Coronavirus, and Future of Globalization, Protectionist Policies – Op-ed

Hardly a day passes without reading about scientists ’discovery in different countries of new health threats to humanity, Dr. Salem Al-Ketbi, the UAE writer and analist, says.

Yesterday, scientists in China said that they had identified a new strain of influenza virus, pointing out to the possibility of it becoming a pandemic, and they explained in a study that the virus called “G4 EA H1N1” is transmitted from pigs to humans.

This virus is a new strain to which humans do not have immunity, which should be carefully monitored. British media quoted Professor Ken Chow Shane saying “Currently, we are busy with the emerging coronavirus, but we should not lose sight of new viruses that can be dangerous.”

Some concerns have emerged in the statements of some experts in which they said that one of the strains of the Corona virus mutated to be ten times more infectious, and they say that the spread of this mutated version is the reason that the virus spread very quickly in the United States of America.

Not only that, but there is a remarkable warning issued by Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus saying that “the worst is yet to come” in the outbreak of the “Corona” pandemic, pointing out that the virus will affect more people if governments do not adopt the appropriate policies.

The virus, which has infected more than ten million since it began spreading in China at the beginning of this year, and has killed more than 500,000 people so far, is still at the center of the global threat, and “the hard truth is that we are not even close to the end,” said the WHO chief, warning of the acceleration of the spread of danger globally despite the lifting of the restrictions of the global closure and the adoption of the policy of coexistence with the pandemic, reflecting the size of the dangers and threats that remain, although the world has already moved towards “coexistence” to avoid the worst economically and socially.

The world, which is supposed to “anticipate the worst,” according to the World Health Organization, is lacking  solidarity in the face of this epidemic. Rather, all the claims about joint cooperation, exchange of benefits, interests, experiences, and other rigid slogans and stereotypes that have coincided with the era of globalization have collapsed.

What is even stranger is that it is governments, not peoples that have failed this test. The peoples instead have used the means of globalization from communications technology and social media and other means in the exchange of experiences and knowledge to draw strength against the threat with a culture of coexistence to overcome the atmosphere of isolation and frustration.

The world pays high prices for divisions, disputes, and differences of interests in several international issues, but the absence of serious global solidarity in facing immediate and potential health risks remains the greatest challenge for all of humanity.

The issue here exceeds the discussions and conversations taking place among elites about the future of globalization and so on, as it became clear that these concepts and terminology have not yet taken root in the global collective awareness; they are only related to economic and commercial transactions and have completely missed the human sense and the sense of shared responsibility for global collective security, whose health security is one of its most important aspects and pillars.

The problem is that protectionist policies, which some belief prevent the transmission of any health threat transient to geography; represent a threat to economies and peoples that is more serious than viruses and diseases.

The world has not yet assimilated the “Corona lesson” sufficiently, and some still see the closing of borders as protection from transient threats, and the prolonged political talks during summits and virtual meetings held during the last months are still far from reality in light of intense global competition over the discovery of the appropriate vaccine for the virus.

This, in addition to the scandalous selfish practices that some countries demonstrated during the height of the crisis, and the piracy by authorities in some countries on shipments of medicines and health equipment destined to other countries and peoples, in a shameful exposure to all the values ​​and principles that the world has repeatedly echoed through all its collective platforms!

Indeed, the claim of the global village did not stand in the face of the threat of the spread of the pandemic, at least in its moral and humanitarian aspect, but the reality is that surrender to the advocates of protectionism, isolationism and nationalist extremists who advocate closure will be a huge loss for all of humanity, and we must all realize that what happened from differences and divisions was a reflection of the weakness of the institutional mechanisms for international cooperation.

It has been proven that existing international organizations urgently need to restructure and define precisely the roles, tasks, and tools for the implementation, accountability, and allocation of responsibilities to the Member States.

It has been proven to everyone that international organizations did not take into account such crisis scenarios, which reflects weakness in the imagination and lack of awareness of the nature of threats and dangers facing humanity by organizations that are supposed to be fully and accurately aware of these threats.

And then, what is expected is a review of all policies and systems and not the end to globalization, which has become an integral part of our world.

We must not forget that the aggravation of the suffering of the people of the world in the face of the Corona pandemic was not due to globalization or international cooperation, but because of the absence of this cooperation and the weak human and moral aspect of globalization policies.