The article in question seems to be "Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward". The abstract is:
The voluntary moratorium on gain-of-function research related to the transmissibility of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus should continue, pending the resolution of critical policy questions concerning the rationale for performing such experiments and how best to report their results. The potential benefits and risks of these experiments must be discussed and understood by multiple stakeholders, including the general public, and all decisions regarding such research must be made in a transparent manner.
The article proper seems to say little more than the abstract. A key point, though, is that Fauci didn't seem to believe that there was any risk of a pandemic from properly conducted gain-of-function research. The potential risk was from publishing the results:
[T]he issue that has been intensely debated is whether knowledge obtained from these experiments could inadvertently affect public health in an adverse way [...]. Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment, consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?
Scientists working in this field might say—as indeed I have said—that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.
This seems similar to many other debates about whether potentially dangerous knowledge should be published or suppressed, although the stakes are unusually high.
I think that the statement
Dr. Fauci argued that the benefits of gain-of-function research are worth risking even a global pandemic caused by a lab leak.
is correct, but misleading – first, since anyone who reads it will naturally assume that the lab in question is the one doing the beneficial gain-of-function research, which isn't the case, and second, because it omits the fact that not performing the research increases the risk of a global pandemic caused by an act of God. The article is specifically about H5N1 and other "virus[es] with serious pandemic potential", and Fauci apparently believed the latter risk to be higher for those viruses.