What really happened in Wuhan

Joe Biden will be far from alone in being disappointed that the 18 top US intelligence agencies he gave 90 days to establish the origins of the Covid-19 virus failed to reach a definitive conclusion. But their finding that a lab leak and human exposure to an infected animal are both plausible hypotheses underlines the need for the international community to be unrelenting in its demand for the truth and complete transparency about the start and spread of the devastating pandemic, specifically from China.

As Sharri Markson wrote on Monday, quoting a “very senior Five Eyes intelligence source” about the US intelligence investigation: “The problem was not with the intelligence collection – there is plenty of it, including intercepts, signals intelligence and human sources – the problem lies with the analysis. This source said there was ample circumstantial evidence supporting a laboratory leak (theory) while there was no intelligence pointing to Covid-19 arising from an infected animal. That’s right, no intelligence. Yet vast sections of the intelligence community ultimately view the origins issue as inconclusive because the evidence, while all on the lab-leak side of the ledger, is circumstantial.”

Given the ongoing global devastation caused by the virus, it will be a pity if that is indeed the case and the US investigation ends up being accepted as just another failed attempt to establish the truth. The US intelligence community may claim credit for airing the differing views in the unclassified version of the report. But in intelligence, the number of agencies that believe in one or another theory is less important than getting it right. Doing so must remain the overwhelming imperative as the world seeks ways to establish exactly what and who caused the pandemic.

Markson, whose book, What Happened in Wuhan, will be published next month, described as “truly absurd” one conclusion that was reached: “Most agencies also assess with low confidence that SARS-CoV-2 probably was not genetically engineered; however, two agencies believe there was not sufficient evidence to make an assessment either way.” She noted: “Can US intelligence analysts be so ill-informed and ignorant as to assess, albeit with low confidence, that SARS-CoV-2 was probably not genetically altered?”

Adding intrigue to the US intelligence report’s failure to reach a definitive conclusion is Markson’s account of what she was told by a US State Department source involved in the investigation – that Donald Trump’s enthusiasm for the lab leak theory during an election year “infected the way the intelligence community treated this issue”.

It may be that with 18 intelligence agencies vying against each other, the investigation was never going to come up with a definitive finding. But its failure to do so in the face of compelling evidence that the first human infection “most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology” demands unrelenting further investigation, as promised by Mr Biden. As Michael McCaul, the top Republican on the US House of Representatives foreign affairs committee, disclosed to Markson: “They (the agencies) didn’t come to a unified conclusion, but … the more credible ones came out stating they did think there was genetic manipulation, that it did not come from animals and that it was leaked accidentally from the lab.” The one thing all 18 intelligence agencies agreed on was China’s culpability in persistently refusing to be upfront with investigations into the provenance of the virus.

As the report notes, the world lacks vital “clinical samples or a complete understanding of the epidemiological data” that hold the truth. In the interests of every one of the 194 members of the World Health Organisation, including China, Beijing must stop behaving like a lawless, irresponsible bully over Covid-19. If it wants to retain any international respect, China must produce the data that is needed and play its part in ensuring the world is better prepared for the next pandemic.