Please click "Follow" before reading the article, so that you can see the latest content every day in time, and participate in the discussion and sharing, thank you very much for your support.
Text | Editor: Zhenhua said
Preface:
The World Health Organization, an international body that is supposed to uphold global public health, has recently stirred up widespread controversy over an incident.
The United States has found many reasons to stop paying its dues to the WHO, resulting in a reduction in WHO funding, but surprisingly, the WHO turned around and asked China to increase its contribution by 20% to make up for the huge gap caused by the withdrawal of the United States.
This request immediately caused an uproar in the public opinion field, because according to reason, the WHO should maintain neutrality and fulfill its responsibility to prevent and control infectious diseases, but during the epidemic, it was clearly closer to the United States and ignored the United States' shirking of responsibility.
We have to ask, what is WHO's mandate? In the face of the epidemic, what should it do and behave? Does it have double standards for the United States and China? Should China agree to increase its membership fees and continue to fund an institution whose impartiality is questioned?
WHO's position and responsibilities are revisited
As a specialized international organization, what is the main role and positioning of the World Health Organization? We need to take a fresh look.
WHO's predecessor can be traced back to the Bern Health Authority, established in 1900, whose main purpose is to promote international cooperation to prevent the global spread of disease, and the WHO established after World War II with the aim of "achieving the highest possible standard of health for all".
Historically, the core responsibility entrusted by WHO is to maintain public health, prevent and treat diseases, and pay special attention to the improvement of medical conditions in poor areas, which determines that it must be a neutral international institution, which should not be controlled by any country and should not serve any political goals.
So, has WHO fulfilled this role during the pandemic? I'm afraid the answer is no.
When the epidemic first broke out in Wuhan, the WHO was slow to respond, did not take timely action, and did not show its due scientific attitude on the issue of virus traceability, but cooperated with the accusations of the United States against China, which raised questions that it had deviated from the proper positioning of a neutral international health organization.
As the guardian of global health, WHO should have sent professionals to conduct on-site investigations as soon as possible to guide countries in effective prevention and control, but it is clearly behind the development of the situation in its actions.
After the pandemic, it also failed to issue early warnings or call for the international community to help, which led to the global spread of the epidemic, for which WHO is responsible.
The WHO should also adhere to a scientific attitude and not follow the trend because of political pressure from the United States, but in fact, it has lost its objective position on the issue of traceability and has not played its due role.
We look forward to the WHO moving away from political influence and truly returning to a professional institution that safeguards the health of all mankind, which needs to rethink, reorient, restore credibility, and fulfill its core responsibility to fight global infectious diseases, and only a healthy WHO can bring about a healthy global society.
WHO's failure in the outbreak
During the pandemic, the World Health Organization, the dedicated international health organization, was supposed to play a key leadership role in helping countries respond effectively to this global public health crisis, but it has shown all kinds of failures in this outbreak.
When the outbreak first broke out in Wuhan, China, WHO did not act in time, and unknown cases of pneumonia were detected in Wuhan in early January, but WHO did not declare the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern until January 30, a delay that seriously affected countries' preparedness for prevention and control.
WHO also misjudged the risk of human-to-human transmission in the early stages of the outbreak, and on 14 January 2020, WHO also said there was no clear evidence that the outbreak could be transmitted from person to person, a miscalculation that further exacerbated the spread of the outbreak.
WHO did not advise countries on travel restrictions in a timely manner, and many countries were asking WHO to establish border controls, but WHO delayed recommending travel restrictions until the end of February, again missing a critical window.
It can be said that during this epidemic, WHO did not play the expected key leadership role, and there was dereliction of duty in responding to emergencies, risk judgment, prevention and control recommendations, etc., and we hope that WHO can learn lessons, improve emergency response capabilities, and better fulfill its responsibilities in disease prevention and control.
The United States does not give money or responsibility, but the WHO can only remain silent
In this new crown epidemic, the United States, as the largest donor to WHO, not only shirked its responsibilities in the epidemic, but also defaulted on a large amount of dues, but WHO has done almost nothing about it and can only bear it silently.
As early as the 40s of the last century, the United States became the largest donor to the WHO and contributed the most to its funding, but in this epidemic, the United States not only failed to actively fulfill its responsibilities as a major country and control the domestic epidemic, but also took the responsibility on China and the WHO, trying to shirk its dereliction of duty.
More seriously, the United States also defaulted on nearly $1 billion in membership funds to the WHO during the epidemic, which is equivalent to the WHO's total budget for two years, which shows how big the financial blow is, but WHO has remained silent about this, doing almost nothing, and allowing the United States to default on its dues.
Not only that, the United States also loudly accused the WHO of obeying China's words and adopting double standards against China during the epidemic. In the end, the United States angrily withdrew from the WHO and humiliated it, but even so, the WHO chose compromise and silence.
It can be said that the United States is not only the largest donor to the WHO, but also the biggest failed country in this epidemic. However, out of dependence on the United States, WHO can only silently bear the failure of the United States, and is unable to make any criticism or condemnation, and this imbalance needs the world's attention and reflection.
Inexplicably, there are many money, so why does the WHO bother with China
After the United States announced that it would stop paying its dues, the WHO turned around and asked China to increase its membership fees by 20%, which immediately aroused public doubts, and we have to ponder, is this approach of the WHO reasonable? Can its entanglement of funds really benefit the global epidemic prevention and control?
It does not think from the perspective of human welfare, but shows panic and passivity at the moment of funding gaps, which shows that it has responded passively everywhere in this epidemic, without foresight or initiative.
As an important member of the developing world, China's status in the WHO is increasing, but if the WHO chooses to cling to China due to a funding crisis, it will inevitably weaken its prestige as an impartial and neutral institution.
Such an approach would also raise questions about whether there was an ulterior motive in its financial entanglement.
And even if China agrees to raise its dues, the US withdrawal has carved out a huge hole, and China's overpayment alone cannot erase this dislocation.
The WHO should not rush to achieve results, but fundamentally reflect that consolidating the financial foundation through reform is actually difficult to support a large international organization by membership dues and donations alone.
WHO needs to innovate ideas, develop new sources of financing such as investment funds and bond issuance, and control wasteful spending to improve the efficiency of the use of funds.
China will continue to do its best to support the development of the WHO, but this needs to be based on mutual respect, not unilateral demand, and we expect the WHO to return to its duties, show professional epidemic prevention capabilities and neutral positions, and lead the international community to unite to fight the epidemic.
China is responsible and hardworking, and the WHO turns a blind eye
During this epidemic, the Chinese government and people have made great efforts to resolutely contain the spread of the virus, and China has not only protected the lives and safety of its own people, but also won valuable prevention and control time for the world, which fully demonstrates China's image as a responsible major country.
In the face of the raging epidemic, China decisively adopted strict control measures, which had a significant impact on national life and economy, but the Chinese people fully understood and fully supported national decision-making, and the spirit of unity of will was admired by the rest of the world. Chinese selfless dedication, stick to their posts, and show a strong collective will.
Moreover, China has also actively provided medical supplies and assistance teams to countries with serious epidemics, and Chinese enterprises have worked overtime to produce masks and other epidemic prevention materials, which continue to supply the world.
It can be said that China has fulfilled its obligations as a responsible major country with practical actions, and its efforts and contributions have exceeded the scope of its obligations, but WHO seems to have turned a blind eye to China's efforts in this epidemic.
Instead of giving China the recognition it deserves, it entangles itself too much in China's fiscal responsibilities, which makes people lament the prejudice and injustice of the WHO.
China will continue to actively play its role as a major country and contribute to the building of a community of human health and health, but this should not be taken for granted by the WHO, which needs to prove its neutral position and fully affirm China's efforts, rather than making up for the support of major countries through unreasonable demands.
WHO reflects on reform and rebuilds the image of authority
The outbreak has fully exposed WHO's shortcomings and dereliction of duty in responding to emergencies, and as a dedicated international health organization, WHO urgently needs to rethink deeply and carry out thorough reform in order to re-establish its authoritative image.
WHO needs to reflect on the slow response in this outbreak, an efficient and authoritative international organization should make judgments and take action at the first time, WHO needs to establish a rapid response mechanism to greatly improve its ability to respond to public health emergencies.
More importantly, the WHO must adhere to an independent and scientific attitude, and cannot lose its objectivity and impartiality due to political pressure from a certain country, and it needs to show professionalism and find out scientific facts on issues such as virus traceability, rather than catering to the political needs of any country.
It can be said that WHO needs to learn profound lessons from the epidemic, reform the shortcomings of the existing problems, and re-establish its authoritative position in global health affairs, which requires the WHO to return to its original intention and rebuild its professionalism and authority.
Epilogue:
WHO is one example of the failures and biases of some international agencies in responding to global crises that have been amply exposed by the pandemic.
The WHO, which should have remained neutral and fulfilled its responsibility to combat infectious diseases, has clearly favored a certain country in this epidemic, not only failing to fully recognize China's efforts and contributions, but unilaterally apportioning more obligations to China after the United States unjustifiably withdrew and defaulted on its dues.
In the face of WHO's dereliction of duty and injustice, we call on the international community to actively supervise and promote its reform, and China will continue to do its best to support WHO's development, but this support is based on mutual respect, not imposed by arbitrary and random burdens.
We hope that WHO can re-examine its positioning, return to its original intention of serving all mankind, and become a solid moat that unites countries and maintains world health. China will, as always, join hands with global partners to build a community of human health and health.
See here, please "like + follow", with your support, I can continue to bring more quality content to everyone!