National Post (National Edition)
Israel locks down
‘THIS IS A WAR. WE HAVE TO ADAPT TO A NEW WAY OF LIFE,’ NETANYAHU TELLS THE NATION
Early Tuesday afternoon, the coronavirus crisis in Israel accelerated dramatically, with the entire country in lockdown, effectively, residents permitted to leave their homes only in very limited and urgent circumstances. And this in a country where proactive measures intended to spread the virus have been among the most stringent in the world.
Since mid-January, shortly after initial reports of the viral terror in China and mass quarantines, Israeli political leaders, key public institutions and officials, media and other critical stakeholders have been focused, obsessively, on how to manage the crisis they were certain would burgeon and migrate globally.
This country is accustomed to living on a knifeedge, pretty much constantly, a snap away from war-readiness and footing; a chronic condition that clearly promotes a natural sense of collective responsibility that seeps into all aspects of daily life. Israel did not squander precious time on speculating about whether or not a public-health issue was racist or xenophobic or any one of a litany of irrelevant non-issues. As with most things here, responses are rapid and have the elegance of a sledgehammer. They are also effective. China is Israel’s second largest trading partner (after the U.S.), and the flow of goods and people between the two countries is significant. By Jan. 30, three weeks before the first case was diagnosed in Israel, direct flights between the two countries were suspended, which seemed, at the time, a touch “over the top.”
On Feb. 22, case #1 in Israel was identified as a female repatriated from a cruise ship off the coast of Japan.
The same day, health officials learned that among a group of South Korean tourists who had been in the country from Feb. 8 to 15, numerous individuals were coronavirus positive. Within hours, all passengers on a flight from South Korea were refused admission to Israel and sent home. Many of the travellers had originated in Daegu, the South Korean city that has been the viral epicentre in that country.
Almost three months after the outbreak in China became public knowledge in the West, the progressive measures to proactively contain COVID-19 in Israel are a blur. Each day brings new details, recommendations, conjecture (all while Israelis readied for the third election in a year on March 2).
And, yes, there was that Trumpian moment, here too.
Israel is very dependent on American support and leadership and was loathe to provoke the unpredictable ire of the president. Just over one week ago, when it became clear that the virus had a firm foothold in America, Israeli officials grappled with an appropriate response. As with every progressive decision made to that point, potential ramifications were incomprehensible: economic, security, family connections.
Widespread reports at the time indicated that Israeli officials were keen initially to target travellers from New York, California and Washington, focusing on the early American epicentres. But, according to Israeli media, U.S. Vice-President Mike Pence, tasked with managing the domestic coronavirus response, asked Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, directly, to impose a global ban on all travellers entering Israel. This avoided singling out the U.S. which, at the time, had been sluggish in implementing coronavirus measures. President Trump was still referring to the virus issue as a “hoax.”
And so, one week ago, Israel banned entry of all foreign nationals before any other country in the world had done so. If there was a moment that Israelis felt most exposed, this was probably “it.”
On Monday, additional measures were enacted, including cellphone surveillance of all individuals required to be in home isolation or a more stringent institutional quarantine. (Presumably, since the new directives publicized on Tuesday require all Israelis to remain at home — with limited exceptions, the surveillance measures will apply only to those who have tested positive or returned recently from abroad and are required to remain in isolation.) The technology is deployed by the domestic security service to manage ongoing terrorist threats but the application to civilian oversight is raising alarm bells among some, and rightly so. Cabinet has authorized an initial 30-day surveillance period which may, if necessary, be extended.
Agile and multi-faceted measures are focused on “flattening the curve,” which has quickly become a common catchphrase.
There is a critical moment — when the rate of contagion spins out of control; when that last drop of accelerator turns a campfire into a raging forest disaster. This delicate calibration will be different in each country but it is not about blindly comparing raw numbers of cases. Intervention must be uncompromising, decisive and early in order to “flatten the curve.”
Which means, the focus is not on preventing the spread of infection among a population (which, over time, is inevitable), but rather, controlling the rate of contagion to avoid an overload and breakdown of the healthcare system, as has transpired in Italy.
Prevention of uncontrolled community transmission is critical to flattening the curve. It’s all about controlling the spread rather than preventing it.
This early assumption — made by Israel and several other countries — is now a science-based consensus, buttressed by three months of data, evidence and experience. And it appears that the window for such prevention is days, at most, from the presentation of initial cases.
The magic is in getting ahead of the tipping point.
Italy waited too long to respond. Israel acted weeks before the first domestic case presented.
As Netanyahu said recently: “We want to be like South Korea, not Italy.”
Interestingly, the countries that have been most aggressive and, thus far effective, in flattening the curve are all on a near-constant state of high security alert: Israel, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea. Robust national capabilities with respect to emergency preparedness are meshing with a behavioural readiness in the population. Modifications in “normal” routines are implemented quite seamlessly.
This deeply ingrained groupthink was invoked, masterfully, by Netanyahu in what was probably his most important national address, when he stated, repeatedly: “This is a war. We have to adapt to a new way of life.” Israelis understand war.
Of course, critics of Netanyahu’s handling of the coronavirus crisis are legion, but, interestingly, none faults him for overreacting but, rather, for exploiting the events for personal political gain. And it peeves his detractors, to no end, that he is an unsurpassed, brilliant crisis manager; unrivalled public speaker with innate thespian intuition and talent; a towering intellect able to assimilate complex detail and explain it in terms that resonate with the broad public. He’s an extraordinarily skilful tactician in managing diplomatic sensitivities. And he does so, unscripted, without notes.
To the degree that, it went almost unnoticed on Monday, when, after three elections, President Reuven Rivlin officially instructed Blue and White leader Benny Gantz to attempt to form a governing coalition, dramatically sidelining Netanyahu and his right-wing bloc.
Sure, there are “mistakes” and glitches in the dizzying rollout of measures, in the ceaseless tsunami of information and dynamic statistics. But — there is no finger-wagging going on here reproaching the authorities for being slow to react and protect the population.
On the contrary, if anything, it was the opposite in the early days. There was alarm. “Are we being excessively vigilant?”
In a country of hardbaked skeptics, with a legendary appetite for arguing and parsing and complaining, the level of compliance has been astonishing, and the numbers are the best evidence.
Vivian Bercovici is a former
Canadian ambassador to Israel. She lives in Tel Aviv. Twitter.com/VivianBercovici