Speaking to journalists in Geneva on January 27, the regional director for Africa of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Patrick Youssef, expressed the ICRC's alarm at the risk of a bacteriological catastrophe in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). 

Youssef noted that the upsurge in fighting in the then besieged, now occupied city of Goma could trigger a serious catastrophe if the power cuts that were occurring caused a break in the cold chain in the preservation of pathogens stored at the National Institute of Biomedical Research (INRB) in Goma. A "leakage of Ebola samples and other pathogens," he explained, "could trigger a catastrophe of unimaginable consequences."

Despite the gravity of the situation, such an alert was barely echoed by the Western media and authorities. Nor did any international organization show any public or official concern, much less any Western government, not even the Congolese government itself! No one showed any concern, at least not publicly.

The alert and the silence about it raise many questions. How is it possible that the independent media do not give importance to this very real risk? How is it possible that governments, neither near nor far, are concerned about it? On the other hand, who would think of having a laboratory of such dangerous and sensitive material in one of the most insecure and unstable areas of the world for decades? And why don't we know the person or persons responsible for such negligence? Who allows this?

Only AFP published Youssef's words in a note on January 28, as if it were a mere slippage. After the AFP article, the news was reproduced in various non-Western media such as The Hindu, Citizen TV in Kenya, This is Beirut, Ciudad CCS in Venezuela, some minor media outlets in Argentina, Chile... journalist Max Blumenthal, with his more than 700,000 followers, was probably the one who had the greatest diffusion effect, when he spoke about it on January 30.

Likewise, neither the European Union, nor the African Union, nor the WHO... nobody expressed any concern or showed any interest. I could only find an official statement from one government: the Russian government. The Russian Consumer Protection Agency, named Rospotrebnadzor, issued an official statement on the matter on January 28.

The laboratory in question claims to be Congolese, but in reality, it is entirely the responsibility of France and the United States, financed mainly through USAID and most likely run by USAMRIID (United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases), the most active bio-warfare research center in the world.

The Russian agency in its communiqueé considers it "irresponsible" for the United States and France to work with dangerous pathogens on the territory of third countries and states: "This is yet another proof that they accumulate samples of agents such as Ebola or smallpox without guaranteeing the safety of infrastructures," which is a "negligent attitude of Washington and its allies."

Related News

Did 'Israel', US fight a proxy war with China in South Asia during the India-Pakistan escalation?

The spirit of Bandung: 70 years on

The ICRC did not mention the issue explicitly again, as if it were a mere slippage; one could only read in its network messages that it called on all warring parties to respect "critical and essential infrastructures such as laboratories and hospitals."

I consulted Francine Kongolo of the ICRC in Kinshasa and she clarified for me the tireless and enormous effort made by her organization during the past weeks:

"Indeed, the building of the National Institute of Biomedical Research (INRB) also located in Goma represented a risk while the fighting was being carried out with heavy artillery. If the physical integrity of the INRB were to be affected or if the cold chain were to be interrupted, this was a potential danger that could go well beyond the borders of the DRC.

The ICRC had to work to help secure the perimeter of the INRB site against looting. The ICRC had also placed a Red Cross emblem on the roof of the INRB so that it would be clearly visible from the sky and could not be mistaken for a military target. The ICRC also supplied fuel to the INRB to avoid power cuts and maintain the cold chain."

No wonder that on February 13, Youssef himself traveled to the capital of Rwanda, (whose regime is responsible for the war in question), to meet with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, James Kabarebe, (an obscure character prosecuted in Spain for crimes of “genocide”, “integration in a terrorist organization,” and “terrorist acts”). Both stated that they discussed ways of collaboration and the situation in the east of the DRC. The huge emblem on the roof of the lab was clearly intended for the Rwandan military and paramilitary bombing Goma; it was necessary to make sure they got the message.

It was not until almost a month later that the head of the Red Cross met with the authorities of the country under attack, the DRC, in a more relaxed spirit. On March 4, he met with Congolese Prime Minister Judith Suminwa Tuluka, and on March 5, he met with the Congolese Minister of Foreign Affairs, Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner, to discuss the situation in the east of the country.

While Minister Kayikwamba Wagner said she had met with Youssef to "discuss the disastrous humanitarian situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo, especially in the east of the country, hard hit by the Rwandan aggression and its M23 collaborators," Prime Minister Suminwa Tuluka said one of the key points she had made to the ICRC representative was "the creation of a humanitarian corridor to facilitate the delivery of aid to areas under Rwandan occupation." Meanwhile, the ICRC Africa director only spoke diplomatically of discussing the "humanitarian crisis"… without Rwanda in the equation, without any responsible parties.

Conclusion

The conclusions that can be drawn from this story are twofold. The first is that all governments, international agencies, large multinationals, and foundations that are related to this laboratory, and others like it, are extremely irresponsible, I would even say dangerous for public health and the life they claim to defend. 

The second conclusion is that all this bizarre story is yet another proof that the media are not only at the service of the psychopathic capitalist system, but they are an important part of it. The selection of the news they reproduce is not at all innocent, nor does it have anything to do with the slightest intention to inform. Orwell said that «journalism is publishing what someone does not want you to publish and everything else is just Public Relations». The Western mainstream media and the media controlled by Western governments hide the important things from us, distract us and are nothing more than the propaganda arm, PR in Orwell's words, of a system more interested in waging war than in protecting people's lives. If we want to be informed and know the things that concern us, we better stop watching the news in the Western corporate media. They are part of a psychopathic system that is dying taking everything down with it.