A recent spate of reports in US media features US officials accusing Official Enemies Russia and China of “stealing” the US’s coronavirus vaccine research data. To accuse another party of “stealing” something, of course, is to imply unjust deprivation. If my wallet is stolen, it means I no longer possess it or its contents, while someone else does. Does it make sense to describe the alleged actions of Russian and Chinese hackers as a form of “theft”? If so, what kind of “theft” is it?

The New York Times (7/16/20) reported that “Russia has aimed much of its recent cyberespionage, like election interference, at weakening geopolitical rivals and strengthening its hand.”
The New York Times’ report, “Russia Is Trying to Steal Virus Vaccine Data, Western Nations Say” (7/16/20), levied the accusations of US, British and Canadian governments that “the Kremlin” is “opening a new front in its spy battles with the West amid the worldwide competition to contain the pandemic.”
The Times story, by national security reporter Julian Barnes, takes it for granted that individual countries around the world are engaged in a ruthless struggle to gain geopolitical advantage by being the first to develop an effective vaccine. That ignores projects like the Inclusive Vaccine Alliance, formed by the German, French, Dutch and Italian governments to speed up development of a vaccine through joint research and investments. The Chinese government, for its part, has declared that its vaccine will be a “global public good,” and has repeatedly insisted on the necessity of “solidarity and cooperation,” in addition to actively cooperating with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (People’s Daily, 7/10/20).
The day after the Times published these accusations, the Russian government revealed that it had already sealed a deal with AstraZeneca and Oxford University for Russian manufacturing of the potential British vaccine (one of the leading contenders), and claimed that it didn’t need to “steal” state secrets because it would be given to them (Reuters, 7/17/20).
The Times report undermined its own headline when it admitted:
American intelligence officials said the Russians were aiming to steal research to develop their own vaccine more quickly, not to sabotage other countries’ efforts. There was likely little immediate damage to global public health, cybersecurity experts said.
In other words, even if these allegations were true, Western governments have not been deprived of their research. The Times fully admits that this alleged hacking would not harm US public health, but only the profits of US pharmaceutical companies:
Private firms are more at risk than the public, said Mike Chapple, a former National Security Agency computer scientist who teaches cybersecurity at the University of Notre Dame.
“The potential harm here is limited to commercial harm, to companies that are devoting a lot of their own resources into developing a vaccine in hopes it will be financially rewarding down the road,” he said.
The Times also acknowledged that:
The accusations against Russia were also the latest example of an increasing willingness in recent months by the United States and its closest intelligence allies to publicly accuse foreign adversaries of breaches and cyberattacks…. Attributing such attacks, however, is imprecise, an ambiguity that Moscow takes advantage of in denying responsibility, as it did Thursday.
Despite these acknowledgments, the Times nevertheless echoed the certitude of “American experts,” and anonymous government and intelligence officials, about Russian culpability and motives. The Times simply asserted that “the Russian espionage” signals “a new kind of competition between Moscow and Washington akin to Cold War spies stealing technological secrets during the space race generations ago.” Without providing any evidence, anonymous sources assert that Cozy Bear, an alleged Russian cyberespionage group “controlled by Russia’s elite SVR intelligence agency” is trying to “exploit the chaos created by the coronavirus pandemic.”
Despite the Times admitting that US government officials “would not identify victims of the hackings,” the paper speculated that the “primary target of the attacks appeared to be Oxford University in Britain and the British-Swedish pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca.” Note that these are the same groups with whom the Russian government has already announced a deal to manufacture their potential vaccine.

The New York Times (7/21/20) writes that “Trump administration officials…have stepped up warnings in recent weeks about Chinese intelligence services and their campaign to steal information and influence American politics.”
Days later, the New York Times (7/21/20) produced another dubious report, “US Accuses Hackers of Trying to Steal Coronavirus Vaccine Data for China,” which focused on a Justice Department indictment against suspects Li Xiaoyu and Dong Jiazhi, for “targeting vaccine development” on behalf of Chinese intelligence. The Times story, also by Barnes, described the pair as a “blended threat who sometimes worked on behalf of China’s spy services and sometimes to enrich themselves.” Neither the Times, nor the US government officials it cites as sources, establish a direct link between the suspects and Chinese intelligence agencies. Instead, the only indirect evidence provided is the kind of hacking the duo allegedly performed:
“You can see by the variety of the hacks that they did how they were being directed by the government,” Mr. Demers said at a news conference at the Justice Department. “Extorting someone for cryptocurrency is not something that the government is usually interested in, nor are criminal hackers usually interested in human rights activists and clergymen.”
According to the Times, Americans should care about this story because China’s alleged “covert activity could potentially set back vaccine research efforts.” The Times openly admitted that the pair are “unlikely to be brought to trial,” where evidence is supposed to be presented in order to convict them of the accusations levied against them by the Justice Department, and that no evidence has been presented on whether these hackers actually “stole” any information, or whether they actually did set back US vaccine research efforts with their alleged activity:
The indictment, which was filed in the Eastern District of Washington, did not say that the hackers successfully stole information or research on the vaccine…. Mr. Demers said an attempted breach could slow down research because it must be secured, but researchers also must make sure their data has not been corrupted or altered by the intruders. The government officials did not say they had evidence that such manipulation had occurred, however.
Despite the lack of evidence establishing the Chinese government’s guilt or impact, the Times treats speculation by US government officials as “evidence” of the Chinese government’s wrongdoing, when the report concludes with:
“This indictment reveals yet again that Chairman Xi leads an army of hackers that steal and attempt to steal—every single day, in almost every country and industry,” Mr. Sasse said, referring to President Xi Jinping of China.
But focusing too much on whether or not Russian and Chinese hackers actually did try to hack US coronavirus vaccine research would be missing the point. Corporate media reports accuse China of stealing “American” intellectual property, even though the vast majority of Americans don’t own any, and would likely benefit from China not respecting the intellectual property of corporations like Microsoft and Pfizer (FAIR.org, 5/23/18, 8/27/19). Why anyone should care more about the potential inability of US corporations to profit off a coronavirus vaccine—as opposed to getting an effective vaccine as soon as possible, no matter where the source is—is never explained in these reports.
As epidemiologists, US academics and FAIR (4/2/20; CounterSpin, 5/9/20) have pointed out before, the optimal way to develop a coronavirus vaccine on the pace and scale required to combat the pandemic is through international cooperation and open research, which would both minimize risk and maximize efficiency. Current Affairs’s Nathan J. Robinson (7/17/20) noted that corporate media hysteria over alleged enemy hacking is one of “the most egregious examples” of “nationalistic bias leading to moral imbecility”:
What’s incredible is that nowhere in the stories is anybody quoted questioning the logic of viewing vaccine development as a “competition.” Nobody explains why researchers are keeping their research secret rather than sharing it as widely as possible. There is no discussion of how this constitutes a totally bizarre way to combat a global pandemic, which should not be a “race to see which country can find a vaccine first so that it can force everyone else to pay up if they want to save their people’s lives.”… Let’s have some moral honesty: The competitive approach is evil. It is criminal that any country is keeping vaccine information secret from other countries in the first place. That is mass murder.
One should expect corporate media outlets like the Times to equate corporate interests with the US national interest. By spinning the intellectual property of large US corporations as something that must be safeguarded rather than something that should be shared, US media are failing to inform their audiences about how corporations are delaying the development of a vaccine—and causing unnecessary deaths.
ACTION ALERT: You can send a message to the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com (Twitter:@NYTimes). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your communication in the comments thread.




Joe Dough’s Big Pharma ties don’t augur well for a cooperative approach should he supplant The Killer Clown.
Just if anyone was interested, my letter to the New York times – and thanks for mentioning that we can do this in your article.
Dear all,
https://fair.org/home/worries-about-foreign-hacking-of-vaccine-research-place-corporate-profits-ahead-of-public-health/
this does seem to make sense? Isn’t the european try to make a vaccine against Covid-19 available to all, for example, a good thing?
I would additionally ask the New York Times if you could report what – sadly enough – nearly all western media I know did nearly never – if ever – mention. Yes, Covid-19 started in China. But how did it spread? It spread through our western manic aviation worldwide. In Europe, for example luxurious-tourism to Austria led to a horribly high infection rate later. A little skiing resort for the rich was a place where Covid-19 spread fast around Europe and beyond.
Our flying-life-styles are mainly “western lifestyles”. We fly like if there was no tomorrow – 85% of the earth’s population (now India and China slowly joining, our former cheap-work-helpers) did never ever fly.
If you could agree to that fact – then a vaccine “for all, and soon” is the only option, is it? I find it curious that so many countries who got the virus thanks to us do not even complain. Health systems in various countries collapsed thanks to the fast spreading of Covid-19.
This should not be any means for private corporations to keep their scientific knowledge and use it for making billions – – here the aim is to help the poor around the world who got Covid-19 partly thanks to our western life-styles…
Thank you for reading this. It might be a naive hope, but the vaccine that would help should be available to all – as soon as possible, as soon science had the chance to test it properly. Available world wide. This is about life and death – and in such cases markets and personal enrichment were never a good solution, look at HIV Aids…
All the best!
I knew y’all would be all over this. It’s not just the times. Almost every western outlet reported on this “stealing” without questioning why the information was secret in the first place.
Great article ! Thanks.
While we are playing armchair questions about a large issue like COVID, how about we ask – how many deaths is a government responsible for when it muzzles and denies and attacks those who detect a novel coronovirus within its borders? What’s an acceptable mass murder level for FAIR readers?
While this question certainly applies to the Trump Death count certain to leap past six figures, what’s the CCP Death count – 0?
According to a piece in Vox in February by Julia Belluz, “Yet, for weeks now, reports in both the scientific literature and local and international news have contradicted what Chinese authorities were telling the world. These reports show the outbreak started weeks or months sooner than China let on, and the virus was already spreading among people — and beyond the food market in Wuhan — in early January. Authorities also censored information and silenced the whistleblowers who tried to sound the alarm.”
Yet FAIR/Cho depicts the Chinese government now as being wonderful, innocent humanitarians: “The Chinese government, for its part, has declared that its vaccine will be a “global public good,” and has repeatedly insisted on the necessity of “solidarity and cooperation,” in addition to actively cooperating with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.”
Yeah, sure , “solidarity and cooperation.” One group of people will not go for those Orwellian terms- dead people. They’re very tough to hoodwink.
Honestly, I’ve seen your pointless rants on many of my articles before (it seems you have this weird obsession with me) and I just feel bad for you. Old white men should have better things to do with their time than furiously typing screeds on their keyboards that accomplish nothing. If you feel you know better than me and other FAIR authors you harass, feel free to submit your work elsewhere so you actually get paid for your efforts.
Thanks for your wonderful, generous, humanistic response.
If commenting about errant criticism is considered “harassment,” then please feel free to ignore any and all objections to your output.
“Old white men should have better things to do with their time” – is there a racial and age classification labeling system to FAIR blog commeners that I missed?
What stuck out for me was teNYT byline for Julian E. Barnes. He’s a natsec correspondent for them, an before that the WSJ. It seems that a whole lot of is articles are scoops from the intel community that are treated as breaking news. Take a look at his oeuvre: https://redef.com/author/55e0753130fbd5267df990e2
It’s an astonishing series of articles that seem to say exactly what the intel community wanted to communicate.
We know that key intel agencies funnel information they want known to selected journalists, and those writers depend on their reliable sources to be reliable mouthpieces. Look at the listing above, Joshua, and try to decide whether Barnes is one of them. Because, if he is, NYT and other outlets who take these details at face value are a big problem for journalism and for democracy. In general, be on the lookout for agitprop from secret chambers.
What a sad world we have now.
Imagine—once upon a time humanity was more important than drug company profits. Where is that 21st century miracle of a doctor–like —like the one who realized that humanity and sharing are most important in a pandemic.
Dr.Jonas Salk–who valued LIFE over profits — Physicians—- CLONE thy selves .
The funny part is that every state-sponsored intelligence agency on the planet is trying to use the pandemic chaos to gain the upper hand for more mundane types of espionage like stealing the launch codes and finding out if Dick Cheney is a zombie clone, or not!
One point not made in this article is the extent to which the government is paying for this research. For example, Moderna has received almost almost a billion dollars to develop its vaccine so far, so whose “intellectual property” is it anyway?