This article has been written by Ms. Pooja Padmanabhan, a 3rd year student of VIT, University Chennai. 

ABSTRACT

With an emphasis on the COVID-19 pandemic, the article, “Global Health Diplomacy in the Face of Pandemics: Lessons Learned from COVID-19” explores the critical role that global health diplomacy plays in managing pandemics. The article focuses on how the epidemic has affected diplomatic relations, including how travel limitations have an influence on foreign commerce operations and tourism revenue. It also talks about how the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator was established in order to help in the development, production, and equitable distribution of COVID-19 treatments, vaccines, and diagnostics on a worldwide basis. Alongside these, the Indian perspective of diplomacy has also been touched upon. 

Keywords: diplomacy, global, health, COVID-19, India, economy, geopolitics,

INTRODUCTION

Health is a crucial aspect of foreign policy. The enhancement of technology and development has indeed contributed to this interconnectivity of the world. Thus in such a scenario, any outbreak of diseases would lead to a very spontaneous spread of the same across the globe.. Traditionally, diplomacy is limited to the arena of socio-political and economic issues, but with changing times, all the actions impacting the behavior of the states contribute to diplomacy. Some of the crucial areas that changed the dynamics that the nation-states shared amongst each other include, travel restrictions, the production and distribution of vaccines, and the sharing of medical resources. Though these may seem trivial at the outset, it does hit the economy at a huge level indeed. For instance, the travel restrictions significantly impact the revenue accrued out of tourism and the pace of operation of international trade diminishes. Moreover, the latter indeed contributes to self-reliance, but at the same time, it reduces the accessibility of products to people. Socially, this can hamper the lives of immigrant residents, and international students amongst others. 

Early on, it became evident that finding common ground in the creation, manufacturing, acquisition, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines—which held the prospect of being able to eradicate the virus—would require a stepped-up global health diplomacy effort. This led to the establishment of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator in 2020, a significant international partnership to expedite the creation, manufacturing, and fair distribution of COVID-19 diagnostics, therapies, and vaccines, all accomplished in record time.

In governance spaces, these stakeholders convene to engage in negotiations, discussions, and decision-making regarding significant health-related matters. The WHO is the most significant global health platform due to its ability to establish norms and negotiate treaties. The World Health Assembly is a yearly forum for negotiations, discussions, and decision-making among its 194 Member States. The WHO’s mission to ensure that all of its citizens have the highest possible standard of physical and mental well-being is supported by about 4000 participants worldwide. All governing bodies now convene virtually during COVID-19 pandemic. 

GLOBAL HEALTH DIPLOMACY?

The practice of global health diplomacy did not come before, for the first instance in the COVID-19 pandemic. From the onset of international relations, this practice of global health diplomacy has been prevalent as a practice. The significance of the practice of health diplomacy is indeed being put to light owing to the blatant re-surfacing of such practice of 

Global Health Diplomacy ( hereinafter referred to as GHD) proves to be very useful for negotiating better policies, and building strong partnerships ( COVAX facility), amongst many others.  Moreover, it has helped nation-states to unite towards a common objective which is indeed an optimistic geopolitical shift, that has helped nations move on from their nationalistic priorities. 

Though from the lens of international law, the questions brought down to the Negotiation table, quite often put countries in a divided situation, which does not have an effective outcome. But the health emergency that the COVID-19 pandemic brought did change the way nations behaved. It is indeed a rare instance in world politics to see nations choosing to resolve disputes peacefully. The instant pandemic is one of those rarest of occurrences, that sought to build new equations of diplomacy.

Global solidarity is indeed a key aspect of analyzing the diplomatic relations of the countries on the health front. Did nations demonstrate an optimistic application of this solidarity? This question does indeed not lead to an affirmative response. It can be considered as one of the crucial areas where there is indeed a huge scope of learning. The main aim of vaccine equity is based on this simple thought that the WHO Director-General had once said, “ no one is safe until everyone is safe”. The risk of diseases is not eradicated until all the nation-states don’t gain access to the vaccine facility. The prioritization of national response over international coordination was indeed one of the reasons for the failure of global solidarity. 

But at the same time, this can’t be criticized in entirety as all these countries are independent nation-states, which have the power of sovereignty and the UN Charter also doesn’t entertain infringing the sovereign equality for all its members under article 2(1) of the UN Charter. Thus, from the understanding of municipal law though the principle of vaccine nationalism does seem like a wrong practice, this school of thought does distinguish municipal law from international law. From the lens of international law, this is indeed the interest of the countries that bring nation-states together, which indeed eventually occurred. 

To maintain friendly relations among the nation-states United Nations also intends to promote, solutions to international health problems under Article 55 of the UN Charter. World Health Organization looks at this as an initiative that connects public international law, health, management, economics, negotiations, and shaping policies for global welfare. 

First, the hegemonic shift between the USA and China appears to be accelerating. This is evident from the pattern in which China provides supplies and coordination to nations severely impacted by the virus, while the USA keeps failing. Undoubtedly, a May 2020 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) snap poll indicates that most American IR researchers (54 percent) disagree with the idea that the COVID-19 outbreak has significantly changed the balance of power in international politics.

Global health diplomacy has been greatly impacted by the geopolitical tensions between China and the United States since the beginning of 2020. These conflicts peaked during the 

during the COVID-19 pandemic, the US announced its plan to leave the WHO (a move later reversed by the Biden administration). Despite border closures, protectionist measures, and trade restrictions put in place during the early stages of the pandemic response, multilateralism and cooperation in Europe have generally increased as a result of the threat posed by COVID-19. To support the COVAX programme, the African Union has obtained an additional 270 million doses of the COVID-19 vaccine from manufacturers for its member states. 

LESSONS LEARNT

The instant pandemic did not add new lessons alone, but it gave a sort of relevance and a new shape to the existent philosophies. One such is that of global solidarity.  The success of global solidarity more lies in the unity with which the international community collaborates in addressing the problem, and the chances of succeeding in solving the same. The international cooperation in vaccines and related medical research and development is another illustration of the significance of global solidarity as demonstrated by COVID-19. We need to have the resources to stop a pandemic. These are specifically referred to as therapeutics, vaccines, and diagnostics (also known as medical countermeasures or MCMs). Covid-19 vaccines continue to save a great deal of lives because they were developed at an astounding rate. In a similar vein, quick MCM R&D will be essential to both anticipating and combating the next pandemic. However, it is unrealistic to expect one nation to handle all MCM R&D, stockpiling, and manufacturing. The development of many of the recently developed COVID-19 vaccines actually involves several countries, spanning from basic research to production. 

 More is needed for effective infectious disease crisis management globally than just improving quarantine regulations and developing vaccines. The DIME concept,( which breaks down as follows: 1) diplomacy, 2) intelligence, 3) military action, and 4) economics ) which categorizes such measures into four areas and has been applied to other forms of international crisis, should be studied to develop an effective response to a pandemic. 

The WHO, long regarded as a symbol of international solidarity, has long been essential to the management of infectious disease crises. However, the WHO had already faced criticism for its actions prior to the pandemic, particularly in relation to the 2013 Ebola outbreak in West Africa.  Some nations criticised the WHO once more in the early stages of COVID-19, even going so far as to claim that the UN and the WHO were not necessary as an international collaborative framework. Nonetheless, the WHO is still a key player in the worldwide battle against infectious illnesses. Specifically, one essential instrument for managing infectious disease crises is the World Health Organization’s International Health Regulations (IHRs). 

THE INDIA STORY

There always exists the choice that nation-states tend to have. India’s distinct approach to GHD, which was founded on humanitarian diplomacy, placed a strong emphasis on empathy and teamwork as well as the welfare of humanity by adopting the idea that “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam,” or “the world is one family.”

Many nations initially reacted to the pandemic with haphazard crisis diplomacy, fearing an unidentified health danger. The focus on national responses worldwide and the geopolitical standoff between the United States and China prevented this from happening. Normally, countries around the world would have cooperated to address the threat under the World Health Organization’s (WHO) auspices after the organization declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). 

In fact, 2020 saw a growing decoupling of global health, which presented challenging issues for global health diplomacy. For instance, the US first insisted on referring to the pandemic as COVID-19 ( “the China virus disease” in key political resolutions)  and rejected accords that mentioned supporting the WHO 

ONLY UN?

Aside from the WHO, a number of other international forums, such as the G20, the G7, and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), are taking on roles that are becoming more and more significant. The fact that infectious disease crises are now seen as security issues, as well as public health issues, is largely responsible for this institutional development. 

CONCLUSION

The article concludes by considering the lessons that can be drawn from the COVID-19 pandemic, including the importance of international cooperation in the development of vaccines, global solidarity, and the changing responsibilities of international forums in addressing global health issues. In order to delve deeper into the subject matter, it also offers citations to supplementary materials such as papers, reports, and the UN Charter. Global health diplomacy is a vast and intricate system made up of numerous non-health stakeholders, global health institutions, a variety of mechanisms, and a wide range of actors, as demonstrated by the different reactions to COVID-19. 

REFERENCES

This article is a report that was originally authored by Haruko Sakamoto, and published on the JSTOR website. The link for the same is herein. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep53056.4

This article was originally authored by Sanaz Taghizade and three others, and published on the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s website. The link for the same is herein. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8310918/

This is the UN Charter that was originally published on the United Nations website. The link for the same is herein. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text 

This article was originally authored by Vijay Kumar Chattu amongst many others, and published on the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s website. The link for the same is herein. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38235005/

This article titled Responding to COVID-19: A Resurgence of Global Health Diplomacy, is originally authored by Ilona Kickbusch, Mihály Kökény, Michel Kazatchkine and Ece Karaman and published on Revista Mexicana de Politica Exterior. The link for the same is herein. https://revistadigital.sre.gob.mx/index.php/rmpe/article/download/18/17/30 

This article is originally authored by Sitakanta Mishra , published on Indian Foreign Affairs Journal Vol 15 No. 2, accessed on JSTOR. The link for the same is herein. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48630172