Working Together
Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic
Today everything seems hunky-dory in Eyam, a pretty British village of 900 people southeast of Manchester. Children can be seen picking plump blackberries from hedgerows, cyclists amble on roads covered with fallen leaves. But in 1665, this idyllic village quarantined itself, with the residents making the heroic choice to sacrifice their lives to stop the spread of the bubonic plague.
The same story of responsibility and heroism links Eyam in the 1660s with Wuhan in 2020 when it too made the same difficult choice after the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a once-in-a-century deadly epidemic, hit the city of 11 million people in Hubei Province, central China.
Thanks to the lockdown of Wuhan, the infections were controlled and valuable time was bought for the rest of China and the world to contain the disease. Yet despite the sacrifice, there are still groundless and politically motivated accusations to vilify China. The global narrative of COVID-19 should be objective and truthful, based on facts.
Responsible response
It is wrong to accuse China of covering up. China’s handling and sharing information on the virus has been transparent, speedy and responsible.
On December 27, 2019, a hospital in Hubei Province of China reported three cases of pneumonia of unknown causes for the first time. It was only two days later that relevant authorities carried out an epidemiological investigation. On December 31, four days afterward, the World Health Organization (WHO) office in China was notified. On January 3, Chinese officials provided information to WHO on the cluster of cases of “viral pneumonia of unknown cause” identified in Wuhan. The virus was separated on January 7. On January 12, the whole genome sequence of the novel coronavirus was shared with WHO, and the extremely contagious, cunning and harmful characteristics of the virus were notified, together with China’s exploration of diagnosis and treatment methods. Since then, China has been keeping in contact with WHO and other countries and has been updating the data every day.
Richard Horton, Editor in Chief of the medical journal The Lancet, said the message from China was absolutely clear: “… a new virus, with pandemic potential, was hitting cities.”
It is also wrong to say China did not release the real number of confirmed cases and the death toll. China has been releasing the data, including the number of diagnosed, suspected, severe and cured cases, in a timely manner.
The epidemic was controlled due to the most comprehensive and rigorous possible prevention and control measures taken in a relatively early stage by the Chinese Government. Also, the Chinese, out of their inherent values to sacrifice individual benefit for collective good, cooperated with the containment measures.
This resulted in China effectively controlling the epidemic on the mainland within three months, and resuming work and normal life. However, due to imported cases and an unknown number of asymptomatic infections, there are still a few new cases every day, and the possibility of another wave of the virus cannot be ruled out. The government, therefore, is still highly vigilant to guard against a resurgence.
The U.S. and Europe, important contributors and promoters of the modern civilization, have reliable medical facilities, well-established early warning systems and developed healthcare. But today’s situation proves that self-confidence is not enough to beat COVID- 19. Instead, it became one of the underlying causes of the virus persistence.
It is also wrong to claim that China’s lockdown was delayed, which led to the spread of the virus. China’s lockdown was the most swift and effective possible.
I t should be remembered that COVID-19 is a new virus, it is therefore natural for any country to take some time to make a scientific and prudent assessment of its character, transmissibility and severity before compassing proactive prevention and cure. No country would have announced the extreme measure of locking down when only a few dozen cases were found.
In fact, the Chinese Government announced the lockdown of Wuhan on January 23, less than a month since the first case was reported. At that time, the total number of confirmed cases in China was 571 and only nine cases were confirmed outside China.
It was not until January 30 that WHO declared the epidemic a public health emergency of international concern, which once again proved that there was no delay on the Chinese side.
Fair evaluation
It is wrong for those who failed to test, report and act timely to pin the blame on others. Should a country be considered the place of origin of the virus, held accountable and made to pay for others’ inept responses simply because it was the first to honestly report what it found?
When the epidemic occurred in China, a few politicians in the U.S. gloated about taking the opportunity to obtain economic benefits by moving U.S. companies back home from China. But when the virus spread to the U.S., they tried everything possible to shirk responsibility and pin the blame on China to deflect from their failure to handle it.
Tracing the origin of a virus requires scientific, fact- based and professional assessment by scientists and medical experts. But a handful of politicians with little respect for science rushed to attach a geographical label to the coronavirus, politicize its source and stigmatize China. However, they both overestimated their own ability to spread disinformation and underestimated others’ ability to tell right from wrong.
Now more and more cases are being discovered outside China, and the types of the novel coronavirus found in China, the
U.S. and European countries are different, suggesting that the disease might have appeared in other countries earlier on, and the tracing endeavor should be carried out on a global scale.
China is open to joint efforts by the international science community to identify the source of the virus. However, it must be a professional, impartial and constructive process.
It is also wrong to say that China’s help to other countries to fight COVID-19 may be driven by geopolitical factors. Such accusations are more of a psychological calculation.
In the U.S. mentality, China went very quickly within a few years from a developing country to a “dangerous counterpart,” a “threat” and even an “enemy.” This judgment, originating largely from the old mentality of power politics, does not fit in the 21st century.
China has no intention to replace the U.S. It has repeated time and again that as the largest developing country and the largest developed country respectively,
China and the U.S. shoulder great responsibility for global peace and development. China remains prepared to work with the U. S. in the spirit of no conflict or confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation and build a relationship based on coordination, cooperation and stability.
In the meantime, China will defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity, its legitimate right to development, and its dignity and place in the world which the Chinese people have worked so hard to earn. It is time for the U.S. to give up its wishful thinking of changing China or stopping 1.4 billion people’s historic march toward modernization.
In the global COVID-19 fight, China has assisted other countries because it is ready and willing to reciprocate the friendship and kindness it received during the most difficult time of its COVID-19 combat. China also believes that one country’s success does not mean the end of the global pandemic; only when the virus is defeated in all countries can we claim a final victory.
China would also like to be a friend in need and a sincere partner to be counted on in difficulty. It has done everything in the open, with no strings attached, with only one and clear objective: to save more lives.
On February 29, China sent its first antiCOVID-19 medical expert team abroad. By early May, 26 medical expert teams had been dispatched to 24 countries, medical supplies sent to more than 150 countries and international organizations, and the containment experience, diagnosis and treatment plans were shared with 180 countries and 10 international and regional organizations.
China donated $50 million to WHO. Faced with a global shortage of medical supplies, as the world’s largest producer of medical protective suits and masks, it raced against time to meet the needs of other countries, exporting more than 56.8 billion surgical masks and 250 million protective gowns. The Chinese Government, to ensure the quality and safety of exported medical supplies, introduced stricter regulatory measures and cracked down on
violations of laws and regulations.
At the opening ceremony of the World Health Assembly 2020, President Xi Jinping elaborated China’s anti-epidemic propositions, calling on countries to support the leadership of WHO and bolstering support for developing countries, especially African countries. He also advocated stepping up international macroeconomic policy coordination, keeping the global industrial and supply chains stable and unclogged, and restoring growth to the world economy.
China will provide $2 billion over two years to help COVID-19 responses and economic and social development in the countries affected, especially developing ones. It will work with the UN to set up a global humanitarian response depot and hub on its soil, ensure the operation of anti-epidemic supply chains and establish fast tracks to facilitate transportation and customs clearance.
State liability farce
The attempt to file frivolous lawsuits against China by some U.S. groups and individuals demanding so-called “compensation and accountability” has no legal foundation and international precedent.
Customary international law on state responsibility holds that a state violating international law has “an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrong act.” In another word, the precondition here is that the country has committed an international wrongful act.
Given the extensive and multifaceted links between the Chinese and U.S. economies, any decoupling would spell disaster for both.
In the age of intensified globalization, national economic development is no longer a zero-sum game. There is no fundamental contradiction between the development of China and the U.S. Both can and should proceed apace, stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation.
In trade, for instance, China and the U. S. have complementary advantages and shared benefits. China is the United States’ largest trading partner and their relations are a complicated mix of competition and cooperation. Cooperation is more