COVID-19 drives isolationism

By JeongWon Bourdais Park

COVID-19 has killed nearly 386,100 people globally as of June 4. The World Bank estimates that global gross domestic product in 2020 will record a 3 percent contraction, in what could be the worst economic recession since the Great Depression in the 1930s. The comparison to the Great Depression in terms of economic devastation is an attempt to draw some useful lessons from previous experiences of resilience measures. But there has been rising reactionary skepticism to multilateral inter-governmental cooperation that sheds light on previously under-discussed aspects of the current crisis, which is “environmental security.”

Once the outbreak of the COVID-19 pathogen began, it spread rapidly to peak in February in South Korea. Many anticipated that the central government would implement strict measures such as an immediate full-scale border shut down. Border closure is undoubtedly a diplomatically delicate action, but nonetheless the first option that authorities would consider. However, even this straightforward policy requires efficient transnational information sharing to avoid a chaotic situation caused by the imposition of a unilateral measure.

Simultaneously in Europe and in the U.S., a growing number of racist assaults against Asian-appearing citizens and visitors was seen, causing minority groups to suffer from social and psychological anxiety. Ultra-nationalist demagogues popped up and encouraged exclusive popular nationalism. History has shown that ultra-nationalism can escalate amid an economic downturn. The isolationist approach seemingly serves national solidarity but it will also soon divide society within the nation, ultimately destabilizing social cohesion both domestically and internationally.

Anti-multilateralism, which has been a characteristic of the Trump administration, is not new, but it has been re-ignited by the U.S. president's ire towards the World Health Organization (WHO) in handling the global health crisis. Being accused for mishandling the coronavirus pandemic at home, President Trump began to antagonize the WHO for its “pro-Beijing” propensity, and finally announced plans to terminate Washington's relationship with the organization. The blame game started also on the origin of ― and in turn the liability for ― the virus. Under this current situation, the rationale of multilateral cooperation through international governmental organizations should be promoted to assist in coping with the multilayered disaster by coordinating multiple actors. Beyond that, the organizations have their own uses, for example, paying particular attention to marginalized communities in fragile states (e.g. people in Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and North Korea).

Experts have already discussed COVID-19 and its environmental consequences such as lower pollution levels in large cities. However, such a phenomenon is only an incidental effect of a temporary lockdown. Pollution levels will return to usual or even higher levels during the period of economic recovery. Pollution is not the major tenor of the current pandemic, but rather biodiversity. One needs to be cautious when raising the question of the origin of COVID-19 as the discussion itself has become politically sensitive.

Talking about certain animal species has become a highly politicized subject too. For example, inter alia, the pangolin, which is internationally protected under the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) is an endangered species. Its poaching/trading is banned according to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITIES).

What we know clearly is that the virus was first “discovered” in Wuhan, China. The live animal markets there are allegedly under control according to the Chinese Ambassador to the U.K., in a recent interview with the BBC.

National governments alone cannot effectively control people's lifestyle that is embedded within food, medicine and livelihoods. When a certain lifestyle is banned, the illegal market flourishes and the price for the banned animals rises, making the industry even more lucrative and globalized. The pandemic is not a single country's fault and the entire world is its victim. Nonetheless, environmentally-induced human health problems are complicatedly interlinked with human disruption in biophysical systems.

No single national government can effectively handle novel crises. The demand of transparent investigation and cooperation should not serve to finger-pointing or to the ostracization of a country, but as a means to collaborate in managing disasters, beyond rivalry for leadership in a new field, and to prevent future mishaps.

JeongWon Bourdais Park is currently serving as associate professor at the department of international relations and regional studies at KIMEP University in Almaty, Kazakhstan.