"On October 16, 2014, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy announced the launch of..........During this process the USG paused the release of federal funding for GOF studies anticipated to enhance the pathogenicity or transmissibility among mammals by respiratory droplets of influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses."

https://osp.od.nih.gov/biotechnology/gain-of-function-research/ 

~

Although it is virtually certain that the Wuhan biolab is connected to the Covid outbreak, it is also virtually certain that the 'culprits' were not from a single country. Now that the U.S. is raising the leaky lab theory again, the Chinese are responding.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1224597.shtml 

It looks like a group of people from several countries, including the U.S. and China, arranged a magnificent series of events that could be played out for decades to hide their 'climate catastrophe avoidance project'.

Most likely the virus was carefully developed by a multinational group, distributed in late 2019 to lab workers and soldiers at the Wuhan military games, then new strains were developed to be released according to economic factors. Several months from now, if the Chinese are backed into a corner, the debate will shift to the military games and the connection of various soldiers to the facility mentioned in the Global Times article. At that point enough scientific types will be speculating about motives that there will be some discussion of whether the motive was to reduce carbon consumption temporarily, at which point a flurry of scientists will start creating viruses to 'save the world'.

~

A lot has changed on the 'global warfare' front since World War II.

One of the most significant changes is that large armies no longer have any real strategic power.

They can be used in small actions against primitive tribal groups, in places like Afghanistan or Vietnam, but no modern army would dare try to conquer nor occupy an educated developed region.

Today there are countless weapons available to educated small groups attacked by large countries. These weapons thoroughly shift the balance of power against countries that use large troop concentrations to impose a melting pot political/military agenda.

~

So the question arises, what do countries which 'occupy/possess' small ethnic groups do to protect their 'national interests'?

China does not want to give up the territory of Tibet, nor does it want to lose the Uyghur territory it occupies. But within a few years any spark could motivate a Tibetan or Uyghur who has an advanced chemistry or biology degree to create mayhem. 

Likewise, the United States has crushed many indigenous tribes, even exterminated dozens of tribes. Now survivors are capable individually of creating more destruction than the entire United States military was capable of only several decades ago.

Common sense would suggest China and the U.S. and other nations in that situation should abruptly make peace with their former victims and cede sovereign territory to them, create buffers, a psychological retreat. 

An emerging type of tool, ethnic bioweapons, is quickly developing to create a new strategic landscape in war.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/11/hacking-the-presidents-dna/309147/ 

The urgent goal of China, the U.S., and other 'occupying' powers is usually assimilation.

China wants Tibetans and Uyghurs to 'become Chinese'. The U.S. wants native Americans to 'become U.S. supporters'. Other countries in that situation likewise, for the most part.

Unfortunately, that agenda cannot proceed without some help from the dark side of science.

An occupied population is usually encouraged to view its occupiers as defenders also. The subtext of occupation is 'You are a more primitive vulnerable population, and we, the occupiers, are like parents protecting you'.

This pretext allows the occupiers to profit from the vulnerability of the occupied, much like an abusive husband 'protects' a battered wife.

Unfortunately this almost always leads to the occupier enhancing vulnerability in the occupied. The occupier profits from the weakness an occupied people has within the society that is trying to consume them. This creates a vicious circle that never ends until the occupied society has been fully consumed.

With respect to bioweapons, there is a rapidly developing rivalry between the two groups. A very rough developmental timeline would be as follows.

A) Occupier scientists develop neutral technologies e.g. 'cures'.

B) A few among those occupier scientists lean in a scientific direction that favors their group.

C) Occupied individuals slowly acclimate into those sciences, lagging by a few years initially.

D) Eventually a small minority of occupier scientists take further steps, whether their motives are felt as ideological or motivated by demographic fears or whatever.

The progression continues, and is easy to figure out, but that is roughly where China and the U.S. and some other countries are now.

Individual 'occupier' scientists have easy access to the knowledge and tools they need to become 'an army of one'. Their incredibly destructive arsenal costs less than a bicycle to build, doesn't need any other people to help implement, is completely invisible, except footprints, until its destruction is in full force. 

~

The obvious, and only, defense against this rapidly emerging warfare is physically sovereign tribal entities, with sovereign independent economies.

Countries like China and the United States and others, of course, do not want to give up their 'tribal pets' the societies and cultures which they have militarily conquered, and whose territories they 'own' by virtue of military conquest.

Also relevant, once these attacks become more overt, part of the occupier calculus will be that assimilated occupied people of mixed blood provide some future protection against similar attacks from outside, as long as the 'main' genetic body of the respective tribes are extinct. 

In other words targeting an occupied tribal group in a way that exterminates full blooded tribal members will seem advantageous to occupiers.

~ The U.S., China etc try to solve problems like this using technologies e.g. surveillance, over-policing, bureaucratic controls etc, solutions from a past era, to lesser problems 

So, what is the solution?

Should tribal groups walk peacefully into extinction?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/01/18/crispr-and-the-splice-to-survive 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/25/the-rogue-experimenters 

https://bugssonline.org/about/faq/ 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shir%C5%8D_Ishii 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731