In December 2019, the first case of COVID-19 was detected in Wuhan, the capital city of Hubei province of China. The Chinese media has stated that the virus originated from bats, pinning the source of origin to the food market in Wuhan which sold a number of wild animals including bats. But all this is in the realm of speculation. It would not be out of order to consider other possibilities of the source of the outbreak of the virus, especially one having military connotations.

Could the virus have originated from one of the virology laboratories located in Wuhan? Could this have been a planned trial by the Chinese of a biological weapon which could carry out mass destruction? Or was this an accidental leak? This too is a matter of conjecture, but as the potential consequences of the spread of the Wuhan virus are so cataclysmic, each and every possibility needs thorough examination and cannot be brushed under the carpet.

Let us examine the hypothesis that this was a planned Chinese biological warfare weapon, which they let loose on the world, first exposing their own residents to the virus, but restricting its impact so that neither Beijing nor Shanghai was impacted. The capacity of the virus to kill is limited, and the data from China shows that over 80 per cent of COVID-19 cases are either asymptomatic or have mild disease. But the fact that the virus spreads very fast once it is introduced to a population, makes it lethal. As an example, if one million people are infected in an area, while 80 per cent will recover quickly, most not even knowing that they are sick, at least 200,000 will require hospitalisation, which is a very large number putting a huge strain on the civic infrastructure and causing governments to impose a lockdown to prevent further spread. The fatalities will be even lesser, perhaps in the range of 20,000 or so, but the impact on the nation’s economy will be crippling. Today, besides India, the US, Europe, Japan, ASEAN, the Gulf countries and others have been seriously impacted, with their economies taking a severe hit.

The Chinese economy, while the hit to some extent, appears to have recovered and is projected to grow at 2.5 per cent. While this is the lowest rate of growth for China in decades, it is far better than the projected rate of growth in Europe and India, which is close to zero per cent. So, if this was a planned biological attack by the Chinese, then they have succeeded in full measure as the Western economies stand crippled and may well go into recession. This puts China in the pole position.

Major stock exchanges across the world have taken a drubbing with the coronavirus pandemic shaving off nearly a third of the global market cap. But interestingly, the Chinese stock exchange has emerged almost unscathed amid the global market rout. With supply chains and global demand being disrupted, a great deal of uncertainty has been created over the long term. China appears to be in a good position to weather the storm and emerge as the market leader, post the pandemic. With stocks tumbling, China is being stocked at reduced rates and in India, has already picked up a one per cent stake in HDFC.

In mid-January, President Donald Trump signed an initial trade deal with China, bringing to a close, the first chapter of a protracted and economically damaging trade war, which was hurting China’s economy. Based on the terms of the agreement, China agreed to buy $12.5 billion in the US agricultural products in 2020 and a further $19.5 billion in 2021. However, with the pandemic raging across the world, the trade deal is as good as dead, which will be a source of dissatisfaction to the US.

Beijing has ratcheted up the pressure on Taiwan, which it seeks to reunite with the mainland. In February, while carrying out military drills, Chinese jets crossed an unofficial middle line in the Taiwan Strait. A day earlier, Chinese fighters and bombers flew around the island. Then in early April, a Chinese naval flotilla led by the country’s first aircraft carrier passed by the eastern and southern coasts of Taiwan to carry out drills. These acts are coercive and designed to put pressure on Taiwan at a time when the world is battling the coronavirus. China is also ramping up pressure on its claim areas in the South China Sea. Chinese belligerence is a deliberate show of force, cocking a snook at the world.

Coincidentally, at this time, the US naval fleet has been hit by the coronavirus. Of the 11 aircraft carriers in the US Navy's fleet, the crew in three of the aircraft carriers are reported to have been infected. More than half the crew of the USS Theodore Roosevelt have been disembarked at Guam, which shows how a virus can impact military capability. So, at a time when the Chinese are getting belligerent in the Indo-Pacific, the US naval fleet finds a part of its crew disabled due to the coronavirus. The USS Ronald Reagan, presently docked in Yokosuka, Japan, is for the moment the only available aircraft carrier to project power in the western Pacific, to counter potential hostilities from China.

India needs to be concerned as China claims a large chunk&nbsp;of Indian Territory in Arunachal Pradesh and is in illegal occupation of the Aksai Chin. If China is moving in the direction of using biological weapons, then India needs to be prepared accordingly. This is no longer in the realm of science fiction as portrayed in the film Contagion. Biological weapons can destroy a nation's economy and seriously degrade its military potential. It is a reality thrust upon us, which we can ignore only at our peril.

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

In December 2019, the first case of COVID-19 was detected in Wuhan, the capital city of Hubei province of China. The Chinese media has stated that the virus originated from bats, pinning the source of origin to the food market in Wuhan which sold a number of wild animals including bats.

In December 2019, the first case of COVID-19 was detected in Wuhan, the capital city of Hubei province of China. The Chinese media has stated that the virus originated from bats, pinning the source of origin to the food market in Wuhan which sold a number of wild animals including bats. But all this is in the realm of speculation. It would not be out of order to consider other possibilities of the source of the outbreak of the virus, especially one having military connotations. Could the virus have originated from one of the virology laboratories located in Wuhan? Could this have been a planned trial by the Chinese of a biological weapon which could carry out mass destruction? Or was this an accidental leak? This too is a matter of conjecture, but as the potential consequences of the spread of the Wuhan virus are so cataclysmic, each and every possibility needs thorough examination and cannot be brushed under the carpet. Let us examine the hypothesis that this was a planned Chinese biological warfare weapon, which they let loose on the world, first exposing their own residents to the virus, but restricting its impact so that neither Beijing nor Shanghai was impacted. The capacity of the virus to kill is limited, and the data from China shows that over 80 per cent of COVID-19 cases are either asymptomatic or have mild disease. But the fact that the virus spreads very fast once it is introduced to a population, makes it lethal. As an example, if one million people are infected in an area, while 80 per cent will recover quickly, most not even knowing that they are sick, at least 200,000 will require hospitalisation, which is a very large number putting a huge strain on the civic infrastructure and causing governments to impose a lockdown to prevent further spread. The fatalities will be even lesser, perhaps in the range of 20,000 or so, but the impact on the nation’s economy will be crippling. Today, besides India, the US, Europe, Japan, ASEAN, the Gulf countries and others have been seriously impacted, with their economies taking a severe hit. The Chinese economy, while the hit to some extent, appears to have recovered and is projected to grow at 2.5 per cent. While this is the lowest rate of growth for China in decades, it is far better than the projected rate of growth in Europe and India, which is close to zero per cent. So, if this was a planned biological attack by the Chinese, then they have succeeded in full measure as the Western economies stand crippled and may well go into recession. This puts China in the pole position. Major stock exchanges across the world have taken a drubbing with the coronavirus pandemic shaving off nearly a third of the global market cap. But interestingly, the Chinese stock exchange has emerged almost unscathed amid the global market rout. With supply chains and global demand being disrupted, a great deal of uncertainty has been created over the long term. China appears to be in a good position to weather the storm and emerge as the market leader, post the pandemic. With stocks tumbling, China is being stocked at reduced rates and in India, has already picked up a one per cent stake in HDFC. In mid-January, President Donald Trump signed an initial trade deal with China, bringing to a close, the first chapter of a protracted and economically damaging trade war, which was hurting China’s economy. Based on the terms of the agreement, China agreed to buy $12.5 billion in the US agricultural products in 2020 and a further $19.5 billion in 2021. However, with the pandemic raging across the world, the trade deal is as good as dead, which will be a source of dissatisfaction to the US. Beijing has ratcheted up the pressure on Taiwan, which it seeks to reunite with the mainland. In February, while carrying out military drills, Chinese jets crossed an unofficial middle line in the Taiwan Strait. A day earlier, Chinese fighters and bombers flew around the island. Then in early April, a Chinese naval flotilla led by the country’s first aircraft carrier passed by the eastern and southern coasts of Taiwan to carry out drills. These acts are coercive and designed to put pressure on Taiwan at a time when the world is battling the coronavirus. China is also ramping up pressure on its claim areas in the South China Sea. Chinese belligerence is a deliberate show of force, cocking a snook at the world. Coincidentally, at this time, the US naval fleet has been hit by the coronavirus. Of the 11 aircraft carriers in the US Navy's fleet, the crew in three of the aircraft carriers are reported to have been infected. More than half the crew of the USS Theodore Roosevelt have been disembarked at Guam, which shows how a virus can impact military capability. So, at a time when the Chinese are getting belligerent in the Indo-Pacific, the US naval fleet finds a part of its crew disabled due to the coronavirus. The USS Ronald Reagan, presently docked in Yokosuka, Japan, is for the moment the only available aircraft carrier to project power in the western Pacific, to counter potential hostilities from China. India needs to be concerned as China claims a large chunk of Indian Territory in Arunachal Pradesh and is in illegal occupation of the Aksai Chin. If China is moving in the direction of using biological weapons, then India needs to be prepared accordingly. This is no longer in the realm of science fiction as portrayed in the film Contagion. Biological weapons can destroy a nation's economy and seriously degrade its military potential. It is a reality thrust upon us, which we can ignore only at our peril. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

How coronavirus impacts the military capability

Amidst a pandemic and the largest lockdown in history, the eighties' cult series; the 'Ramayan'&nbsp;is back on Doordarshan.

From trending on Twitter to massive viewership rewards for the state broadcaster, the good old 'Ramayan' is the new household rage in India.

With the show's re-run receiving a thumbs up from the younger generation too, the Sunday morning soap opera of the Gods is back

After hooking Indian audience in the eighties, the Ramayan's&nbsp;re-run is now dopamine to life in lockdown with zero avenues to outdoor entertainment.

Unaffected by the cliched idealism, Twitter is testimony to the soaring adulation of 'Ramayan'. A case in point was the killing of Meghnath recently aired on the series. Ramayan's mighty Lankan warrior aka Indrajit is Ravana's son.

A grey character who falls prey to his uncle Vibhishan's betrayal, and is eventually killed&nbsp;by Laxmana. Soon after, Twitter went into a tizzy, lauding Meghnath's valour

Before Meghnath was put to the sword, a meme on Lord Hanumana also went viral.

The return of Ramanand Sagar's legendary series even sparked the feminism debate on Twitter. While some users felt 'Ramayan'&nbsp;was unfair to its female characters, especially Sita, others felt the storyline champions women's empowerment.

Some slammed queen Kaikeyi and her maid Manthara, some have empathised with the sacrifice of Lakshmana's wife Urmila.

The golden days of Doordarshan were relived when memes on Lakshman became another hot favourite, so did his advice to Sita demarcating the ''Lakshman Rekha'', which for the Twitterati translated to the lockdown motto of stay home.

The show has garnered 51 million viewers in the first weekend of the telecast, the highest ever figure across the Hindi entertainment genre since 2015. 
 
Various government machinery publicised the re telecast of the show in a big way- thereby catching the attention of many.

BARC's chief executive Sunil Lulla called Prasar Bharti's move as 'brilliant' and admitted the numbers garnered by the show was surprising.

(With inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

Amidst a pandemic and the largest lockdown in history, the eighties' cult series; the 'Ramayan' is back on Doordarshan. From trending on Twitter to massive viewership rewards for the state broadcaster, the good old 'Ramayan' is the new household rage in India.

Amidst a pandemic and the largest lockdown in history, the eighties' cult series; the 'Ramayan' is back on Doordarshan. From trending on Twitter to massive viewership rewards for the state broadcaster, the good old 'Ramayan' is the new household rage in India. With the show's re-run receiving a thumbs up from the younger generation too, the Sunday morning soap opera of the Gods is back After hooking Indian audience in the eighties, the Ramayan's re-run is now dopamine to life in lockdown with zero avenues to outdoor entertainment. Unaffected by the cliched idealism, Twitter is testimony to the soaring adulation of 'Ramayan'. A case in point was the killing of Meghnath recently aired on the series. Ramayan's mighty Lankan warrior aka Indrajit is Ravana's son. A grey character who falls prey to his uncle Vibhishan's betrayal, and is eventually killed by Laxmana. Soon after, Twitter went into a tizzy, lauding Meghnath's valour Before Meghnath was put to the sword, a meme on Lord Hanumana also went viral. The return of Ramanand Sagar's legendary series even sparked the feminism debate on Twitter. While some users felt 'Ramayan' was unfair to its female characters, especially Sita, others felt the storyline champions women's empowerment. Some slammed queen Kaikeyi and her maid Manthara, some have empathised with the sacrifice of Lakshmana's wife Urmila. The golden days of Doordarshan were relived when memes on Lakshman became another hot favourite, so did his advice to Sita demarcating the ''Lakshman Rekha'', which for the Twitterati translated to the lockdown motto of stay home. The show has garnered 51 million viewers in the first weekend of the telecast, the highest ever figure across the Hindi entertainment genre since 2015. Various government machinery publicised the re telecast of the show in a big way- thereby catching the attention of many. BARC's chief executive Sunil Lulla called Prasar Bharti's move as 'brilliant' and admitted the numbers garnered by the show was surprising. (With inputs from agencies)

Coronavirus lockdown: 'Ramayan' gets thumbs up from the younger generation as well

The rush to understand, predict and head off the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-patients-recovering-quickly-after-getting-remdesivir-an-experimental-drug-293051">COVID-19 outbreak</a> has prompted world researchers to create several tools to detect the virus. It has prompted them to analyse hundreds of ways to avoid the virus.&nbsp;

A professor at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburg has created a tool to determine the COVID-19 infection through the sound of a person’s cough, speech and breathing.

Currently, most of these efforts are at a stage in which the researchers are gathering speech and coughing recordings, which are then fed to AI algorithms to determine whether someone has the COVID-19 infection. 
 
<a href="wionews.com/world/new-thermal-scanning-tech-could-save-millions-of-lives-during-the-covid-19-crisis-293175">Also read: New thermal scanning tech could save millions of lives</a>

The COVID-19 voice detector, as professor Rita Singh calls it, traces the micro signatures of one’s voice, which are not audible to the untrained listener but are nevertheless present.

Rita Singh is a Computer Science Research Professor at the Carnegie Mellon University, whose team has created the COVID voice detector.

“Any condition affecting the lungs or the respiratory system, as has been established in the cases of COVID-19 infections, has a palpable effect on the voice. The tool is basically a self-learning system that is now trying to learn signatures of a COVID infection in the voice, not just in cough,” said Singh.

A similar initiative is being carried out by the Mumbai-based Wadhwani Institute for Artificial Intelligence. Wadhwani’s ‘cough against COVID’ mobile application asks the user to record the sound of their coughing to conduct s test of COVID-19.

As the disease brings much of the planet to a halt, scientists and health experts have called for technology to play a bigger part in tackling the pandemic.

Where on one side, the researchers are working on detecting the infection from the sound of cough, another study shows that the two-metre distance considered as a safety measure to avoid close contact is not safe enough.

A recent Western-led study suggests that two metres might not be far enough away if someone lets an uncovered cough loose in your direction.

Virologists at a Canadian hospital have explored that cough airflow, produced by human subjects, is naturally infected with seasonal flu. As per the study, if someone coughs unobstructively from a couple of metres away, then the cough has reached you and is still moving. The study also shows that as much as 10 per cent of the fine droplets from cough remain suspended in the air even after four seconds. The findings add calls for these efforts in combination with social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A third such UK-based study shows that hands dried on a paper towel spread less virus to other surfaces. The researchers deliberately contaminated four people’s hands with a harmless virus and dried them in four different ways. The average surface contamination was more than 10 times higher after contact with jet air-dried hands compared with those dried on paper towels. 
&nbsp;

The rush to understand, predict and head off the COVID-19 outbreak has prompted world researchers to create several tools to detect the virus. It has prompted them to analyse hundreds of ways to avoid the virus.

The rush to understand, predict and head off the COVID-19 outbreak has prompted world researchers to create several tools to detect the virus. It has prompted them to analyse hundreds of ways to avoid the virus. A professor at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburg has created a tool to determine the COVID-19 infection through the sound of a person’s cough, speech and breathing. Currently, most of these efforts are at a stage in which the researchers are gathering speech and coughing recordings, which are then fed to AI algorithms to determine whether someone has the COVID-19 infection. Also read: New thermal scanning tech could save millions of lives The COVID-19 voice detector, as professor Rita Singh calls it, traces the micro signatures of one’s voice, which are not audible to the untrained listener but are nevertheless present. Rita Singh is a Computer Science Research Professor at the Carnegie Mellon University, whose team has created the COVID voice detector. “Any condition affecting the lungs or the respiratory system, as has been established in the cases of COVID-19 infections, has a palpable effect on the voice. The tool is basically a self-learning system that is now trying to learn signatures of a COVID infection in the voice, not just in cough,” said Singh. A similar initiative is being carried out by the Mumbai-based Wadhwani Institute for Artificial Intelligence. Wadhwani’s ‘cough against COVID’ mobile application asks the user to record the sound of their coughing to conduct s test of COVID-19. As the disease brings much of the planet to a halt, scientists and health experts have called for technology to play a bigger part in tackling the pandemic. Where on one side, the researchers are working on detecting the infection from the sound of cough, another study shows that the two-metre distance considered as a safety measure to avoid close contact is not safe enough. A recent Western-led study suggests that two metres might not be far enough away if someone lets an uncovered cough loose in your direction. Virologists at a Canadian hospital have explored that cough airflow, produced by human subjects, is naturally infected with seasonal flu. As per the study, if someone coughs unobstructively from a couple of metres away, then the cough has reached you and is still moving. The study also shows that as much as 10 per cent of the fine droplets from cough remain suspended in the air even after four seconds. The findings add calls for these efforts in combination with social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. A third such UK-based study shows that hands dried on a paper towel spread less virus to other surfaces. The researchers deliberately contaminated four people’s hands with a harmless virus and dried them in four different ways. The average surface contamination was more than 10 times higher after contact with jet air-dried hands compared with those dried on paper towels.

Independent researchers explore ways to detect and prevent coronavirus

Identifying the unique characteristics of COVID-19, understanding the techniques that have been used to study coronaviruses and analysing the scientific publications going back two decades or more will all be key in determining the origin of the Wuhan pandemic.

Since the 2002-2003 SARS coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV), which also originated in China, it has been known that human infectivity depends on the coronavirus’ capability to bind to a human lung cell receptor, in this case, angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2), a property that CoVid-19 also possesses.

In 2008, scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology led by Zhengli Shi <a href="https://jvi.asm.org/content/82/4/1899.full">demonstrated</a> the importance of the human ACE2 binding capability by using bioengineering techniques to “splice” the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV onto a non-human-infecting bat coronavirus, thereby creating the capability for the “new” virus to infect humans.

By 2013, a growing number of horseshoe bat coronaviruses, capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor, were <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12711">isolated</a> by the Wuhan Institute of Virology under the direction of Zhengli Shi.

Given the possibility that CoVid-19 could be a naturally-occurring mutation within the bat population that “jumped” to humans, scientists worldwide have attempted to match COVID-19’s genetic and amino acid sequence with coronaviruses found in nature.

Until now, they have been unable to do so, but the nearest naturally-occurring relatives or “progenitors” of COVID-19 have been suggested.

In the March 2020 scientific <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9">article </a>“The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” which has been widely cited both in the scientific literature and the mainstream media as evidence for CoVid-19 being a naturally-occurring coronavirus, the authors identified a number of close relatives to CoVid-19 and, from that, quickly concluded that CoVid-19 must occur in nature.

Yet, the authors cannot explain the presence of a unique amino acid sequence composed of Arginine-Arginine-Alanine-Arginine (RRAR), called furin (polybasic) cleavage site that does not exist in any of the identified close relatives.

The <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1964754/">minimum sequence</a> for a furin cleavage site is R-X-X-R, where Arginine (R) occurs in the first and last positions and the middle two positions can be any amino acid, but the activity of the furin cleavage site can be significantly enhanced with a basic amino acid-like Arginine in the second position, as occurs in COVID-19.

Furin cleavage sites have been found to be important factors contributing to the pathogenicity in human <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1038/emi.2016.125">(MERS)</a> coronavirus infections and in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3713968/">animals</a>, like the bird infectious bronchitis Beaudette coronavirus strain, which has a furin cleavage site sequence of Arginine-Arginine-Lysine-Arginine, closely matching that of COVID-19.

It is important to note that furin cleavage sites have been <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042682206000900">“introduced”</a> into coronaviruses using widely-known genetic engineering techniques since, at least, 2006 in order to study the effect of cleavage to mediate cell-to-cell fusion and affect viral infectivity.

In the absence of conclusive evidence that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring either within the bat population or as a Chinese laboratory isolate, it is postulated that COVID-19 may have been manufactured as part of a research program and accidentally leaked from a high containment facility. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Identifying the unique characteristics of COVID-19, understanding the techniques that have been used to study coronaviruses and analysing the scientific publications going back two decades or more will all be key in determining the origin of the Wuhan pandemic.

Identifying the unique characteristics of COVID-19, understanding the techniques that have been used to study coronaviruses and analysing the scientific publications going back two decades or more will all be key in determining the origin of the Wuhan pandemic. Since the 2002-2003 SARS coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV), which also originated in China, it has been known that human infectivity depends on the coronavirus’ capability to bind to a human lung cell receptor, in this case, angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2), a property that CoVid-19 also possesses. In 2008, scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology led by Zhengli Shi demonstrated the importance of the human ACE2 binding capability by using bioengineering techniques to “splice” the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV onto a non-human-infecting bat coronavirus, thereby creating the capability for the “new” virus to infect humans. By 2013, a growing number of horseshoe bat coronaviruses, capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor, were isolated by the Wuhan Institute of Virology under the direction of Zhengli Shi. Given the possibility that CoVid-19 could be a naturally-occurring mutation within the bat population that “jumped” to humans, scientists worldwide have attempted to match COVID-19’s genetic and amino acid sequence with coronaviruses found in nature. Until now, they have been unable to do so, but the nearest naturally-occurring relatives or “progenitors” of COVID-19 have been suggested. In the March 2020 scientific article “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” which has been widely cited both in the scientific literature and the mainstream media as evidence for CoVid-19 being a naturally-occurring coronavirus, the authors identified a number of close relatives to CoVid-19 and, from that, quickly concluded that CoVid-19 must occur in nature. Yet, the authors cannot explain the presence of a unique amino acid sequence composed of Arginine-Arginine-Alanine-Arginine (RRAR), called furin (polybasic) cleavage site that does not exist in any of the identified close relatives. The minimum sequence for a furin cleavage site is R-X-X-R, where Arginine (R) occurs in the first and last positions and the middle two positions can be any amino acid, but the activity of the furin cleavage site can be significantly enhanced with a basic amino acid-like Arginine in the second position, as occurs in COVID-19. Furin cleavage sites have been found to be important factors contributing to the pathogenicity in human (MERS) coronavirus infections and in animals, like the bird infectious bronchitis Beaudette coronavirus strain, which has a furin cleavage site sequence of Arginine-Arginine-Lysine-Arginine, closely matching that of COVID-19. It is important to note that furin cleavage sites have been “introduced” into coronaviruses using widely-known genetic engineering techniques since, at least, 2006 in order to study the effect of cleavage to mediate cell-to-cell fusion and affect viral infectivity. In the absence of conclusive evidence that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring either within the bat population or as a Chinese laboratory isolate, it is postulated that COVID-19 may have been manufactured as part of a research program and accidentally leaked from a high containment facility. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

COVID-19 could be man-made

There is no doubt that after the second world war, COVID 19 is the most decisive development in the world, that is likely to turn upside down the relations between different countries and the way that humanity would view things in life.

China’s ambition for world dominance :

In the last few decades, China has been steadily and cleverly improving its strategic importance in the world by strengthening its industrial, technological, economic and military base, by launching schemes such as OBOR and several others, which appear to be successful to some extent, as far as China is concerned.

China has been emboldened in launching several strategies with least concern for fairness and with a high level of self-centredness, as it has remained largely unchallenged. For example, China occupied Tibet by aggressive methods several decades back, when the Tibetan dissenters were ruthlessly massacred and it drove out the protestors including the venerable the Dalai Lama.&nbsp;

With the nearby countries like Japan, Vietnam, Philippines and others, China has raised disputes in several areas such as Senkaku Island, the South China Sea where China claims sovereign power. While the affected countries have been protesting, China remains unconcerned about such protests and the world view on these disputes.

China is rapidly expanding trade and investment activities and taking over several mines in different countries and acquiring assets abroad in a well planned and systematic way to gradually increase its world dominance.

So far, rest of the world has largely remained as if it is unconcerned about China’s efforts to rapidly increase its dominance in the world arena, since China has opened its large market to the rest of the world and multinational companies, who want to exploit market potential in China, particularly since, the market in developed countries have become nearly saturated for several products. Today, no country or any multinational company want to miss the trade opportunities that China offers.

Why the concern about China’s increasing dominance?

There is nothing wrong if any country would want to strengthen itself economically and become a major power in the world. This could be a legitimate ambition for any nation.

However, this logic cannot be straightaway applied in the case of China, as China is known to have expansionist ambitions not only in terms of economy but also in terms of territory.

China has a totalitarian regime with freedom of speech heavily suppressed and personal liberty severely curtailed. Dissenters in China are known to be eliminated ruthlessly.

The concern is that if a country with a totalitarian regime and not having any concern about ethical and fair practices would happen to dominate the world, then the world would become an unsafe place.

Now, there is a rapidly developing world view that China’s increasing dominance in world affairs could upset the world balance of power and create conflicts of interest.

This is one of the primary reasons why US President Trump launched a trade war against &nbsp;China. However, the trade war has not discouraged China so far or dissuaded it from the ambition of world dominance at any cost. Now, at this juncture, many people wonder as to who would be the bigger loser in the trade war, &nbsp;whether China or the USA.

China's propaganda amid coronavirus crisis

China is the originator of COVID 19 and is accused of playing a trick on the world by not sharing with the world, 
&nbsp;information about &nbsp;COVID 19 at the right time, that has now engulfed the entire world.

In the present ongoing COVID 19 crisis, it appears that China looks like having the last laugh.

USA and West European countries, as well as Japan, which has considered themselves as the leading lights among the world countries and scientifically advanced now, stand humiliated, with the rapid spread of the virus in their regions causing huge loss of lives.

As the world is struggling to tackle the crisis and now facing distress and uncertain conditions, China claims that it has sorted out the issue and it has become free of the virus in the region. When some people were affected by the virus after China lifted the lockdown China says that it has happened only due to the overseas visitors and not due to any development within.

In this scenario, China is deliberately trying to create an impression, by launching a massive propaganda campaign that it has the capability to control the virus. This campaign obviously implies that when the other countries do not know how to go about China has wiped out the virus in its region. In the process, China is deliberately trying to create an impression around the world that China is more advanced than in other countries.

In other words, China seems to convey the view that it has the merits to claim that it is the superpower and not the USA, which has recorded the highest deaths in the world due to coronavirus.

The agony&nbsp;of affected countries:

Obviously, the USA and most European countries and Japan are seething with anger and frustration at the humiliation that they have suffered due to COVID crisis. This is more so, in view of China’s arrogant assertion that the COVID 19 did not first happen in China but elsewhere such as Italy or the USA or anywhere else.

There is a clear realisation amongst these countries that China’s ambition to dominate the world should be defeated if they were to hold their place in the world scenario. This realization would be the ultimate driving force for any possible coordinated action against China.

While there is no formal coordinated efforts between the USA, West European countries and Japan in tackling “China dragon”, the pointers are clear that they would soon discuss the strategies in a coordinated manner with a mutual interest in view.

The first step to control China has already been taken by Japan, which has said that it would fund firms of Japanese companies to shift production out of China.

Export dependent economy :

China became the world's largest exporter in 2010, and the largest trading nation in 2013

While the investments in China have gone up in a big way, too much of capacities have been built up in several areas such as steel aluminium and several others such as chemical/polymer and allied products. As a result, the capacity utilisation of industries in China has gone down to an unacceptable level in many cases, leading to losses, closures and mergers.

Since 2009, China has been trying hard to rejig its export-dependent economy to the one more dependent on domestic consumption. However, such efforts to increase domestic consumption are not making a big impact, since &nbsp;China's per capita income is below the world average.

Import dependence :

Even as China is a large exporter, it is also dependent on import in a big way for several products and services.

China is dependent on imports of crude oil to around &nbsp;70 per cent of its requirement and is the largest importer of crude oil in the world.

About 80 per cent of its microchip requirement is met by imports. It has been spending &nbsp;$260 billion every year on import of semiconductors and chips, which is more than the money spent on import of crude oil.

 
What options are available for countries wanting to combat&nbsp;China’s domination?

A large part of the investment in China has been made by multinational companies with a base in Europe, USA and Japan. They just cannot withdraw from China on any count in the immediate future in view of the investments already committed in China, technologies already shared with Chinese technologists and the fact that equipment and the infrastructure facilities built cannot just be lifted out of China at will.

Further, the market base in China is large and cannot be surrendered in a quick period by any multinational companies and regions like USA, Western Europe and Japan. Their alternate strategies to “teach China a lesson” will take time to evolve and implement.

In the event of trade and economic warfare launched by the USA, West European countries and Japan, China will not be able to hold on to its present economic strength. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
 
&nbsp;

There is no doubt that after the second world war, COVID 19 is the most decisive development in the world, that is likely to turn upside down the relations between different countries and the way that humanity would view things in life.

There is no doubt that after the second world war, COVID 19 is the most decisive development in the world, that is likely to turn upside down the relations between different countries and the way that humanity would view things in life. China’s ambition for world dominance : In the last few decades, China has been steadily and cleverly improving its strategic importance in the world by strengthening its industrial, technological, economic and military base, by launching schemes such as OBOR and several others, which appear to be successful to some extent, as far as China is concerned. China has been emboldened in launching several strategies with least concern for fairness and with a high level of self-centredness, as it has remained largely unchallenged. For example, China occupied Tibet by aggressive methods several decades back, when the Tibetan dissenters were ruthlessly massacred and it drove out the protestors including the venerable the Dalai Lama. With the nearby countries like Japan, Vietnam, Philippines and others, China has raised disputes in several areas such as Senkaku Island, the South China Sea where China claims sovereign power. While the affected countries have been protesting, China remains unconcerned about such protests and the world view on these disputes. China is rapidly expanding trade and investment activities and taking over several mines in different countries and acquiring assets abroad in a well planned and systematic way to gradually increase its world dominance. So far, rest of the world has largely remained as if it is unconcerned about China’s efforts to rapidly increase its dominance in the world arena, since China has opened its large market to the rest of the world and multinational companies, who want to exploit market potential in China, particularly since, the market in developed countries have become nearly saturated for several products. Today, no country or any multinational company want to miss the trade opportunities that China offers. Why the concern about China’s increasing dominance? There is nothing wrong if any country would want to strengthen itself economically and become a major power in the world. This could be a legitimate ambition for any nation. However, this logic cannot be straightaway applied in the case of China, as China is known to have expansionist ambitions not only in terms of economy but also in terms of territory. China has a totalitarian regime with freedom of speech heavily suppressed and personal liberty severely curtailed. Dissenters in China are known to be eliminated ruthlessly. The concern is that if a country with a totalitarian regime and not having any concern about ethical and fair practices would happen to dominate the world, then the world would become an unsafe place. Now, there is a rapidly developing world view that China’s increasing dominance in world affairs could upset the world balance of power and create conflicts of interest. This is one of the primary reasons why US President Trump launched a trade war against China. However, the trade war has not discouraged China so far or dissuaded it from the ambition of world dominance at any cost. Now, at this juncture, many people wonder as to who would be the bigger loser in the trade war, whether China or the USA. China's propaganda amid coronavirus crisis China is the originator of COVID 19 and is accused of playing a trick on the world by not sharing with the world, information about COVID 19 at the right time, that has now engulfed the entire world. In the present ongoing COVID 19 crisis, it appears that China looks like having the last laugh. USA and West European countries, as well as Japan, which has considered themselves as the leading lights among the world countries and scientifically advanced now, stand humiliated, with the rapid spread of the virus in their regions causing huge loss of lives. As the world is struggling to tackle the crisis and now facing distress and uncertain conditions, China claims that it has sorted out the issue and it has become free of the virus in the region. When some people were affected by the virus after China lifted the lockdown China says that it has happened only due to the overseas visitors and not due to any development within. In this scenario, China is deliberately trying to create an impression, by launching a massive propaganda campaign that it has the capability to control the virus. This campaign obviously implies that when the other countries do not know how to go about China has wiped out the virus in its region. In the process, China is deliberately trying to create an impression around the world that China is more advanced than in other countries. In other words, China seems to convey the view that it has the merits to claim that it is the superpower and not the USA, which has recorded the highest deaths in the world due to coronavirus. The agony of affected countries: Obviously, the USA and most European countries and Japan are seething with anger and frustration at the humiliation that they have suffered due to COVID crisis. This is more so, in view of China’s arrogant assertion that the COVID 19 did not first happen in China but elsewhere such as Italy or the USA or anywhere else. There is a clear realisation amongst these countries that China’s ambition to dominate the world should be defeated if they were to hold their place in the world scenario. This realization would be the ultimate driving force for any possible coordinated action against China. While there is no formal coordinated efforts between the USA, West European countries and Japan in tackling “China dragon”, the pointers are clear that they would soon discuss the strategies in a coordinated manner with a mutual interest in view. The first step to control China has already been taken by Japan, which has said that it would fund firms of Japanese companies to shift production out of China. Export dependent economy : China became the world's largest exporter in 2010, and the largest trading nation in 2013 While the investments in China have gone up in a big way, too much of capacities have been built up in several areas such as steel aluminium and several others such as chemical/polymer and allied products. As a result, the capacity utilisation of industries in China has gone down to an unacceptable level in many cases, leading to losses, closures and mergers. Since 2009, China has been trying hard to rejig its export-dependent economy to the one more dependent on domestic consumption. However, such efforts to increase domestic consumption are not making a big impact, since China's per capita income is below the world average. Import dependence : Even as China is a large exporter, it is also dependent on import in a big way for several products and services. China is dependent on imports of crude oil to around 70 per cent of its requirement and is the largest importer of crude oil in the world. About 80 per cent of its microchip requirement is met by imports. It has been spending $260 billion every year on import of semiconductors and chips, which is more than the money spent on import of crude oil. What options are available for countries wanting to combat China’s domination? A large part of the investment in China has been made by multinational companies with a base in Europe, USA and Japan. They just cannot withdraw from China on any count in the immediate future in view of the investments already committed in China, technologies already shared with Chinese technologists and the fact that equipment and the infrastructure facilities built cannot just be lifted out of China at will. Further, the market base in China is large and cannot be surrendered in a quick period by any multinational companies and regions like USA, Western Europe and Japan. Their alternate strategies to “teach China a lesson” will take time to evolve and implement. In the event of trade and economic warfare launched by the USA, West European countries and Japan, China will not be able to hold on to its present economic strength. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Here's how affected countries can combat China's increasing dominance

It has been over three weeks since India declared nationwide lockdown to fight and prevent the spread of coronavirus pandemic in India.&nbsp;

The lockdown has been extended till May 3, 2020. It’s important to evaluate the effectiveness of the government response and policy towards this pandemic.&nbsp;

When COVID 19 emerged in India in the first week of March, the global concern was that India will suffer a very high rate of death in view of its high-density population (1.3 billion people), with fewer resources, extreme poverty, and weak health system. It was believed that India will have devastating and far-reaching consequences.&nbsp;

However, the same has been proved to be untrue. &nbsp;Like many other nations, India also initially faced the dilemma of maintaining a balance between economy and health. However, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India managed quite well which is evident as&nbsp;its mortality rate is amongst the lowest in the world, considering the huge population in India.&nbsp;

(In United States 6,41,919 cases, 28,399 deaths, Spain - 1,80,659 cases, 18,812 deaths, Italy - 1,65,155 cases, 21,645 deaths, France - &nbsp;1,06,206 cases, 17,167 deaths, Germany - 1,34,753 cases, 3,804 deaths, United Kingdom - 98,476cases, 12,868deaths, China - 82,341cases 3,342 deaths, Iran - 76,389 cases, 4,777 deaths, Turkey - 69,392 cases, 1,518 deaths, India-11,933 and deaths-392)&nbsp;

Even the World Health Organisation’s chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus praised India for its effort and policy to combat coronavirus spread. This relative success could become possible due to the following reasons:&nbsp;

<ul>
	<li>PM Modi is the first executive in the entire world to directly appeal to its own people to maintain social distancing. He has addressed the nation four times so far. In every address to the nation, he reassured the citizens that the governmental machinery is doing its best. 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>He succeeded in bringing national unity, solidarity and cooperation throughout the country to fight this pandemic. Citizens in every part of India supported his decisions of Janta curfew, appreciating the efforts of essential service providers ( doctors, nurses, paramedical staff, government officials, members of the armed forces and police, disaster management officials ) by clapping, lighting a candle or 'diya' during this period. He gave citizens a national purpose to unite.&nbsp; 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Though India did face the challenge of internal migrant labourers, but the governments, at both centre and state level, synchronised their policies and efforts to extend the much needed social security to its vulnerable population.&nbsp;&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

<ul>
	<li>Lastly, as the majority of Indians, today has full faith in the leadership of PM Modi, it becomes easy for the Indian government to implement its decision with the cooperation of people.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

Moreover, PM Modi’s role in dealing with the pandemic has been acknowledged internationally as well. India actively participated in the meetings of SAARC ( South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) and G-20( Group of 20 nations). India has exported critical drugs like hydroxychloroquine, paracetamol as well as azithromycin to several countries to aid the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic - starting from the United States in the west to Bangladesh in the east.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

It has been over three weeks since India declared nationwide lockdown to fight and prevent the spread of coronavirus pandemic in India. The lockdown has been extended till May 3, 2020.

It has been over three weeks since India declared nationwide lockdown to fight and prevent the spread of coronavirus pandemic in India. The lockdown has been extended till May 3, 2020. It’s important to evaluate the effectiveness of the government response and policy towards this pandemic. When COVID 19 emerged in India in the first week of March, the global concern was that India will suffer a very high rate of death in view of its high-density population (1.3 billion people), with fewer resources, extreme poverty, and weak health system. It was believed that India will have devastating and far-reaching consequences. However, the same has been proved to be untrue. Like many other nations, India also initially faced the dilemma of maintaining a balance between economy and health. However, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India managed quite well which is evident as its mortality rate is amongst the lowest in the world, considering the huge population in India. (In United States 6,41,919 cases, 28,399 deaths, Spain - 1,80,659 cases, 18,812 deaths, Italy - 1,65,155 cases, 21,645 deaths, France - 1,06,206 cases, 17,167 deaths, Germany - 1,34,753 cases, 3,804 deaths, United Kingdom - 98,476cases, 12,868deaths, China - 82,341cases 3,342 deaths, Iran - 76,389 cases, 4,777 deaths, Turkey - 69,392 cases, 1,518 deaths, India-11,933 and deaths-392) Even the World Health Organisation’s chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus praised India for its effort and policy to combat coronavirus spread. This relative success could become possible due to the following reasons: PM Modi is the first executive in the entire world to directly appeal to its own people to maintain social distancing. He has addressed the nation four times so far. In every address to the nation, he reassured the citizens that the governmental machinery is doing its best. He succeeded in bringing national unity, solidarity and cooperation throughout the country to fight this pandemic. Citizens in every part of India supported his decisions of Janta curfew, appreciating the efforts of essential service providers ( doctors, nurses, paramedical staff, government officials, members of the armed forces and police, disaster management officials ) by clapping, lighting a candle or 'diya' during this period. He gave citizens a national purpose to unite. Though India did face the challenge of internal migrant labourers, but the governments, at both centre and state level, synchronised their policies and efforts to extend the much needed social security to its vulnerable population. Lastly, as the majority of Indians, today has full faith in the leadership of PM Modi, it becomes easy for the Indian government to implement its decision with the cooperation of people. Moreover, PM Modi’s role in dealing with the pandemic has been acknowledged internationally as well. India actively participated in the meetings of SAARC ( South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) and G-20( Group of 20 nations). India has exported critical drugs like hydroxychloroquine, paracetamol as well as azithromycin to several countries to aid the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic - starting from the United States in the west to Bangladesh in the east. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

PM Narendra Modi led from the front in the fight against coronavirus crisis in India

Last November we planned a vacation to Europe for the following March. By the end of December, we were reading about a new viral disease spreading in China. Like any other, we began looking out for updates posted by the World Health Organisation on the virus; and up to the very end of February 2020, we thought we were safe in visiting places outside of China. But less than 24 hours before our flight, we took a call and cancelled our trip. By then it was no more a “Chinese” virus, as US President Donald Trump had elucidated once, but was slowly and surely entrapping most of the globe. We had almost been blindsided by the dallying of the most reputed health organisation globally into believing that the virus is not a breaking force outside China. &nbsp;

The WHO has been called out for its belated response to the upheaval which has, in turn, hampered relief efforts globally. But is the name-calling mere politicisation or bears substance? As an international specialised body of the UN, the basic responsibility of WHO is for international public health. However, the WHO has been lately disparaged for its dealing with the prevalent pandemic by erring on the side of China. To say the least, the WHO has come out as an exceedingly bureaucratic organisation, akin to other UN bodies and its fallacies have been exposed further by the current handling. &nbsp;&nbsp;

On December 31, 2019, the country office of WHO in China reported “pneumonia” like syndrome for an unidentified pathogen. By many estimates, this was very late in the day after the Chinese authorities had been suspected of trying to suppress the fact for a while. On January 20, 2020, China confirmed human to human transmission and on January 23, put Wuhan under quarantine. Concurrently WHO categorically stated then that this is only an emergency in China and has not yet become a global health emergency. WHO’s Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom, further added that there was no evidence of human to human transmission outside China. &nbsp;

Since the first reporting, the organisation nearly took a month to declare COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, relenting only on January 30, 2020. As such it can be commented that when public health should be the basic concern, WHO was busy making politically correct statements. First, it wholeheartedly backed China’s response to the disease, no questions asked. Second, it recommended against stalling international trade or travel and even accosted the US for imposing travel restrictions on China. So while China was, on the one hand, locking down its whole province in order to curtail transmission; on the other hand, WHO was emphatically reiterating that there no need to impose a travel ban. &nbsp;

Retrospectively, it may have been a better course for the WHO to focus itself in espousing a travel ban for China entirely rather than concentrating on showering praises at the Chinese authorities for being transparent. The World Health Organisation is not a political organisation and has no business defending governance in any country. Questions are also being raised on China stifling early warning signals. However, more importantly, it is time to fix accountability of the WHO which has been caught defending stigma against China rather than providing accurate information about the virus.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Shockingly, after over 1,18,000 cases in 114 countries which were responsible for 4291 deaths, WHO declared it a pandemic only on March 11, 2020. And finally, on March 13, WHO recommended avoiding unnecessary travel. A step called out globally as perhaps being too little, too late. The magnitude of the situation can be judged by the fact that, like us, many others would have avoided non-essential travel by simply adhering to the WHO’s directive. However, with the belated response, it is seen that many people are presently stranded globally due to the sudden restrictions imposed on travel.&nbsp;

The WHO’s Director-General’s credentials have also been brought to light in the discourse. A signed petition is circulating globally asking him to step down for his shoddy handling of the situation. Previously, even his candidature for WHO was challenged as he was accused of supporting a repressive government in Ethiopia, his home country. Even on the ebola crisis in Africa, it is widely perceived that action was taken by WHO was tardy and they did not get their act together in time.&nbsp;

It is not the first time that the world is facing a problem of such mammoth proportion. There was the 430 BC Plague, the Black Death of 1346-1353, and the Spanish Flu of the last century, among others which resulted in large scale loss of human life. Though making leaps and bounds in health and science, we are still vulnerable to new forms of diseases. Accordingly the role of WHO is paramount in early detection and prevention of these new diseases.&nbsp; &nbsp;

One such form of prevention is declaring a public health emergency of international concern. It is an efficient system that WHO uses to sound the alarm on a serious disease that may have caught the world off guard and put lives in danger. It draws immediate attention to galvanise resources and stop the disease from spreading any further or across borders. In fact, the WHO has only declared a public health emergency five times since the International Health Regulations, which govern global health emergency responses, were enacted in 2007. The first time was in 2009, with the outbreak of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic. The second time was in May 2014, when polio seemed to surge again, threatening the eradication effort. The third time, in August 2014, came as the Ebola outbreak in West Africa was growing out of control. The fourth was related to Zika in 2016. And the fifth, in 2019, was another outbreak of Ebola that’s ongoing in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. &nbsp;A key consideration in declaring a PHEIC is whether the disease threat is dire enough to risk countries enacting travel and trade restrictions.&nbsp;

As such declarations can be devastating to local economies and are often associated with economic losses. So what should be the approach of WHO - to consider economic losses or saving lives? In the present situation, it has been seen that the WHO did not support imposing travel restrictions/lockdown even when over a lakh people all across the globe had been affected. It even criticised the US for imposing travel restrictions to China. Had WHO put public health first, the spread could have been perhaps been restrained. &nbsp;

The world had prior experience with other forms of coronavirus in the form of SARS and MERS. In the absence of a vaccine, isolation was the logical plan of action to break the chain. Perhaps, WHO squandered its opportunity and as many say it, past its prime when the world depended on it to be agile. Surely this will not be the last virus outbreak to be transmitted from animal to human. It is time to recalibrate the significance and utility of the WHO in preventing new diseases. The World expects more from the WHO and it must adopt a preventive approach with the foresight to minimise loss of life. After all, it is better to be safe than sorry.&nbsp;

(The&nbsp;article is co-authored by Tanvi Saran Srivastava. She is Law Officer in MSTC Ltd, CPSU.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Last November we planned a vacation to Europe for the following March. By the end of December, we were reading about a new viral disease spreading in China. Like any other, we began looking out for updates posted by the World Health Organisation on the virus; and up to the very end of February 2020, we thought we were safe in visiting places outside of China.

Last November we planned a vacation to Europe for the following March. By the end of December, we were reading about a new viral disease spreading in China. Like any other, we began looking out for updates posted by the World Health Organisation on the virus; and up to the very end of February 2020, we thought we were safe in visiting places outside of China. But less than 24 hours before our flight, we took a call and cancelled our trip. By then it was no more a “Chinese” virus, as US President Donald Trump had elucidated once, but was slowly and surely entrapping most of the globe. We had almost been blindsided by the dallying of the most reputed health organisation globally into believing that the virus is not a breaking force outside China. The WHO has been called out for its belated response to the upheaval which has, in turn, hampered relief efforts globally. But is the name-calling mere politicisation or bears substance? As an international specialised body of the UN, the basic responsibility of WHO is for international public health. However, the WHO has been lately disparaged for its dealing with the prevalent pandemic by erring on the side of China. To say the least, the WHO has come out as an exceedingly bureaucratic organisation, akin to other UN bodies and its fallacies have been exposed further by the current handling. On December 31, 2019, the country office of WHO in China reported “pneumonia” like syndrome for an unidentified pathogen. By many estimates, this was very late in the day after the Chinese authorities had been suspected of trying to suppress the fact for a while. On January 20, 2020, China confirmed human to human transmission and on January 23, put Wuhan under quarantine. Concurrently WHO categorically stated then that this is only an emergency in China and has not yet become a global health emergency. WHO’s Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom, further added that there was no evidence of human to human transmission outside China. Since the first reporting, the organisation nearly took a month to declare COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, relenting only on January 30, 2020. As such it can be commented that when public health should be the basic concern, WHO was busy making politically correct statements. First, it wholeheartedly backed China’s response to the disease, no questions asked. Second, it recommended against stalling international trade or travel and even accosted the US for imposing travel restrictions on China. So while China was, on the one hand, locking down its whole province in order to curtail transmission; on the other hand, WHO was emphatically reiterating that there no need to impose a travel ban. Retrospectively, it may have been a better course for the WHO to focus itself in espousing a travel ban for China entirely rather than concentrating on showering praises at the Chinese authorities for being transparent. The World Health Organisation is not a political organisation and has no business defending governance in any country. Questions are also being raised on China stifling early warning signals. However, more importantly, it is time to fix accountability of the WHO which has been caught defending stigma against China rather than providing accurate information about the virus. Shockingly, after over 1,18,000 cases in 114 countries which were responsible for 4291 deaths, WHO declared it a pandemic only on March 11, 2020. And finally, on March 13, WHO recommended avoiding unnecessary travel. A step called out globally as perhaps being too little, too late. The magnitude of the situation can be judged by the fact that, like us, many others would have avoided non-essential travel by simply adhering to the WHO’s directive. However, with the belated response, it is seen that many people are presently stranded globally due to the sudden restrictions imposed on travel. The WHO’s Director-General’s credentials have also been brought to light in the discourse. A signed petition is circulating globally asking him to step down for his shoddy handling of the situation. Previously, even his candidature for WHO was challenged as he was accused of supporting a repressive government in Ethiopia, his home country. Even on the ebola crisis in Africa, it is widely perceived that action was taken by WHO was tardy and they did not get their act together in time. It is not the first time that the world is facing a problem of such mammoth proportion. There was the 430 BC Plague, the Black Death of 1346-1353, and the Spanish Flu of the last century, among others which resulted in large scale loss of human life. Though making leaps and bounds in health and science, we are still vulnerable to new forms of diseases. Accordingly the role of WHO is paramount in early detection and prevention of these new diseases. One such form of prevention is declaring a public health emergency of international concern. It is an efficient system that WHO uses to sound the alarm on a serious disease that may have caught the world off guard and put lives in danger. It draws immediate attention to galvanise resources and stop the disease from spreading any further or across borders. In fact, the WHO has only declared a public health emergency five times since the International Health Regulations, which govern global health emergency responses, were enacted in 2007. The first time was in 2009, with the outbreak of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic. The second time was in May 2014, when polio seemed to surge again, threatening the eradication effort. The third time, in August 2014, came as the Ebola outbreak in West Africa was growing out of control. The fourth was related to Zika in 2016. And the fifth, in 2019, was another outbreak of Ebola that’s ongoing in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A key consideration in declaring a PHEIC is whether the disease threat is dire enough to risk countries enacting travel and trade restrictions. As such declarations can be devastating to local economies and are often associated with economic losses. So what should be the approach of WHO - to consider economic losses or saving lives? In the present situation, it has been seen that the WHO did not support imposing travel restrictions/lockdown even when over a lakh people all across the globe had been affected. It even criticised the US for imposing travel restrictions to China. Had WHO put public health first, the spread could have been perhaps been restrained. The world had prior experience with other forms of coronavirus in the form of SARS and MERS. In the absence of a vaccine, isolation was the logical plan of action to break the chain. Perhaps, WHO squandered its opportunity and as many say it, past its prime when the world depended on it to be agile. Surely this will not be the last virus outbreak to be transmitted from animal to human. It is time to recalibrate the significance and utility of the WHO in preventing new diseases. The World expects more from the WHO and it must adopt a preventive approach with the foresight to minimise loss of life. After all, it is better to be safe than sorry. (The article is co-authored by Tanvi Saran Srivastava. She is Law Officer in MSTC Ltd, CPSU.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Mishandling of coronavirus pandemic by WHO has cost the world dearly

China has the knowledge and the techniques to manufacture new viruses and animal models to test the ability of those new viruses to infect humans.

The question remains – is the Chinese virus, COVID-19, the cause of the global pandemic, a naturally-occurring coronavirus that 'jumped' from bats to humans within the Wuhan Seafood Market as China claims or did it 'leak' from a Chinese laboratory either as a yet unknown bat viral isolate stored there or as a man-made virus?

A second, but additionally important question – has China been using politically 'tainted' scientific articles as part of an information campaign to absolve itself of responsibility for the Chinese coronavirus pandemic?

That is, to leverage the widely-accepted credibility of science as one element of a propaganda strategy orchestrated by the Chinese Communist Party.

Beginning already in January 2020, articles written by Chinese scientists started appearing in the international scientific literature that either <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054935/">rejected </a>outright the possibility that COVID-19 originated in a Chinese laboratory or were <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017">peppered</a> with statements reinforcing the Chinese government argues that it originated in the Wuhan Seafood Market, such as <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7">one </a>written by a lead scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Zheng-Li Shi.

Many of those articles were published by <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054935/">Chinese-controlled scientific journals</a>, had<a href="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.02.974139v3.article-info"> not undergone the normal peer review</a> process or were written by Chinese scientists with no apparent research background in coronaviruses.

Yet, occasionally, the likely truth slipped through the cracks.

Contrary to the official Chinese government narrative of a late December 2019 onset originating in the Wuhan Seafood Market, a <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext">Chinese-authored article</a> published in the prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, states that the first documented case of COVID-19 was at least as early as December 1, 2019, being a hospitalised patient who had not visited the Wuhan Seafood Market.

On December 10, 2019, two out of the three coronavirus patients admitted to the hospital had not been in the Wuhan Seafood Market. It was only after December 15, 2019, that a larger percentage of COVID-19 patients were identified as visitors to the Wuhan Seafood Market.

A Chinese-authored scientific article written during the first week of February 2020 also directly <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079563/">contradicts</a> the Chinese government narrative that COVID-19 'jumped' from bats to humans within the Wuhan Seafood Market:

“The epidemiological investigation of early cases of 2019-nCoV pneumonia showed that many cases had been exposed to the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan. In addition, 33 of the 585 environmental samples from Huanan Seafood Market were positive for 2019-nCoV; however, that market was trading a variety of live animals, such as hedgehog, badger, snake, and bird (turtledoves), probably pangolin, but not bats. Thus, bats are less likely to have direct contact with humans, and direct transmission of the virus from bat to human is unlikely.”

An alternative explanation for the origin of the Chinese COVID-19 pandemic is that it resulted from a 'leak' out of a Chinese laboratory.

Just such a leak out of a Chinese laboratory occurred in <a href="https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-beijing-lab-twice-50137">two separate incidents </a>in April 2004 involving researchers infected with the deadly coronavirus SARS-CoV, responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic.

In such a scenario, COVID-19, representing one of the hundreds of coronaviruses isolated by the Chinese from various animals, could have similarly leaked out of a Wuhan laboratory either carried by an infected employee who later visited the Wuhan Seafood Market or by an infected experimental laboratory animal that was sold to the market.

An especially dangerous possibility is that COVID-19 is man-made. That would involve a bioengineering capability to construct novel viruses by combining parts of two or more viruses (chimera). The infectivity of the novel viruses would then be tested in cell cultures and animal models.

China possesses all those capabilities.

In 2015, Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina and Zheng-Li Shi from the Wuhan Institute of Virology jointly published a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985">scientific article </a>describing the combination of the receptor-binding spike protein from a newly isolated coronavirus (SHC014) and the “backbone” from SARS-CoV, the coronavirus responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic. It produced a novel virus (chimera SHC014-MA15), which showed “robust viral replication both in vitro [cell cultures] and in vivo [animals],” using models adapted to test human infectivity.

Many of the techniques involved in creating coronavirus chimeras are described in detail in a publicly-available 2018 patent (US9884895B2) submitted by Dr. Baric.

In addition to possessing the techniques for creating new viruses, China has <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/aalas/cm/2007/00000057/00000005/art00003">developed</a> a genetically-engineered mouse model, not only to test the human infectivity of coronaviruses but, through multiple passages, potentially increase its human receptor selectivity.

It was recently<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211291/U-S-government-gave-3-7million-grant-Wuhan-lab-experimented-coronavirus-source-bats.html"> reported </a>that the Wuhan Institute of Virology received a $3.7 million grant from the US National Institutes of Health to study coronaviruses.

Given the well-known propensity for coronaviruses to mutate, both in animals and humans, the introduction of man-made coronaviruses into nature could have catastrophic consequences for human health and the ecosystem.

From the perspective of biological warfare, China could develop new viruses for which there are no known treatments or viruses deliberately designed to circumvent them, risks already <a href="https://casw.org/sites/default/files/Baric_NewHorizons-slideset_2012.pdf">identified</a> by Dr Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina in 2012.

It is now urgent to confront China in order to determine the true origin of COVID-19. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China has the knowledge and the techniques to manufacture new viruses and animal models to test the ability of those new viruses to infect humans. The question remains – is the Chinese virus, COVID-19, the cause of the global pandemic, a naturally-occurring coronavirus that 'jumped' from bats to humans within the Wuhan Seafood Market as China claims or did it 'leak' from a Chinese laboratory either as a yet unknown bat viral isolate stored there or as a man-made virus?

China has the knowledge and the techniques to manufacture new viruses and animal models to test the ability of those new viruses to infect humans. The question remains – is the Chinese virus, COVID-19, the cause of the global pandemic, a naturally-occurring coronavirus that 'jumped' from bats to humans within the Wuhan Seafood Market as China claims or did it 'leak' from a Chinese laboratory either as a yet unknown bat viral isolate stored there or as a man-made virus? A second, but additionally important question – has China been using politically 'tainted' scientific articles as part of an information campaign to absolve itself of responsibility for the Chinese coronavirus pandemic? That is, to leverage the widely-accepted credibility of science as one element of a propaganda strategy orchestrated by the Chinese Communist Party. Beginning already in January 2020, articles written by Chinese scientists started appearing in the international scientific literature that either rejected outright the possibility that COVID-19 originated in a Chinese laboratory or were peppered with statements reinforcing the Chinese government argues that it originated in the Wuhan Seafood Market, such as one written by a lead scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Zheng-Li Shi. Many of those articles were published by Chinese-controlled scientific journals, had not undergone the normal peer review process or were written by Chinese scientists with no apparent research background in coronaviruses. Yet, occasionally, the likely truth slipped through the cracks. Contrary to the official Chinese government narrative of a late December 2019 onset originating in the Wuhan Seafood Market, a Chinese-authored article published in the prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, states that the first documented case of COVID-19 was at least as early as December 1, 2019, being a hospitalised patient who had not visited the Wuhan Seafood Market. On December 10, 2019, two out of the three coronavirus patients admitted to the hospital had not been in the Wuhan Seafood Market. It was only after December 15, 2019, that a larger percentage of COVID-19 patients were identified as visitors to the Wuhan Seafood Market. A Chinese-authored scientific article written during the first week of February 2020 also directly contradicts the Chinese government narrative that COVID-19 'jumped' from bats to humans within the Wuhan Seafood Market: “The epidemiological investigation of early cases of 2019-nCoV pneumonia showed that many cases had been exposed to the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan. In addition, 33 of the 585 environmental samples from Huanan Seafood Market were positive for 2019-nCoV; however, that market was trading a variety of live animals, such as hedgehog, badger, snake, and bird (turtledoves), probably pangolin, but not bats. Thus, bats are less likely to have direct contact with humans, and direct transmission of the virus from bat to human is unlikely.” An alternative explanation for the origin of the Chinese COVID-19 pandemic is that it resulted from a 'leak' out of a Chinese laboratory. Just such a leak out of a Chinese laboratory occurred in two separate incidents in April 2004 involving researchers infected with the deadly coronavirus SARS-CoV, responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic. In such a scenario, COVID-19, representing one of the hundreds of coronaviruses isolated by the Chinese from various animals, could have similarly leaked out of a Wuhan laboratory either carried by an infected employee who later visited the Wuhan Seafood Market or by an infected experimental laboratory animal that was sold to the market. An especially dangerous possibility is that COVID-19 is man-made. That would involve a bioengineering capability to construct novel viruses by combining parts of two or more viruses (chimera). The infectivity of the novel viruses would then be tested in cell cultures and animal models. China possesses all those capabilities. In 2015, Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina and Zheng-Li Shi from the Wuhan Institute of Virology jointly published a scientific article describing the combination of the receptor-binding spike protein from a newly isolated coronavirus (SHC014) and the “backbone” from SARS-CoV, the coronavirus responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic. It produced a novel virus (chimera SHC014-MA15), which showed “robust viral replication both in vitro [cell cultures] and in vivo [animals],” using models adapted to test human infectivity. Many of the techniques involved in creating coronavirus chimeras are described in detail in a publicly-available 2018 patent (US9884895B2) submitted by Dr. Baric. In addition to possessing the techniques for creating new viruses, China has developed a genetically-engineered mouse model, not only to test the human infectivity of coronaviruses but, through multiple passages, potentially increase its human receptor selectivity. It was recently reported that the Wuhan Institute of Virology received a $3.7 million grant from the US National Institutes of Health to study coronaviruses. Given the well-known propensity for coronaviruses to mutate, both in animals and humans, the introduction of man-made coronaviruses into nature could have catastrophic consequences for human health and the ecosystem. From the perspective of biological warfare, China could develop new viruses for which there are no known treatments or viruses deliberately designed to circumvent them, risks already identified by Dr Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina in 2012. It is now urgent to confront China in order to determine the true origin of COVID-19. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China, coronavirus and the weaponisation of medical science

This too shall pass - albeit with excruciating pain and agony. But as it passes, most of us are at home watching the catastrophe unfold. Many working from home, while at it.

Some of us are still out there working. One of them is me - a TV News Anchor.

Not the most dangerous of jobs, far from it. Yet one that needs to be done, and for which you need to risk stepping outside of the home to tell people, watching you, to never step out.

The truth is this TV news anchor/reporter is a character that society loves to bash. And for good reason. No questions asked.

But strangely the one who gets bashed the most, ends up getting watched the most too.

It's some kind of weird collective catharsis.

But away from the maddening crowd, there's a huge chunk of the population who have simply given up. They simply do not want to watch anybody. They claim to be above it all. They say it's all biased anyway. Yet they reinforce their own biases through their choices in social media activity. And blame the TV News anchors for not being in sync with their views.

It is a vicious cycle.

However, in this apocalyptic moment when even the good old newspaper is out of reach, for many, News TV has become the crucial constant - one of the essential services. 
&nbsp; 
In a country like India where nearly one-third&nbsp;of the population is illiterate, the News channel fills in the information gap.

Disseminating credible information, at the earliest, to as many people as possible is crucial at this hour.

TV sets are all-pervasive in a country where over 20 per cent still live below the poverty line.

Even in English news, where the entire target audience is at least literate, and way above the poverty line, TV News has become the prime source for getting verified information at the earliest.

Yes, for that audience, social media is King and has superseded TV. But then social media is flooded with all kinds of miracle coronavirus cures and vaccines. And panic-inducing conspiracy theories.&nbsp;

Now, there is a slow realisation. If at all there is some kind of kryptonite to help humanity defeat this virus, it will surely be announced on TV. Along with all those gut-wrenching data&nbsp;points about the number of deaths and infections. 
&nbsp; 
So to all those cynics who had written us off, I say, one way or the other, we're your best shot now. It's either us or those Whatsapp forwards. You choose.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

This too shall pass - albeit with excruciating pain and agony. But as it passes, most of us are at home watching the catastrophe unfold. Many working from home, while at it.

This too shall pass - albeit with excruciating pain and agony. But as it passes, most of us are at home watching the catastrophe unfold. Many working from home, while at it. Some of us are still out there working. One of them is me - a TV News Anchor. Not the most dangerous of jobs, far from it. Yet one that needs to be done, and for which you need to risk stepping outside of the home to tell people, watching you, to never step out. The truth is this TV news anchor/reporter is a character that society loves to bash. And for good reason. No questions asked. But strangely the one who gets bashed the most, ends up getting watched the most too. It's some kind of weird collective catharsis. But away from the maddening crowd, there's a huge chunk of the population who have simply given up. They simply do not want to watch anybody. They claim to be above it all. They say it's all biased anyway. Yet they reinforce their own biases through their choices in social media activity. And blame the TV News anchors for not being in sync with their views. It is a vicious cycle. However, in this apocalyptic moment when even the good old newspaper is out of reach, for many, News TV has become the crucial constant - one of the essential services. In a country like India where nearly one-third of the population is illiterate, the News channel fills in the information gap. Disseminating credible information, at the earliest, to as many people as possible is crucial at this hour. TV sets are all-pervasive in a country where over 20 per cent still live below the poverty line. Even in English news, where the entire target audience is at least literate, and way above the poverty line, TV News has become the prime source for getting verified information at the earliest. Yes, for that audience, social media is King and has superseded TV. But then social media is flooded with all kinds of miracle coronavirus cures and vaccines. And panic-inducing conspiracy theories. Now, there is a slow realisation. If at all there is some kind of kryptonite to help humanity defeat this virus, it will surely be announced on TV. Along with all those gut-wrenching data points about the number of deaths and infections. So to all those cynics who had written us off, I say, one way or the other, we're your best shot now. It's either us or those Whatsapp forwards. You choose. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Blog: The Anchorman's corona chronicle

Amidst the uncertainties surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is certain that this global crisis will amplify the gradual shift towards the new world order.

While the signs of the declining influence of the ‘West’ remain no secret, this pandemic has the potential to be the final milestone of that process.

International political and financial institutions formed in 1940s are gradually becoming irrelevant along with slow and steady retreat of ‘globalisation’. The hyper-globalised world has witnessed the inability or ineffectiveness of UN institutions and US-dominated western bloc in responding to global threats - from terrorism to climate change. World Health Organisation’s (WHO) initial response to coronavirus pandemic is just another example.&nbsp;

The relevance of existing international frameworks and power structures is waning. Many of these institutions 
are slowly adopting the role of ‘think-tanks’. We all have witnessed how meetings of international forums from G7 to G20 are increasingly becoming ‘inconclusive’ with little or no real impact. Citizens across the nations are sceptical&nbsp;regarding these institutions’ ability to protect global interests.&nbsp;

It would not be surprising if this pandemic strengthens the calls for wider reforms in the UN system, and particularly in the UN Security Council (UNSC). Reluctance to address these flaws in the system would fuel the shift from international cooperation towards competing and conflicting national interests.

Another major impact of this pandemic is on our understanding of ‘globalisation’. It has exposed risks and vulnerability of existing ‘hyper-globalised’ system. The disruption to global supply chains and its wider impact will make us question the ‘economic value’ of outsourcing, particularly in the manufacturing domain. Preference for localised manufacturing will gain momentum, with global trade increasingly restricted to essential commodities and raw material.&nbsp;

Even the sector like financial systems will see a more regulated flow of ‘foreign’ capital. Threats of new-age colonisation, facilitated by trade, aid, and investments have compounded. Increasing support for nation-state sovereignty and ‘nationalism’ is simply the natural extension of fading ‘globalisation’. The notion of less interdependence for essentials (be it food, medicine or strategic manufacturing) is becoming new normal.

Many have argued that this is not the end of the globalisation, but a shift towards a different kind of globalisation. Professor Mahbubani considers this as an event that 'will only accelerate a change that had already begun: a move away from US-centric globalisation to more China-centric globalisation”. However, it is worthwhile to notice that people’s trust in any kind of ‘globalisation’ is low. ‘America First’ sentiment in the US, Brexit and other inward-looking&nbsp;sentiments across the globe will also resist even China-centric globalisation.

China has attempted to fill the ‘void’ created by retreating the US from global affairs and is visible from its proactive supply of medical aid from Africa and Latin America to Eastern Europe. In continuation of its grand strategy of leveraging economic and military clout along with building credibility, Beijing is also actively seeking support for its system of governance, particularly by showcasing how it has been able to respond in times of global crisis. Yet, it will take decades for Beijing to effectively replace the US in an increasingly multipolar world.

Coronavirus pandemic may perhaps turn out to be the most crucial event since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and probably an event marking the beginning of new world order. 
 
 
(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Amidst the uncertainties surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is certain that this global crisis will amplify the gradual shift towards the new world order. While the signs of the declining influence of the ‘West’ remain no secret, this pandemic has the potential to be the final milestone of that process.

Amidst the uncertainties surrounding the coronavirus pandemic, it is certain that this global crisis will amplify the gradual shift towards the new world order. While the signs of the declining influence of the ‘West’ remain no secret, this pandemic has the potential to be the final milestone of that process. International political and financial institutions formed in 1940s are gradually becoming irrelevant along with slow and steady retreat of ‘globalisation’. The hyper-globalised world has witnessed the inability or ineffectiveness of UN institutions and US-dominated western bloc in responding to global threats - from terrorism to climate change. World Health Organisation’s (WHO) initial response to coronavirus pandemic is just another example. The relevance of existing international frameworks and power structures is waning. Many of these institutions are slowly adopting the role of ‘think-tanks’. We all have witnessed how meetings of international forums from G7 to G20 are increasingly becoming ‘inconclusive’ with little or no real impact. Citizens across the nations are sceptical regarding these institutions’ ability to protect global interests. It would not be surprising if this pandemic strengthens the calls for wider reforms in the UN system, and particularly in the UN Security Council (UNSC). Reluctance to address these flaws in the system would fuel the shift from international cooperation towards competing and conflicting national interests. Another major impact of this pandemic is on our understanding of ‘globalisation’. It has exposed risks and vulnerability of existing ‘hyper-globalised’ system. The disruption to global supply chains and its wider impact will make us question the ‘economic value’ of outsourcing, particularly in the manufacturing domain. Preference for localised manufacturing will gain momentum, with global trade increasingly restricted to essential commodities and raw material. Even the sector like financial systems will see a more regulated flow of ‘foreign’ capital. Threats of new-age colonisation, facilitated by trade, aid, and investments have compounded. Increasing support for nation-state sovereignty and ‘nationalism’ is simply the natural extension of fading ‘globalisation’. The notion of less interdependence for essentials (be it food, medicine or strategic manufacturing) is becoming new normal. Many have argued that this is not the end of the globalisation, but a shift towards a different kind of globalisation. Professor Mahbubani considers this as an event that 'will only accelerate a change that had already begun: a move away from US-centric globalisation to more China-centric globalisation”. However, it is worthwhile to notice that people’s trust in any kind of ‘globalisation’ is low. ‘America First’ sentiment in the US, Brexit and other inward-looking sentiments across the globe will also resist even China-centric globalisation. China has attempted to fill the ‘void’ created by retreating the US from global affairs and is visible from its proactive supply of medical aid from Africa and Latin America to Eastern Europe. In continuation of its grand strategy of leveraging economic and military clout along with building credibility, Beijing is also actively seeking support for its system of governance, particularly by showcasing how it has been able to respond in times of global crisis. Yet, it will take decades for Beijing to effectively replace the US in an increasingly multipolar world. Coronavirus pandemic may perhaps turn out to be the most crucial event since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and probably an event marking the beginning of new world order. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Coronavirus pandemic exposes risks and vulnerability of ‘hyper-globalised’ system

Today the world is witnessing an outbreak of a global pandemic ‘COVID-19’, unseen in the recent past, illustrating the fragile nature of a globalised world. The case of ‘COVID-19’ is more relevant to the Communist Party of China (CPC) than to anyone else. It shows how the sudden and unanticipated outbursts could create global reverberations in a globalised world. That could put the regime in a precarious position, threatening the unwritten social contract—the legitimacy of CPC is driven by its ability to deliver economic prosperity to its Citizens.&nbsp;

Nevertheless, increasing global economic integration has driven China's domestic growth in the past. With global growth set to slow down significantly and COVID-19 set to push the growth to new low, as the early predictions show signs of recession. The rise in ‘uncertainty’ cast a shadow of doubts on the goals set forth by CPC. China has entered into a “New Era”, an era where Xi Jinping, CPC General Secretary, targets to wipe out the extreme rural poverty —through an increase in per capita income and achieve a “moderately well-off society”(  Xiaokang society), by 2021— the hundredth anniversary of CPC formation.&nbsp;

Today, China is more connected to the world than in the past. According to the World Economic Situation and Prospects Report 2020, released by the United Nations Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), China alone contributed 0.75 per cent out of an average 3 per cent of the global growth. These indicators not only reflect the major trends in globalisation, but the extent to which China is connected in a globalised world.&nbsp;

Nevertheless, globalisation is not a linear progression, but a tumultuous ride. Increasingly complex challenges due to globalisation—where the domestic events could have large-scale global repercussions —with ‘phenomena of coronisation’, describing the limits of globalisation. CPC is set for more challenging times in a globalised world.&nbsp;

The world is stepping into a new era of political, social and financial instability driven by COVID-19, with global growth set to decline and alarm bells ringing by IMF on a possible recession soon.

The inability to maintain economic growth and rise in inequality fuelled by low growth, in future, are more immediate threats that could undermine the social contract, leading towards domestic instability. It is not only the domestic challenges that Xi Jinping will face, but political criticism of his policies, handling of the COVID-19 crisis and social instability caused by a slump in the production are the biggest challenges in the decades that CPC is set to face for the time.&nbsp;

While CPC has shown the ability to manage the ‘domestic uncertainties’, by delivering economic results, mastering propaganda and control over information flow. However, these strategies no longer serve the effectiveness for ensuring CPC legitimacy and Xi’s rule to govern. For instance, take the case of mounting discontent among the Chinese citizens in the early stage of the outburst of COVID-19, where the local officials tried desperately to cover-up the ‘truth about the outburst’, fearing the response from the central government. To alleviate growing citizen distrust of the central leadership and Xi’s rule, CPC reacted by sacking the Hubei Party chief Jiang Changling and Wuhan mayor Ma Guoqiang to calm down the public anger thus effectively channelising the growing resentment toward the local officials. &nbsp;

What is more worrying for the CPC at the moment is the echoing of the anger from Chinese people themselves against the Xi’s rule. The death of Li Wenliang, a doctor who alerted the Chinese Local officials during the early stages of outbreak, was forced to silence by the local officials by hiding the truth about the outburst. This event raged widespread discontent amongst the people and netizens alike, for instance, the popular social-network sites Sina Weibo and Wechat platforms surfaced with the lyrics of a song- “Do you hear the people sing” —an popular song which was widely used during the Hong Kong protests in 2019. Denoting public anger and failure of the early response to COVID-19. CPC blocked the ‘anthem of protest’ in mainland China and subsequently, launched a massive propaganda operation to regain the lost legitimacy: The "gratitude education campaign", which eventually backfired against the party for placing its role over the hardship endured by Wuhan residents.&nbsp;

These are the early shoots of symptoms of Xi Jinping losing control over the CPC narrative and threat to his legitimacy to rule. Jude Blanchette, director of China studies program at the Center for Strategic International and Security Studies argues that “CPC has reoriented itself from time to time to meet the changing demands in the society and CPC is more focused on long-term threats than the short term disruptions like the COVID-19 crisis”. Indeed, it is true to some extent that COVID-19 may be a short term disruption rather than a long term threat to the stability of the regime and to Xi Jinping’s rule. First, the mounting discontent is a sporadic outburst of anger, then the sustained and coordinated movement challenging the ‘Party’s mandate to rule’. Second, during the outbreak of SARS in 2002, where CPC faced a similar situation, responded by stifling dissent and placing stringent measures in place.&nbsp;

Nevertheless, it is for certain that COVID-19 will redefine the limits of globalisation and continue to shape Chinese politics in the times to come. It could bring more democratic order, not necessarily democracy in China —that demands more responsibility and accountability of the CPC towards society in general and citizens in particular.&nbsp;

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Today the world is witnessing an outbreak of a global pandemic ‘COVID-19’, unseen in the recent past, illustrating the fragile nature of a globalised world. The case of ‘COVID-19’ is more relevant to the Communist Party of China (CPC) than to anyone else.

Today the world is witnessing an outbreak of a global pandemic ‘COVID-19’, unseen in the recent past, illustrating the fragile nature of a globalised world. The case of ‘COVID-19’ is more relevant to the Communist Party of China (CPC) than to anyone else. It shows how the sudden and unanticipated outbursts could create global reverberations in a globalised world. That could put the regime in a precarious position, threatening the unwritten social contract—the legitimacy of CPC is driven by its ability to deliver economic prosperity to its Citizens. Nevertheless, increasing global economic integration has driven China's domestic growth in the past. With global growth set to slow down significantly and COVID-19 set to push the growth to new low, as the early predictions show signs of recession. The rise in ‘uncertainty’ cast a shadow of doubts on the goals set forth by CPC. China has entered into a “New Era”, an era where Xi Jinping, CPC General Secretary, targets to wipe out the extreme rural poverty —through an increase in per capita income and achieve a “moderately well-off society”(  Xiaokang society), by 2021— the hundredth anniversary of CPC formation. Today, China is more connected to the world than in the past. According to the World Economic Situation and Prospects Report 2020, released by the United Nations Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), China alone contributed 0.75 per cent out of an average 3 per cent of the global growth. These indicators not only reflect the major trends in globalisation, but the extent to which China is connected in a globalised world. Nevertheless, globalisation is not a linear progression, but a tumultuous ride. Increasingly complex challenges due to globalisation—where the domestic events could have large-scale global repercussions —with ‘phenomena of coronisation’, describing the limits of globalisation. CPC is set for more challenging times in a globalised world. The world is stepping into a new era of political, social and financial instability driven by COVID-19, with global growth set to decline and alarm bells ringing by IMF on a possible recession soon. The inability to maintain economic growth and rise in inequality fuelled by low growth, in future, are more immediate threats that could undermine the social contract, leading towards domestic instability. It is not only the domestic challenges that Xi Jinping will face, but political criticism of his policies, handling of the COVID-19 crisis and social instability caused by a slump in the production are the biggest challenges in the decades that CPC is set to face for the time. While CPC has shown the ability to manage the ‘domestic uncertainties’, by delivering economic results, mastering propaganda and control over information flow. However, these strategies no longer serve the effectiveness for ensuring CPC legitimacy and Xi’s rule to govern. For instance, take the case of mounting discontent among the Chinese citizens in the early stage of the outburst of COVID-19, where the local officials tried desperately to cover-up the ‘truth about the outburst’, fearing the response from the central government. To alleviate growing citizen distrust of the central leadership and Xi’s rule, CPC reacted by sacking the Hubei Party chief Jiang Changling and Wuhan mayor Ma Guoqiang to calm down the public anger thus effectively channelising the growing resentment toward the local officials. What is more worrying for the CPC at the moment is the echoing of the anger from Chinese people themselves against the Xi’s rule. The death of Li Wenliang, a doctor who alerted the Chinese Local officials during the early stages of outbreak, was forced to silence by the local officials by hiding the truth about the outburst. This event raged widespread discontent amongst the people and netizens alike, for instance, the popular social-network sites Sina Weibo and Wechat platforms surfaced with the lyrics of a song- “Do you hear the people sing” —an popular song which was widely used during the Hong Kong protests in 2019. Denoting public anger and failure of the early response to COVID-19. CPC blocked the ‘anthem of protest’ in mainland China and subsequently, launched a massive propaganda operation to regain the lost legitimacy: The "gratitude education campaign", which eventually backfired against the party for placing its role over the hardship endured by Wuhan residents. These are the early shoots of symptoms of Xi Jinping losing control over the CPC narrative and threat to his legitimacy to rule. Jude Blanchette, director of China studies program at the Center for Strategic International and Security Studies argues that “CPC has reoriented itself from time to time to meet the changing demands in the society and CPC is more focused on long-term threats than the short term disruptions like the COVID-19 crisis”. Indeed, it is true to some extent that COVID-19 may be a short term disruption rather than a long term threat to the stability of the regime and to Xi Jinping’s rule. First, the mounting discontent is a sporadic outburst of anger, then the sustained and coordinated movement challenging the ‘Party’s mandate to rule’. Second, during the outbreak of SARS in 2002, where CPC faced a similar situation, responded by stifling dissent and placing stringent measures in place. Nevertheless, it is for certain that COVID-19 will redefine the limits of globalisation and continue to shape Chinese politics in the times to come. It could bring more democratic order, not necessarily democracy in China —that demands more responsibility and accountability of the CPC towards society in general and citizens in particular. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Communist Party of China and the crisis of social contract in a globalised world

Lockdowns and, in some regions of the world, quarantines have become a feature of life in a COVID 19 stricken world. One consequence, among others, has been working and/or studying from home through the facility of the internet and other forms of technology. Will this COVID 19 induced temporary arrangement become permanent? Will it redefine work and study as we know it? The answer is both yes and now. Yes, because much of white-collar work will stand transformed in a post-COVID 19 world; in fact, white-collar work was already in the process of change.

The impetus for change, as ever, came from technology and disruptive forces that were forcing a review of the nature and form of work. COVID 19 adds a structural overlay-howsoever ephemeral- to a trend that was already underway. No, because, in aggregate terms, much of the world does not do white-collar work: hundreds of thousands, if not millions, work in farms across the world, some are factory hands, others do jobs that cannot by a stretch be called white collar. So, it is white-collar work and its form and format that is likely to be fundamentally transformed- as might be delivery of education and learning.

The reasons, in the main, pertain to, one, technological disruption, but more fundamentally the drastic lowering of costs by virtue of technology and the attendant network effects. All this will reduce costs drastically and will add to the savings kitties of firms. But, unlike outsourcing in the recent past, online or work from home will not merely be a strategic choice; it might actually be thrust upon companies by conditions that are likely to emerge in a post-COVID-19 world. Because there will be a recession whose magnitude and nature remains unknown at this point in time and because it will take years to reboot international trade and commerce, and because there will be liquidity constraints on firms because of a not so benign interest environment, firms will be forced to trim costs. One obvious way would be to take recourse to the work from home option.

What about universities and the delivery of education? While bricks and mortar facilities will remain essential and pivotal to teaching and instruction at all levels of education, gradually there might be a shift to the online model. Yet, again costs will be important here but more important is likely to be changed dynamic essentially for Western universities that have gone for-profit and internationalised over the past few decades. Online delivery of education can never be a perfect substitute for bricks and mortar variety but structural forces might propel Western universities in this direction. If this comes to pass, there will be radical innovation in the delivery of instruction and education. The forces of competition will ensure that students remain the centre of gravity of education and as such more empowered than in the bricks and mortar model. The nature of pedagogy and curriculum will be different than the traditional one and as internet and smartphone penetration increases across the world, online education will assume greater salience.

This will have salience on the business and operating models of universities. What might emerge is a synthesis of the bricks and mortar classroom model and the online variant.

All in all then the world of work and study is on the cusp of profound structural changes. While some of these changes were already incipient and in the offing, COVID 19 and the conditions that have emerged from it will hasten these changes. These changes will impact both the world of work and that of education which, in turn, will be a bellwether for other changes. But, this does not take into account the poor and the underprivileged of the world. For them, the world will be the same in some senses and radically altered in others. While firms and governments think of and conceive concepts, ideas and practices to adapt to a post-COVID 19 world and make work user friendly, so to speak, the multitude of the poor and the deprived but visibly invisible must not be forgotten. It is to them and their welfare that attention must be devoted to as well.

One effective method, besides safety nets for the underprivileged, would be their skill development. While it may be the shovel and the pickaxe that might have been the first technological tools that humans mastered for survival, now it is the computer and its concomitants that can even determine the potentiality of livelihoods. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Lockdowns and, in some regions of the world, quarantines have become a feature of life in a COVID 19 stricken world. One consequence, among others, has been working and/or studying from home through the facility of the internet and other forms of technology.

Lockdowns and, in some regions of the world, quarantines have become a feature of life in a COVID 19 stricken world. One consequence, among others, has been working and/or studying from home through the facility of the internet and other forms of technology. Will this COVID 19 induced temporary arrangement become permanent? Will it redefine work and study as we know it? The answer is both yes and now. Yes, because much of white-collar work will stand transformed in a post-COVID 19 world; in fact, white-collar work was already in the process of change. The impetus for change, as ever, came from technology and disruptive forces that were forcing a review of the nature and form of work. COVID 19 adds a structural overlay-howsoever ephemeral- to a trend that was already underway. No, because, in aggregate terms, much of the world does not do white-collar work: hundreds of thousands, if not millions, work in farms across the world, some are factory hands, others do jobs that cannot by a stretch be called white collar. So, it is white-collar work and its form and format that is likely to be fundamentally transformed- as might be delivery of education and learning. The reasons, in the main, pertain to, one, technological disruption, but more fundamentally the drastic lowering of costs by virtue of technology and the attendant network effects. All this will reduce costs drastically and will add to the savings kitties of firms. But, unlike outsourcing in the recent past, online or work from home will not merely be a strategic choice; it might actually be thrust upon companies by conditions that are likely to emerge in a post-COVID-19 world. Because there will be a recession whose magnitude and nature remains unknown at this point in time and because it will take years to reboot international trade and commerce, and because there will be liquidity constraints on firms because of a not so benign interest environment, firms will be forced to trim costs. One obvious way would be to take recourse to the work from home option. What about universities and the delivery of education? While bricks and mortar facilities will remain essential and pivotal to teaching and instruction at all levels of education, gradually there might be a shift to the online model. Yet, again costs will be important here but more important is likely to be changed dynamic essentially for Western universities that have gone for-profit and internationalised over the past few decades. Online delivery of education can never be a perfect substitute for bricks and mortar variety but structural forces might propel Western universities in this direction. If this comes to pass, there will be radical innovation in the delivery of instruction and education. The forces of competition will ensure that students remain the centre of gravity of education and as such more empowered than in the bricks and mortar model. The nature of pedagogy and curriculum will be different than the traditional one and as internet and smartphone penetration increases across the world, online education will assume greater salience. This will have salience on the business and operating models of universities. What might emerge is a synthesis of the bricks and mortar classroom model and the online variant. All in all then the world of work and study is on the cusp of profound structural changes. While some of these changes were already incipient and in the offing, COVID 19 and the conditions that have emerged from it will hasten these changes. These changes will impact both the world of work and that of education which, in turn, will be a bellwether for other changes. But, this does not take into account the poor and the underprivileged of the world. For them, the world will be the same in some senses and radically altered in others. While firms and governments think of and conceive concepts, ideas and practices to adapt to a post-COVID 19 world and make work user friendly, so to speak, the multitude of the poor and the deprived but visibly invisible must not be forgotten. It is to them and their welfare that attention must be devoted to as well. One effective method, besides safety nets for the underprivileged, would be their skill development. While it may be the shovel and the pickaxe that might have been the first technological tools that humans mastered for survival, now it is the computer and its concomitants that can even determine the potentiality of livelihoods. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

COVID-19 will change the nature of work and delivery of education. Here’s how

The recent report about People’s Bank of China (PBoC) buying stake in HDFC Limited shouldn’t come as a surprise; off late Chinese investors have been buying up strategically small stakes in Indian companies especially startup’s; the startups need funding and for them, it’s easy to access to much-needed capital. Of late China has emerged one of the fastest-growing sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), especially in the Indian startup ecosystem. According to a recent study by the Brookings Institution, India the biggest challenge is accurately mapping Chinese investments in India due to lack of a comprehensive single point database availability.

India-China Economic and Cultural (ICEC) Council estimates that in the last three years, Chinese and Chinese-origin investors have invested about $3.7 billion (Rs 23,600 crore) into Indian startups. China is also the biggest trading partner of India, and India the largest project-contracting market for Chinese companies in South Asia outside the digital and startup space. China’s investments have traditionally been concentrated in the automobile industry, however, major beneficiaries are around 25 startups, including Truebil, Ixigo, Paytm, Flipkart and MakeMyTrip. According to domain experts, Chinese investors are in for a long haul in comparison to their western counterparts.

Ola, India’s largest cab-hailing service had raised $50 million at a valuation of roughly $4.3 billion from Hong Kong-based Sailing Capital and the China-Eurasian Economic Cooperation Fund (CEECF), as part of the SoftBank-backed startup’s move to raise fresh funds of at least $1 billion. Sailing and CEECF, a state-backed investment fund of China, will hold a combined stake of more than 1 per cent in Ola. According to a report, Chinese investments into India’s startups and digital platforms represent a new take on the tried and tested China plus one model – shifting or expanding operations out of China to benefit from cheaper labour, new markets, and less domestic vulnerability. In three major ways, however, Chinese companies are expanding on China plus one model to enhance their access to Indian markets, and deepen their presence in the burgeoning digital economy.

Currently, multiple Chinese venture capital funds, are considering buying stakes in Indian startups, ranging from those innovating financial and education technology to e-commerce, content, and online classifieds platforms. In May 2018, China’s leading state-run bank, The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, publicised the launch of its first India-dedicated publicly offered investment fund. The Industrial and Commercial Bank Credit Suisse India Market Fund, it will track the following sectors for investments – financial industry, information technology, alternative consumption, energy, essential consumption, raw materials, and healthcare, among others.

India’s startup environment is third largest in the world and it may appear to be exciting times, wherein one of the major global economic players is showing keen interest. But as they say, nothing is altruistic in nature, especially in business. Chinese investments into Indian markets is not a one-off event rather it follows a pattern of similar investments across the globe. Chinese investors have been investing in the US, EU, Germany, Australia, France, Italy, Canada over the past few years, especially in the backdrop of the 2008 global financial crisis these investments have increased in volume. Chinese firms have been trying to buy a stake in western firms, which are involved, especially involved in IT, AI, construction, energy, telecom, utilities etc.

But Chinese investment in the United States after hitting record levels and, are now attracting enhanced official scrutiny for potential national security risks; the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) conducts reviews. The number of such cases has increased from 155 In 2016, the latest year for which data exist, a total of 172 notices were filed for ‘review’ with CFIUS compared to 155 notices submitted in 2008. The United States has blocked several proposed deals by Chinese firms due to security concerns.&nbsp;Similar measures are being put in place by many European Union countries like Germany, Italy, France. Apart from them Canada and Australia have also enhanced scrutiny of Chinese investments in their country especially in their critical infrastructure sectors which have national security implications.

It is an understandable response by the US—and other like-minded states—is to intensify its scrutiny of the national security risks such inbound transactions might pose domestically, particularly in sectors that even the most advanced of countries consider ‘sensitive’. Some of the industries that used to not be considered ‘sensitive’ have begun to be treated so as it becomes more apparent that there is the involvement of a foreign government with ulterior objectives that owns or controls the entity pursuing the investment. Problem is that an increasing number of these foreign investors are from nations where there is significant involvement in business decisions by governments whose agendas are perceived to go way beyond commercial objectives.

In India’s case, we need to become cautious to such means of stealth investment in our economy. It may be recalled that Chinese in early 2000s started investing in media companies across the continent as part of it wider public engagement exercise by investing gradually and raising stakes in them, now they are using that to influence what gets published in the media. Recently, there were reports coming out of Africa that media houses having Chinese stakeholders have begun censuring stories which aren’t favourable to them.&nbsp;The recent global debate with respect to Huawei has raised genuine concerns with respect to national security infrastructure, corporate espionage and individual privacy. Chinese firms have had a dubious track record when it to honouring proprietary technology and information; hardware-based hacking of big US corporations had highlighted the concerns with the near Chinese monopoly on global supply chains.

India needs to be vigilant, as a country, about such investments, in our startups as well as other institutions, as they will be critical to the economic development of the country in future, especially when startups will mature to the MSMEs. The need of the hour is to a have system in place which acts as a screening authority for such investment proposals i.e. Know Your Investor (KYI), whose database needs to be maintained and published by the SEBI. India’s tryst with its bureaucracy has not been business-friendly, but we need to ensure a balance in order to make the startups thrive as well as protect our national security interests as well as individual privacy of Indian users.

Chinese have been practising salami-slicing strategy in the geopolitical space, it can be now be said that they have been practising the same in geo-economic space as well.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The recent report about People’s Bank of China (PBoC) buying stake in HDFC Limited shouldn’t come as a surprise; off late Chinese investors have been buying up strategically small stakes in Indian companies especially startup’s; the startups need funding and for them, it’s easy to access to much-needed capital.

The recent report about People’s Bank of China (PBoC) buying stake in HDFC Limited shouldn’t come as a surprise; off late Chinese investors have been buying up strategically small stakes in Indian companies especially startup’s; the startups need funding and for them, it’s easy to access to much-needed capital. Of late China has emerged one of the fastest-growing sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), especially in the Indian startup ecosystem. According to a recent study by the Brookings Institution, India the biggest challenge is accurately mapping Chinese investments in India due to lack of a comprehensive single point database availability. India-China Economic and Cultural (ICEC) Council estimates that in the last three years, Chinese and Chinese-origin investors have invested about $3.7 billion (Rs 23,600 crore) into Indian startups. China is also the biggest trading partner of India, and India the largest project-contracting market for Chinese companies in South Asia outside the digital and startup space. China’s investments have traditionally been concentrated in the automobile industry, however, major beneficiaries are around 25 startups, including Truebil, Ixigo, Paytm, Flipkart and MakeMyTrip. According to domain experts, Chinese investors are in for a long haul in comparison to their western counterparts. Ola, India’s largest cab-hailing service had raised $50 million at a valuation of roughly $4.3 billion from Hong Kong-based Sailing Capital and the China-Eurasian Economic Cooperation Fund (CEECF), as part of the SoftBank-backed startup’s move to raise fresh funds of at least $1 billion. Sailing and CEECF, a state-backed investment fund of China, will hold a combined stake of more than 1 per cent in Ola. According to a report, Chinese investments into India’s startups and digital platforms represent a new take on the tried and tested China plus one model – shifting or expanding operations out of China to benefit from cheaper labour, new markets, and less domestic vulnerability. In three major ways, however, Chinese companies are expanding on China plus one model to enhance their access to Indian markets, and deepen their presence in the burgeoning digital economy. Currently, multiple Chinese venture capital funds, are considering buying stakes in Indian startups, ranging from those innovating financial and education technology to e-commerce, content, and online classifieds platforms. In May 2018, China’s leading state-run bank, The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, publicised the launch of its first India-dedicated publicly offered investment fund. The Industrial and Commercial Bank Credit Suisse India Market Fund, it will track the following sectors for investments – financial industry, information technology, alternative consumption, energy, essential consumption, raw materials, and healthcare, among others. India’s startup environment is third largest in the world and it may appear to be exciting times, wherein one of the major global economic players is showing keen interest. But as they say, nothing is altruistic in nature, especially in business. Chinese investments into Indian markets is not a one-off event rather it follows a pattern of similar investments across the globe. Chinese investors have been investing in the US, EU, Germany, Australia, France, Italy, Canada over the past few years, especially in the backdrop of the 2008 global financial crisis these investments have increased in volume. Chinese firms have been trying to buy a stake in western firms, which are involved, especially involved in IT, AI, construction, energy, telecom, utilities etc. But Chinese investment in the United States after hitting record levels and, are now attracting enhanced official scrutiny for potential national security risks; the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) conducts reviews. The number of such cases has increased from 155 In 2016, the latest year for which data exist, a total of 172 notices were filed for ‘review’ with CFIUS compared to 155 notices submitted in 2008. The United States has blocked several proposed deals by Chinese firms due to security concerns. Similar measures are being put in place by many European Union countries like Germany, Italy, France. Apart from them Canada and Australia have also enhanced scrutiny of Chinese investments in their country especially in their critical infrastructure sectors which have national security implications. It is an understandable response by the US—and other like-minded states—is to intensify its scrutiny of the national security risks such inbound transactions might pose domestically, particularly in sectors that even the most advanced of countries consider ‘sensitive’. Some of the industries that used to not be considered ‘sensitive’ have begun to be treated so as it becomes more apparent that there is the involvement of a foreign government with ulterior objectives that owns or controls the entity pursuing the investment. Problem is that an increasing number of these foreign investors are from nations where there is significant involvement in business decisions by governments whose agendas are perceived to go way beyond commercial objectives. In India’s case, we need to become cautious to such means of stealth investment in our economy. It may be recalled that Chinese in early 2000s started investing in media companies across the continent as part of it wider public engagement exercise by investing gradually and raising stakes in them, now they are using that to influence what gets published in the media. Recently, there were reports coming out of Africa that media houses having Chinese stakeholders have begun censuring stories which aren’t favourable to them. The recent global debate with respect to Huawei has raised genuine concerns with respect to national security infrastructure, corporate espionage and individual privacy. Chinese firms have had a dubious track record when it to honouring proprietary technology and information; hardware-based hacking of big US corporations had highlighted the concerns with the near Chinese monopoly on global supply chains. India needs to be vigilant, as a country, about such investments, in our startups as well as other institutions, as they will be critical to the economic development of the country in future, especially when startups will mature to the MSMEs. The need of the hour is to a have system in place which acts as a screening authority for such investment proposals i.e. Know Your Investor (KYI), whose database needs to be maintained and published by the SEBI. India’s tryst with its bureaucracy has not been business-friendly, but we need to ensure a balance in order to make the startups thrive as well as protect our national security interests as well as individual privacy of Indian users. Chinese have been practising salami-slicing strategy in the geopolitical space, it can be now be said that they have been practising the same in geo-economic space as well. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Explained: Why Chinese firms are exploring investment opportunities in India

Many scholars have been arguing and presenting a case against the present political dispensation of the People’s Republic of China in light of the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. The civil liability of the Chinese government is being discussed and debated in the intellectual circles with lawsuits being filed in USA and Italy seeking damages. There is also the prospect of dragging China to the International Court of Justice and seek reparations. But is the question just about monetary compensation? Surely, the death of over 1,19,000 people can’t be just brought to justice by paying compensation of billions of dollars by China. If the act done by the Chinese dispensation falls within the contours of a criminal act under the International Criminal Law, then the all the culprits in the Chinese regime need to face trial or at least efforts should be made by nation-states in that direction.&nbsp;

The cardinal principle of any criminal law is that an act must be made criminal before its commission. International criminal law recognises certain acts by individuals that would be considered ‘international crime’. International crime does not mean crime between nationals of two or more different, independent and sovereign citizens. It means a crime which is proscribed by international legal order, of which international criminal law is an important component. International legal order recognises only certain acts, which will be considered as an international crime, and consequently, it would entail individual criminal responsibility. The current framework of the International Criminal Law flows from the Rome Statute under which the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been set up. The Rome Statute identifies 4 crimes under Article 5 within the jurisdiction of the ICC (a) the crime of genocide; (b) crimes against humanity; (c) war crimes; (d) the crime of aggression. The Chinese political dispensation, headed by its President,&nbsp;should be held criminally liable for committing international crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.&nbsp;

The Crime against humanity which is defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute as widespread or systematic attack with the connivance of governmental apparatus against the civilian population is a violation of the current international criminal law under which the Chinese regime can be held to be culpable. The widespread nature of the attack of the novel coronavirus is beyond doubt as it has spread to about 209 countries and territories and has infected around 15,00,000 people. &nbsp;The systematic attack of the virus can be understood from the actions of the Chinese regime in handling the COVID-19 virus. Chinese political architecture is highly centralised. It is infamous for hiding the truth and does not have an independent free press. The criminality of the Chinese regime emanates from the fact that the administration downplayed the catastrophic nature of the COVID-19 till February 2020 and also maliciously misguided and misinformed the WHO about the spread of the virus from human to human until January 2020. 
 
As a result of which, WHO issued its advisory to the international community at a very belated stage and induced the damage to be done. The Chinese political dispensation, under&nbsp;President Xi, knew the nature and lethality of the virus and yet they let lose it on the international community. When a whistleblower tried to communicate it to Chinese people and the international community about the novel coronavirus, he was silenced and he perished in mysterious circumstances while treating the patients of virus. The act of silencing the whistleblower was aiding and abetting the crime and contribution in the commission of the crime.&nbsp;

Article 8 of the Rome Statute provides for definition the crime of aggression as planning by a person in control of affairs of a country which would constitute a violation of the UN Charter. An international crime of aggression is nothing but a violation of Article2(4) of the UN Charter which proscribes the use of force by States in their in international relations. Use of force for the purpose of the international crime of aggression is the use of armed force as resolved by general Assembly Resolution 3314 which was adopted by Review Conference of Rome Statute on June 11, 2010. The question is how a spread of the deadly virus by the name of COVID-19 is aggression? In other words, could a virus be considered as use of armed force? &nbsp;Use of armed force would mean the use of violence that results in the death of humans and/or loss of property. 
 
The number of death that COVID-19 has caused, over a period of three months, has crossed 1,19,000. The means and methods of warfare or belligerency in the modern day is not restricted to merely mechanised weapons, it has transformed to war from space and war from biological weapons. COVID-19 certainly qualifies to be a biological weapon. The means and methods of warfare are governed by the Additional Protocol 1 of 1977 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and it renders the use of biological weapons as illegal. The unleashing of this virus could have been intentional or criminal neglect, it could also have been with the knowledge of the highest political authority in China. There is little doubt that the use of coronavirus is certainly use of force, and therefore, aggression.&nbsp;

As China is not a party to the Rome Statute, the only way in which Chinese regime responsible for this crime can be brought to the ICC is when it voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the ICC or the matter is referred to the ICC by the United Nations Security Council by invoking its power under Art.13 of the Rome Statute. The People’s Republic of China being a global power, submitting itself to the ICC is an absolute impossibility and with it being a permanent member of the Security Council the matter being referred to the ICC is also ruled out due to the veto power it enjoys. In that case, the resort could be taken to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377A, the “Uniting for Peace” resolution which states that in case the UN Security Council due to lack of unanimity amongst its five members is not able to act to maintain international peace and security, the General Assembly may issue necessary recommendations.&nbsp; &nbsp;

The Chinese regime must be held accountable and the rule of law should prevail, so as to affirm&nbsp;faith of the nation-states in the rule-based international world order. It is about time that the international legal order in general and international criminal order, in particular, should assert itself to bring criminals of the Chinese regime to justice. &nbsp;

(The article is co-authored by Abhishek Mishra. Abhishek&nbsp;is currently a PhD fellow at Albrecht Mendelssohn Bartholdy Graduate School of Law, University of Hamburg, Germany) 
&nbsp; 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Many scholars have been arguing and presenting a case against the present political dispensation of the People’s Republic of China in light of the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic.

Many scholars have been arguing and presenting a case against the present political dispensation of the People’s Republic of China in light of the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. The civil liability of the Chinese government is being discussed and debated in the intellectual circles with lawsuits being filed in USA and Italy seeking damages. There is also the prospect of dragging China to the International Court of Justice and seek reparations. But is the question just about monetary compensation? Surely, the death of over 1,19,000 people can’t be just brought to justice by paying compensation of billions of dollars by China. If the act done by the Chinese dispensation falls within the contours of a criminal act under the International Criminal Law, then the all the culprits in the Chinese regime need to face trial or at least efforts should be made by nation-states in that direction. The cardinal principle of any criminal law is that an act must be made criminal before its commission. International criminal law recognises certain acts by individuals that would be considered ‘international crime’. International crime does not mean crime between nationals of two or more different, independent and sovereign citizens. It means a crime which is proscribed by international legal order, of which international criminal law is an important component. International legal order recognises only certain acts, which will be considered as an international crime, and consequently, it would entail individual criminal responsibility. The current framework of the International Criminal Law flows from the Rome Statute under which the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been set up. The Rome Statute identifies 4 crimes under Article 5 within the jurisdiction of the ICC (a) the crime of genocide; (b) crimes against humanity; (c) war crimes; (d) the crime of aggression. The Chinese political dispensation, headed by its President, should be held criminally liable for committing international crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression. The Crime against humanity which is defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute as widespread or systematic attack with the connivance of governmental apparatus against the civilian population is a violation of the current international criminal law under which the Chinese regime can be held to be culpable. The widespread nature of the attack of the novel coronavirus is beyond doubt as it has spread to about 209 countries and territories and has infected around 15,00,000 people. The systematic attack of the virus can be understood from the actions of the Chinese regime in handling the COVID-19 virus. Chinese political architecture is highly centralised. It is infamous for hiding the truth and does not have an independent free press. The criminality of the Chinese regime emanates from the fact that the administration downplayed the catastrophic nature of the COVID-19 till February 2020 and also maliciously misguided and misinformed the WHO about the spread of the virus from human to human until January 2020. As a result of which, WHO issued its advisory to the international community at a very belated stage and induced the damage to be done. The Chinese political dispensation, under President Xi, knew the nature and lethality of the virus and yet they let lose it on the international community. When a whistleblower tried to communicate it to Chinese people and the international community about the novel coronavirus, he was silenced and he perished in mysterious circumstances while treating the patients of virus. The act of silencing the whistleblower was aiding and abetting the crime and contribution in the commission of the crime. Article 8 of the Rome Statute provides for definition the crime of aggression as planning by a person in control of affairs of a country which would constitute a violation of the UN Charter. An international crime of aggression is nothing but a violation of Article2(4) of the UN Charter which proscribes the use of force by States in their in international relations. Use of force for the purpose of the international crime of aggression is the use of armed force as resolved by general Assembly Resolution 3314 which was adopted by Review Conference of Rome Statute on June 11, 2010. The question is how a spread of the deadly virus by the name of COVID-19 is aggression? In other words, could a virus be considered as use of armed force? Use of armed force would mean the use of violence that results in the death of humans and/or loss of property. The number of death that COVID-19 has caused, over a period of three months, has crossed 1,19,000. The means and methods of warfare or belligerency in the modern day is not restricted to merely mechanised weapons, it has transformed to war from space and war from biological weapons. COVID-19 certainly qualifies to be a biological weapon. The means and methods of warfare are governed by the Additional Protocol 1 of 1977 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and it renders the use of biological weapons as illegal. The unleashing of this virus could have been intentional or criminal neglect, it could also have been with the knowledge of the highest political authority in China. There is little doubt that the use of coronavirus is certainly use of force, and therefore, aggression. As China is not a party to the Rome Statute, the only way in which Chinese regime responsible for this crime can be brought to the ICC is when it voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the ICC or the matter is referred to the ICC by the United Nations Security Council by invoking its power under Art.13 of the Rome Statute. The People’s Republic of China being a global power, submitting itself to the ICC is an absolute impossibility and with it being a permanent member of the Security Council the matter being referred to the ICC is also ruled out due to the veto power it enjoys. In that case, the resort could be taken to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377A, the “Uniting for Peace” resolution which states that in case the UN Security Council due to lack of unanimity amongst its five members is not able to act to maintain international peace and security, the General Assembly may issue necessary recommendations. The Chinese regime must be held accountable and the rule of law should prevail, so as to affirm faith of the nation-states in the rule-based international world order. It is about time that the international legal order in general and international criminal order, in particular, should assert itself to bring criminals of the Chinese regime to justice. (The article is co-authored by Abhishek Mishra. Abhishek is currently a PhD fellow at Albrecht Mendelssohn Bartholdy Graduate School of Law, University of Hamburg, Germany) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Here's how China can be held legally accountable for coronavirus coverup

What is a safe distance that one should follow for social distancing in times of COVID-19? A recent study tried to find the answer to the question, taking the potential aerodynamic effects into account. The aerodynamic effects are introduced by person movement, such as walking fast, running and cycling. The preprint of the paper ‘Towards aerodynamically equivalent COVID19 1.5 meters&nbsp;social distancing for walking and running’, is a detailed study which investigates whether a first-person moving nearby a second person at 1.5 metres distance or beyond could cause droplet transfer to this second person. 
 
<img alt="Social Distancing" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="70b367a2-968a-4f3f-aca2-3b2e28456eef" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Capture%201.PNG" />

Previous research has shown that the spread of COVID-19 virus can occur effectively through saliva, often in the form of micro-droplets. When a person sneezes, coughs or even exhales, he or she is emitting small droplets – often too small to see with the naked eye – that can carry the virus. The receiving persons can be infected by inhaling these droplets, or by getting these droplets on their hands and then touching their face. That is why during the COVID-19 crisis, countries worldwide have declared a “social distance” of about 1.5 metres to be kept between individuals. This is considered important and effective because it is expected that most of the droplets indeed fall and reach the floor and/or evaporate before having travelled a distance of 1.5 metres. 
 
<img alt="Social Distancing" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="de647f1d-ec12-4e98-bd87-fd124ba8b88c" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Capture%202.PNG" />

The typical social distancing rules applied by most of the countries range within 1-2 meters between two persons. However, this social distance has been defined for persons that are standing still. It does not take into account when you go for a walk, bike ride or run. The aerodynamic effects introduced by person movement leaves the trail runner at high risk. When someone during a run breathes, sneezes or coughs, those particles stay behind in the air. The person running behind you in the so-called slip-stream goes through this cloud of droplets.

As mentioned earlier, it is often assumed that most of the respiratory droplets fall and reach the floor and/or evaporate before having travelled a distance of 1.5 metres, which is what has inspired the COVID-19 social distance of 1.5 metres. However, micro-droplets have very little inertia and when two people are walking or running in each other’s vicinity, even at 1.5 metres distance, due to the airflow patterns and people movements, these micro-droplets could be transferred from person A to person B due to the airflow patterns generated by the persons’ movement. 
 
<img alt="Social distancing" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3fe6e0bf-08d2-46bc-a479-bc66003fec8c" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/1_xR4JuvsEr8WFfBJM1qjyvg.jpeg" />

The researchers concluded that the exposure increases as the distance between leading and trailing person decreases. This suggests a safe distance for social distancing while walking, running or bike riding can be achieved, either by avoiding to run, walk or ride in the slipstream of the leading person and maintaining the 1.5 m distance or by keeping larger social distances, where the distance increases with the walking or running speed. The study however strongly suggests the best way is to stay out of the slipstream of the leading person.

According to the results of the research, it is advised that for walking, a distance of about 5 metres leads to no droplets reaching the trailing walker. For running and slow biking, this distance should be at least 10 metres. Similarly, for hard biking, the distance should be at least 20 meters. Also, when passing someone it is advised to already be in different lane at a considerable distance, e.g. 20 meters for biking. 
&nbsp;

What is a safe distance that one should follow for social distancing in times of COVID-19? A recent study tried to find the answer to the question, taking the potential aerodynamic effects into account.

What is a safe distance that one should follow for social distancing in times of COVID-19? A recent study tried to find the answer to the question, taking the potential aerodynamic effects into account. The aerodynamic effects are introduced by person movement, such as walking fast, running and cycling. The preprint of the paper ‘Towards aerodynamically equivalent COVID19 1.5 meters social distancing for walking and running’, is a detailed study which investigates whether a first-person moving nearby a second person at 1.5 metres distance or beyond could cause droplet transfer to this second person. Previous research has shown that the spread of COVID-19 virus can occur effectively through saliva, often in the form of micro-droplets. When a person sneezes, coughs or even exhales, he or she is emitting small droplets – often too small to see with the naked eye – that can carry the virus. The receiving persons can be infected by inhaling these droplets, or by getting these droplets on their hands and then touching their face. That is why during the COVID-19 crisis, countries worldwide have declared a “social distance” of about 1.5 metres to be kept between individuals. This is considered important and effective because it is expected that most of the droplets indeed fall and reach the floor and/or evaporate before having travelled a distance of 1.5 metres. The typical social distancing rules applied by most of the countries range within 1-2 meters between two persons. However, this social distance has been defined for persons that are standing still. It does not take into account when you go for a walk, bike ride or run. The aerodynamic effects introduced by person movement leaves the trail runner at high risk. When someone during a run breathes, sneezes or coughs, those particles stay behind in the air. The person running behind you in the so-called slip-stream goes through this cloud of droplets. As mentioned earlier, it is often assumed that most of the respiratory droplets fall and reach the floor and/or evaporate before having travelled a distance of 1.5 metres, which is what has inspired the COVID-19 social distance of 1.5 metres. However, micro-droplets have very little inertia and when two people are walking or running in each other’s vicinity, even at 1.5 metres distance, due to the airflow patterns and people movements, these micro-droplets could be transferred from person A to person B due to the airflow patterns generated by the persons’ movement. The researchers concluded that the exposure increases as the distance between leading and trailing person decreases. This suggests a safe distance for social distancing while walking, running or bike riding can be achieved, either by avoiding to run, walk or ride in the slipstream of the leading person and maintaining the 1.5 m distance or by keeping larger social distances, where the distance increases with the walking or running speed. The study however strongly suggests the best way is to stay out of the slipstream of the leading person. According to the results of the research, it is advised that for walking, a distance of about 5 metres leads to no droplets reaching the trailing walker. For running and slow biking, this distance should be at least 10 metres. Similarly, for hard biking, the distance should be at least 20 meters. Also, when passing someone it is advised to already be in different lane at a considerable distance, e.g. 20 meters for biking.

COVID-19: Distance of 1.5 meters is not enough for social distancing measures, study reveals

The coronavirus is the turning point of the new millennium, something that’s already made it to the annals of history. After all, it's not everyday one witnesses a global shutdown. While the optimistic upshot will be a colossal upscaling of the healthcare system, the current financial crisis is only deepening the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

Now the question we all should be asking is, 'Who benefits from this crisis?' Chances are that somebody does. The virus has cleverly created a myopic understanding of the calamity whereby the masses are focused on choosing life over death, ignorant of the upcoming ramifications even if they survive.

It was on October 18, 2019, at the World Economic Forum that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in partnership with The Johns Hopkins Centre For Health Security, hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise in New York. Bill Gates’ foresight to predict this pandemic way back in 2015 has struck the curiosity of sceptics like me. The billionaire philanthropist’s Ted Talks sermon is testimony to the point I’m making. The man has already pledged funding for vaccinations. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is giving $5 million to support the response in China, the virus-host. To be distributed among private and public partners that the organisation already works with, the Gates’ funding will reach China’s National Health Commission, Chinese Centre For Disease Control and Prevention and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Why would a business magnate invest millions in fighting an outbreak without any returns in the offing? Beware, because Gates, the psychic, has already warned of similar pandemics every two decades.

That Beijing has already gained a geopolitical edge over the west as it battles to contain COVID-19 is no secret. A big shot in the arm is the dragon’s massive Belt and Road initiative but the recent developments have raised the stakes higher. Not only is China leading with medical supplies to hard-hit countries in Europe and Africa, but it is also buying shares in banks across Asia. Case in point is The People’s Bank Of China buying HDFC's 1.75 crore shares worth 1.01 per cent of the shareholding.

 
Is COVID-19 a bioweapon? I personally believe that it's beyond just a zoonotic disease. As much as we want to support the idea of vegetarianism and lambaste ecological destruction as the cause for microbes jumping on to humans from animals, nobody can deny that consumption of wild meat is an ancient practice. Whether this virus was manufactured at a Wuhan lab or got leaked and reached Wuhan's wet market remains unanswered. But, the role of the Harvard Professor, Charles Leiber, allegedly setting up a laboratory is again questionable and not just a “coincidence”.

Analysts from the Eurasia group have already rated the current scenario as “the first international crisis" where China is actively taking a global leadership role and it stands in particular contrast to the US, which has disdained international cooperation and invested more political capital in criticising Beijing for its role in allowing the outbreak to spread.”

And perhaps it is the western void in multilateral institutions like the WHO that’s now being filled by China. Critics have questioned WHO’s unjustifiably delayed response in declaring the outbreak as a global pandemic in March when the virus had already surfaced in December 2019 in Wuhan. Moving into a new field- Health, Beijing has found a willing partner in the WHO.

After several denials and coverups, China successfully contained the COVID-19 but exported it to the world, now donning the new role of a public health superpower.

FYI, the WHO is dependent on China for funding. And, it was only when its Director-General, Dr Tedros Ghebreyesus, met with Xi Jinping in the end of January that WHO’s international experts were allowed access to China. Until then information by China was merely parroted by the international health body. Taiwan’s warnings were left unheard. Considering Taiwan’s estranged relationship with the dragon, it's not surprising that the country has no representation in a body that’s ironically part of the United Nations.

Termed as a “whacko” conspiracy theorist by many, David Icke talks about the 1 per cent at the top of the pyramid controlling the global economy and manufacturing total collapse of the current world economic system. He does throw some for food for thought though; What will this unprecedented financial disruption lead to?

Think and be ahead of the curve.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The coronavirus is the turning point of the new millennium, something that’s already made it to the annals of history. After all, it's not everyday one witnesses a global shutdown.

The coronavirus is the turning point of the new millennium, something that’s already made it to the annals of history. After all, it's not everyday one witnesses a global shutdown. While the optimistic upshot will be a colossal upscaling of the healthcare system, the current financial crisis is only deepening the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Now the question we all should be asking is, 'Who benefits from this crisis?' Chances are that somebody does. The virus has cleverly created a myopic understanding of the calamity whereby the masses are focused on choosing life over death, ignorant of the upcoming ramifications even if they survive. It was on October 18, 2019, at the World Economic Forum that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in partnership with The Johns Hopkins Centre For Health Security, hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise in New York. Bill Gates’ foresight to predict this pandemic way back in 2015 has struck the curiosity of sceptics like me. The billionaire philanthropist’s Ted Talks sermon is testimony to the point I’m making. The man has already pledged funding for vaccinations. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is giving $5 million to support the response in China, the virus-host. To be distributed among private and public partners that the organisation already works with, the Gates’ funding will reach China’s National Health Commission, Chinese Centre For Disease Control and Prevention and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Why would a business magnate invest millions in fighting an outbreak without any returns in the offing? Beware, because Gates, the psychic, has already warned of similar pandemics every two decades. That Beijing has already gained a geopolitical edge over the west as it battles to contain COVID-19 is no secret. A big shot in the arm is the dragon’s massive Belt and Road initiative but the recent developments have raised the stakes higher. Not only is China leading with medical supplies to hard-hit countries in Europe and Africa, but it is also buying shares in banks across Asia. Case in point is The People’s Bank Of China buying HDFC's 1.75 crore shares worth 1.01 per cent of the shareholding. Is COVID-19 a bioweapon? I personally believe that it's beyond just a zoonotic disease. As much as we want to support the idea of vegetarianism and lambaste ecological destruction as the cause for microbes jumping on to humans from animals, nobody can deny that consumption of wild meat is an ancient practice. Whether this virus was manufactured at a Wuhan lab or got leaked and reached Wuhan's wet market remains unanswered. But, the role of the Harvard Professor, Charles Leiber, allegedly setting up a laboratory is again questionable and not just a “coincidence”. Analysts from the Eurasia group have already rated the current scenario as “the first international crisis" where China is actively taking a global leadership role and it stands in particular contrast to the US, which has disdained international cooperation and invested more political capital in criticising Beijing for its role in allowing the outbreak to spread.” And perhaps it is the western void in multilateral institutions like the WHO that’s now being filled by China. Critics have questioned WHO’s unjustifiably delayed response in declaring the outbreak as a global pandemic in March when the virus had already surfaced in December 2019 in Wuhan. Moving into a new field- Health, Beijing has found a willing partner in the WHO. After several denials and coverups, China successfully contained the COVID-19 but exported it to the world, now donning the new role of a public health superpower. FYI, the WHO is dependent on China for funding. And, it was only when its Director-General, Dr Tedros Ghebreyesus, met with Xi Jinping in the end of January that WHO’s international experts were allowed access to China. Until then information by China was merely parroted by the international health body. Taiwan’s warnings were left unheard. Considering Taiwan’s estranged relationship with the dragon, it's not surprising that the country has no representation in a body that’s ironically part of the United Nations. Termed as a “whacko” conspiracy theorist by many, David Icke talks about the 1 per cent at the top of the pyramid controlling the global economy and manufacturing total collapse of the current world economic system. He does throw some for food for thought though; What will this unprecedented financial disruption lead to? Think and be ahead of the curve. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

COVID-19: A crisis manufactured?

World Health Organisation (WHO), a wing of the United Nations Organisation (UN), was established with the specific mandate of monitoring the health conditions of the world community, providing approvals for several laboratories/testing agencies across the world relating to medical procedures, and appraising the world as and when necessary about any development that would impact the health conditions.

WHO is an organisation well funded by several countries, with the top funders being the USA and China. WHO has several offices in a number of countries with facilities and team to monitor the regional conditions and certainly, the organisation does not lack adequate facilities or funds to carry out it’s mandated tasks.&nbsp;

On several occasions, WHO has monitored the conditions in individual regions with the permission of the governments, if warranted by any local developments relating to health issues or disease occurrence.&nbsp;

Widespread criticism :&nbsp;

At present, WHO is facing widespread criticism with regard to its role&nbsp;in handling the global COVID-19 crisis. &nbsp;

While US President Donald Trump has led the criticism, the fact is that several countries, except China and Russia, broadly agree with the views of President Trump, though some of the countries may be remaining silent for their own reasons. &nbsp;

Many people across the world are of the view that WHO has failed in its duty to warn the world at the right time about the impending disaster due to COVID 19, when it occurred in China in November 2019.

In the absence of warning from WHO, many countries thought that COVID 19 would be confined to China and there will be little impact on the rest of the world. &nbsp;

Caught in controversy :&nbsp;

President Trump has said that Director-General of WHO,&nbsp;Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has favoured China by not highlighting the seriousness of COVID 19 at the right time, when it originated in Wuhan, to protect the reputation of China. A few other countries including Taiwan have echoed the view. &nbsp;

In November 2019, when COVID19 occurred in China, there were a lot of reports in the world media about the happening in Wuhan. China, however, conspicuously remained silent and did not share the information with the rest of the world. China deliberately concealed the information and did not permit any overseas visitors to Wuhan and even expelled some of the foreign correspondents.&nbsp;

When the world was aware of the Wuhan virus crisis, it is shocking that WHO did not insist that its team should visit Wuhan area, see the conditions and take a stand about the serious nature of the crisis.&nbsp;

It is also asked by several people that while WHO did not care to visit Wuhan site in November/December 2019, would the organisation have reacted in the same way if COVID-19 or similar type of health crisis had&nbsp;happened in any other country like India, Sri Lanka or Kenya?

Rejoinders not based on facts and figures :&nbsp;

What is even more shocking is that as the world is now suffering due to COVID 19 and criticisms are made against WHO, its Director-General is sending rejoinders refuting the criticisms to the President of the USA, who is the major contributor of funds to &nbsp;WHO&nbsp;and have the right to ask questions about its level of efficiency. &nbsp;

Instead of explaining in a constructive way by sending the team from WHO to the USA and other criticising countries to explain as to what it has done and what it has not done, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is accusing US President of politicising this issue and alleging of racial discrimination by the Taiwanese government.

This has brought down the level of global discussions on COVID 19 to abysmally low level. The present Director-General of WHO is trying to twist the issues without straightaway answering the criticisms backed by facts and figures.&nbsp;

Stand of Secretary-General of the UN:

Even the Secretary-General of UN, António Guterres, has simply supported the WHO and it appears that he has not cared to investigate the matter and the criticisms levelled against WHO with any level of seriousness, particularly in a situation where thousands of human lives have been lost due to COVID 19 crisis and more people are dying every day.&nbsp;

While WHO is primarily responsible for the present depressing world scenario, which appears to be due to the inefficiency and failure of WHO to forewarn the world at the right time, &nbsp;one wonders as to what is the responsibility of &nbsp;António Guterres and why he has failed to monitor and supervise the performance of WHO.&nbsp;

The statement of UN Secretary-General asking all the countries to stay together in fighting the COVID 19 crisis, is likely to be viewed with scepticism in the present scenario. This paper statement does not have much value in the present situation when WHO /UN&nbsp;remain unrepentant about its shortcomings.&nbsp;

Revamp WHO :&nbsp;

The revamping of WHO is a matter of absolute necessity now, to ensure that the future of health conditions of the world community would be adequately and efficiently monitored.&nbsp;

It is clearly evident that there is increasing feeling amongst many sections of a world community that the present leadership of WHO&nbsp;should pay the price for its failure and the top office-bearers in WHO should quit immediately owning responsibility for the failure so that WHO&nbsp;can be revamped, which has become a matter of absolute necessity now. &nbsp;

&nbsp; 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

World Health Organisation (WHO), a wing of the United Nations Organisation (UN), was established with the specific mandate of monitoring the health conditions of the world community, providing approvals for several laboratories/testing agencies across the world relating to medical procedures, and appraising the world as and when necessary about any development that would impact the health conditions.

World Health Organisation (WHO), a wing of the United Nations Organisation (UN), was established with the specific mandate of monitoring the health conditions of the world community, providing approvals for several laboratories/testing agencies across the world relating to medical procedures, and appraising the world as and when necessary about any development that would impact the health conditions. WHO is an organisation well funded by several countries, with the top funders being the USA and China. WHO has several offices in a number of countries with facilities and team to monitor the regional conditions and certainly, the organisation does not lack adequate facilities or funds to carry out it’s mandated tasks. On several occasions, WHO has monitored the conditions in individual regions with the permission of the governments, if warranted by any local developments relating to health issues or disease occurrence. Widespread criticism : At present, WHO is facing widespread criticism with regard to its role in handling the global COVID-19 crisis. While US President Donald Trump has led the criticism, the fact is that several countries, except China and Russia, broadly agree with the views of President Trump, though some of the countries may be remaining silent for their own reasons. Many people across the world are of the view that WHO has failed in its duty to warn the world at the right time about the impending disaster due to COVID 19, when it occurred in China in November 2019. In the absence of warning from WHO, many countries thought that COVID 19 would be confined to China and there will be little impact on the rest of the world. Caught in controversy : President Trump has said that Director-General of WHO, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has favoured China by not highlighting the seriousness of COVID 19 at the right time, when it originated in Wuhan, to protect the reputation of China. A few other countries including Taiwan have echoed the view. In November 2019, when COVID19 occurred in China, there were a lot of reports in the world media about the happening in Wuhan. China, however, conspicuously remained silent and did not share the information with the rest of the world. China deliberately concealed the information and did not permit any overseas visitors to Wuhan and even expelled some of the foreign correspondents. When the world was aware of the Wuhan virus crisis, it is shocking that WHO did not insist that its team should visit Wuhan area, see the conditions and take a stand about the serious nature of the crisis. It is also asked by several people that while WHO did not care to visit Wuhan site in November/December 2019, would the organisation have reacted in the same way if COVID-19 or similar type of health crisis had happened in any other country like India, Sri Lanka or Kenya? Rejoinders not based on facts and figures : What is even more shocking is that as the world is now suffering due to COVID 19 and criticisms are made against WHO, its Director-General is sending rejoinders refuting the criticisms to the President of the USA, who is the major contributor of funds to WHO and have the right to ask questions about its level of efficiency. Instead of explaining in a constructive way by sending the team from WHO to the USA and other criticising countries to explain as to what it has done and what it has not done, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is accusing US President of politicising this issue and alleging of racial discrimination by the Taiwanese government. This has brought down the level of global discussions on COVID 19 to abysmally low level. The present Director-General of WHO is trying to twist the issues without straightaway answering the criticisms backed by facts and figures. Stand of Secretary-General of the UN: Even the Secretary-General of UN, António Guterres, has simply supported the WHO and it appears that he has not cared to investigate the matter and the criticisms levelled against WHO with any level of seriousness, particularly in a situation where thousands of human lives have been lost due to COVID 19 crisis and more people are dying every day. While WHO is primarily responsible for the present depressing world scenario, which appears to be due to the inefficiency and failure of WHO to forewarn the world at the right time, one wonders as to what is the responsibility of António Guterres and why he has failed to monitor and supervise the performance of WHO. The statement of UN Secretary-General asking all the countries to stay together in fighting the COVID 19 crisis, is likely to be viewed with scepticism in the present scenario. This paper statement does not have much value in the present situation when WHO /UN remain unrepentant about its shortcomings. Revamp WHO : The revamping of WHO is a matter of absolute necessity now, to ensure that the future of health conditions of the world community would be adequately and efficiently monitored. It is clearly evident that there is increasing feeling amongst many sections of a world community that the present leadership of WHO should pay the price for its failure and the top office-bearers in WHO should quit immediately owning responsibility for the failure so that WHO can be revamped, which has become a matter of absolute necessity now. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

WHO needs to own up for coronavirus coverup

When the first few cases of COVID 19 were reported from China and other select countries in early to mid-January 2020, few would have realised that the world, as we know it, would be so drastically altered. Today a globalised world has become a cluster of localised countries, suspicious and wary of each other.&nbsp;

Within national boundaries, enclaves of humans have been created that are being encouraged to not ‘socialise’.&nbsp;

The health-related aspects of the emergency have been well covered with the exponential increase in cases in countries like Italy, Spain and the US constantly dominating the headlines. The economic impact has also gotten due importance with the IMF downgrading the growth prospects of several countries. What has perhaps been covered in parts but not fully understood is the larger political and social impact of the pandemic. In some countries, partial authoritarian regimes are converting into full dictatorships, media &amp; individual freedoms are being eroded, social contract with the governments is being questioned. In others, the class, regional and caste impact of the spread of the virus and measures taken to control it are creating grounds for civil unrest. With the perception of the China angle to the virus, World Health Organisation's (WHO) perceived missteps and strengthening of national borders in the EU, the systems of global governance are coming under increased pressure.&nbsp;

While the health impact of the pandemic will subside sooner or later, the trends mentioned above can have lasting consequences:&nbsp;

Political subterfuge and erosion of civil liberties: 
 
In an article published in The Times, Lord Sumption (former senior British judge) aptly summarised the situation – ‘Governments armed with vast powers are usually reluctant to part with it.’ I would add that some governments who have discovered new forms of surveillance or passed absolute ‘coronavirus’ emergency laws will be unable to give up the addiction of continuing to use them. In this context, it is prudent to mention developments in central and eastern Europe where a clash between ‘illiberal populists’ &amp; ‘nationalist governments’ and the perceived democratic, open values of the EU has been ongoing for some time now. &nbsp;

Officially Hungary became the first country to give far-reaching, unlimited and most importantly no-time bound power to its Prime Minister Viktor Orban to rule by decree on March 30. He now has an unlimited authority to fight the COVID emergency by suspending the parliament &amp; all future elections and imprisoning people for “violating a quarantine” and “spreading false information.” PM Orban has been heading towards the path of dismantling parliamentary democracy for some time now along with his government’s controversial anti-immigration stance and subtle tolerance of xenophobia and anti-Semitism. For the last two years, EU has contemplated invoking Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty to sanction Orban’s ‘illiberal’ actions.&nbsp;

In Poland, which has been trailing Hungary in its political developments, the government changed the electoral law overnight to ensure that the presidential elections go ahead on 10 May. Given the restrictions in place for fighting the health emergency, the only candidate who will be able to use state resources to organise a campaign will be the current president, Andrzej Duda. In Slovakia, special measures have been introduced by the government to violate privacy rules and access all citizen data. These measures are not restricted to this part of Europe – in Philippines police has been ordered to take harshest measures against opposition and critics who question the ‘lockdown measures’.&nbsp;

The repudiation may not be this blatant in other countries but increasingly there will be efforts to contain the whistleblowers &amp; critics who question either handling of the pandemic, laws passed or the help that most nations will need to take from China. From countries like Israel (use of secret cellphone data to track COVID outbreak), Myanmar (complete information censorship), Russia (extensive monitoring system that tracks all technological devices) to Venezeula – the governments have rolled out extensive surveillance and any criticism is being stifled. &nbsp;

The looming spectre of civil unrest: 
 
In India, a country of 1.3 billion people, as a nation-wide lockdown was enforced on March 24, millions of migrant labour walked on foot to reach their home states. They were stopped at various places, reportedly beaten by the police and many have been left in limbo. A telephonic survey of workers from North and Central India by an NGO revealed that if the lockdown continued beyond 21 days, 66 per cent of those interviewed will be unable to manage their household expenses. Many of them had no ration left for the day and were worried they would find no employment if the situation continued. &nbsp;

Latest reports from the US showed a surge in demand at food banks, with the food insecurity surging by 30 per cent just in the city of New York. Combined with unemployment and predicted recession, these conditions are likely to amplify. There have been reports of a surge in supermarket raids and robberies in Italy’s southern region as food shortages continue due to extension of the lockdown. As about half of the global population remains in lockdown, supply chains are broken and agricultural harvesting suffers – WHO and other agencies have spoken about the possibility of food riots, intensification of existing conflicts and a spectre of civil unrest. &nbsp;

Further weakening of global governance models: 
 
There is a fear that the COVID 19 crisis will amplify the global stress points – already US President Donald Trump’s regular emphasis on the ‘Chinese virus’ signifies the deepening of distrust with the Chinese leadership. In countries like Italy and Spain – narratives built around African immigrants being responsible for the virus are gaining prominence, which can further fuel the anti-immigration sentiment and populist movements. WHO’s, one of the very few global institutions of repute, role in the handling of the pandemic and accusations of ‘towing the China line’ are creating a renewed questioning of global institutions. &nbsp;

The global watchdogs will have their hands full in keenly observing as countries try to balance the exigencies of fighting the pandemic with increased surveillance and violation of privacy. Governments will have to be on their toes to formulate economic and social packages to ensure that unrest is checked. The pandemic has also offered a unique opportunity for nations to unite – to share information, technology and collaborate on economic revival. However, as of now, the global leadership remains uncoordinated and largely ‘national’. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

When the first few cases of COVID 19 were reported from China and other select countries in early to mid-January 2020, few would have realised that the world, as we know it, would be so drastically altered.

When the first few cases of COVID 19 were reported from China and other select countries in early to mid-January 2020, few would have realised that the world, as we know it, would be so drastically altered. Today a globalised world has become a cluster of localised countries, suspicious and wary of each other. Within national boundaries, enclaves of humans have been created that are being encouraged to not ‘socialise’. The health-related aspects of the emergency have been well covered with the exponential increase in cases in countries like Italy, Spain and the US constantly dominating the headlines. The economic impact has also gotten due importance with the IMF downgrading the growth prospects of several countries. What has perhaps been covered in parts but not fully understood is the larger political and social impact of the pandemic. In some countries, partial authoritarian regimes are converting into full dictatorships, media & individual freedoms are being eroded, social contract with the governments is being questioned. In others, the class, regional and caste impact of the spread of the virus and measures taken to control it are creating grounds for civil unrest. With the perception of the China angle to the virus, World Health Organisation's (WHO) perceived missteps and strengthening of national borders in the EU, the systems of global governance are coming under increased pressure. While the health impact of the pandemic will subside sooner or later, the trends mentioned above can have lasting consequences: Political subterfuge and erosion of civil liberties: In an article published in The Times, Lord Sumption (former senior British judge) aptly summarised the situation – ‘Governments armed with vast powers are usually reluctant to part with it.’ I would add that some governments who have discovered new forms of surveillance or passed absolute ‘coronavirus’ emergency laws will be unable to give up the addiction of continuing to use them. In this context, it is prudent to mention developments in central and eastern Europe where a clash between ‘illiberal populists’ & ‘nationalist governments’ and the perceived democratic, open values of the EU has been ongoing for some time now. Officially Hungary became the first country to give far-reaching, unlimited and most importantly no-time bound power to its Prime Minister Viktor Orban to rule by decree on March 30. He now has an unlimited authority to fight the COVID emergency by suspending the parliament & all future elections and imprisoning people for “violating a quarantine” and “spreading false information.” PM Orban has been heading towards the path of dismantling parliamentary democracy for some time now along with his government’s controversial anti-immigration stance and subtle tolerance of xenophobia and anti-Semitism. For the last two years, EU has contemplated invoking Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty to sanction Orban’s ‘illiberal’ actions. In Poland, which has been trailing Hungary in its political developments, the government changed the electoral law overnight to ensure that the presidential elections go ahead on 10 May. Given the restrictions in place for fighting the health emergency, the only candidate who will be able to use state resources to organise a campaign will be the current president, Andrzej Duda. In Slovakia, special measures have been introduced by the government to violate privacy rules and access all citizen data. These measures are not restricted to this part of Europe – in Philippines police has been ordered to take harshest measures against opposition and critics who question the ‘lockdown measures’. The repudiation may not be this blatant in other countries but increasingly there will be efforts to contain the whistleblowers & critics who question either handling of the pandemic, laws passed or the help that most nations will need to take from China. From countries like Israel (use of secret cellphone data to track COVID outbreak), Myanmar (complete information censorship), Russia (extensive monitoring system that tracks all technological devices) to Venezeula – the governments have rolled out extensive surveillance and any criticism is being stifled. The looming spectre of civil unrest: In India, a country of 1.3 billion people, as a nation-wide lockdown was enforced on March 24, millions of migrant labour walked on foot to reach their home states. They were stopped at various places, reportedly beaten by the police and many have been left in limbo. A telephonic survey of workers from North and Central India by an NGO revealed that if the lockdown continued beyond 21 days, 66 per cent of those interviewed will be unable to manage their household expenses. Many of them had no ration left for the day and were worried they would find no employment if the situation continued. Latest reports from the US showed a surge in demand at food banks, with the food insecurity surging by 30 per cent just in the city of New York. Combined with unemployment and predicted recession, these conditions are likely to amplify. There have been reports of a surge in supermarket raids and robberies in Italy’s southern region as food shortages continue due to extension of the lockdown. As about half of the global population remains in lockdown, supply chains are broken and agricultural harvesting suffers – WHO and other agencies have spoken about the possibility of food riots, intensification of existing conflicts and a spectre of civil unrest. Further weakening of global governance models: There is a fear that the COVID 19 crisis will amplify the global stress points – already US President Donald Trump’s regular emphasis on the ‘Chinese virus’ signifies the deepening of distrust with the Chinese leadership. In countries like Italy and Spain – narratives built around African immigrants being responsible for the virus are gaining prominence, which can further fuel the anti-immigration sentiment and populist movements. WHO’s, one of the very few global institutions of repute, role in the handling of the pandemic and accusations of ‘towing the China line’ are creating a renewed questioning of global institutions. The global watchdogs will have their hands full in keenly observing as countries try to balance the exigencies of fighting the pandemic with increased surveillance and violation of privacy. Governments will have to be on their toes to formulate economic and social packages to ensure that unrest is checked. The pandemic has also offered a unique opportunity for nations to unite – to share information, technology and collaborate on economic revival. However, as of now, the global leadership remains uncoordinated and largely ‘national’. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Socio-political implications of coronavirus pandemic

Anthrax, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Ebola, SARS and now the coronavirus. All these diseases have something in common,&nbsp;they can all be traced to unhygienic animal markets.

Markets with extreme confinement levels. Markets where both live and dead animals are on offer. Not only are we harming animals, but have time and again, ended up endangering ourselves.

China claims its coronavirus lockdown is over, it says it has conquered this pandemic.&nbsp;Beijing has encouraged celebrations of victory across the country. 
&nbsp; 
The Chinese regime has supposedly banned exotic-meat trade. There's a draft in circulation which provides a 'white list' of animals allowed to be raised for meat.

It was released by the Chinese Agricultural Ministry and is being called a 'game-changer' for animal welfare in China because this draft exempts dogs from human consumption.

There are no other exemptions, from foxes to deer and minks, most wildlife has again been approved as farm-raised species. The draft doesn't even mention bats and pangolins - the alleged source of the coronavirus. China's wet markets have gone back to operating in exactly the same way as they did before this pandemic.

UK's Dailymail has in fact given a detailed account of what's happening at these wet markets. Terrified dogs and cats crammed into rusty cages, bats and scorpions are on sale for traditional medicine, rabbits and ducks are being skinned alive.

This is how China is celebrating its so-called victory over the coronavirus. The coronavirus is a result of the many variants of unnatural &amp; unnecessary practices that every society and culture can do better without. Even after several pandemics, the Chinese regime is yet to realise that its entire system is a flaw. 
&nbsp;

Anthrax, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Ebola, SARS and now the coronavirus. All these diseases have something in common, they can all be traced to unhygienic animal markets.

Anthrax, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Ebola, SARS and now the coronavirus. All these diseases have something in common, they can all be traced to unhygienic animal markets. Markets with extreme confinement levels. Markets where both live and dead animals are on offer. Not only are we harming animals, but have time and again, ended up endangering ourselves. China claims its coronavirus lockdown is over, it says it has conquered this pandemic. Beijing has encouraged celebrations of victory across the country. The Chinese regime has supposedly banned exotic-meat trade. There's a draft in circulation which provides a 'white list' of animals allowed to be raised for meat. It was released by the Chinese Agricultural Ministry and is being called a 'game-changer' for animal welfare in China because this draft exempts dogs from human consumption. There are no other exemptions, from foxes to deer and minks, most wildlife has again been approved as farm-raised species. The draft doesn't even mention bats and pangolins - the alleged source of the coronavirus. China's wet markets have gone back to operating in exactly the same way as they did before this pandemic. UK's Dailymail has in fact given a detailed account of what's happening at these wet markets. Terrified dogs and cats crammed into rusty cages, bats and scorpions are on sale for traditional medicine, rabbits and ducks are being skinned alive. This is how China is celebrating its so-called victory over the coronavirus. The coronavirus is a result of the many variants of unnatural & unnecessary practices that every society and culture can do better without. Even after several pandemics, the Chinese regime is yet to realise that its entire system is a flaw.

Can China change its eating habits?

By Niki J P Alsford

North Korea continues to insist that it is completely free of coronavirus. The World Health Organisation’s representative to the country said that 709 people had been tested with no confirmed cases as of April 2.

Observers are naturally sceptical, particularly given the 10,000 cases and 200 deaths from COVID-19, the disease linked to the new coronavirus, in neighbouring South Korea.

North Korea has taken some of the most draconian measures since the virus was first reported in January. It was among the first countries to seal its borders in February. It automatically quarantined all foreign diplomats in Pyongyang for one month and controlled the movement of its population. Compared to North Korea’s response to SARS in 2003 and Ebola in 2014, it’s clear that the leadership in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) is now being much more assertive – and this may have helped.

However, officials in North Korea have begun to ask for humanitarian assistance. To benefit, North Korea must navigate a range of sanctions. Aid organisations have had to secure emergency exemptions from the UN to allow specific shipments of aid to arrive in recent weeks. However, getting the shipments in also proves difficult because of strict border controls.

It’s still unclear whether the closure of the North Korean border has also stopped the state-sanctioned smuggling across the country’s border with China that the government uses to bypass certain sanctions.

If the border is now closed to these smuggling routes, then this is an opportunity to understand the full brunt of the sanctions. But if the smuggling continues, then the chances of COVID-19 spreading into North Korea are greatly increased.

Getting ready 
 
The DPRK’s official stance is that North Korea is clear of infection. This, however, is beginning to look unlikely.

In early March, South Korea’s Daily NK news reported that as many as 200 North Korean soldiers had died from COVID-19 with a further 4,000 in quarantine.

While reporting of the coronavirus is controlled in North Korea, information on the global pandemic is not being suppressed in the country. However, there are no specific public discussions taking place on whether there is an outbreak in North Korea.

The Rodung Shimun, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party of Korea has reported on the country’s readiness to tackle COVID-19. On April 1, as well as an article that outlined the increase in reported cases in South Korea, it also reported that nurses are beloved and respected by the North Korean people. The cogs of the propaganda machine are beginning to turn.

Meanwhile, Chongnyon Jonwi, a daily paper in North Korea, has focused primarily on recent missile testing. The only reference given to any health issues was the construction of the Pyongyang General Hospital. Another paper, the Minju Choson, didn’t report on coronavirus directly either. It did discuss the construction of the hospital, but also referenced efforts by the Supreme People’s Assembly to improve general infectious disease prevention – without mentioning COVID-19 specifically.

Tight control

North Korea’s secretive response to coronavirus is no surprise, given its long history of isolationism, which reinforces the North Korean ideological concept of Juche, or self reliance.

However, the country’s leadership has not suggested that it won’t have any cases, but is focusing instead on its preparedness and the proactive measures being taken.

It’s possible that pride may be a factor in concealing an outbreak. The new round of missile testing in March could be seen as a strategic diversion technique. North Korea faces significant public health challenges, with aid workers clear that the past few decades have seen an increase in malnutrition.

Emphasis on the construction of the hospital – due to be finished by October in time for the 75th anniversary of the Worker’s Party of Korea – is a key part of the government’s domestic information strategy. But to complete the hospital ahead of schedule would require the work of thousands of North Koreans living, working and eating side by side. This would leave no space for social distancing in the country’s efforts to prevent an epidemic.

But then controlling the spread of information – and avoiding any panic – is a central part of how the regime’s leader, Kim Jong-un, holds onto power.

(Niki J P Alsford is Professor in Asia Pacific Studies, Director of the Asia Pacific Studies Institutes, University of Central Lancashire)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read <a href="https://theconversation.com/north-korea-insists-it-has-no-coronavirus-how-the-state-is-managing-the-story-135379">the original article</a>)

By Niki J P Alsford North Korea continues to insist that it is completely free of coronavirus. The World Health Organisation’s representative to the country said that 709 people had been tested with no confirmed cases as of April 2.

By Niki J P Alsford North Korea continues to insist that it is completely free of coronavirus. The World Health Organisation’s representative to the country said that 709 people had been tested with no confirmed cases as of April 2. Observers are naturally sceptical, particularly given the 10,000 cases and 200 deaths from COVID-19, the disease linked to the new coronavirus, in neighbouring South Korea. North Korea has taken some of the most draconian measures since the virus was first reported in January. It was among the first countries to seal its borders in February. It automatically quarantined all foreign diplomats in Pyongyang for one month and controlled the movement of its population. Compared to North Korea’s response to SARS in 2003 and Ebola in 2014, it’s clear that the leadership in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) is now being much more assertive – and this may have helped. However, officials in North Korea have begun to ask for humanitarian assistance. To benefit, North Korea must navigate a range of sanctions. Aid organisations have had to secure emergency exemptions from the UN to allow specific shipments of aid to arrive in recent weeks. However, getting the shipments in also proves difficult because of strict border controls. It’s still unclear whether the closure of the North Korean border has also stopped the state-sanctioned smuggling across the country’s border with China that the government uses to bypass certain sanctions. If the border is now closed to these smuggling routes, then this is an opportunity to understand the full brunt of the sanctions. But if the smuggling continues, then the chances of COVID-19 spreading into North Korea are greatly increased. Getting ready The DPRK’s official stance is that North Korea is clear of infection. This, however, is beginning to look unlikely. In early March, South Korea’s Daily NK news reported that as many as 200 North Korean soldiers had died from COVID-19 with a further 4,000 in quarantine. While reporting of the coronavirus is controlled in North Korea, information on the global pandemic is not being suppressed in the country. However, there are no specific public discussions taking place on whether there is an outbreak in North Korea. The Rodung Shimun, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party of Korea has reported on the country’s readiness to tackle COVID-19. On April 1, as well as an article that outlined the increase in reported cases in South Korea, it also reported that nurses are beloved and respected by the North Korean people. The cogs of the propaganda machine are beginning to turn. Meanwhile, Chongnyon Jonwi, a daily paper in North Korea, has focused primarily on recent missile testing. The only reference given to any health issues was the construction of the Pyongyang General Hospital. Another paper, the Minju Choson, didn’t report on coronavirus directly either. It did discuss the construction of the hospital, but also referenced efforts by the Supreme People’s Assembly to improve general infectious disease prevention – without mentioning COVID-19 specifically. Tight control North Korea’s secretive response to coronavirus is no surprise, given its long history of isolationism, which reinforces the North Korean ideological concept of Juche, or self reliance. However, the country’s leadership has not suggested that it won’t have any cases, but is focusing instead on its preparedness and the proactive measures being taken. It’s possible that pride may be a factor in concealing an outbreak. The new round of missile testing in March could be seen as a strategic diversion technique. North Korea faces significant public health challenges, with aid workers clear that the past few decades have seen an increase in malnutrition. Emphasis on the construction of the hospital – due to be finished by October in time for the 75th anniversary of the Worker’s Party of Korea – is a key part of the government’s domestic information strategy. But to complete the hospital ahead of schedule would require the work of thousands of North Koreans living, working and eating side by side. This would leave no space for social distancing in the country’s efforts to prevent an epidemic. But then controlling the spread of information – and avoiding any panic – is a central part of how the regime’s leader, Kim Jong-un, holds onto power. (Niki J P Alsford is Professor in Asia Pacific Studies, Director of the Asia Pacific Studies Institutes, University of Central Lancashire) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article)

North Korea insists it has no coronavirus – how the state is managing the story

From New York to Paris to England to New Delhi, life has come to a standstill with some three billion people confined to their homes as&nbsp;governments and agencies&nbsp;fight&nbsp;the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/new-york-city-from-a-global-cultural-capital-to-a-ghost-town-290305">coronavirus outbreak</a>.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/as-coronavirus-becomes-a-global-threat-who-china-ties-need-greater-international-scrutiny-291137">COVID 19 </a>infected more than 1.44 million people and killed over 83,000 worldwide.

The exact source of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/four-priorities-for-a-global-strategy-to-contain-coronavirus-pandemic-290518">novel coronavirus</a> remains under investigation, though it is thought to be linked to Wuhan wet market. Another theory&nbsp;says the virus was developed in a Chinese&nbsp;virology lab.

Here are the key developments since the novel coronavirus was announced:&nbsp;Coronavirus Timeline

December 30, 2019

The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention in central China's Hubei province detected cases of "pneumonia of unknown cause". &nbsp;

December 31, 2019

The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission confirmed 27 cases, telling the public not to go to enclosed public&nbsp; 
 
January 8, 2020

The World Health Organisation (WHO) said a new coronavirus could be behind a pneumonia epidemic documented in December in the Chinese city of Wuhan.&nbsp;

January 11, 2020

China announced&nbsp;its first death in Wuhan

January 24, 2020

The first cases in Europe are recorded, in France.&nbsp;

January 25, 2020

Hubei province followed Wuhan in being placed in quarantine

January 28, 2020

Germany and Japan announced the first two confirmed instances of human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 outside China. Nations rushed to evacuate their citizens from China.

January 30, 2020

The WHO declared a "public health emergency of international concern".

February 2, 2020

The Philippines reported the first death outside China, a man from Wuhan.

February 7, 2020

The WHO warned that the world is running out of masks and other protective equipment.

February 19, 2020

As the toll topped 2,000, the WHO called for "proportionate" actions to COVID-19's international spread.

February 25, 2020

The WHO said&nbsp;there is a risk of a pandemic. The next day the number of new cases in the rest of the world surpasses that of China.

March 6-8, 2020

More than 100,000 cases were recorded around the world. Northern Italy was locked down, quickly followed by the rest of the country.

March 11, 2020

The WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. US borders were gradually closed to around 30 countries. Governments and central banks rolled out massive economic support measures.

March 13, 2020

The WHO declared Europe as the pandemic's new epicentre.

By March 18, 2020

More than 2,00,000 cases were registered across the world.

March 19, 2020

Italy became the country with the highest death toll.&nbsp;

March 23, 2020

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned against a worse recession than the one that followed the 2008 world financial crisis.

Several<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/sporting-events-that-fell-victim-to-coronavirus-280070#la-liga-285951"> sporting events </a>were either cancelled or postponed due to the spread of the novel virus.&nbsp;

March 24, 2020

Indian Prime Minister announced a 21 days nationwide lockdown.

March 26, 2020

The leaders of the Group of 20 nations came together for an ‘extraordinary virtual G20 Summit’ to discuss the impact of coronavirus pandemic on the global economy.

March 28, 2020

As China's Wuhan started emerging from lockdown, Italy passed the 10,000 death mark.

April 7, 2020

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/neighbourhood-first-indias-policy-on-hydroxychloroquine-as-trump-demands-drug-for-us-291189">Indian government</a> decided to licence and paracetamol, in appropriate quantities, to the&nbsp;neighbouring countries. These drugs are seen as key in the treatment of coronavirus.

(With inputs from AFP and PTI)

From New York to Paris to England to New Delhi, life has come to a standstill with some three billion people confined to their homes as governments and agencies fight the coronavirus outbreak.

From New York to Paris to England to New Delhi, life has come to a standstill with some three billion people confined to their homes as governments and agencies fight the coronavirus outbreak. COVID 19 infected more than 1.44 million people and killed over 83,000 worldwide. The exact source of the novel coronavirus remains under investigation, though it is thought to be linked to Wuhan wet market. Another theory says the virus was developed in a Chinese virology lab. Here are the key developments since the novel coronavirus was announced: Coronavirus Timeline December 30, 2019 The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention in central China's Hubei province detected cases of "pneumonia of unknown cause". December 31, 2019 The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission confirmed 27 cases, telling the public not to go to enclosed public January 8, 2020 The World Health Organisation (WHO) said a new coronavirus could be behind a pneumonia epidemic documented in December in the Chinese city of Wuhan. January 11, 2020 China announced its first death in Wuhan January 24, 2020 The first cases in Europe are recorded, in France. January 25, 2020 Hubei province followed Wuhan in being placed in quarantine January 28, 2020 Germany and Japan announced the first two confirmed instances of human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 outside China. Nations rushed to evacuate their citizens from China. January 30, 2020 The WHO declared a "public health emergency of international concern". February 2, 2020 The Philippines reported the first death outside China, a man from Wuhan. February 7, 2020 The WHO warned that the world is running out of masks and other protective equipment. February 19, 2020 As the toll topped 2,000, the WHO called for "proportionate" actions to COVID-19's international spread. February 25, 2020 The WHO said there is a risk of a pandemic. The next day the number of new cases in the rest of the world surpasses that of China. March 6-8, 2020 More than 100,000 cases were recorded around the world. Northern Italy was locked down, quickly followed by the rest of the country. March 11, 2020 The WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. US borders were gradually closed to around 30 countries. Governments and central banks rolled out massive economic support measures. March 13, 2020 The WHO declared Europe as the pandemic's new epicentre. By March 18, 2020 More than 2,00,000 cases were registered across the world. March 19, 2020 Italy became the country with the highest death toll. March 23, 2020 The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned against a worse recession than the one that followed the 2008 world financial crisis. Several sporting events were either cancelled or postponed due to the spread of the novel virus. March 24, 2020 Indian Prime Minister announced a 21 days nationwide lockdown. March 26, 2020 The leaders of the Group of 20 nations came together for an ‘extraordinary virtual G20 Summit’ to discuss the impact of coronavirus pandemic on the global economy. March 28, 2020 As China's Wuhan started emerging from lockdown, Italy passed the 10,000 death mark. April 7, 2020 The Indian government decided to licence and paracetamol, in appropriate quantities, to the neighbouring countries. These drugs are seen as key in the treatment of coronavirus. (With inputs from AFP and PTI)

Coronavirus timeline: From COVID-19's origin to spread

By Michael Skey and César Jiménez-Martínez

The coronavirus pandemic cuts across borders, cultures and political systems. As the virus spread across the planet, global institutions such as the World Health Organization (WHO) called for worldwide solidarity, arguing that “we’re all in this together and we can only stop it together”.

Despite the very obvious global nature of the pandemic and some of the more humanitarian responses to it, it has often been discussed in terms of national territories, priorities and communities.

Some have argued that nationalism is a worrying side-effect of the virus, pointing to the closure of national borders as a threat to globalisation or noting how some political leaders have tried to blame other countries. For instance, both the Trump administration in the US and the Bolsonaro administration in Brazil have courted controversy by blaming China for the coronavirus crisis.

The problem with these arguments is that they tend to view nationalism in very narrow, and very negative, terms. Often nationalism is associated with the actions of politicians or groups who are labelled as extremist, such as Hungary’s Victor Orbán or France’s Marine La Pen. But if we want to make sense of the continuing salience and power of the nation, particularly in times of crisis, we need a wider understanding of nationalism.

Shaped by national borders 
 
Our research argues that nationalism is much better defined as an established belief system, broadly accepted by many people around the globe – rather than an extremist ideology. Put simply, the world is perceived as “naturally” divided into identifiable nations, which influence the way people think and behave, and their responsibilities and entitlements.

Such a definition not only encompasses the nasty aspects of nationalism, but also points to the ways in which the lives of very ordinary people are often defined, represented and discussed in national terms. For example, by making an Italian meal, telling a joke about Canadians, researching the history of Japan or planning a visit to India.

The extreme nationalist outbursts also only make sense in relation to the unremarkable stuff that seems to generate much less concern or interest. In other words, Donald Trump’s diatribes against the “Chinese virus” only make sense in a world where most people take for granted that there is a country called China that has its own territory, history, government, culture and food.

The current pandemic has frequently been defined and understood in national terms. First and foremost, media reporting of the virus has primarily focused on the impact it’s having in particular nations, from China to South Korea, Iran, Italy and so on. The virus may ignore national borders, but our understanding of it continues to be shaped by those very borders.

Coming ‘home’ 
 
A second issue is the way in which responses to the virus are often shaped by national priorities and objectives. Global institutions such as the WHO and UN have coordinated some of the response to the pandemic and advised states on how best to deal with it. But it is national governments that are seen as primarily responsible for managing the pandemic and protecting “their” citizens.

One of the major responses by governments has been to recall citizens to their homeland and close national borders. Far from uniting humanity in a global endeavour, the pandemic has actually reinforced the physical and symbolic boundaries between a country’s citizens and foreigners. These actions may be viewed as exceptional but they are rarely reported as unjustified – it seems pretty normal that each person should belong to a nation which they return to during a moment of extreme crisis.

This also explains concerns about people stranded “abroad”. It is related to feelings of solidarity and calls to take care of each other, which are often aimed at fellow nationals rather than to the whole of humankind. In Britain, this can be seen in the groundswell of support for the country’s National Health Service. This idea of having a homeland where you can return, and where you feel relatively comfortable and protected, is what makes the nation such a powerful symbol during a time of global crisis.

As the crisis has progressed, it also seems that competition has increasingly characterised the way in which governments and citizens understand and narrate its spread and impact. Public debates have compared how well or badly national authorities have managed the situation, lambasting those who are seen to be either ill-equipped or adopting “incorrect” policies. There is also competition between governments to get hold of equipment to protect “their” citizens.

While solutions to the current pandemic obviously need to be global, national systems and communities continue to bring comfort to people during this time of anxiety and uncertainty. Dismissing nationalism as only the work of extremists or ideologues doesn’t take us very far in understanding why national forms of identification and solidarity still continue to matter to so many people around the globe. 
 
(Michael Skey is Lecturer in Media and Communications, Loughborough University; César Jiménez-Martínez is Lecturer Global Media and Communications, Cardiff University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. <a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-reveals-how-important-the-nation-is-to-our-daily-lives-135125">Read the original article</a>)

By Michael Skey and César Jiménez-Martínez The coronavirus pandemic cuts across borders, cultures and political systems. As the virus spread across the planet, global institutions such as the World Health Organization (WHO) called for worldwide solidarity, arguing that “we’re all in this together and we can only stop it together”.

By Michael Skey and César Jiménez-Martínez The coronavirus pandemic cuts across borders, cultures and political systems. As the virus spread across the planet, global institutions such as the World Health Organization (WHO) called for worldwide solidarity, arguing that “we’re all in this together and we can only stop it together”. Despite the very obvious global nature of the pandemic and some of the more humanitarian responses to it, it has often been discussed in terms of national territories, priorities and communities. Some have argued that nationalism is a worrying side-effect of the virus, pointing to the closure of national borders as a threat to globalisation or noting how some political leaders have tried to blame other countries. For instance, both the Trump administration in the US and the Bolsonaro administration in Brazil have courted controversy by blaming China for the coronavirus crisis. The problem with these arguments is that they tend to view nationalism in very narrow, and very negative, terms. Often nationalism is associated with the actions of politicians or groups who are labelled as extremist, such as Hungary’s Victor Orbán or France’s Marine La Pen. But if we want to make sense of the continuing salience and power of the nation, particularly in times of crisis, we need a wider understanding of nationalism. Shaped by national borders Our research argues that nationalism is much better defined as an established belief system, broadly accepted by many people around the globe – rather than an extremist ideology. Put simply, the world is perceived as “naturally” divided into identifiable nations, which influence the way people think and behave, and their responsibilities and entitlements. Such a definition not only encompasses the nasty aspects of nationalism, but also points to the ways in which the lives of very ordinary people are often defined, represented and discussed in national terms. For example, by making an Italian meal, telling a joke about Canadians, researching the history of Japan or planning a visit to India. The extreme nationalist outbursts also only make sense in relation to the unremarkable stuff that seems to generate much less concern or interest. In other words, Donald Trump’s diatribes against the “Chinese virus” only make sense in a world where most people take for granted that there is a country called China that has its own territory, history, government, culture and food. The current pandemic has frequently been defined and understood in national terms. First and foremost, media reporting of the virus has primarily focused on the impact it’s having in particular nations, from China to South Korea, Iran, Italy and so on. The virus may ignore national borders, but our understanding of it continues to be shaped by those very borders. Coming ‘home’ A second issue is the way in which responses to the virus are often shaped by national priorities and objectives. Global institutions such as the WHO and UN have coordinated some of the response to the pandemic and advised states on how best to deal with it. But it is national governments that are seen as primarily responsible for managing the pandemic and protecting “their” citizens. One of the major responses by governments has been to recall citizens to their homeland and close national borders. Far from uniting humanity in a global endeavour, the pandemic has actually reinforced the physical and symbolic boundaries between a country’s citizens and foreigners. These actions may be viewed as exceptional but they are rarely reported as unjustified – it seems pretty normal that each person should belong to a nation which they return to during a moment of extreme crisis. This also explains concerns about people stranded “abroad”. It is related to feelings of solidarity and calls to take care of each other, which are often aimed at fellow nationals rather than to the whole of humankind. In Britain, this can be seen in the groundswell of support for the country’s National Health Service. This idea of having a homeland where you can return, and where you feel relatively comfortable and protected, is what makes the nation such a powerful symbol during a time of global crisis. As the crisis has progressed, it also seems that competition has increasingly characterised the way in which governments and citizens understand and narrate its spread and impact. Public debates have compared how well or badly national authorities have managed the situation, lambasting those who are seen to be either ill-equipped or adopting “incorrect” policies. There is also competition between governments to get hold of equipment to protect “their” citizens. While solutions to the current pandemic obviously need to be global, national systems and communities continue to bring comfort to people during this time of anxiety and uncertainty. Dismissing nationalism as only the work of extremists or ideologues doesn’t take us very far in understanding why national forms of identification and solidarity still continue to matter to so many people around the globe. (Michael Skey is Lecturer in Media and Communications, Loughborough University; César Jiménez-Martínez is Lecturer Global Media and Communications, Cardiff University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article)

Coronavirus reveals how important the nation is to our daily lives

The world is struggling to contain <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/new-york-city-from-a-global-cultural-capital-to-a-ghost-town-290305">Coronavirus </a>as it has spread across more than 180 countries. COVID-19 has infected more than 1.4 million people, with over 89000 fatalities around the world, according to John Hopkins University. With around 2.6 billion people around the world in some kind of lockdown, experts believe not enough is being done to stop people from spitting in public places. According to them, the saliva of an infected person can carry the virus for more than 24 hours which makes spitting at public places a great cause of concern. 
&nbsp; 
In India however, public spitting was never a concern for authorities until the coronavirus spread. In a recent press conference on April 5, Lav Aggarwal, Joint Secretary of Union Health Ministry said, “In view of the increasing dangers from the COVID pandemic, ICMR has issued an advisory requesting people to avoid smoking, spitting in public places and consumption of tobacco products in this period.”

In India, in two separate incidents, people were spat upon raising concerns amid coronavirus scare. In a racist attack in Delhi, a man allegedly spat tobacco on a Manipuri Woman and called her “corona”. He was later nabbed by Delhi Police and was put behind the bars. In a separate incident, a 33-year-old man from Meerut, who attended the Tablighi Jamaat Meeting in Delhi last month and had tested positive for COVID-19, spat on a doctor while creating ruckus in a quarantine facility in Kanpur.

Public spitting is just isn’t an Indian problem&nbsp;it seems, such incidents have been reported from many developed countries like New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the USA, Australia, etc. In Australia, reports emerged of how a woman after being stopped for speeding, spat on a police officer while she claimed to be on her way to get tested for Coronavirus. Reports suggested of Xenophobic attacks in America against Asian-Americans being bullied, including being spit on. A man in New Zealand was jailed for three months after spitting at a policeman. The man pleases guilty to aggravated assault against police in a hearing on Thursday at the new Plymouth district court on the country’s north island.

Spitting poses an increased risk of infection among people. So what should one do if you come in contact with someone’s spit?&nbsp; 
 
According to NHS (National Health Service, UK), you should:

*Wash the affected area with soap and lots of running water 
*If there is a wound, encourage the wound to bleed and rinse it thoroughly under running water- but don’t scrub or suck the wound. 
*Wash your nose, eyes, and mouth with lots of cold running water. 
*The next step is to consult your doctor immediately for further steps.

Can fines and jail terms be the way to stop public spitting?

Many countries think so. Countries like New Zealand, Belgium, Australia, France, Norway, etc have imposed heavy fines and jail terms to control public spitting amid coronavirus.

Following is a list of countries that have punishments in place on public spitting or spitting on healthcare workers:

*New Zealand: A person could face 14 years in jail if they spit or cough on another person and infect them with a disease. 
 
Belgium: Offenders could be fined up to €2,400 and could face prison terms of between 3 months and 2&nbsp;years. 
 
Australia: In New South Wales, authorities have introduced a fine of $5000 for spitting or coughing on frontline workers. Offenders could also be awarded a jail term of up to six months. 
 
France: A Mayor in northern France passed an order on April 2 to fine citizens spitting in public. A fine of $74 could be imposed on offenders which can go up to $197 for late payment of the fine. 
 
Saudi Arabia: A man in Saudi Arabia being trialled for spitting in shopping trolleys could face the death penalty as his actions amount to first-degree murder. 
 
Norway: Norwegian Court has sentenced a man to 75 days of prison for threatening to spit on a police officer. He was also sentenced to pay $188 as fine. 
 
Singapore: A man is jailed for spitting and shouting “Corona Corona” at Changi Airport hotel on March 3 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-timeline-from-covid-19s-origin-to-spread-291354">Also Read: Coronavirus timeline: From COVID-19's origin to spread</a>

What's India doing?

In India, Uttar Pradesh was among the first states to slap a ban on selling tobacco products and spitting in public. Telangana became another state to ban spitting in public places as part of COVID-19 containment measures. The health department in a notification issued today declared banning spitting of any chewable tobacco or non-tobacco products in public places. The government, however, has clarified that there is no penalty for violating the order and requested the citizens to act responsibly. 
 
Maharashtra and Gujarat are other states that have imposed a ban on public spitting and declared a fine of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 respectively for offenders violating the ban. Respective authorities in Bengaluru and Vijaywada has also decided to fine people caught in violating the ban with Rs 1000. CM of Odisha, in a public appeal on March 13,&nbsp;urged people from his state to stop spitting “Paan” in a step to fight coronavirus.

Lastly, the solution to this problem lies in our own hands. Authorities can impose fines, put offenders behind the bars, but until people stop using it as a tool to defy public order or violate rules, nothing can stop the menace. 
 
By spreading correct information and challenging mindsets of people, and speaking up when we come across those who are spitting, coughing in public spaces, we may be able to change the habits of at least a few of them.

The world is struggling to contain Coronavirus as it has spread across more than 180 countries. COVID-19 has infected more than 1.4 million people, with over 89000 fatalities around the world, according to John Hopkins University.

The world is struggling to contain Coronavirus as it has spread across more than 180 countries. COVID-19 has infected more than 1.4 million people, with over 89000 fatalities around the world, according to John Hopkins University. With around 2.6 billion people around the world in some kind of lockdown, experts believe not enough is being done to stop people from spitting in public places. According to them, the saliva of an infected person can carry the virus for more than 24 hours which makes spitting at public places a great cause of concern. In India however, public spitting was never a concern for authorities until the coronavirus spread. In a recent press conference on April 5, Lav Aggarwal, Joint Secretary of Union Health Ministry said, “In view of the increasing dangers from the COVID pandemic, ICMR has issued an advisory requesting people to avoid smoking, spitting in public places and consumption of tobacco products in this period.” In India, in two separate incidents, people were spat upon raising concerns amid coronavirus scare. In a racist attack in Delhi, a man allegedly spat tobacco on a Manipuri Woman and called her “corona”. He was later nabbed by Delhi Police and was put behind the bars. In a separate incident, a 33-year-old man from Meerut, who attended the Tablighi Jamaat Meeting in Delhi last month and had tested positive for COVID-19, spat on a doctor while creating ruckus in a quarantine facility in Kanpur. Public spitting is just isn’t an Indian problem it seems, such incidents have been reported from many developed countries like New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the USA, Australia, etc. In Australia, reports emerged of how a woman after being stopped for speeding, spat on a police officer while she claimed to be on her way to get tested for Coronavirus. Reports suggested of Xenophobic attacks in America against Asian-Americans being bullied, including being spit on. A man in New Zealand was jailed for three months after spitting at a policeman. The man pleases guilty to aggravated assault against police in a hearing on Thursday at the new Plymouth district court on the country’s north island. Spitting poses an increased risk of infection among people. So what should one do if you come in contact with someone’s spit? According to NHS (National Health Service, UK), you should: *Wash the affected area with soap and lots of running water *If there is a wound, encourage the wound to bleed and rinse it thoroughly under running water- but don’t scrub or suck the wound. *Wash your nose, eyes, and mouth with lots of cold running water. *The next step is to consult your doctor immediately for further steps. Can fines and jail terms be the way to stop public spitting? Many countries think so. Countries like New Zealand, Belgium, Australia, France, Norway, etc have imposed heavy fines and jail terms to control public spitting amid coronavirus. Following is a list of countries that have punishments in place on public spitting or spitting on healthcare workers: *New Zealand: A person could face 14 years in jail if they spit or cough on another person and infect them with a disease. Belgium: Offenders could be fined up to €2,400 and could face prison terms of between 3 months and 2 years. Australia: In New South Wales, authorities have introduced a fine of $5000 for spitting or coughing on frontline workers. Offenders could also be awarded a jail term of up to six months. France: A Mayor in northern France passed an order on April 2 to fine citizens spitting in public. A fine of $74 could be imposed on offenders which can go up to $197 for late payment of the fine. Saudi Arabia: A man in Saudi Arabia being trialled for spitting in shopping trolleys could face the death penalty as his actions amount to first-degree murder. Norway: Norwegian Court has sentenced a man to 75 days of prison for threatening to spit on a police officer. He was also sentenced to pay $188 as fine. Singapore: A man is jailed for spitting and shouting “Corona Corona” at Changi Airport hotel on March 3 Also Read: Coronavirus timeline: From COVID-19's origin to spread What's India doing? In India, Uttar Pradesh was among the first states to slap a ban on selling tobacco products and spitting in public. Telangana became another state to ban spitting in public places as part of COVID-19 containment measures. The health department in a notification issued today declared banning spitting of any chewable tobacco or non-tobacco products in public places. The government, however, has clarified that there is no penalty for violating the order and requested the citizens to act responsibly. Maharashtra and Gujarat are other states that have imposed a ban on public spitting and declared a fine of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 respectively for offenders violating the ban. Respective authorities in Bengaluru and Vijaywada has also decided to fine people caught in violating the ban with Rs 1000. CM of Odisha, in a public appeal on March 13, urged people from his state to stop spitting “Paan” in a step to fight coronavirus. Lastly, the solution to this problem lies in our own hands. Authorities can impose fines, put offenders behind the bars, but until people stop using it as a tool to defy public order or violate rules, nothing can stop the menace. By spreading correct information and challenging mindsets of people, and speaking up when we come across those who are spitting, coughing in public spaces, we may be able to change the habits of at least a few of them.

Explained: As world battles coronavirus outbreak, here's how spit attacks can land you in trouble

A tiny bird flew in to make her nest on my verandah yesterday. She started with a few scraps of leaves and bits of straw, that magically grew to be her home over the course of the day. I don’t remember the last time I saw something like that.

Just a few weeks ago, we were all busy. Jobs demanded time, goals were high, we were dropping kids to school, meeting deadlines, wooing clients, picking up kids, braving traffic, and coordinating with pest control and the plumber. Weekends too had a predictable pattern - entertainment was chalked out - meet friends, have a party, video call parents, clean the house, stock the fridge, watch movies, eat ice-cream and the like. We spun around on our little axis with a plethora of stars, whizzing around us to make it all happen. Cooks, drivers, helpers, teachers, yoga instructors, hairdressers, everyone chipped in to build a life as we know it. And now, suddenly there is no one. Newspapers have disappeared from our doorsteps, cars are slowly collecting dust, and in most houses, there is no outside assistance to help with daily tasks. India is in a lockdown mode, and life is on hold.

It’s an unfamiliar state of affairs, especially in a country like ours. If you go by conversations on social media, it sounds like a period of trial and hardship, that is not necessarily only because of the threat from the virus.&nbsp;

WhatsApp groups are buzzing with suggestions on easy recipes, home fitness routines, curated list of ‘must-see’ films, how to keep our children busy and how to keep ourselves positive. It is as though we are desperately reaching out to each other, reminding ourselves on how to survive.&nbsp;

But why do we need reminding for something as basic as looking after our own selves and our families? It should be a natural state of being. Like all the other beasts in the world, we should take the onus for feeding and grooming ourselves.&nbsp;

Our bodies need to be heard, by us. No pilates or Zumba instructor should be passionately pushing us for 'one more’. Our grandmothers talked about cooking with love for our families, but we have comfortably given the task to an outsider who chops vegetables and makes rotis, with an eye on the clock. Our prayers have been outsourced to a priest or a modern age guru, who tells us how to ‘connect’ with our own inner selves. We raise our little ones, by herding them from school to maths tuitions, to music teachers, to football coaches, to ballet, robotics and the like. We stretch out for a pedicure, instead of bending over and scrubbing our toes on our own. But not anymore.&nbsp;

Millions of us are confined to our homes. The doors are closed. Our backs hurt from the swabbing and mopping. Cooking is not much fun if it is to be done every day. And try doing an official conference on Zoom with a toddler howling in the next room. Of course, it's not easy. Life has changed.

We are creatures of habit. Finding comfort in day to day routines, familiar food, friends and so on. Change is hard, and more so when it is not by choice. It is natural to want to complain about the present and be concerned about the future. These are difficult times. &nbsp;We keep telling each other that this is temporary. Perhaps we should remind ourselves that, it is also an opportunity.&nbsp;

In the modern world, we are defined by our careers, and what we do. How busy we are is a big part of our perceived identity. Days have accelerated. We are so used to streamlining objectives, being productive, paying back loans, mastering yoga poses, chasing our dreams and constantly competing to beat the odds. Now is the time to slow down.&nbsp;

This brief interlude in our lives gives us a chance to live in a simple way, the way we are meant to. If health is not an issue, then laziness cannot be an excuse. So look after yourself and your loved ones. Be in tune with your body and mind. Hear music, find time to talk, make love, listen to children, and if you are&nbsp;lucky, perhaps you will&nbsp;get to hear the birds as well.

A tiny bird flew in to make her nest on my verandah yesterday. She started with a few scraps of leaves and bits of straw, that magically grew to be her home over the course of the day.

A tiny bird flew in to make her nest on my verandah yesterday. She started with a few scraps of leaves and bits of straw, that magically grew to be her home over the course of the day. I don’t remember the last time I saw something like that. Just a few weeks ago, we were all busy. Jobs demanded time, goals were high, we were dropping kids to school, meeting deadlines, wooing clients, picking up kids, braving traffic, and coordinating with pest control and the plumber. Weekends too had a predictable pattern - entertainment was chalked out - meet friends, have a party, video call parents, clean the house, stock the fridge, watch movies, eat ice-cream and the like. We spun around on our little axis with a plethora of stars, whizzing around us to make it all happen. Cooks, drivers, helpers, teachers, yoga instructors, hairdressers, everyone chipped in to build a life as we know it. And now, suddenly there is no one. Newspapers have disappeared from our doorsteps, cars are slowly collecting dust, and in most houses, there is no outside assistance to help with daily tasks. India is in a lockdown mode, and life is on hold. It’s an unfamiliar state of affairs, especially in a country like ours. If you go by conversations on social media, it sounds like a period of trial and hardship, that is not necessarily only because of the threat from the virus. WhatsApp groups are buzzing with suggestions on easy recipes, home fitness routines, curated list of ‘must-see’ films, how to keep our children busy and how to keep ourselves positive. It is as though we are desperately reaching out to each other, reminding ourselves on how to survive. But why do we need reminding for something as basic as looking after our own selves and our families? It should be a natural state of being. Like all the other beasts in the world, we should take the onus for feeding and grooming ourselves. Our bodies need to be heard, by us. No pilates or Zumba instructor should be passionately pushing us for 'one more’. Our grandmothers talked about cooking with love for our families, but we have comfortably given the task to an outsider who chops vegetables and makes rotis, with an eye on the clock. Our prayers have been outsourced to a priest or a modern age guru, who tells us how to ‘connect’ with our own inner selves. We raise our little ones, by herding them from school to maths tuitions, to music teachers, to football coaches, to ballet, robotics and the like. We stretch out for a pedicure, instead of bending over and scrubbing our toes on our own. But not anymore. Millions of us are confined to our homes. The doors are closed. Our backs hurt from the swabbing and mopping. Cooking is not much fun if it is to be done every day. And try doing an official conference on Zoom with a toddler howling in the next room. Of course, it's not easy. Life has changed. We are creatures of habit. Finding comfort in day to day routines, familiar food, friends and so on. Change is hard, and more so when it is not by choice. It is natural to want to complain about the present and be concerned about the future. These are difficult times. We keep telling each other that this is temporary. Perhaps we should remind ourselves that, it is also an opportunity. In the modern world, we are defined by our careers, and what we do. How busy we are is a big part of our perceived identity. Days have accelerated. We are so used to streamlining objectives, being productive, paying back loans, mastering yoga poses, chasing our dreams and constantly competing to beat the odds. Now is the time to slow down. This brief interlude in our lives gives us a chance to live in a simple way, the way we are meant to. If health is not an issue, then laziness cannot be an excuse. So look after yourself and your loved ones. Be in tune with your body and mind. Hear music, find time to talk, make love, listen to children, and if you are lucky, perhaps you will get to hear the birds as well.

Blog: Coronavirus impact - now is the time to slow down

No matter which part of the world you are living in, chances are you are in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/lockdowns-shouldnt-end-until-covid-19-vaccine-is-found-says-study-291549">lockdown </a>due to the coronavirus <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/over-15-million-cases-of-coronavirus-registered-across-192-countries-291490">pandemic</a>, and stuck indoors for your own good. Some of us may be spending more time meeting our professional targets, others keep themselves occupied with household chores, and then there are those who are utilising this time to nurture their hobbies. But if you are among those who are struggling to make the most of the day, try out some of these apps that promise to not only help you kill boredom, but also boost your brain power.

1. QuizUp: The quiz app is pretty interesting and has something for everyone. The app includes a wide range of topics to choose from such as logos, movies, TV series, sports, music, science, food and so on. You can choose a subject as per your interest and mood. You can either choose to play as a single-player or with an opponent.

2. Paperama: If you are not really into quizzes, we have an even more interesting suggestion for you. Remember those days when you would create different objects like airplanes, boats and flowers by folding a paper? It was a creative activity that most of us enjoyed as children. And you know what? You can now learn the craft of origami on your phone. Download the Paperama app and there you go! The app brings you the paper-folding art in the form of a game. Note that each puzzle comes with a defined number of folds. You can only score if you fold the page with accuracy. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/working-from-home-5-tips-to-stay-safe-from-hackers-291352">Also Read:&nbsp;Working from home? 5 tips to stay safe from hackers</a>

3. Duolingo: It’s a digital place where you can learn different languages for free. Wondering how does it work? You can choose any language that you want to learn. It then starts to teach you words in the chosen language - that too with the help of pictures. It then asks you to take a quiz. There is an audio guide too, so that you can learn the correct pronunciation. And as you proceed, it keeps on getting tougher. Do give this language app a try.

4. Words With Friends 2: It’s a mobile word game - similar to the traditional board game, Scrabble. You can either play the game solo or you can challenge your friends. Besides being fun, it can help improve your vocabulary.

5. Elevate: The last on our list is a brain-training app. Elevate has a multitude of games that claim to improve your attention span, writing, speech, reading and processing power. What’s even more interesting is that it keeps a track of your performance.

So, the next time you find yourself with nothing to do, try out some of these boredom-busting apps. 
&nbsp;

No matter which part of the world you are living in, chances are you are in lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, and stuck indoors for your own good. Some of us may be spending more time meeting our professional targets, others keep themselves occupied with household chores, and then there are those who are utilising this time to nurture their hobbies.

No matter which part of the world you are living in, chances are you are in lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, and stuck indoors for your own good. Some of us may be spending more time meeting our professional targets, others keep themselves occupied with household chores, and then there are those who are utilising this time to nurture their hobbies. But if you are among those who are struggling to make the most of the day, try out some of these apps that promise to not only help you kill boredom, but also boost your brain power. 1. QuizUp: The quiz app is pretty interesting and has something for everyone. The app includes a wide range of topics to choose from such as logos, movies, TV series, sports, music, science, food and so on. You can choose a subject as per your interest and mood. You can either choose to play as a single-player or with an opponent. 2. Paperama: If you are not really into quizzes, we have an even more interesting suggestion for you. Remember those days when you would create different objects like airplanes, boats and flowers by folding a paper? It was a creative activity that most of us enjoyed as children. And you know what? You can now learn the craft of origami on your phone. Download the Paperama app and there you go! The app brings you the paper-folding art in the form of a game. Note that each puzzle comes with a defined number of folds. You can only score if you fold the page with accuracy. Also Read: Working from home? 5 tips to stay safe from hackers 3. Duolingo: It’s a digital place where you can learn different languages for free. Wondering how does it work? You can choose any language that you want to learn. It then starts to teach you words in the chosen language - that too with the help of pictures. It then asks you to take a quiz. There is an audio guide too, so that you can learn the correct pronunciation. And as you proceed, it keeps on getting tougher. Do give this language app a try. 4. Words With Friends 2: It’s a mobile word game - similar to the traditional board game, Scrabble. You can either play the game solo or you can challenge your friends. Besides being fun, it can help improve your vocabulary. 5. Elevate: The last on our list is a brain-training app. Elevate has a multitude of games that claim to improve your attention span, writing, speech, reading and processing power. What’s even more interesting is that it keeps a track of your performance. So, the next time you find yourself with nothing to do, try out some of these boredom-busting apps.

Coronavirus lockdown: 5 apps to kill your boredom

The word co-operation doesn't seem to exist in the American dictionary. The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/wion-edit-why-a-strategic-reserve-for-medicine-is-need-of-the-hour-291311">United States</a> has always ignored the role of other nations in its agenda for hegemony. It is now struggling to contain the Coronavirus and is trying to bully allies.&nbsp;

Every time the US faces a crisis, it has one policy for itself, and a completely different one for the rest of the world. What's worse is that we've allowed this country to impose its views, interests and values on whoever it wants and however it wants. 
 
WATCH: &nbsp;The end of American supremacy?&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-edit-the-end-of-american-supremacy-291425/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/explained-us-president-donald-trumps-misplaced-priorities-289696">President Donald Trump</a> wants the people of Wisconsin to exercise their right to vote. Over 14,000 Americans have died due to this pandemic.&nbsp;Over 100&nbsp;deaths are from Wisconsin alone. This state beats the nationwide figure of some countries, but the US President wants the people of this state to defy the lockdown and risk their lives for votes.

America's health-care system is in a sorry state. Hospitals are overflowing, soccer stadiums, churches, convention centres and even ships are being converted into make-shift hospitals.

The financial capital, New York, has turned into a virus capital. It has reported over 80,000&nbsp;cases and more than 4,000 deaths.

Meanwhile, the US is busy piling up body-bags, buying ventilators from sanctioned Russian firms and blowing hot and cold with India over hydroxychloroquine.

America wants medical supplies from outside, but has itself banned the export of face masks.

We can only wait and see how this pandemic changes this world, but one thing can be safely said - among the casualties will be America's so-called supremacy. 
 
&nbsp;(Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world) 
&nbsp;

The word co-operation doesn't seem to exist in the American dictionary. The United States has always ignored the role of other nations in its agenda for hegemony.

The word co-operation doesn't seem to exist in the American dictionary. The United States has always ignored the role of other nations in its agenda for hegemony. It is now struggling to contain the Coronavirus and is trying to bully allies. Every time the US faces a crisis, it has one policy for itself, and a completely different one for the rest of the world. What's worse is that we've allowed this country to impose its views, interests and values on whoever it wants and however it wants. WATCH: The end of American supremacy? × President Donald Trump wants the people of Wisconsin to exercise their right to vote. Over 14,000 Americans have died due to this pandemic. Over 100 deaths are from Wisconsin alone. This state beats the nationwide figure of some countries, but the US President wants the people of this state to defy the lockdown and risk their lives for votes. America's health-care system is in a sorry state. Hospitals are overflowing, soccer stadiums, churches, convention centres and even ships are being converted into make-shift hospitals. The financial capital, New York, has turned into a virus capital. It has reported over 80,000 cases and more than 4,000 deaths. Meanwhile, the US is busy piling up body-bags, buying ventilators from sanctioned Russian firms and blowing hot and cold with India over hydroxychloroquine. America wants medical supplies from outside, but has itself banned the export of face masks. We can only wait and see how this pandemic changes this world, but one thing can be safely said - among the casualties will be America's so-called supremacy. (Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)

WION Edit: Could this be end of American hegemony?

Merely after three months of Coronavirus outbreak, the pandemic has already started impacting economies all across the globe.

In order to contain the spread of COVID-19, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on March 23, announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown. Pursuant thereto, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman released a Rs 1.7 trillion package to curtail the impact of the said lockdown. In the context of the economy, the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Shaktikanta Das, had repeatedly assured that RBI holds enough capability to handle the emergency and shall utilise the same at the right time. Therefore, the RBI, on March 27, rolled out a long list of announcements in order to safeguard the economy from the vicious impact of the pandemic, including relaxation on instalments, lower interest rates and easier access to working capital to help the market function better without much financial pressure.&nbsp;

The RBI, as a major relief to retail borrowers, decided to defer the instalments on all term loans to businesses and individuals, including principal and interest, by a period of three months. However, each bank will take its own call so as to decide who can benefit from this measure. All commercial banks have been allowed to impose a moratorium of three months on paying instalments on term loans from March 1, 2020. The tenures will be extended accordingly. All lenders have also been permitted to defer interest payments on working capital loans by three months. It has been made clear that the accumulated interest shall be paid after expiry of the said period of three months. The Governor of the RBI clarified that the moratorium on term loan repayments and deferred interest payments on working capital will classify the borrowers as defaulters as NPA accounts and hence, there will be no adverse impact on the credit history thereof.&nbsp;

Apart from the relaxation provided to the customers as detailed above, the RBI, as an exceptional measure, also reduced the repo rate by 75 basis points or 0.75 per cent, which would mean that other banks can now borrow money from RBI at a much lower interest rate. This will also provide a boost to the industrial sector as industries will be able to get loans at cheaper interest rates, which would, in turn, result in commodities becoming cheaper, ultimately benefitting the end consumer. However, it is reiterated that each bank will have to decide how and when will it implement the lowered interest rates on the loans it offers. 
 
The RBI further reduced the Cash Reserve Ratio of all banks by 100 basis points, taking it down to 3 per cent from the earlier 4 per cent with effect from March 28 for a period of one year. This reduction in the Cash Reserve Ratio would release Rs.1.37 lakh crores for banks in India. Furthermore, the RBI has decided that the banks can get durable liquidity up to Rs.1 lakh crore from the RBI for a three-year period. The RBI has also raised the borrowing limit of the Statutory Liquidity Ratio under the Marginal Standing Facility (“MSF”) to 3 per cent with immediate effect applicable up to March 30, intending to provide comfort to the banking system by allowing it to avail additional Rs.1.37 lakh crores of liquidity in times of stress at the MSF Rate so announced. More so, in these testing times, in order to discourage banks to park surplus funds, the RBI has reduced the reverse repo rate to 4 per cent.&nbsp;

However, it is made clear by the banks that the relaxation period of three months provided to the customers is not a waiver of the monthly instalments for three months, instead, it is a grace period for three months, to reduce to the burden and distress caused by the pandemic. Most banks have resolved to place the onus on the borrowers to inform the bank that they wish to take benefit of the three-month breathing period. However, once a borrower avails this facility, interest will continue to accrue on the principal outstanding for the entire period of the moratorium at rate agreed upon by the parties and the loan tenure will get extended by the corresponding period accordingly. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that it is only a deferment option and not a concession or waiver given by the banks to the customers, since the interest would continue to accrue for the entire period of the moratorium.&nbsp;

In a bid to mitigate the impact of the outbreak of the pandemic on businesses, industries and individuals, the RBI has tried to ensure that viable businesses and industries are not driven out of the market owing to financial distress. RBI has provided the much-needed rate cuts and tried to inject more liquidity in the economy to encourage each bank to lower its interest rates. Ideally, with such measures taken by the RBI, there must be a decline in the interest rates on loans offered by various banks, bringing down the overall cost of the loan of the customer. However, it remains to been seen how banks implement the aforementioned rate cuts on the loans they offer. None of these steps might prove to be effective if the banks are not ready to pass on this relaxation to the customers. However, with proper coordination and sensitivity of the banking industry, these steps are intended to reduce the burden on businesses, industries, individuals etc. and will give a huge boost to the economic activities with a view to safeguard our economy from the impact of the pandemic.&nbsp;&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Merely after three months of Coronavirus outbreak, the pandemic has already started impacting economies all across the globe. In order to contain the spread of COVID-19, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on March 23, announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown.

Merely after three months of Coronavirus outbreak, the pandemic has already started impacting economies all across the globe. In order to contain the spread of COVID-19, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on March 23, announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown. Pursuant thereto, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman released a Rs 1.7 trillion package to curtail the impact of the said lockdown. In the context of the economy, the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Shaktikanta Das, had repeatedly assured that RBI holds enough capability to handle the emergency and shall utilise the same at the right time. Therefore, the RBI, on March 27, rolled out a long list of announcements in order to safeguard the economy from the vicious impact of the pandemic, including relaxation on instalments, lower interest rates and easier access to working capital to help the market function better without much financial pressure. The RBI, as a major relief to retail borrowers, decided to defer the instalments on all term loans to businesses and individuals, including principal and interest, by a period of three months. However, each bank will take its own call so as to decide who can benefit from this measure. All commercial banks have been allowed to impose a moratorium of three months on paying instalments on term loans from March 1, 2020. The tenures will be extended accordingly. All lenders have also been permitted to defer interest payments on working capital loans by three months. It has been made clear that the accumulated interest shall be paid after expiry of the said period of three months. The Governor of the RBI clarified that the moratorium on term loan repayments and deferred interest payments on working capital will classify the borrowers as defaulters as NPA accounts and hence, there will be no adverse impact on the credit history thereof. Apart from the relaxation provided to the customers as detailed above, the RBI, as an exceptional measure, also reduced the repo rate by 75 basis points or 0.75 per cent, which would mean that other banks can now borrow money from RBI at a much lower interest rate. This will also provide a boost to the industrial sector as industries will be able to get loans at cheaper interest rates, which would, in turn, result in commodities becoming cheaper, ultimately benefitting the end consumer. However, it is reiterated that each bank will have to decide how and when will it implement the lowered interest rates on the loans it offers. The RBI further reduced the Cash Reserve Ratio of all banks by 100 basis points, taking it down to 3 per cent from the earlier 4 per cent with effect from March 28 for a period of one year. This reduction in the Cash Reserve Ratio would release Rs.1.37 lakh crores for banks in India. Furthermore, the RBI has decided that the banks can get durable liquidity up to Rs.1 lakh crore from the RBI for a three-year period. The RBI has also raised the borrowing limit of the Statutory Liquidity Ratio under the Marginal Standing Facility (“MSF”) to 3 per cent with immediate effect applicable up to March 30, intending to provide comfort to the banking system by allowing it to avail additional Rs.1.37 lakh crores of liquidity in times of stress at the MSF Rate so announced. More so, in these testing times, in order to discourage banks to park surplus funds, the RBI has reduced the reverse repo rate to 4 per cent. However, it is made clear by the banks that the relaxation period of three months provided to the customers is not a waiver of the monthly instalments for three months, instead, it is a grace period for three months, to reduce to the burden and distress caused by the pandemic. Most banks have resolved to place the onus on the borrowers to inform the bank that they wish to take benefit of the three-month breathing period. However, once a borrower avails this facility, interest will continue to accrue on the principal outstanding for the entire period of the moratorium at rate agreed upon by the parties and the loan tenure will get extended by the corresponding period accordingly. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that it is only a deferment option and not a concession or waiver given by the banks to the customers, since the interest would continue to accrue for the entire period of the moratorium. In a bid to mitigate the impact of the outbreak of the pandemic on businesses, industries and individuals, the RBI has tried to ensure that viable businesses and industries are not driven out of the market owing to financial distress. RBI has provided the much-needed rate cuts and tried to inject more liquidity in the economy to encourage each bank to lower its interest rates. Ideally, with such measures taken by the RBI, there must be a decline in the interest rates on loans offered by various banks, bringing down the overall cost of the loan of the customer. However, it remains to been seen how banks implement the aforementioned rate cuts on the loans they offer. None of these steps might prove to be effective if the banks are not ready to pass on this relaxation to the customers. However, with proper coordination and sensitivity of the banking industry, these steps are intended to reduce the burden on businesses, industries, individuals etc. and will give a huge boost to the economic activities with a view to safeguard our economy from the impact of the pandemic. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

RBI's timely and decisive response to safeguard Indian economy from coronavirus impact

The fundamental axioms of modernity- the ‘faith’ that equated progress with reason, fetishising it- seem to be questioned by the COVID -19 virus. In the schemata of modernity, the reason was the new deity, worshipping which would lead to historical, &nbsp;political scientific, industrial, technological and social progress.&nbsp;

While there was no overarching theory of modernity, these were the elements that formed its grist and mill. The scientific method, with its Cartesian flavour and zealous adherence to empiricism, was central to modernity. &nbsp;Even politics was said and held to be subject to science – both in theory and practice- the former begat the discipline of political science and the latter the ‘science’ of public policy. The reason, all in all, was held to be the solvent of human problems and the torchbearer and paragon of progress. This was the essential ‘truth’ of modernity.

There was much to be said about modernity, its contents and manifestations. The Industrial Revolution, the torchbearer and one clear manifestation of reason and its application to human affairs, changed the complexion and nature of the world. Scientific advances made humans live healthier lives, many rabid and incurable diseases were conquered, there accrued the isomorphism of the state form of political organisation and the will of the people became, gradually, in many parts of the world the governing philosophy of the state.&nbsp;

The list can go on and on. That modernity improved the human condition (broadly defined) was a reality but modernity also had a dark side. To cite the eminent historian, Niall Ferguson, roughly, it was the Gattling gun- also a product of modernity- that helped in the reification of colonialism and imperialism. The killing fields of the First and the Second Great Wars were eminently possible because of modern forms of organisation, weaponry and employment of scientific techniques in killing people.

But, all this is not to detract from the good side of modernity. It did elevate mankind, in many domains. The problem, however, began or begins when the axioms of modernity were held to be the truth(s), the only game in town, so to speak. It was the corpus of postmodernity that questioned the fundamental assumptions of modernity. The postulates of post-modernity questioned modernity’s modes of knowledge and its ‘truths’ including its reliance on reason and science. Acknowledging other forms of knowledge and reality, post-modernity held that there was no central, overarching reality, roughly. In a way, post-modernity was an intellectual and discursive assault on the central tenets of modernity. &nbsp;While post-modernity did not gain much traction beyond the academy, it did have something to it, in some senses.

(By way of clarification here, I am not an ardent proponent of post-modernity. I think it was something to offer and this something is in the nature of being a required and necessary correction to the hubris of modernity)

All this is not to say that modernity and its constituent is evil or fundamentally bad. Stating this would amount to a denial. It is to state that while modernity has indeed improved the human condition but man (woman) is more than mere reason. Mankind cannot and must not be reduced to utility-maximising rational agents. It is more than this. Attributes of love, hate, generosity, courage, valour, jealousy, greatness and pettiness are also elemental features and attributes of human beings. Consider an example. And, more fundamentally, we human beings are weak and, sometimes helpless, a fact that COVID- 19 has eloquently demonstrated. It is not that mankind is on the verge of extinction. Ultimately, the virus will be conquered and vanquished, perhaps ironically by science itself. But, this should not obscure the fact that we humans despite having risen to heights in most domains of life are vulnerable and fragile, individually and collectively.

But, our mastery over nature and its components, made possible by modernity and its applications make us forgetful: we forget our essential and fundamental fragility and vulnerability and make us be the masters of the universe(In the narrow sense). The defence spending of major nations, the millions and even billions spent on armaments, state of the art weaponry, basically to kill, is a case in point. 
 
The theories of international relations suggest that to protect itself, the state must increase its security meaning build armies, armaments and weaponries and enter into an alliance. This approach called the ‘security dilemma’ does not increase a given state’s security; it decreases it, because other states do the same. But, even if were to be granted that armaments and lethally sophisticated weaponry will protect states from each other, can these protect us from the COVID-19 virus? No is the obvious answer. What will then? Humility, especially of the modern mind and cooperation than competition. We are all in it together. The response must reflect this togetherness in the frailty and fragility of humankind!

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

The fundamental axioms of modernity- the ‘faith’ that equated progress with reason, fetishising it- seem to be questioned by the COVID -19 virus. In the schemata of modernity, the reason was the new deity, worshipping which would lead to historical, political scientific, industrial, technological and social progress.

The fundamental axioms of modernity- the ‘faith’ that equated progress with reason, fetishising it- seem to be questioned by the COVID -19 virus. In the schemata of modernity, the reason was the new deity, worshipping which would lead to historical, political scientific, industrial, technological and social progress. While there was no overarching theory of modernity, these were the elements that formed its grist and mill. The scientific method, with its Cartesian flavour and zealous adherence to empiricism, was central to modernity. Even politics was said and held to be subject to science – both in theory and practice- the former begat the discipline of political science and the latter the ‘science’ of public policy. The reason, all in all, was held to be the solvent of human problems and the torchbearer and paragon of progress. This was the essential ‘truth’ of modernity. There was much to be said about modernity, its contents and manifestations. The Industrial Revolution, the torchbearer and one clear manifestation of reason and its application to human affairs, changed the complexion and nature of the world. Scientific advances made humans live healthier lives, many rabid and incurable diseases were conquered, there accrued the isomorphism of the state form of political organisation and the will of the people became, gradually, in many parts of the world the governing philosophy of the state. The list can go on and on. That modernity improved the human condition (broadly defined) was a reality but modernity also had a dark side. To cite the eminent historian, Niall Ferguson, roughly, it was the Gattling gun- also a product of modernity- that helped in the reification of colonialism and imperialism. The killing fields of the First and the Second Great Wars were eminently possible because of modern forms of organisation, weaponry and employment of scientific techniques in killing people. But, all this is not to detract from the good side of modernity. It did elevate mankind, in many domains. The problem, however, began or begins when the axioms of modernity were held to be the truth(s), the only game in town, so to speak. It was the corpus of postmodernity that questioned the fundamental assumptions of modernity. The postulates of post-modernity questioned modernity’s modes of knowledge and its ‘truths’ including its reliance on reason and science. Acknowledging other forms of knowledge and reality, post-modernity held that there was no central, overarching reality, roughly. In a way, post-modernity was an intellectual and discursive assault on the central tenets of modernity. While post-modernity did not gain much traction beyond the academy, it did have something to it, in some senses. (By way of clarification here, I am not an ardent proponent of post-modernity. I think it was something to offer and this something is in the nature of being a required and necessary correction to the hubris of modernity) All this is not to say that modernity and its constituent is evil or fundamentally bad. Stating this would amount to a denial. It is to state that while modernity has indeed improved the human condition but man (woman) is more than mere reason. Mankind cannot and must not be reduced to utility-maximising rational agents. It is more than this. Attributes of love, hate, generosity, courage, valour, jealousy, greatness and pettiness are also elemental features and attributes of human beings. Consider an example. And, more fundamentally, we human beings are weak and, sometimes helpless, a fact that COVID- 19 has eloquently demonstrated. It is not that mankind is on the verge of extinction. Ultimately, the virus will be conquered and vanquished, perhaps ironically by science itself. But, this should not obscure the fact that we humans despite having risen to heights in most domains of life are vulnerable and fragile, individually and collectively. But, our mastery over nature and its components, made possible by modernity and its applications make us forgetful: we forget our essential and fundamental fragility and vulnerability and make us be the masters of the universe(In the narrow sense). The defence spending of major nations, the millions and even billions spent on armaments, state of the art weaponry, basically to kill, is a case in point. The theories of international relations suggest that to protect itself, the state must increase its security meaning build armies, armaments and weaponries and enter into an alliance. This approach called the ‘security dilemma’ does not increase a given state’s security; it decreases it, because other states do the same. But, even if were to be granted that armaments and lethally sophisticated weaponry will protect states from each other, can these protect us from the COVID-19 virus? No is the obvious answer. What will then? Humility, especially of the modern mind and cooperation than competition. We are all in it together. The response must reflect this togetherness in the frailty and fragility of humankind! (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

How coronavirus exposes the fragility of modernity and the vulnerability of mankind

Science has knocked religion and traditional healing methods out of the ring in the battle between rival approaches towards getting the coronavirus pandemic under control.

Global leaders have imposed science-driven solutions&nbsp;of lockdown, social distancing, and the search for medical cures&nbsp;after initially opting for political expediency or advocacy of traditional healing methods or religious precepts.

Remarkably, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of a kingdom that was founded and shaped by an ultra-conservative strand of Islam, was one leader who was not held back by religion when he suspended the Umrah (the smaller pilgrimage to Mecca). He announced that this year’s Hajj could be cancelled, and locked down the holy city, as well as, its counterpart, Medina.

“What if this year’s Hajj was under Imran Khan rather than Mohammed bin Salman? Would he have waffled there as indeed he has in Pakistan?” asked Pakistani nuclear scientist, political analyst, and human rights activist Pervez Hoodbhoy.

Hoodbhoy noted that Pakistan is yet to import Saudi dates touted as a cure for all diseases by Maulana Tariq Jameel, Pakistan’s most popular preacher and an ally of Khan.

Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei has similarly dropped his resistance to the closure of shrines in the holy cities of Qom and Mashhad. His government has closed schools and universities and urged the public to stay at home while announcing that “low-risk” economic activity would be allowed to resume next week.

The consequences of science-based approaches for civilizationalists, who advocate policies inspired by religion or the supremacy of one religious group over another, could go far beyond what should shape public health policies.

They could threaten the foundations of their religious support base, as well as, their discriminatory policies towards religious or ethnic minorities. Israel is a case in point in terms of both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s religious support base and his policies towards Israeli nationals of Palestinian descent.

With ultra-orthodox Jewish neighbourhoods and cities emerging as the communities most affected by the coronavirus, some Israeli commentators argue that the pandemic could undermine rabbinical authority on a scale not seen since the Holocaust when large numbers left ultra-orthodoxy after rabbinical advice to remain in Europe proved devastating.

Health Minister Yaakov Litzman, who together with his wife, has tested positive. Ultra-orthodox rabbis had to reverse themselves in recent days as the virus ate its way through their communities in Jerusalem and other Israeli cities.

“Torah no longer saves from death. The coronavirus has dealt an unimaginable blow to the rabbinical authority – and worldview – that ultra-Orthodox Jews previously regarded as infallible and eternal,” said prominent Israeli journalist Anshel Pfeffer, who authored an acclaimed biography of Netanyahu.

The non-discriminatory nature of the coronavirus forced the Israeli government last week to ramp up testing in communities of Israeli Palestinians which had been described by public health experts as a ticking time bomb.

The experts warned that Israeli Palestinians were an at-risk group, many of whom suffer from chronic diseases, live in crowded conditions, and are socially and economically disadvantaged.

“In terms of public health, due to the present situation, the Arab communities are likely to become epicentres of the coronavirus outbreak, which will threaten the health of the entire population,” said Nihaya Daoud, a public health lecturer at the Ben Gurion University of the Negev.

Increased testing of Israel Palestinians tackles Israel’s immediate problem of attempting to stymie the spread of the virus. It doesn’t, however, address the longer-term structural threat to public health posed by imbalances in health infrastructure in Israeli Jewish and Israeli Palestinian communities, a lesson many Israelis could draw from the coronavirus crisis.

Drawing that lesson would challenge a pillar of Israeli policy with far-reaching consequences.

By the same token, the return home of some 45,000 Palestinian workers to the West Bank for this week’s Passover holiday is likely to create bottlenecks in both Israel and the Palestinian territory after the Israeli government decided that they would not be allowed to return because of health concerns.

The decision threatens to create a labour shortage in Israel, increase economic pressure on an already weakened Palestine Authority, and facilitate the spread of the virus on the West Bank given the administration’s inability to test all returnees.

“Because the two populations are so intertwined, curbing the virus only in one society is impossible,” said Ofer Zalzberg of the International Crisis Group.

It’s a lesson that applies universally, not just to Israelis and Palestinians. That is no truer than in Syrian and Palestinian refugee camps that dot the eastern Mediterranean.

The global pandemic also casts a glaring spotlight on the risks of looking the other way when hospitals and health infrastructure are deliberately destroyed in war-torn countries like in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s forces deliberately targetted hospitals, and in Yemen, where the Saudi-UAE-led coalition did the same.

No doubt, it is a lesson that anti-globalists and civilizationalists prefer not to hear.

Yet, whether anti-globalists and civilizationalists like it or not, the coronavirus is global and universal. So is the science that will ultimately help get control of the pandemic and eventually stop it in its tracks.

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

(This article was originally published on <a href="https://insidearabia.com/stopping-covid-19-in-its-tracks-science-gets-the-upper-hand/">The Inside Arabia</a> ) 
&nbsp;

Science has knocked religion and traditional healing methods out of the ring in the battle between rival approaches towards getting the coronavirus pandemic under control.

Science has knocked religion and traditional healing methods out of the ring in the battle between rival approaches towards getting the coronavirus pandemic under control. Global leaders have imposed science-driven solutions of lockdown, social distancing, and the search for medical cures after initially opting for political expediency or advocacy of traditional healing methods or religious precepts. Remarkably, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of a kingdom that was founded and shaped by an ultra-conservative strand of Islam, was one leader who was not held back by religion when he suspended the Umrah (the smaller pilgrimage to Mecca). He announced that this year’s Hajj could be cancelled, and locked down the holy city, as well as, its counterpart, Medina. “What if this year’s Hajj was under Imran Khan rather than Mohammed bin Salman? Would he have waffled there as indeed he has in Pakistan?” asked Pakistani nuclear scientist, political analyst, and human rights activist Pervez Hoodbhoy. Hoodbhoy noted that Pakistan is yet to import Saudi dates touted as a cure for all diseases by Maulana Tariq Jameel, Pakistan’s most popular preacher and an ally of Khan. Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei has similarly dropped his resistance to the closure of shrines in the holy cities of Qom and Mashhad. His government has closed schools and universities and urged the public to stay at home while announcing that “low-risk” economic activity would be allowed to resume next week. The consequences of science-based approaches for civilizationalists, who advocate policies inspired by religion or the supremacy of one religious group over another, could go far beyond what should shape public health policies. They could threaten the foundations of their religious support base, as well as, their discriminatory policies towards religious or ethnic minorities. Israel is a case in point in terms of both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s religious support base and his policies towards Israeli nationals of Palestinian descent. With ultra-orthodox Jewish neighbourhoods and cities emerging as the communities most affected by the coronavirus, some Israeli commentators argue that the pandemic could undermine rabbinical authority on a scale not seen since the Holocaust when large numbers left ultra-orthodoxy after rabbinical advice to remain in Europe proved devastating. Health Minister Yaakov Litzman, who together with his wife, has tested positive. Ultra-orthodox rabbis had to reverse themselves in recent days as the virus ate its way through their communities in Jerusalem and other Israeli cities. “Torah no longer saves from death. The coronavirus has dealt an unimaginable blow to the rabbinical authority – and worldview – that ultra-Orthodox Jews previously regarded as infallible and eternal,” said prominent Israeli journalist Anshel Pfeffer, who authored an acclaimed biography of Netanyahu. The non-discriminatory nature of the coronavirus forced the Israeli government last week to ramp up testing in communities of Israeli Palestinians which had been described by public health experts as a ticking time bomb. The experts warned that Israeli Palestinians were an at-risk group, many of whom suffer from chronic diseases, live in crowded conditions, and are socially and economically disadvantaged. “In terms of public health, due to the present situation, the Arab communities are likely to become epicentres of the coronavirus outbreak, which will threaten the health of the entire population,” said Nihaya Daoud, a public health lecturer at the Ben Gurion University of the Negev. Increased testing of Israel Palestinians tackles Israel’s immediate problem of attempting to stymie the spread of the virus. It doesn’t, however, address the longer-term structural threat to public health posed by imbalances in health infrastructure in Israeli Jewish and Israeli Palestinian communities, a lesson many Israelis could draw from the coronavirus crisis. Drawing that lesson would challenge a pillar of Israeli policy with far-reaching consequences. By the same token, the return home of some 45,000 Palestinian workers to the West Bank for this week’s Passover holiday is likely to create bottlenecks in both Israel and the Palestinian territory after the Israeli government decided that they would not be allowed to return because of health concerns. The decision threatens to create a labour shortage in Israel, increase economic pressure on an already weakened Palestine Authority, and facilitate the spread of the virus on the West Bank given the administration’s inability to test all returnees. “Because the two populations are so intertwined, curbing the virus only in one society is impossible,” said Ofer Zalzberg of the International Crisis Group. It’s a lesson that applies universally, not just to Israelis and Palestinians. That is no truer than in Syrian and Palestinian refugee camps that dot the eastern Mediterranean. The global pandemic also casts a glaring spotlight on the risks of looking the other way when hospitals and health infrastructure are deliberately destroyed in war-torn countries like in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s forces deliberately targetted hospitals, and in Yemen, where the Saudi-UAE-led coalition did the same. No doubt, it is a lesson that anti-globalists and civilizationalists prefer not to hear. Yet, whether anti-globalists and civilizationalists like it or not, the coronavirus is global and universal. So is the science that will ultimately help get control of the pandemic and eventually stop it in its tracks. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) (This article was originally published on The Inside Arabia )

Science gets upper hand in the fight against coronavirus

America spends more than $600 billion on defence. It has one of the biggest weapon arsenals, but amid the coronavirus outbreak - the US is facing a critical shortage of masks and drugs.&nbsp;

Countries stockpile oil, missiles&nbsp;as a strategic reserve and not medicines. However, this outbreak has rendered those strategic reserves useless. It's time to redefine strategic reserves because missiles and oil won't help, medicines will.

A report from 2018 says the US spends $81 billion a year to protect oil supplies around the world. Last year, the US government allocated more than 600 billion dollars for defence.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration shared this year's budget and the plan was to cut expenditure on health. 
 
WATCH: 
&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-edit-why-a-strategic-reserve-for-medicine-is-the-need-of-the-hour-gravitas-291223/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Trump wanted to cut $844 billion in 10 years for health, but that plan went for a toss because last month, Trump had to sign a $2 trillion coronavirus bill.

Nobody was prepared for this pandemic, and hence, America is being forced to spend more on health care, to be fair, every other country is.

According to a report, 47 per cent of drug supply in the US comes from India. America has something that is called the strategic national stockpile - a stock of medicines and medical supplies maintained for a crisis like this.

The stockpile has been maintained for 22 years now. It has around $7 billion of supplies, but some of it has not been completely restocked.

According to a report carried by the Washington Post, &nbsp;the US hasn't restocked N95 masks in the national stockpile. Millions of maks were used up in 2009 during the H1N1 outbreak.&nbsp;

Had countries like the United States prioritised public health over potential wars, things may not have been so bad.

By no stretch of the imagination can India boast of a solid public healthcare system. There are too many problems, but the medicine supply is not one of them.

India manufactures 70 per cent of the world’s supply of hydroxychloroquine, making it the biggest global supplier of this anti-malaria drug.

The present situation solidifies India's position as the world's pharmacy. India ranks 3rd globally in pharmaceutical production, supplying drugs to more than 200 countries.

The coronavirus crisis has disrupted China-based global supply chains. The world has no other option, but to turn to India for help.

Who would've thought an anti-malarial drug, which has not even got scientific backing as a cure, would make superpowers scramble.

This crisis has disrupted&nbsp;a lot of things, including our concepts of what is a strategic reserve - in times of a pandemic, it's medicine.&nbsp;

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

America spends more than $600 billion on defence. It has one of the biggest weapon arsenals, but amid the coronavirus outbreak - the US is facing a critical shortage of masks and drugs.

America spends more than $600 billion on defence. It has one of the biggest weapon arsenals, but amid the coronavirus outbreak - the US is facing a critical shortage of masks and drugs. Countries stockpile oil, missiles as a strategic reserve and not medicines. However, this outbreak has rendered those strategic reserves useless. It's time to redefine strategic reserves because missiles and oil won't help, medicines will. A report from 2018 says the US spends $81 billion a year to protect oil supplies around the world. Last year, the US government allocated more than 600 billion dollars for defence. Earlier this year, the Trump administration shared this year's budget and the plan was to cut expenditure on health. WATCH: × Trump wanted to cut $844 billion in 10 years for health, but that plan went for a toss because last month, Trump had to sign a $2 trillion coronavirus bill. Nobody was prepared for this pandemic, and hence, America is being forced to spend more on health care, to be fair, every other country is. According to a report, 47 per cent of drug supply in the US comes from India. America has something that is called the strategic national stockpile - a stock of medicines and medical supplies maintained for a crisis like this. The stockpile has been maintained for 22 years now. It has around $7 billion of supplies, but some of it has not been completely restocked. According to a report carried by the Washington Post, the US hasn't restocked N95 masks in the national stockpile. Millions of maks were used up in 2009 during the H1N1 outbreak. Had countries like the United States prioritised public health over potential wars, things may not have been so bad. By no stretch of the imagination can India boast of a solid public healthcare system. There are too many problems, but the medicine supply is not one of them. India manufactures 70 per cent of the world’s supply of hydroxychloroquine, making it the biggest global supplier of this anti-malaria drug. The present situation solidifies India's position as the world's pharmacy. India ranks 3rd globally in pharmaceutical production, supplying drugs to more than 200 countries. The coronavirus crisis has disrupted China-based global supply chains. The world has no other option, but to turn to India for help. Who would've thought an anti-malarial drug, which has not even got scientific backing as a cure, would make superpowers scramble. This crisis has disrupted a lot of things, including our concepts of what is a strategic reserve - in times of a pandemic, it's medicine. (Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)

WION Edit: Why a strategic reserve for medicine is need of the hour

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-virus-can-last-on-face-masks-for-a-week-banknotes-for-days-study-291161">coronavirus</a> knows no social boundaries, it does not discriminate. From politicians to movie stars to athletes, the pandemic has been particularly tough on the rich and famous.

The virus-induced slowdown is eroding the fortunes of the billionaire club.&nbsp;

In just two months, the Wuhan virus has made a dent of $408 billion in the wealth of the world's top 100 billionaires.

With operations halted and factories shut, the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/global-death-toll-from-coronavirus-tops-75000-291140">coronavirus </a>is not working out for India's richest man. Mukesh Ambani, the chairman of Reliance Industries has seen his net worth tank by 28 per cent in 60 days.

Reports indicate that his net worth fell 300 million dollars each day in the last 2 months. The impact has been severe, Ambani is no longer among the top 10 richest men in the world.&nbsp; 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/coronavirus-induced-global-downturn-worse-than-financial-crisis-a-decade-ago-imf-290529">Also Read: Coronavirus-induced global downturn worse than financial crisis a decade ago: IMF</a> 
 
Ritesh Agarwal, the 26-year old founder and CEO of Oyo hospitality group, has decided to forego 100 per cent of his annual salary for this year because the company's evaluation has dropped to $6 billion from $10 billion.

China was the company's largest market outside India, but due to the pandemic bookings for Oyo rooms have dropped abysmally. The company has been forced to lay off 7,000 employees across China.

Ritesh Agarwal too is no longer in the top 100 list, he may soon lose to the tag of being the world's second-youngest billionaire.

Gautam Adani, founder &amp; chairman of the Adani Group, is estimated to have lost 37 per cent or $6 billion dollars of his wealth.

Shiv Nadar's, HCL founder &amp; chairman's, wealth has declined by 26 per cent which is close to $5 billion.&nbsp;

Uday Kotak, the chairman of the Kotak Mahindra Bank, has lost $4 billion dollars which is 28 per cent of his wealth.

Globally, 86 per cent of billionaires on the Hurun list have seen their wealth decline. This includes the king of luxury, Bernard Arnault. His net worth fell $30 billion in the last 2 months. 
&nbsp; 
Amancio Ortega, the owner of the Zara Group, saw a decline of 21 per cent in his wealth which has fallen by $17 billion dollars.

The Mexican businessman magnate, Carlos Slim, shed 24 per cent of his wealth. He too lost $17 billion in the last 2 months.

And Jeff Bezos has lost $9 billion in the two month period, but he remains the world's richest man with a net worth of $131 billion.

However, it's a curious coincidence that some billionaires, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/as-coronavirus-becomes-a-global-threat-who-china-ties-need-greater-international-scrutiny-291137">mostly in China</a>, are becoming richer despite the pandemic. 
&nbsp; 
Alex Xu's, the founder of Shenzhen-based ventilator manufacturer Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics, net worth has risen 26 per cent to $13.5 billion in the last 2 months. His company is supplying the world with ventilators to fight the coronavirus.

Eric Yuan's, the US-based founder of video-conferencing app Zoom, net worth has skyrocketed. It has risen by 77 per cent.&nbsp;

The founder of New Hope, the biggest animal feed producer in China, Liu Yonghao's wealth has risen by 20 per cent to $15 billion.

And Qin Yinglin's, the chairman of Muyuan, fortune has risen by 16 per cent to $22 billion.

As the masters of the economic universe lose money due to the Wuhan coronavirus. China's puzzling success story needs to be studied and&nbsp;investigated.

&nbsp;

The coronavirus knows no social boundaries, it does not discriminate. From politicians to movie stars to athletes, the pandemic has been particularly tough on the rich and famous.

The coronavirus knows no social boundaries, it does not discriminate. From politicians to movie stars to athletes, the pandemic has been particularly tough on the rich and famous. The virus-induced slowdown is eroding the fortunes of the billionaire club. In just two months, the Wuhan virus has made a dent of $408 billion in the wealth of the world's top 100 billionaires. With operations halted and factories shut, the coronavirus is not working out for India's richest man. Mukesh Ambani, the chairman of Reliance Industries has seen his net worth tank by 28 per cent in 60 days. Reports indicate that his net worth fell 300 million dollars each day in the last 2 months. The impact has been severe, Ambani is no longer among the top 10 richest men in the world. Also Read: Coronavirus-induced global downturn worse than financial crisis a decade ago: IMF Ritesh Agarwal, the 26-year old founder and CEO of Oyo hospitality group, has decided to forego 100 per cent of his annual salary for this year because the company's evaluation has dropped to $6 billion from $10 billion. China was the company's largest market outside India, but due to the pandemic bookings for Oyo rooms have dropped abysmally. The company has been forced to lay off 7,000 employees across China. Ritesh Agarwal too is no longer in the top 100 list, he may soon lose to the tag of being the world's second-youngest billionaire. Gautam Adani, founder & chairman of the Adani Group, is estimated to have lost 37 per cent or $6 billion dollars of his wealth. Shiv Nadar's, HCL founder & chairman's, wealth has declined by 26 per cent which is close to $5 billion. Uday Kotak, the chairman of the Kotak Mahindra Bank, has lost $4 billion dollars which is 28 per cent of his wealth. Globally, 86 per cent of billionaires on the Hurun list have seen their wealth decline. This includes the king of luxury, Bernard Arnault. His net worth fell $30 billion in the last 2 months. Amancio Ortega, the owner of the Zara Group, saw a decline of 21 per cent in his wealth which has fallen by $17 billion dollars. The Mexican businessman magnate, Carlos Slim, shed 24 per cent of his wealth. He too lost $17 billion in the last 2 months. And Jeff Bezos has lost $9 billion in the two month period, but he remains the world's richest man with a net worth of $131 billion. However, it's a curious coincidence that some billionaires, mostly in China, are becoming richer despite the pandemic. Alex Xu's, the founder of Shenzhen-based ventilator manufacturer Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics, net worth has risen 26 per cent to $13.5 billion in the last 2 months. His company is supplying the world with ventilators to fight the coronavirus. Eric Yuan's, the US-based founder of video-conferencing app Zoom, net worth has skyrocketed. It has risen by 77 per cent. The founder of New Hope, the biggest animal feed producer in China, Liu Yonghao's wealth has risen by 20 per cent to $15 billion. And Qin Yinglin's, the chairman of Muyuan, fortune has risen by 16 per cent to $22 billion. As the masters of the economic universe lose money due to the Wuhan coronavirus. China's puzzling success story needs to be studied and investigated.

World's rich and famous hit hard by coronavirus outbreak