Jim O’Neill, the former Chief Economist for Goldman Sachs, courted controversy recently when he commented that the world should be grateful that the coronavirus did not start in a country like India. His comments, however distasteful they may seem to some people, can’t be dismissed out of hand. The system and structure of government makes a huge difference in how a country handles a situation like the outbreak of the Coronavirus.
The virus, which originated from a fish market in Wuhan in December 2019, was taken cognizance of only in mid -January of this year. Early warnings were ignored as governmental censorship prevented the news of the virus from spreading. This meant an inordinate delay in taking precautions that could have stalled the spread of the virus. Would this have occurred in a more democratic framework? An uncensored social media and a free press would have brought the issue to light far sooner. This could have ensured that the government was much more responsive to the situation before it devolved into a crisis instead of regarding it as inconsequential until the virus snowballed into a public health emergency. International media outlets have reported that Chinese authorities turned many sick people away from hospitals. Many were refused diagnosis for fear for having to increase the death toll. Mortality rates may have been under reported and figures indicating the number of those infected may have been suppressed. In its bid to avoid a dent in its image, the Chinese government risked underestimating the scale of the crisis that confronted them. Without a counter narrative that a free press or uncensored social media provide, these statistics were, and still are, taken at face value. This means that many people were denied access to basic healthcare facilities and left to die. It also means that the world, and the government itself, did not know the real extent of the crisis till it was too late.
And yet, what China did to contain the spread of the virus after its seriousness was recognized was commendable. Would a country like India or even the United States have been able to respond the way China did? Its doubtful, at best. China’s authoritarian system ensured the absence of rumour mongering- on and off social media- preventing widespread panic. The Government was able to impose widespread restrictions on public movement which curbed the spread of the virus. Without the constraint of a right to privacy, the government deployed drones across cities to keep tabs on citizens. The Chinese government put the entire country under a complete lockdown. A clampdown on this scale is unimaginable in most countries. And yet without this lockdown, without this kind of surveillance, would it have been possible to contain the spread of the virus?
Contrast this with how the United States dealt with the virus. It ignored the pandemic till it was too late. The U.S., despite the highest number of cases in the world, has been unable to lockdown the country completely even now. Democratic norms and procedures have made governments more wary of shutting down the country. Authorities acted too late in shutting down non-essential services for fear of a recession. In addition to this, the coronavirus has become an issue of great controversy between the federal government and the states. The l constant public bickering is hardly confidence inspiring. The familiar refrain about crises bring people together has proved false in this moment, with politics becoming more and more partisan and polarised.
The free press, however, is perhaps the America’s saving grace. As the administration repeatedly downplayed the seriousness of the situation, the media kept a close watch on the ground reality. It ensured that accurate information about the virus and its spread reached both the people and the policymakers. The media, by shedding light on governmental inefficiencies, forced concrete measures to plug the holes in the system. Daily press conferences like those of President Trump, however combative and cartoonish they may get at times, promote transparency and accountability in government, increasing trust in public institutions in times of crisis.
India, however, fits in neither category. We have been able to enforce a national lockdown fairly early on. The government enjoys a high degree of public trust and has been able to use that to ensure compliance with some harsh policies. In a rare instance, Union and State governments are working together in almost perfect harmony, irrespective of party. The polarising cacophony over Shaheen Bagh and CAA-NPR-NRC has given way to bipartisan consensus. There have problems with implementation, as seen in the hordes of migrant labourers crowding bus stations, but if India is able to sustain its low infection and death rate, it will have successfully merged the Chinese and Western models to create a truly effective system. Because that is what the world needs. The firmness of the Chinese state and the openness of the West have to be combined to fight of this pandemic.
By: Anoushka Kothari
Literary Source: Bloomberg, The Economic Times
