A report in
CNBC quotes Chatham House Chair Jim O’Neill praising China for its response to
coronavirus. In a disparaging way, he derides Indian approach expressing fears
what would have happened had it originated in India. The report is available here. It is not something new for many Westerners. Their
Indophobia or more precisely Hinduphobia makes them inhabit their deluded land
of India being haven for snake-charmers and elephants. They are simply unable to come to terms of
India emerging on its own and being power contender.
To all the
praise Jim O’Neill heaps on China it was China’s initial reaction of denial and
secrecy that led to the scaling up of the current round of the epidemic. He
seeks to explain the same as dichotomy between the dominance of President Xi
and the officials at the state level. The explanation simply doesn’t hold well
in the light of what has emerged.
The virus
was noticed first by doctors in Wuhan. The first Chinese reaction was denial.
In fact they hounded the doctors, forced them to apologize causing that initial
delay that led to the scaling up of the disease. Had the Chinese reacted with
alacrity it demanded, the global economy would not be jeopardized. Doctors
feared reprisal and thus failed to conduct tests. The public were kept in the
dark about the pathogens that were getting spread at an alarming rate across
the provinces. . The Chinese highhandedness towards the whistle-blowers, their
sense of extreme cover up are the key attributes towards the globalization of
the disease.
In fact a
Reuters report here,
talks about the Chinese missteps in the last 19 months or so in failure to
handle the African swine fever. The report goes on to blame the bureaucratic
secrecy coupled with the perverse structure of the public policy incentives as
critical hurdles in the battle against swine fever. Apparently, the fever has led
to killing of millions of pigs.
The Chinese
bureaucratic functioning is bordered on extreme secrecy. Any openness invites
reprisal thus making many go with the flow of the tide rather than express
independence. In the case of coronavirus causing COVID-19, the same semantics
was at play. The secretive nature of operations clubbed with complete lack of transparency
leads to burgeoning set of rumours that add to the panic.
In
contrast, India has managed pretty well with response to the crisis. In 2018,
Kerala was affected by Nippah virus. The virus too spreads through bats similar
to spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus. There were initial casualties but the
authorities restricted the casualties to under 20 and within the localised territories
of Kozhikode and Mallapuram districts. If the same had happened in China,
Nippah virus perhaps would have assumed dangerous proportions causing the
global pandemic.
In fact,
with reference to COVID-19, India’s response stands far better compared to
China. As on date, only 73 cases are reported with no deaths. Almost all the
cases are on account of being infected during their travel overseas or being
family members of people who have travelled overseas. The infected include
around 15 Italian tourists who contracted the virus. For a population and
density like India, this is no mean achievement. For a comparison, a person
travelling in a Mumbai local in peak hours can potentially infect thousands who
have gathered in their pursuit to earn their daily bread. Despite massive
crowds in public places, the virus has been controlled to great extent. Critics
of course contend, the lack of testing being a reason for lower number of
positive reports but as Foreign Minister Jaishankar recently pointed in an
unrelated context, we tend to be hard on ourselves.
Moreover,
India has managed evacuate its citizens from the infected regions with nearly
1000 people being evacuated so far. More such flights are in the offing to
Iran, Italy among other countries. India has moved fast in imposing quarantine
on those who come from infected regions and has cancelled most visas. There could
be an impact on foreign travel and domestic economy, yet India has gone ahead
with the appropriate measures to contain the uncertainty of the COVID-19.
China adopted
an opaque policy, sought to deny the epidemic, harassed and punished the
whistle blowers and moved in at a time when it was perhaps too late. Their response
was hard-line, a complete shutdown of the provinces and cessation of a large
quantum of economic activity. It was perhaps rational for China to engage in
the response it chose to, yet it cannot be shed aside its culpability in
spreading the disease. If China had taken steps in acknowledging the novel coronavirus
and the risk to poses, lot of global impact and panic could have been avoided.
India has acted with far more calm and transparency in similar situations
limiting the reach of the epidemics.
The Indian
government in its daily press conferences displays a sense of calm, reassurance
of feeling of control. The Prime Minister in his tweets appeal for calm and not
to give in for panic. At the same time, the government has taken some steps
perhaps drastic but seem rational to the occasion. This in contrast to statements
of French President Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel whose statements
indicate panic setting in. Their assertions signal perhaps a lost cause for
them. The panic it might set in downwards might be difficult to handle. To Jim
O’Neill, this contrast in the approaches of the so called advanced countries
and his example of backward terrain like India should be in full glare but for
the deliberate blindness he is displaying.
On balance,
Jim O’Neill was either displaying wilful ignorance or alternatively was part of
massive Chinese PR apparatus that is on overtime to claim the virus did not
originate in China and just that China was its first victim. Either way Jim is erroneous
and displays a disparaging condescension towards India.
Comments
Post a Comment