Coronavirus is a threat not only to the health and lives of millions of people on the planet, but also raises serious crises in Economics, politics, social and cultural life. On Tuesday, July 28, the international discussion club “Valdai” held an online discussion on “the Global response to the pandemic: a strategy for global community and social challenges.” Involved experts told the “MK” with their views on what is happening.
the panel discussion was timed to the release of the Valdai notes co-Director of the research group on political economy the University of Manitoba (Canada) Alan Freeman “How many more people must die? A real alternative for collective immunity.”
According to Alan Freeman when the real danger of coronavirus have become obvious, many are talking about the political consequences of the lockdown. Noteworthy that the most severe consequences of the pandemic facing those countries that ignore tough measures (including USA, Brazil, UK). This led to the fact that some rich countries have coped with the epidemic not as good as some of the poor.
the Choice was between a collective immunity (so more people ill), and the minimum transmission of the virus to the virus is not moved geographically. Because in the poorest countries there is a socially-oriented system of healthcare, it provides free health care and protection gets more people in richer countries have commercialised the health system, not available to everyone.
“MK” asked the questions involved in the debate to the experts:
1) what are the most pressing social challenges faced postpandemic the world?
2) given the escalating confrontation between the powers is it possible to talk about the real possibilities of international cooperation to overcome coronavirus crisis?
Oleg Barabanov, program Director of the club “Valdai”:
the First most immediate challenge relates to the serious deterioration of the economic situation of a large mass of people. Many people lost their jobs, lost their savings. The problem of poverty as a serious social challenge will be on the agenda.
the Second social challenge – we see it abroad, and in Russia, which received a stimulus in the course of the pandemic is the growing social discontent of the people, which sometimes leads to open social protest. This challenge is linked to the deteriorating socio-economic situation, and the fact that during the quarantine significantly large group of citizens have begun to question the efficiency and correctness of actions against the population during the period of quarantine, began to question the official statistics and the official metTiki to combat coronavirus. All this not only led to new protests, although the formal basis can be two different things… the groundwork for these protests lies in the growing social mistrust of citizens to the government.
This issue arose during the quarantine, and she is a very serious challenge, because now the authorities of almost all countries need new seriously and gently work to restore trust in the eyes of the citizens.
the Problem of international cooperation during the outbreak of coronavirus have been politicized. We have seen rare increased geopolitical pressure on China because of the coronavirus in connection with accusations that China is to blame for the emergence of the coronavirus and that he was withholding information.
on the other hand, we see the same conflict in the situation with Russia, to a certain extent with Brazil.
In the US, the government’s response to the coronavirus was one of the major elements of pre-election fight between trump and the Democratic party. Thus, the politicization of the epidemic has become a fact. Appeals to the fact that at the time of the pandemic need to remove sanctions, to stop armed conflicts, to help everyone all – remains largely unheeded.
the World is still divided into warring factions. The epidemic in this regard has not become a deterrent.
Karl Friston, expert of the Valdai club, a neuroscientist and a specialist in neural networks, (UK):
At the global level, the role of international exchange in the virus transmission may require de-globalization. This may require the reorganization and reorientation of infrastructure and human resources that can have a profound impact on world trade – as the abolition of slavery in the nineteenth century.
At the national level, many countries face the challenge to reverse the impact of neo-liberalism on social services and healthcare with a concomitant mitigation of the socio-economic inequality.
In the context of de-globalization, international cooperation can be less important than the rebalancing of the national socio-economic inequalities and to guarantee healthcare and social security.
having Said that – on a scientific and humanitarian level, the international Corporation, will no doubt be important for understanding the demographic, epidemiological and economic dynamics of the pandemic.
Such cooperation may entail an active role of such organizations as the world health organization, and international support to countries, rural areas which do not have sufficient resources to primary and public health.
in Other words, the world may have to react to slow the spread of pandas��MIA the same way he responds to hunger and other natural disasters.
Radhika Desai, an expert of the Valdai club, Director of the research group on geo-political Economics from the University of Manitoba (Canada)
1) First of all, the words “after the pandemic” may be a bit optimistic. At best we can expect in the coming months we will learn to live with it.
globally the pandemic has shaken the foundations of all societies that adhere to the model of neoliberal policies, and have reduced their public health, economic, state and political structures, giving large corporations greater control over them and ignoring their people.
the Leaders in this was, of course, the US and the UK, and not surprisingly, their answer was the least effective and most chaotic.
the Most fundamental social problem facing the society is how they can rebuild their public health infrastructures to make them more effective against the virus and disease well enough to allay the public fear and distrust. Eliminating them is vital if the economy is restored.
However, it is hard to make, because in the neoliberal, market-oriented societies this requires a major paradigm shift not only in relation to public health, but also in terms of Economics, politics and the state. It will be a problem.
2) the Confrontation between the US and the West, on the one hand, and developing economies that are unwilling to subordinate itself to the West, brewing for at least two decades, if not longer.
the End of the cold war brought peace dividends, but led to unilateral US militarism is mainly because the dream of the United Statow of unipolarity was destroyed by the rise of multipolarity, and they are very poorly responded to this frustration.
Now, in the context of a pandemic, when China successfully copes with it, and the United States unsuccessfully defeated, the United States are stepping up their anti-China campaign, with a new problem every week, and often more frequently, and extend the front of the confrontation. This causes the world to choose sides. The United States clearly exerted pressure on the vulnerable because “Brekzita” Britain, for example, it launched its earlier, more reasonable policy towards Huawei.
Those who complains about the lack of cooperation and a growing “vaccine nationalism”, simply ignore this reality and wish to return the world, which was dominated by the West. It’s not going to happen.
there Will be a lot of internationalism, but it is likely to be limited to the networks of cooperation initiated by China and other countries that are partially or fully tear from hostile ��SHA and the West. In what way will continental Europe is an interesting question.
