Five years after the start of the global pandemic, evidence is mounting that the coronavirus may have originated in a laboratory in Wuhan. The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) has apparently been assuming with a high probability since 2020 that a laboratory accident in China triggered the coronavirus pandemic—an assessment that was kept secret for years. This explosive revelation sheds new light on the question of its origins and could have far-reaching political consequences.
German intelligence operation “Saaremaa” and its findings
According to research by "Zeit" and the "Süddeutsche Zeitung," the BND (German Intelligence Service) already assessed the probability of a laboratory accident at 80 to 95 percent in 2020. Under the code name "Project Saaremaa"—named after an Estonian island in the Baltic Sea—BND investigators collected unpublished data and internal documents from Chinese researchers, which, combined with publicly available information, allowed conclusions to be drawn about the virus's origin. The intelligence information suggests that the pathogen originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a leading virus research facility in China.
The BND bases its assessment on a special "probability index," a measure of the reliability of information. The German foreign intelligence agency classifies the laboratory theory as "probable," although definitive proof is lacking. The analysis also included scientific data from the Chinese research institute, which apparently indicate risky experiments and numerous violations of laboratory safety regulations.
Political silence under two chancellorships
Particularly explosive: These findings were not made public under either Angela Merkel's government or her successor, Olaf Scholz. According to reports, those who were informed were the then CDU chancellor, her party colleague and head of the Chancellery, Helge Braun, and Johannes Geisman, the state secretary responsible for the intelligence services. None of the three wanted to comment on the allegations. Merkel merely pointed out that the documents were in the Chancellery.
Following the change of government from Merkel to Scholz, BND chief Bruno Kahl reportedly informed the Chancellery again about the operation and the intelligence agency's assessment. However, the Bundestag's Parliamentary Oversight Committee, which is responsible for overseeing the intelligence services, was not informed, nor was the World Health Organization (WHO).
It was apparently only at the end of 2024 that the German government decided to commission external experts to review the BND's findings. Since December 2024, high-ranking external scientists, including the President of the Robert Koch Institute, Lars Schade, and the Berlin virologist Christian Drosten, have been reviewing the validity of the BND's findings on behalf of the Federal Chancellery. A final result of this review is not yet available.
Restrained reactions from science
The scientific community continues to take a differentiated view of the virus's origin. Berlin-based virologist Christian Drosten, who long supported the theory of natural origin, has recently become increasingly skeptical. "The more time passes, the more skeptical I become," Drosten told the "taz" newspaper in January. He pointed out that China has the technical capability to provide evidence of a natural origin.
"The striking thing is that proof of natural origin could actually be provided. Chinese scientists have all the technical capabilities for this," Drosten explained. The fact that such studies have not been published leaves room for speculation. "Does state policy prohibit work on this? Perhaps. The other explanation, however, would be that there was no natural virus at all," Drosten continued.
It's important to distinguish between various "laboratory theories." While Drosten rules out the possibility of an artificially manipulated virus in the laboratory based on RNA analyses, the possibility that a naturally occurring pathogen was transmitted to humans in a laboratory accident remains entirely within the realm of possibility.
International intelligence agencies come to similar conclusions
The BND's assessment is not unique. US intelligence agencies have also adjusted their assessments of the virus's origin in recent years. According to reports, the CIA now also believes a laboratory malfunction is the cause of the pandemic, albeit with "low confidence" in this finding. The FBI assessed a laboratory origin with "moderate confidence," while the US Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion, albeit with "low confidence."
It is noteworthy that the international intelligence community has not reached a unanimous conclusion. Four other US intelligence agencies believe the deaths were of natural origin with "low confidence," while the CIA remained undecided at times. This disagreement reflects the complex nature of the evidence and highlights the difficulty of reaching a conclusive conclusion without full cooperation from the Chinese authorities.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology in focus
At the center of the controversy is the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a leading Chinese virology research facility. Since 2018, the institute has housed the Center for Virus Culture Collection, Asia's largest virus bank with approximately 1,500 pathogen strains. In addition, the country's first laboratory with the highest biological protection level (BSL-4) was inaugurated there in 2015.
Particularly explosive are the findings from so-called "gain-of-function" experiments conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In these experiments, viruses are deliberately modified to increase their transmissibility or virulence. According to the Berliner Zeitung, official US government data shows that the EcoHealth Alliance received approximately $94.3 million in taxpayer funds from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) between 2008 and 2024, partly for research into bat viruses.
The BND has apparently collected evidence that safety standards were not adhered to in the manipulation of viruses in China. Security precautions in Wuhan were reportedly "surprisingly lax," and sloppiness was widespread.
Political implications and outlook
The revelations could have far-reaching political consequences, particularly for German-Chinese relations. However, the German government does not seem to expect China to admit guilt as a result of the revelations after so many years. Rather, it fears that Beijing will counterattack and portray certain data sets or publications as inaccurate.
However, the BND hopes that the “Saaremaa Project” could help to ensure that laboratory experiments on virus mutation are only permitted under stricter conditions in the future.6The debate about the origin of the virus remains highly explosive – as does the question of what information governments around the world actually have about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and what they may be withholding.
Five years after the first lockdown and the drastic restrictions on public life worldwide, the question of its origin remains not only of scientific interest. It is central to a comprehensive analysis of the pandemic and the lessons that must be learned globally—especially with regard to safety standards in researching potentially dangerous pathogens.
Conclusion: The search for truth continues
Despite the BND's findings, the question of the coronavirus's origin remains unresolved. There is currently no irrefutable evidence for either of the two competing theories—natural origin or laboratory accident. The investigation is further hampered by the Chinese government's blocking of WHO investigations and the withholding of important data.
What the new developments show, however, is that the laboratory theory is not a fringe phenomenon or a conspiracy theory, but a serious possibility that intelligence agencies in various countries consider correct with varying degrees of probability. The growing skepticism, even among scientists like Christian Drosten, who long defended the natural origin theory, illustrates how the assessment can shift with increasing time and the lack of evidence for a natural origin.
Whether the world will ever know with absolute certainty how the pandemic began remains questionable. But the revelations about the BND assessment have reignited the debate and underscore the need for international transparency in high-risk research—regardless of what is ultimately recognized as the truth.
