Kicking off the UN’s second annual Sustainable Development Goals Moment last month, UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador Priyanka Chopra Jonas emphasized the role of solidarity as a driver of change.
“Global solidarity is more important than ever,” she said. “Together, we have an extraordinary opportunity to change the world we live in.”
While Chopra Jonas was referring to the fight against climate change, that sentiment could apply to many other global issues. Solidarity is essential to solving many of humanity’s most pressing challenges, but it is crucial for achieving health security.
After close to three years after COVID-19 was first reported, the world’s health systems are coming apart at the seams. While the end of the pandemic might be in sight, the virus is still raging.
Moreover, the WHO officially declared monkeypox a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and cases of vaccine-derived poliovirus have been documented in more than 30 countries, including the US and the UK.
At a time when infectious diseases can spread around the world within hours, global solidarity matters more than ever. What this means is straightforward. People living along the path of an approaching wildfire must work together to extinguish it. The same goes for global health security.
In 1966 — at the height of the Cold War — the US teamed up with the Soviet Union to end smallpox and measles. This collaboration, in turn, encouraged the WHO to lead the eradication program.
There are important lessons to be learned from this history. For starters, global health solidarity could lead to unexpected alliances. The US and the Soviet Union were rival superpowers, yet they bracketed the Cold War to eradicate a disease that had affected humanity for more than 3,000 years.
Moreover, putting a global organization such as the WHO in charge ensured that the smallpox vaccine was freely available to every country, without richer countries hoarding doses. The last case of smallpox was identified in Somalia in 1977, 10 years after the program began, and the WHO declared the disease eradicated three years later. The entire effort cost US$300 million, but it is estimated to have saved more than US$1 billion per year.
Polio is another disease that is close to eradication, thanks to a coordinated global effort. Rotary International — which has 1.4 million members worldwide — launched a campaign to immunize children around the world against polio in 1985. Three years later, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative was established at the WHO’s World Health Assembly. Many countries joined the initiative, contributed funds, and mobilized agencies and communities.
In the 34 years since its founding, GPEI has reduced the global incidence of polio by more than 99 percent, prevented paralysis in more than 10 million people and immunized 2.5 billion children.
We seem to have forgotten these lessons. In contrast to the concerted global push to end smallpox and polio, the response to COVID-19 has been characterized by nationalist parochialism. The pandemic is a global calamity that has killed more than 6 million people, and afflicted at least 100 million with so-called long COVID-19.
However, this time, instead of coordinating their responses, developed countries focused on mitigating its impact within their borders. Rich Western countries adopted a siege mentality, hoarding personal protective equipment, vaccines and drugs, and leaving poorer countries to settle for crumbs.
Africa, on the other hand, initiated the world’s best-coordinated response to COVID-19, by marshaling the resources of regional institutions such as the African Union and fostering local partnerships. Addressing a pandemic such as COVID-19 requires this level of cooperation on a global scale.
The COVID-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX) facility was meant to be a coordinating mechanism to help galvanize the worldwide vaccination effort and ensure that lower-income countries could access vaccines, but it has faced constant funding gaps and struggled to acquire doses.
COVAX enabled corporate interests to use UN processes to safeguard their profits, with little regard to the social costs, former New York chief of the UN Conference on Trade and Development Harris Gleckman said.
Simply put, vaccine nationalism killed vulnerable people. Mike Whelan, project leader of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations — a foundation that helped launch COVAX — acknowledged this in a panel discussion.
The response to monkeypox is another example of how vaccine nationalism harms global health security. African countries have been battling monkeypox for decades, but the disease did not attract international attention until cases started appearing in the West.
Nigeria’s first case was reported in 1972, and cases have been detected there every year since 2017. Yet even as people are being vaccinated against the disease in developed countries, African countries are still waiting for their doses.
The chance to do better is right around the corner. Health authorities in Uganda have declared an Ebola outbreak after a case was confirmed in the country’s Mubende district. Global solidarity is necessary to contain it. Higher-income countries must take the lead in developing detection and response mechanisms, and global institutions such as the UN and the WHO must counter nationalism by promoting equity.
Together, we can defeat disease outbreaks before they spiral. On our own, it is always much harder. As an Igbo proverb says: “When your house is on fire, do not hunt for rats.”
Ifeanyi Nsofor, a medical doctor, is senior new voices fellow at the Aspen Institute, a global Atlantic fellow for Health Equity at George Washington University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS