As coronavirus becomes a global threat, WHO-China ties need greater international scrutiny
Be the only nation to benefit from the virus
Both the World Health Organisation (WHO) and China have been in the limelight since the onset of COVID-19. The growing camaraderie between both suggests towards China's "charm-offensive" approach of expediting its objectives in the global health body. This holds great significance in the pretext of China's mounting financial clout in the WHO, especially as the latter effusively praises China for its efforts to contain the virus. Moreover, it is also on the issue of Taiwan, that Beijing's political authority in the WHO is most apparent.
However, as COVID-19 becomes a pandemic and a threat to global economic growth, China witnesses its foreign policy and governance model being tested at the inception of criticisms. This entails to its not-so-immediate response to the virus outbreak; relations with the WHO; and Taiwan's membership blockade in the global health body.
In this context, several debates have been arising, which situate around China's accountability as a major global power and WHO's capability towards global health governance. Deliberations have been persisting over China's growing political weight in this global health body in the backdrop of the increasing hostility between China and Taiwan, and the WHO's acknowledgement of 'One China' Policy. Such has corroborated to the exclusion of Taiwan from the WHO, and the former's limited access to timely information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. However, these debates need to be viewed in light of how China plans to achieve its goal of national unification with Taiwan to sustain its political leadership; how Beijing plans to reshape the global order; and how it sustains its global governance model post-COVID-19.
China's approach to global governance under Xi Jinping has strived to realise its economic, strategic and political goals, enabling the country to achieve greater geopolitical gravity. However, it has also strengthened the wall around China to control the flow of information, ideas and capital. These characteristics have brought Beijing's foreign policy into the spotlight; particularly with the suppression of Dr. Li Wenliang's early warnings. A considerable amount of flak has also been drawn by the WHO from the international community, especially as its Director General (DG), Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus praised China for "setting a new standard for outbreak control". However, such has been contrary to Beijing's containment of the virus which has increasingly been criticised by the global community for lacking transparency, legitimacy and liberty.
Also Read: China must allow global probe to ascertain origin of COVID-19
In retrospect, one wonders what has prompted WHO to appreciate China so much when Beijing failed to curb the pandemic to spill outside China, and when the regime under Xi Jinping remained unsuccessful in realising the global consequences arriving from this virus. It becomes evident that the influence arriving from China's 'charm offensive' tactics over the WHO's decision-making process is the reason why the global health body's conduct towards China has been soft. WHO's departure on its perception of China is also visible if one compares how it criticised China during the SARS epidemic in 2002-03. Clearly, the WHO-China connection needs greater international scrutiny.
In fact, China, with its power clout as a UN Security Council P-5 member, has been blocking Taiwan's WHO membership, except for a brief period from 2009-16, when the latter participated in the global health body as a non-voting observer. This comes at the backdrop of Taiwan alerting the WHO in late December about the virus' inter-human transmission potential while accusing the organization of its failure to communicate the early warnings. Taiwan's exclusion from WHO, due to China's claim on it being a part of its territory, indicated Beijing's mounting strategic clout in the multilateral arena. However, Taiwan's blockade also resulted in a relatively slowed global response towards the pandemic, which has now spurred as a health and economic crisis. If anything, the above arguments reiterate China's increasing levels of participation and engagement in multilateral institutions such as WHO, as a means of achieving its national objectives.
One also should not overlook the rising Chinese financial clout over the WHO. Under Xi Jinping, an increase has been noticed in the Chinese contribution to WHO, which has risen by 52 per cent since 2014 to approximately $ 86 million, pointing to the obvious. Even though China's contribution to WHO dwarfs in comparison to the US', having provided $893 million to the organisation in 2018-19, the former's rising influence on WHO cannot be discounted. In fact, China's partnership with WHO through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) since 2017 to strengthen health security, remains an example of its aim to redistribute power in the existing multilateral institutions and acts as a catalyst for its desire to reshape the global order. Moreover, China's economic and strategic clout has proven beneficial for it emerge as a major player in the global health stage through global policy initiatives and investments in Asia and Africa. However, the COVID-19 episode has severely challenged China's leadership role in the international community, particularly in terms of global health; as Beijing struggles to sustain its responsibility and accountability.
Thus, in light of the diminishing faith in China's global governance model and the increasing criticisms towards China's handling of the COVID-19, challenges to China's leadership under Xi seem inevitable. Further, while the majority of the global community acknowledges China's claims over Taiwan, the exclusion of the latter from WHO amidst the widespread criticisms buttresses the argument mentioned above. China's national position in the international affairs, hence, seems to be witnessing a conundrum- of realising its national goals and interests amidst prevalent criticisms towards its governance; and of sustaining and strengthening its economy amidst an impending global economic crisis.
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)