Global Fight against COVID-19 Pandemic: International Cooperation and Path Selection

Zhang Haibing

Assistant President， Shanghai Institutes for International Studies （SIIS）

Director， the SIIS Institute for Global Governance Studies

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a trend of rapid spreading all over the world， having complex bearings on world economic， political and social stability. Particularly， the epidemic is spreading to developing countries， which may lead to global cross dissemination of the novel coronavirus， wreaking havoc for human society. As such， it is necessary for the international community to correctly recognize the opportunities and challenges of globalization， promote the construction of an “orderly globalization” and a modernized global governance system， adhere to multilateralism， improve global governance capacity and further promote the building of a community with a share future for humanity while enhancing international cooperation against COVID-19 epidemic.

Complex and Far-reaching

International Effect of COVID-19 pandemic

As the global effect of COVID-19 pandemic continues to deepen， the international community is faced with the greatest challenge since the end of World War II. There are contradictions between objective demand for global cooperation against common crisis and shortfalls in capacity， mechanisms and resources of global governance， which are underlined in the pandemic. The pandemic has a complex and far-reaching effect on the international community， boiling down to four aspects as follows.

First， it has led to a global economic recession. According to the latest estimates of the IMF in April 2020， under the impact of COVID-19， the global economic growth is predicted to contract by 3 percentage points， conditions being even more serious than the financial crisis between 2008 and 2009. To cope with the pandemic， developed countries represented by the US have adopted unprecedented economic stimulus policy， pushing their monetary and fiscal policy to the extreme， yet it is still difficult for them to effectively check the trend of economic recession. As developed economies of the EU， the US and Japan have entered into the era of negative interest rates， their super quantitative easing monetary policy against economic downward slide may as well lead to competitive currency devaluation. In the area of fiscal policy， the global financial crisis of 2008 and the Euro debt crisis of 2010 broke out respectively， leaving most of the developed countries at a high debt level， and as such， the stimulus fiscal policy taken this time around against the pandemic may as well induce further government debt crisis. Under the pandemic， the US Federal Reserve Board has launched a gigantic stimulus program hitherto unseen in history， which includes twice cutting interest rates down to zero， and putting in place unlimited quantitative easing policy， and at the same time， US Government has launched an economic bailout plan as high as $2.2 trillion. However， under the influence of COVID-19， the US stock market saw 4 circuit breakers in 10 days， underlining the possibility that structural risks hidden in US financial system may lead to the outbreak of systemic risks in the economic system as a whole.

For many developing countries， the fragility of their economic systems is underscored by the impact of COVID-19. The pandemic will seriously impact the medical and health resources and financial conditions of developing countries such as India and African countries. At the same time， the fact that the progress of epidemic prevention and control varies from country to country may lead to “interactive dissemination” on global scale. To cope with the impact of the pandemic， many developing countries have launched economic super stimulus policies， but increasing pressure of fiscal expenditure may lead to a fiscal crisis， especially sizable fiscal deficit likely to happen to developing countries with fragile public health systems like India and African countries may lead to downward trend of global commodity prices as a whole. Against this background， at certain juncture， governmental debt crisis in concerned countries may evolve into a drastic social crisis， further increase systemic risks of the world economy.

Second， nationalist and de-globalization tendencies in some of the countries are intensified. Continued pandemic affects the pattern of global trade， investment and industrial chain， and to prevent and control the spread of the epidemic， many countries have taken border control measures， adding to the pressure of a new round of protectionism and economic nationalism on economic globalization， which is at risk of stalling out. At the same time， countries concerned are rethinking the globalization effects on themselves， and for those developed countries with surging anti-globalization cry from within， the pandemic becomes another “heaven weapon” to resist the process of globalization after their opposition to trade imbalance.

The fact that this pandemic disrupts global supply chain has produced considerable negative implications， which may help various countries to recognize potential risks of global supply chain and thus accelerate their process of localization of supply chain. Those countries increasingly favor an industrial policy with less dependence on the outside， though such a policy tendency will increase unnecessary economic， social and even political costs. For instance， the momentum of the US decoupling with China has been on the rise during the period of epidemic prevention and control. For the US， Japan and some of the European countries that have long been engaged with bringing their enterprises home， a readjustment of the world economic and political pattern triggered off by the pandemic may be a nodal event for them to reconstruct their industrial chain.

Third， global polarization between rich and poor is further worsened by the pandemic. The proliferation of COVID-19 in developing countries poses a new challenge to the global economic development and political cooperation， which if not dealt with timely and effectively may result in humanitarian， political and social crisis， exacerbating the economic recession. Two thirds of world population are in developing countries other than China， where the economy is hit even harder by COVID-19 than by the global financial crisis of 2008. At present， international multilateral institutions represented by the World Health Organization （WHO） are racing against the time to make plans to protect under-developed regions like Africa against the epidemic， and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa also calls for the G20 to increase its support for African countries in public health and to provide emergency assistance them with. Should the pandemic get out of hand in the aforesaid regions， a humanitarian crisis is liable to happen， leading to political turbulence and social disorder.

Fourth， traditional multilateral mechanisms have failed to effectively meet the challenge of divide in global governance. The COVID-19 pandemic this time around underlines the huge gap between demand and capacity of global governance supply， the drastic spike of the epidemic in a short period of time having broken the capacity limit of national governance and global governance， all of which has turned global governance deficit for the worse-to-be global governance divide. Judging from the statistics released by the WHO， the number of confirmed cases in some of the countries doubles every 3 or 4 days， and mortality rate is ten times that of A/H1N1 flu of 2009， resulting in failure of traditional multilateral mechanisms to effectively cope with this global challenge. Though the latest Extraordinary G20 Leaders Summit Statement on COVID-19 played some positive role in easing market panic， it is difficult for the G20 to play a key role as it did during the global financial crisis of 2008， in meeting the present challenge of global governance divide， such as the public health security divide between gigantic demand for medical supplies and shortfall of supply capacity， the information divide between scientific information on prevention and control of COVID-19 and a host of negative， false reporting and infodemic in some of the international mainstay media and social media platforms， and the policy divide between the sky-high quantitative easing monetary policy of various governments and the enormous fluctuations in financial market that are difficult to tranquilize.

Path Selection for Enhancing International Cooperation in

Pandemic Prevention and Control

In face of the global pandemic that runs rampant， it underscores the major significance of international cooperation for countries to share information on epidemic prevention and control， assist one another with medical supplies， and conduct cooperation in medical treatment and scientific research. However， secondary risks produced by the pandemic are posing new challenges to global governance. As the present handling capacity of international cooperation lags far behind the speed of global spread of the virus， this Author proposes to push for and enhance international cooperation in epidemic prevention and control in three aspects， namely building an “orderly globalization”， building a modernized global governance system， and persisting with multilateralism while improving global governance capacity.

First， it is necessary to promote the building of an “orderly globalization”. As globalization is a double-edged sword， it is necessary to call for and explore a sustainable development path to an “orderly globalization”. The rapid development of the world economy since the end of World War II cannot be separated from globalization. However， the development of globalization is obviously affected by major-country driving， for which major-countrys attitude plays a decisive role. The role played by the US as the post-war leader of globalization is changing. Especially since Trump took office， the US has had an increasingly negative attitude toward globalization. On the one hand， it finds expression in US containment of the rise of emerging countries. On the other， it finds expression in the uneven development of globalization， that is， benefits of globalization have not been rationally distributed among all participating countries in a balanced way. Furthermore， while bringing about benefits and opportunities， globalization has also increased liabilities and risks， and the rapid spread of COVID-19 in the era of globalization also to a degree reflects the negative effect of globalization. As humanity is faced with increasingly serious common challenges and there are massive opportunities for advancing wellbeing of humanity residing in international division of labor， benign competition and cooperation between countries is the only right path for human progress. Therefore， for the world economic development and international cooperation， the question is not whether globalization is needed or not but rather what kind of globalization is needed. Though the pandemic underlines defects of globalization， it also illustrates the actual necessity to strengthen cooperation in globalization. How to build a powerful and institutional framework for orderly development concerns the orientation for future development of globalization.

Second， it is necessary to focus on building a modernized system of global governance. The shortcoming in cooperation of the international community against COVID-19 underscores the fact that the crisis management capacity of global governance needs to be systemically improved. In spite of the fact that fast increase of the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases gives full exposure of the fragility of public health governance system， the international community in face of the virus hitherto unseen has not yet reached consensus either in thinking or in action， and countries have ambiguous attitudes toward non-medical intervention measures， the prevention and control strategy adopted varying a great deal from one country to another. To the prevention and control of this sudden and severe infectious disease， many countries in the world have paid less than sufficient attention.

The COVID-19 pandemic has become a global challenge， and from the perspective of systemic elevation of global governance system， it is necessary for the international community to be based on the level of global public health system and actively build effective coordination on national， regional and global levels. First of all， it is the key to conduct timely and effective international joint prevention and control. Not only do countries need to do a good job in domestic prevention and control and timely share epidemic information， they will also need to strengthen technical cooperation and sharing in medical means such as virus test and check， medicine and vaccine research and development. Secondly， it is necessary to set store by leadership building of international organizations， especially enhancing support for international professional organizations like the WHO. Developing countries that are hit by the pandemic need an enormous amount of material， technical and financial support， and urgently need concerned international organizations to play an active coordinating and leading role in mobilizing resources， distributing supplies and providing technical guidance. Finally， it is essential to give mutual support and assistance in epidemic prevention and control. At the moment of truth of the COVID-19 outbreak in China， 79 countries and 10 international organizations sent in anti-pandemic material assistance. By May 31， 2020， China had sent 29 medical expert teams to 27 countries， and had and was providing anti-pandemic assistance to 150 countries and 4 international organizations， playing an important role in the common struggle of the international community against COVID-19.

Third， it is necessary to seek new breakthroughs in multilateralism and global governance capacity. The WHO has played an important leading role in international cooperation against the pandemic. In line with the development of epidemic prevention and control， the WHO advised countries on six criteria to be taken into consideration before relaxing mitigation measures， which is of strong global guidance significance and underlines the authority and guidance of the WHO as the leading body of global public health governance. However， the WHO lacks the mobilization capacity on national level like the government of a sovereign country or traditional means of pushing for collective action， it neither is able to come up with clearly binding and responsibility allocating resolutions as the UN Security Council does， nor has control over the concrete actions and measures taken by member states. As such， in face of global public health challenges， the WHO can only consult and implement rules and coordinate actions with sovereign countries but can hardly achieve unified policy and hold any party to account， which weakens its authority and leadership. As far as global fight against the pandemic is concerned， it is of important significance to strengthen support for multilateral governance bodies， which will be directly causative for the results of global fight against the epidemic.

A Community with a Shared

Future for Humanity and Sense

of Responsibility and Mission for a Major Country

The proposition of a community with a shared future for humanity reveals the actual conditions of human society in the era of globalization， gives theoretical guidance for building the common future of human society， clarifies direction for international cooperation， and offers new thinking for the improvement of global governance. The common struggle of various countries the world over is nothing less than practicing and interpreting the proposition of a community with a shared future for humanity. On March 12， 2020， when speaking to UN Secretary General Guterres over the phone， President Xi Jinping pointed out that the epidemic has once again demonstrated that humanity is a community with a shared future that shares weal and woe， and that only by solidarity and coordination， looking out for one another， and joining hands to tackle risks and challenges， can the international community beat the pandemic and safeguard our planet the common home for humanity. Not only is the international cooperation called for by the struggle against the pandemic a matter of international justice， but failure in effective international cooperation in epidemic prevention and control will make it inevitable for the virus to “cross” disseminate. It will be an urgent and practical imperative to enhance global cooperation and lay a foundation for common security for human society just out of the consideration of upholding collective security.

Against the background of global spread of the pandemic， it is essential to enhance the sense of responsibility for global governance. This pandemic respects no borders or races and is a common challenge to all humanity. In face of the pandemic， it is necessary for global major countries， and particularly G20 members， to display a stronger sense of responsibility. As the pandemic situation in the US continues to spike， the Trump administration has politicized the epidemic， labeled the virus and stigmatized China in order to shift the domestic political crisis and governance crisis. Some of the politicians in the country even raise a hue and cry to claim against China in the form of legal proceedings. As the largest economy in the world， it is very irresponsible for the US to shift conflicts and disrupt international public opinion like that， to the great detriment of its own international image. Even worse， Trump announced on April 14， 2020 to suspend US funding to the WHO， bringing about great negative effect to international cooperation against the pandemic. In sharp contrast， China announced on April 23 that it would make a cash donation of $30 million to the WHO on top of its previous donation of $20 million in cash to support the latters work in COVID-19 prevention and control and in building public health system in developing countries. In short， the sense of responsibility and mission should not only be a slogan in times of peace， but should still more be a test for major countries in special and critical times.