Alla Ramilova,
PhD, Managing Director Swiss Association
“Alpine Arena for Friendship”, Coordinator SRG PA OSCE
conference in Switzerland
The need for global coordination was recognized at the very
beginning of the outbreak of this pandemic that has affected
almost all countries. In light of the ease and speed with
which the virus spread in a globalized space, many experts
asked themselves a crucial question: what if, instead of the
coronavirus, its equivalent with a far more critical
mortality would spread? What tragic consequences could this
have for the whole world?! The main historical example is
the Spanish flu that broke out in 1918. The epidemic lasted
18 months and withered out for natural reasons. According to
various estimates, between 40 and 50 million people died
from the disease and around 500 to 550 million were infected.
These numbers are considerable in spite the fact that at the
beginning of the last century mankind lived in a far less
globalized and interconnected space.
To curb the spread of the epidemic, most countries have
introduced unprecedented restrictive measures that have
affected the economic and social aspects of society.
Researchers at the University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School
of Management are collecting data on restrictive measures
online to calculate the Coronovirus Security Index (COVID-19
Government Response Stringency Index). The index is
calculated on the basis of various criteria: closure of
educational institutions, offices, public transport,
cancellation of mass events, restriction of movement in the
country and abroad, the level of testing coverage and more.
The final value of the index can vary from 0 to 100, where
100 indicates the most restrictive set of measures. For
example, using data of April 20, the countries with the most
cases, such as France and Spain, scored 100 points on the
index. Italy scored 95.24 points, Russia showed 85.71 and
the USA was awarded 76.19 points. When considering the
changes in imposed restrictions, China, for example, scored
71.43 points on the 31st of January and 47.62 points by the
end of April.
This research will allow for the creation of a global
database of governmental restrictive measures for containing
virus outbreaks, making it possible to analyze their
effectiveness in the future and to develop mechanisms for
their implementation and for mitigation of economic and
social consequences of such outbreaks.
When discussing the nature and size of the epidemic in
Europe, the EU Commissioner for Internal Market, Thierry
Breton, noted that none of the EU countries had been
prepared for the development of the outbreak. Virtually
every state found itself short of protective masks,
respiratory machines, disinfectant, hospital beds and
trained medical personnel. In addition to the sanitary and
epidemiological aspects, the current crisis has revealed a
lack of basic mechanisms for information exchange and
coordination. Worse, the common misfortune, which was
supposed to become a unifying factor, instead provoked
information wars and a geopolitical power struggle.
One of the important questions asked by experts and the
public is whether it is possible to create, on the basis of
today’s international institutions and established models of
interstate interaction, a universal system of multilateral
coordination aimed at preventing critical epidemiological
situations in the future? Another equally important question
is what are the scenarios for overcoming the imminent global
economic crisis arising as a consequence of the necessary
emergency containment measures? Obviously, given the current
level of global linkages, movement and general
interdependence, the response can no longer be limited to
narrowly specialized sanitary-epidemiological coordination –
instead, it should be multilevel, involving political,
economic, legal and information aspects.
The current crisis has shown that the mandate and mechanisms
of the World Health Organization (WHO) are insufficient for
the necessary coordination. Is it possible, given the
changed reality and the imminent global economic crisis, to
establish new rules of interaction and coordination among
countries?
The Health Silk Road. Missed opportunities? New approaches?
The nature and speed with which the coronavirus is spreading
around the planet, the difficulties that international
organizations have encountered in obtaining information and
accessing affected areas, have uncovered a lack of
institutionalized information exchange systems, even in
sensitive areas such as sanitary and epidemiology. In a
situation where there is no vaccine (according to various
forecasts, a confirmed and tested drug may appear within
10-12 months at earliest), the threat of new waves of the
epidemic remains imminent. For example, Japan and Singapore
have already been affected by the second wave of infections.
Almost all countries affected by the coronovirus are
preparing the population for the prospect of a long-term
“cohabitation” with the virus and the development of new
socio-cultural and behavioral norms.
Once the domestic situation has been more or less stabilized
and national health care systems, economies and society as a
whole have developed models of existence under the longterm
threat of a pandemic, the time will come to review the
relationships between countries, including their interaction
during the post Covid- 19 crisis. Already today,
international experts are asking questions: what will happen
to the international division of labour? What should the
supply chain expect? What changes will international trade
undergo? How will the regime for international financial
transactions change? Does the world expect “deglobalization”?
Certainly, one of the most pressing needs in light of a
permanent potential threat of the virus will be the
establishment of a multilateral system of coordination
between countries on health issues. Only a constant exchange
of reliable sanitary-epidemiological information and
coordination of measures will allow for relatively stable
international relations and functional socioeconomic “transactions”.
China’s leaders have intented to take a step in this
direction after the country had overcome its critical period
of the epidemic. This was followed by flows of medical
equipment and other protective supplies to the rest of the
world including countries in Europe, North America, Latin
America and Africa. Delegations of Chinese doctors were
dispatched to places with a difficult epidemiological
situation to share their experiences.
The Chinese leadership announced that the package of
measures is at the heart of the Health Silk Road Programme,
which in turn is an important part of China’s global “Belt
and Road Initiative”, or as it is called the “New Silk Road”.
The theme of multilateral cooperation in the field of
healthcare under the “Belt and Way Initiative” was first
mentioned in 2015 in the three-year plan “Exchange and
Cooperation on Health, 2015-2017”.
The main idea of the project was the modernization of the
global health system. It included strategic medium and
long-term goals of crucial importance in current times, such
as the creation of a communication platform in the field of
health, development of health forums at the
intergovernmental level as well as the development of
multilateral mechanisms for the prevention and control of
infection diseases.
The global health communications platform is the most
relevant task in current times. Given the rapid spread of
infections and the unpredictability of the epidemiological
situation, access to and exchange of reliable information
related to the outbreak is critical.
The lack of uniform standards, norms of conduct and exchange
of information under the threat of a pandemic, as
demonstrated by the example of the non-admission of
representatives of the World Health Organization to affect
area of Wuhan, China, can have tragic consequences for all
countries.
For what reason did most Western countries refuse to join
the Chinese Health Silk Road Initiative five years ago? In
the opinion of many experts, the initiative lacked a
well-defined concept and international standards necessary
in order to gain international legitimacy and engage other
countries, especially Western ones. The document was too
densely filled with appeals for the strategic strengthening
China’s global weight and influence.
Is it possible and under what conditions to revive the
Chinese initiative of the global system of cooperation in
health care?
If it were possible to overcome the “China-centricity” of
this initiative, which has traditionally been rejected by
Western countries, and develop clear rules based on
international standards, the model of multilateral
cooperation based on the historical ties of the Silk Road
could become a symbol of balanced participation and dialogue
between the “generalized West” and the “generalized East”.
Such a model may also be in demand in a post-pandemic
period, when focusing on how to overcome the economic
crisis, restore economic growth, create jobs and restore
broken economic ties. According to the forecasts of the
International Monetary Fund, the world’s GDP will decline by
3 percent in 2020, which is far worse than the backlash of
the 2008 financial crisis (-0.1). According to the IMF chief
economist, Gita Gopinath, should the pandemic continue and
the decline of the world economy exceed 8 percent in 2021,
the International Labour Organization predicts that 25
million people could lose their jobs.
The forthcoming crisis is predicted to be much harsher than
the 2008 financial crisis. It is worth mentioning that it
was through the coordinated actions of governments of
developed and developing states that the world economy
managed to recover in a fairly short period of time. China’s
contribution to the overall basket of country stimulus
measures proved to be very impressive, totalling up to $563
billion in financial injections.
This time it is still unclear whether the measures taken in
the sphere of monetary and fiscal policy will be
coordinated.
The New Silk Road and international norms. The role of the
OSCE PA
As epidemiological conditions improve in most countries, the
number of people infected decreases and governments relax
quarantine-related measures, the concerns about the
socio-economic crisis triggered by the pandemic and the
fight against it have become more visible.
While major governments are focusing on domestic health
security and citizens’ socio-economic priorities, global
coordination and joint crisis management have been
extensively discussed in virtual format by international
organizations (IOs).
For example, the United Nations has presented a «Road Map
for the immediate socio-economic response to Covid-19». The
UN has identified three «cornerstones of the response».
The first is the Solidarity Response Fund (a WHO initiative
established in March to finance the fight against the
coronavirus). The second is the UN plan for a global
humanitarian response to the pandemic. The third is the
implementation of the UN socioeconomic recovery plan.
The important role of parliamentarians in building a system
of social trust during the Covid-19 crisis was discussed at
the online meeting of the Bureau of the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly (OSCE PA). The meeting emphasized that in the
difficult period of restricted movement, every effort should
be made to continue the work of the OSCE PA as an important
multilateral platform, including coordination between the
legislative and executive branches of government.
The experience of the past years has shown that the OSCE PA
is not only a representative multilateral forum uniting
parliamentary delegations from 57 countries on the axis from
Vancouver to Vladivostok, but provides effective tools to
contribute to solving specific political and socio-economic
problems. Among the important functions are to organize the
monitoring and observation of elections, to participate in
resolving local conflicts, to mitigate migration crises, to
prevent terrorist threats, and to fight corruption and
cyberthreats.
It should be noted that not so long ago an interesting
interdisciplinary body was formed within the OSCE PA. On the
initiative of 17 delegations of the OSCE PA member states in
Minsk, a Silk Road Support Group (SRG) was established under
the OSCE PA in July 2017. Today, the Group includes 25
delegations representing Western and Eastern Europe,
South-West and Central Asia.
Both the Group’s leaders and delegations members have
consistently emphasized that the Group is not a “promoter”
of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, but aims to create a
representative, legitimate communication platform for the
exchange of information and experience among the delegations
of countries interested in developing multilevel cooperation
between West and East based on the symbolic model of the
historical Silk Road. It should also be noted that China,
not being a member of the OSCE PA, is thus not a member of
the SRG.
Within the framework of the Group’s activities and upon
initiative of the delegations of the OSCE PA member states,
conferences were organized in Baku, Vienna, Minsk and
Andermatt (Switzerland). At each of these conferences, the
host country tried not only to demonstrate its own
investment potential and economic advantages, but also to
identify its national “New Silk Road”, with which it could
later be integrated into the global Eurasian initiative.
It is noteworthy that all of the past conferences were
attended by representatives of the executive branch at the
level of ministers of foreign affairs and economy, as well
as by heads of big national companies. This shows that most
countries, including Western Europe, are not opposed to the
New Silk Road and are interested in creating global channels
of interaction between Europe and Asia so long as those are
founded on terms of equality and non-discrimination.
The role of a so-called “guarantor” could be assumed by the
SRG OSCE PA, focusing on the creation of mechanisms for
multilateral coordination, monitoring, and regular exchange
of information on the organization of interdisciplinary
events involving representatives of the executive and
legislative branches of government, businesses, and the
expert community.
The OSCE PA, as an organization with experience in
monitoring processes, broad multiparty representation, the
ability to influence international public opinion as well as
the decision- making of executive authorities through
parliamentary mechanisms, is best suited for this role.
The predicted severe and long-lasting crisis of the world
economy will require new non-standard intercountry
instruments and channels of interaction between different
regions of the world. The renewed “New Silk Road” may become
one of the models of multilateral cooperation, offering a
new agenda of economic and socio-cultural relations between
the so-called developed and developing countries.
With the Participation of Alexandra Furio, University
of St. Gallen
