberian president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, called for urgent reforms of the WHO.

The visas were issued a week later and the WHO team is now in China. The 10 scientists were in quarantine for two weeks before beginning their research, which will  have to rely upon samples and evidence provided by Chinese officials and access provided by them to places in Wuhan and other areas to gather testimonies from those who have been involved.  

The Chinese government reacted to accusations of destroying incriminating material with furious denials. At the same it had claimed that the virus did not originate in China. Without any credible evidence it claimed, at various times, that the disease came from the US, Australia, Italy, Spain, Russia, Malaysia, India  and Bangladesh – basically anywhere but China. Posters in Wuhan’s Central Hall say that Covid-19 started in “a multiplicity of locations around the world”.

There has been retribution from the regime for those domestically or internationally who challenged the official coronavirus narrative.  As the planning for the New Year celebrations were under way, a court in Shanghai sentenced a former lawyer and citizen journalist, Zhang Zhan, to four years in prison for reporting on the pandemic.    

Zhang was one of several citizen journalists who covered the initial outbreak in Wuhan, revealing that the conditions were far more severe than the authorities were admitting, and highlighting the cases of families of victims, who were seeking accountability, being harassed by officials. She was arrested in Wuhan in May and taken to Shanghai, 640 kilometres away, where she was charged  with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”, an accusation frequently used against activists.  

Zhang was just the latest to pay for Covid in the hands of the state. One of the earliest victims was doctor Li Wenliang, who raised the alarm over a new and virulent disease to fellow medics in December 2019. Li was detained by the Public Security Bureau, accused of “making false comments” that had “severely disturbed the social order” and given a document saying: “We solemnly warn you: If you keep being stubborn, with such impertinence, and continue this illegal activity, you will be brought to justice – is that understood?” The doctor, aged 35, died from coronavirus in February.  

Beijing took a carrot and cash approach to the pandemic abroad. Chinese control of some of the supply lines for PPE – it produces around 50 per cent of face masks in the world – allowed it to approach foreign governments as benefactors, although the items needed to be paid for in most cases and some batches turned out to be faulty.  

Retaliation was swift against those countries which questioned the Chinese narrative on the pandemic. Australia’s call for an international investigation led to a barrage of threats and punitive trade restrictions by Beijing on Australian imports. Chinese diplomats, the so-called “wolf warriors” named after a film about soldiers, were quick to attack those who were critical of the country.  

China’s ambassador to Sweden had warned, “we treat our friends with fine wine. But for our enemies we have shotguns.” The long serving ambassador to London, Liu Xiaoming, now back in Beijing, reacted to criticism of Beijing over  Covid along with condemnation of clampdowns on Hong Kong and Muslim Uighurs by warning that Britain will  “bear the consequences” of treating China as a hostile country.  

There have also been claims that vaccines produced outside China may not be safe: Global Times and CGTN, the English station of the state broadcaster CCTV, accused western media of ignoring the dangers of the Pfizer vaccine. A study by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute says the criticism was ratcheted up after researchers in Brazil claimed the Chinese Sinovac vaccine was only 50.4 per cent effective rather than the 78 per cent maintained  by the manufacturers.

The Trump administration had been foremost in attacking China over the pandemic and Donald Trump sought to use it as an election campaign weapon, claiming Joe Biden would be soft on China because of his son Hunter’s past business links with the country. But this was a change of tune by Trump. Even while evidence was emerging of the disease spreading abroad from China, including to the US, Trump was fulsome in his praise of XI Jinping.  

On 24 January he tweeted: “China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American people, I want to thank President Xi!” On to 10 February, he said: “I think China is very, you know, professionally run in the sense that they have everything under control. I really believe they are going to have it under control fairly soon. On 29 February he was still insisting: “China seems to be making tremendous progress. Their numbers are way down ... I think our relationship with China is very good.”  

Trump, it is claimed, had sought Chinese help in getting himself re-elected. John Bolton, the former National Security Advisor, claimed that at the G20 summit in Osaka the US president pleaded with Xi to keep buying American farm produce as the farmers vote would be highly important. And, while China imposed trade sanctions on Australia, it continued to purchase American farm produce, an insurance policy perhaps, in case Trump did continue in the White House.  

Bolton holds that Trump could well have reversed course once again on China, dropping the Covid allegations, if there was a chance of a trade deal and personal benefit, had he won re-election.  

Trump claimed coronavirus was man-made at the Wuhan laboratory. This was echoed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and both men claimed that intelligence would be unveiled to  support the allegations. But US security agencies contradicted them, pointing  out that there was no definitive proof, and investigations needed to continue.  

There have been claims that Pompeo would unfurl this damning intelligence as he leaves his post. The former Secretary of State said last week that researchers at the Wuhan laboratory fell ill in the autumn of 2019 with symptoms consistent with Covid-19, and that scientists there were working with a bat coronavirus that is 96.2 per cent similar to Covid-19.

Pompeo claimed that despite supposedly being a civilian institution, the Wuhan laboratory worked on secret projects with the Chinese military.  A State Department briefing paper said the Wuhan laboratory had been studying a bat coronavirus known as RaTG13 since at least 2016. The RaTG13 is genetically closest to SARS-CoV-2 ... and the sample came  from a cave in Yunnan Province in 2013, after several miners there died of SARS-like illness. 

Although the Wuhan laboratory  has a published record of conducting “gain-of-function” research on virus to enhance their lethality or transmission capability, the State Department said it has not been transparent or consistent about its record of studying viruses similar to the Covid-19 virus, including RaTG13.

“Beijing continues today to withhold vital information that scientists need to protect the world from this deadly virus – and the next one,” said Pompeo.  He called for WHO investigators to “have access to the records of the WIV's work on bat and other coronaviruses before the Covid-19 outbreak as part of a thorough inquiry. They must also have a full accounting of why the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses.”

Pompeo’s “revelations” received less coverage than expected. It did not provide proof that the virus came from the Wuhan laboratory.  This may have been a reaction against the Trump team repeatedly “crying wolf” and a general scepticism about claims from an administration which has become notorious for its lack of veracity.  

There has, meanwhile, been a campaign to make the Chinese government pay reparations for its role in the pandemic. There are currently around 10 law suits lodged against Beijing, ranging from groups of private companies in Europe and the US, to states like Missouri and Mississippi with reports that others are to follow.

Legislation has also been introduced in the US that would allow Congress to sanction officials who carry out acts intended to “deliberately conceal or distort information about a public health emergency of international concern”. It is modelled on the Global Magnitsky Act, a law designed to punish individuals around the world who are accused of human rights violations or corruption brought in over the death of a whistle-blowing lawyer in a Russian prison.

Whether any successful litigation can be pursued is, however, another matter entirely. It is also a matter of doubt whether Beijing would accept a verdict by an international court. China adopted a Declaration on the Promotion of International Law in June 2016 – but when it lost a landmark case over a territorial dispute in the South China Sea against the Philippines a month later, it simply ignored the judgment. A senior former Chinese diplomat dismissed it as “nothing more than a piece of paper” and, indeed, there was no means of enforcing the ruling apart from through military action.

There are other problems. The lawsuits in America came after Republican Senator Josh Hawley introduced the Justice for Victims of Coronavirus Act to strip China of sovereign immunity for prosecution, and create a task force in the state department to investigate Beijing’s handling of the disease and secure compensation from the Chinese government. The Magnitsky proposal was put forward by another Republican Senator, Tom Cotton.

Both men are fervent Trump supporters. Cotton advocated using the military against the Black Lives Matter protests in the summer. He is also under embarrassing scrutiny for falsely claiming that he served as a US Army Ranger in Afghanistan and Iraq. Hawley is facing a possible Congressional ethics investigation over accusations that he played a part in inciting the Washington riot by Trump’s supporters. The credibility of two leading American campaigners on China and Covid is thus somewhat low.  

It remains unclear exactly what the WHO team will be able to inspect and when. Whether they will be able to examine the laboratory or speak to whistleblowers, seems unlikely under the terms of reference, and the  whole process will take a very long time.  

It is also the case that while Joe Biden’s administration, while likely to be combative with China over issues ranging from human rights to trade, is less likely to focus on its role in the pandemic. And it may well be the case that, with the struggle to recover from pandemic continuing in the foreseeable future, focus on how it all started may fade away, and the origins of the disease, which caused so much havoc around the world, will remain buried in secrets and lies.