Business Recorder Column March 31, 2020

Origins and challenges of coronavirus pandemic

Rashed Rahman

The current COVID-19 illness gripping the world is caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, the second severe acute respiratory syndrome virus to emerge since 2002. As a result of its rapid spread, whole cities, regions, even countries are in lockdown, with hospitals under pressure from patient surges and shortage of protective and curative equipment. China, where the initial outbreak occurred in Wuhan, is breathing easier since the pandemic is in decline, affording a gradual and incremental loosening of the lockdown in Wuhan and other parts of the country. This success has enamoured a large part of world opinion to the China ‘model’ of combating the virus.

But before we examine the China ‘model’ and contrasting approaches elsewhere (that arguably have ‘elevated’ the US and Europe to the dubious distinction of the worst afflicted parts of the globe), it may be instructive to trace the origins of the virus and its subsequent rapid spread globally.

The earlier SARS epidemic was ascribed to originating in bats, subsequently spreading to humans. The current coronavirus is ascribed to the consumption of pangolins in Wuhan. Whether this is later proved scientifically or not, these ascriptions point the way towards understanding the origin of pathogens and their transmission in contemporary times.

The literature argues that industrialised modes of agriculture for profit maximisation produce pathogens such as Salmonella and Campylobacter at the site of production centres. But COVID-19-like viruses originate on the ‘frontiers’ of capitalist production, where the drive for profit maximisation has taken a serious toll of forests and wildernesses and given birth to a taste for wildlife as exotic food. The processes of natural selection that created immunity from pathogens has been eroded by industrial-type production of agricultural, livestock and poultry products, leaving them free to infect local human communities and travel up the supply and interconnectedness chain to large cities and then the world. Exotic wildlife products extracted at the edge of forests and wildernesses in periurban areas also can follow the same path. In short, capitalist agricultural and food production as well as the exotic wildlife products so much in demand may between them be the culprits responsible for transmission of pathogens and deadly viruses worldwide. Of course the real villain remains unfettered capitalism, for whom neither nature’s increasingly delicate ecology nor human welfare can be allowed to stand in the way of the drive for maximisation of profits. In this schema, profits, not people, are priority.

To tackle these capitalist practices is a bigger question encroaching onto the domain of politics and economics. However, that is a debate to be explicated another day. Currently, the issue of how to tackle the coronavirus pandemic, learning from other countries’ successes and failures, is top of the agenda.

China’s approach to tackling the virus, starting from the epicentre Wuhan, was predicated on a suppression programme, going all out fast enough to drive the outbreak into extinction (or as near it as to pose no further major threat). Given that despite its embrace in the last four decades of capitalism, the Chinese regime is still communist, permitted a mobilisation of lockdown measures that other, less disciplined societies have found difficult if not impossible to emulate. Without getting bogged down in the debate about balancing virus suppression measures with minimising economic hardship for the poorest because of its appreciation that half-hearted incremental strict measures would only cause greater and longer pain than a total approach, and being bolstered by its social safety nets to mitigate economic hardship for the most vulnerable, China’s ‘blitzkrieg’ against the coronavirus has succeeded beyond imagination. Infections from returning travellers or local infections are declining and dwindling to insignificant proportions. An estimate of Chinese efficiency and discipline can be gauged from the fact that when the pandemic first broke out in Wuhan, the Chinese authorities built an isolation 100-bed hospital on the outskirts of the city in 10 days, a project the Americans said would take a year!

For reasons of political structure and culture, not many countries, even if they wish to, will be able to emulate the Chinese ‘model’ in toto. However, the most important and critical steps can and must be taken by more liberal regimes the world over if mankind is to see the back of the coronavirus pandemic with minimum human deaths and in the shortest time frame of economic and social disruption as possible.

Experience has shown that, short of the total Chinese approach, the priority has to be mitigation, i.e. ‘flattening the curve’ of infections by reducing the rate of the spread of the virus so as not to overwhelm the healthcare sector (which in Pakistan is already inadequate in terms of hospital beds, equipment, etc, let alone specialised isolation facilities). Those detected as having been infected need to be quarantined, and the population at large induced to practice social distancing and other preventive measures. These measures may not end up being implemented as efficiently as in China, but they will act as mitigatory effects.

Another aspect of the suppression of the coronavirus outbreak must consist of tracing those who may have been in contact with the infection and putting them through the testing and quarantining routine. In addition, private hospitals and other spaces that can be used as isolation centres for the infected must be commandeered to strengthen the capacity in the public sector for this purpose. Testing volume must be dramatically increased to cover all suspected infections to the extent humanly possible. China’s dispatch of medical teams and equipment to Pakistan in this hour of need is one more proof of the bonds between the two neighbouring countries.

Last but not least, medical professionals must be prioritised as far as protective equipment is concerned otherwise we risk losing our ‘frontline’ force in this war. Equally, the Corona Tiger (youth) Force Imran Khan wants to raise to provide the poor and daily wagers food supplies at their doorstep must be provided protective gear and trained in preventive measures so as to avoid turning acts of kindness into sources of further infection.

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder Editorial March 31, 2020

Not letting our guard down

The coronavirus pandemic fatalities toll in Pakistan is still comparatively low at 21 deaths so far, especially compared to countries like China, Italy, Spain and the US. But this should not lull us into complacency since the number of cases is still rising and has crossed 1,500 so far, with Punjab now overtaking Sindh. In a press conference on March 27, 2020 after a meeting of the National Coordination Committee, Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan spelt out the steps the federal government was taking to meet the challenge of the coronavirus pandemic. First and foremost, the federal government has lifted the ban on goods transport but the ban on public transport will continue. Food-related industries are to continue to function to ensure an adequate and uninterrupted supply of essential goods and discourage panic buying that has been in evidence in some areas, but factories must take all necessary precautions to prevent a spread of the pandemic. This is an inherently tough task since distancing in a work environment is not easy. Imran Khan compared Pakistan’s situation favourably with countries like Italy, Iran and the US, but stated the federal government was preparing for the worst-case scenario of a possible sharp rise in the number of cases. This is wise since the experience of countries worst afflicted shows the tendency of the pandemic to acquire an exponential rise after a relatively slow start. However, on the question of contact with opposition leaders to forge a consensus countrywide on combating the pandemic, Imran Khan flatly refused and trotted out as justification his ‘corruption’ mantra. While admitting the failure of the federal and Balochistan governments to handle the influx of returning pilgrims from Iran at Taftan well, Imran Khan announced that gas prices would be kept stable, a relief fund set up to mitigate hardship amongst the poor, and a youth platform established called Coronavirus Relief Tigers (CRT) to provide food items at the doorstep of daily wage earners whose localities were sealed to prevent the spread of the virus. The only concern regarding the CRT is whether the country can provide sufficient protective equipment to the young volunteers to keep them safe from infection by the virus. The PM also appealed to Pakistani expats to donate generously to a fund being set up under the State Bank of Pakistan to bolster the country’s foreign exchange reserves against any possible decline and the rise of the dollar vis-à-vis the rupee. Both trends have been seen in recent days and, with the economy bound to suffer because of the necessary lockdown, both these trends may continue. Next week, Imran Khan announced, a fund for monetary assistance to daily wage earners would also be set up, which would be in addition to the Ehsaas programme.

On the day PM Imran Khan spoke to the press, there were mixed reports of congregations in mosques for the Friday prayers. Although the clerics have by and large swung round to the necessity of curbing prayer congregations in mosques, this sentiment will receive a shot in the arm from Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s endorsement of the call to avoid such gatherings. Meantime the encouraging news is that China has sent a medical team and equipment to help Pakistan in its fight against the virus. What needs to be learnt from the experience of China and other countries is that mass testing is crucial but only of those carrying symptoms. This has proved critical elsewhere in helping flatten the curve of fresh infections to avoid the healthcare system being overwhelmed. The only other lacuna is the stubborn insistence of Prime Minister Imran Khan not to seek to take the opposition on board while laying aside his political positions in the interests of a holistic national effort so badly required. As it is, efforts, although positive, are still dispersed amongst the federal and provincial governments, amongst the latter the Sindh government’s performance being praiseworthy. It should not be forgotten that the virus is no respecter of boundaries; it has flattened the world. What the crisis needs according to healthcare experts is a whole-of-government approach centring on prevention, detection, response and mitigation. Surely the conjuncture facing the country today enjoins on Imran Khan the duty to help bring together all the country and its political forces to pull together and help the country face this enormous challenge.

Business Recorder Editorial March 27, 2020

Sports fallout

There is hardly any aspect of life that has not been impacted by the coronavirus pandemic. It comes as no surprise then that sports, that flagship of competitive humanity, should also be affected. In recent days, a rash of cancellations and postponements of major world sports events and tournaments has been in evidence. But perhaps the biggest blow was delivered on March 24, 2020 when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced the postponement of the Tokyo Olympics scheduled to be held July 24-August 9, 2020. The postponement decision had been on the cards for days if not weeks as the coronavirus pandemic rolled over the globe, inducing lockdowns in many countries worst affected and social distancing appeals in all the rest. Sports imply spectators, which implies crowds. That meant that such gatherings simply could not stand in the face of the fear that the coronavirus pandemic could spread through contact between players and players, players and fans, and spectators and spectators. Thus almost all major sports have announced cancellations and postponements of events and tournaments in recent days, a long list that includes football, cricket, tennis and others. Athletes and their respective national Olympics associations had been cogitating the viability of the Tokyo Olympics in the current situation for weeks. But the decision finally came after the IOC spoke to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and local organisers. The decision pushes forward the games, which will retain the Olympic flame already set alight in Fukushima without the usual attendance by athletes and spectators, to no later than summer 2021. The flame will be stored and remain in Fukushima until the new schedule of the Tokyo Olympics is announced. Putting a brave face on a devastating blow to Tokyo’s organisers of the event, who have already spent $ 28 billion on arrangements and completed so many stadia and sites well ahead of time, the IOC and Tokyo organisers agreed that the Olympic Games in Tokyo could stand as a beacon of hope to the world during these troubled times and that the Olympic flame could become the light at the end of the tunnel in which the world finds itself at present. One difficulty that looms in summer 2021 is that the World Athletics championships are scheduled for August 6-15, 2021 in Eugene, Oregon and the international federation of swimming has planned its world championships in Fukuoka, Japan on July 16-August 1, 2021. However, both bodies have agreed to show flexibility and reschedule if necessary to accommodate the Tokyo Olympics in a crowded international sports calendar.

Life, as so many have commented by now, seems unlikely to ever be the same again in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. In all aspects, work, personal, social, and yes, sports, things will have to be organised very differently than what has been the norm in the past. Even should the pandemic abate of its own accord combined with the precautionary measures the world is taking, or succumb to the discovery of a vaccine cure sometime in the near future, it seems bound to leave an indelible impression on human affairs across the board.

Business Recorder Editorial March 26, 2020

Pompeo’s dash to Kabul

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo dashed to Kabul in an unannounced visit on March 23, 2020, just one day after hopes for a breakthrough in the stalled intra-Afghan dialogue were raised by a Skype video conferencing exchange between the Taliban and Afghan government. However, despite long meetings with rivals Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah, a frustrated Pompeo was unable to heal their rift. Returning to Washington via Doha where he met the Taliban, an exasperated Pompeo announced the US was cutting $ one billion aid to Afghanistan, with another cut of $ one billion in 2021 and further cuts after that. The step marks a devastating blow to a country whose GDP is merely $ 20 billion. The immediate cut alone constitutes 20 percent of Afghanistan’s crucial aid from the US. There are indications that Washington now is committed to withdrawing its troops by the agreement deadline of April 2021, irrespective of what happens because of the rift at the top of the Afghan ruling structure, the risks entailed in ignoring continuing and increasing attacks by the Taliban after the agreement, and the added affliction of the coronavirus pandemic that potentially could devastate a poor country struggling with the war.

To recall, the US-Taliban agreement signed on February 29, 2020 in Qatar envisaged a reduction in violence leading hopefully to a ceasefire and a prisoner swap between the Afghan government and the Taliban to pave the way for the intra-Afghan talks between the two sides, scheduled originally to begin on March 10, 2020 in Oslo, Norway. All this was to create the conditions for a foreign troops reduction if not withdrawal, particularly of the bulk of US forces from Washington’s longest war abroad. The prisoner swap as laid down in the US-Taliban agreement was intended to free 5,000 prisoners by the Afghan government against 1,000 held by the Taliban. However, the flaw in this arrangement was the exclusion of the Afghan government from the Qatar talks. This led to the perception in the Afghan government that it was being abandoned by the US and thrown under the Taliban bus. Lacking any other leverage, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani initially refused to release the prisoners prior to the start of the intra-Afghan dialogue, particularly since the Taliban consistently described the Kabul government as a US ‘puppet’. This ‘offer’ was in turn rejected by the Taliban, creating the semblance of an impasse in the peace process. With no doubt some pressure from Washington, President Ghani then softened his stance and offered to free the prisoners in groups, 1,500 before and 3,500 after the intra-Afghan talks started. That too was flatly refused by the Taliban. Meanwhile, Taliban attacks against the Afghan security forces have been on the uptick since the Doha agreement, compelling Washington to remind the Taliban of their commitment to reduce violence. This admonition does not seem to have had the desired effect. So the scenario resembles nothing more than a merry-go-round of Afghan government offers through statements and their rejection by the Taliban, whose attacks against the Afghan government forces continue. It is to break this impasse that the US Special Representative on Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad restarted his efforts to get the intra-Afghan dialogue back on track. The solution he suggested was ‘virtual engagement’ via video conferencing and this has transpired in the presence of the US and Qatar delegations.

Pompeo had his work cut out for him in Kabul. First and foremost, he had to assure the Afghan government that the US is not ditching it or leaving it to its own devices. This was never easy, given the declared intent of Washington to withdraw its forces. Second, Pompeo had to persuade President Ghani to show greater flexibility on the prisoner exchange to remove the roadblocks to a continuation of the intra-Afghan dialogue, which still has many miles to go and many other issues to discuss apart from the prisoner swap. Third, Pompeo had to put the best face possible on the compulsion to have separate meetings with President Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah, the two rival candidates and claimants of victory in the Afghan presidential elections (both have taken oath of office of the president separately). This was necessary to push both ‘incumbents’ to work together in the interests of peace. Now Pompeo’s ire after his failure to persuade in Kabul has strengthened the perception that the US intends to withdraw no matter what the consequences. That may well end up throwing the whole peace process off kilter.

Business Recorder Column March 24, 2020

Pakistan Day musings

Rashed Rahman

Pakistan Day, March 23, 2020, passed this year in novel fashion. The coronavirus pandemic caused the cancellation of the traditional military parade on the day as well as the proliferation of symposia to reflect on the importance of the anniversary of the passing of the Lahore (later dubbed Pakistan) Resolution passed by the Muslim League in its historic meeting in the Punjab capital in 1940. Being a national holiday, the day produced a ‘natural’ lockdown across the country.

Speaking of lockdowns, whose necessity and efficacy are now the subject of debate here and throughout the world, reference can be had to Prime Minister Imran Khan’s second address to the country on the coronavirus emergency. He argued that given Pakistan’s concrete circumstances and limitations, a total, countrywide lockdown would cause great hardship to the (at least) 25 percent of the population below the poverty line and critically dependent on daily wages. Instead, Prime Minister Imran Khan argued, people should voluntarily and responsibly exercise social distancing and eschew unnecessary coming out of their homes or indulging in panic buying of goods of everyday use.

The two main opposition parties, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) critiqued Prime Minister Imran Khan’s address as betraying the absence of any plan with the federal government to combat the pandemic. Both parties insisted there was no alternative to an immediate and complete lockdown.

This disagreement was overtaken by the Sindh and Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B) governments imposing a 15-day and indefinite lockdown respectively on March 22, 2020. Even the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) government in Punjab followed suit with the announcement of a 14-day lockdown the next day. These developments reflect the alarm in these provinces at the rise in cases of those suspected of being infected (5,650 according to Special Assistant to the PM Dr Zafar Mirza), confirmed (646 according to Dr Mirza, 799 according to media reports), and fatal (six so far). Against this stands the lonely figure of five cases of recovery from the infection.

Pakistan’s figures so far compare with those worldwide of 188 countries affected, 300,000 people infected, 13,000 deaths and the recovery of 95,000 people from the infection. After the virus first emerged in Wuhan, China, Italy today is the worst hit country, having surpassed China’s toll of infections and fatalities (the latter in dramatic decline due to the stringent lockdown and amazing healthcare mobilisation by China). The US is the third worst hit country, not the least because President Donald Trump as usual fumbled when the pandemic first hit. Europe, with the dubious distinction now of the centre of the global epidemic, has gratefully accepted the help in terms of equipment and medical personnel offered by China, Cuba and Russia. These humanitarian gestures will endear these countries to people all over the world.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) hit the nail on the head when it argued for rethinking our national priorities so that people, not profits, shape the country’s economic system, keeping in view the coronavirus situation that demands an immediate increase in allocations for health, low income housing and social safety nets in the federal and provincial budgets (implying less spending on our war machine). The HRCP demanded rights-based economic measures without further delay. It also stressed the need for government to invest in providing protective gear to medical staff on the front line of the struggle against the pandemic. Further, HRCP demanded the testing for the corona virus to be nationalised and made free of cost, and small businesses to be provided non-collateralised credit and tax breaks provided they retained their staff.

HRCP’s statement and its thrust can equally be applied to the world at large. Those arguing that China’s model in tackling the outbreak cannot be reproduced in democracies offer at best a foolish argument, given that even democracies impose stringent and necessary measures in times of war or crisis. Better the suspension of ‘normal’ life and work for a short period than a contribution to rising fatalities as the patchwork shutdowns and voluntary social distancing fail to prevent the outbreak from spreading and the number of cases rising exponentially (as has happened in Italy, Spain and France, in that order of seriousness). As things stand today, 35 countries are in lockdown, with some one billion people worldwide confined to their homes. Perhaps much more is needed in this direction.

Self-medication is as useless as it could prove detrimental to people’s health. Hence anti-malarial drugs that people all over the world started using in an effort to prevent or cure the corona virus are now being discouraged if not positively banned. So far, there is no cure for the affliction, although scientists are working day and night in a number of countries to develop a vaccine. The most optimistic forecasts still speak of at least a year before such a vaccine could become available after clinical trials.

Humanity’s capacity to overcome the pandemic should not be underestimated. In the past, and the Spanish flu that killed 50 million worldwide at the end of World War I and then died out naturally deserves special mention as the closest in living memory, the level of scientific and medical knowledge and technology available today is incomparably more advanced and hopefully will prove capable of finding a vaccine/cure that will banish the coronavirus from our collective lives.

However, no ‘vaccine’ seems capable of curing the undeniable questioning of the current dominant capitalist system as incapable of meeting the people’s healthcare and other needs and wresting itself away from ‘service’ to the interests of the rich. It is at seminal moments like this in world history that revolutionary changes insert themselves into the consciousness of humanity, challenging all received wisdom and complacent arguments for the status quo.

Life, work, love, are all going to change immeasurably in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. The signs of this radical change are already there even before the virus has been defeated. With its passing, is it possible to imagine a world reverting to ‘business as usual’ in the interests of the global capitalist moneybags? In that intriguing question lies the terrain on which the struggle for revolutionary change post-coronavirus may well be fought.

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

The March 2020 issue of Pakistan Monthly Review (PMR) is out

The March 2020 issue of Pakistan Monthly Review is out. Link: pakistanmonthlyreview.com

Contents:

1. Professor Dr Maqsudul Hasan Nuri: Security Perceptions and Pitfalls of Cognitive Biases.

2. Rashed Rahman: Book Review of Husain Haqqani’s Reimagining Pakistan.

3. Dr Maria Rashid: Book Review of Dr Ayesha Khan’s The Women’s Movement in Pakistan.

Rashed Rahman
Editor, Pakistan Monthly Review
Director, Research and Publication Centre

Business Recorder Editorial March 20, 2020

Pandemic threat

It comes as no surprise that in a world struggling to cope with the corona virus, Pakistan’s healthcare system, which is known not to be top of the line, should fail to grapple with the enormity of the task. The worst lapse has been the failure to manage suspected infected carriers at our borders, of which the Taftan border with Iran, one of the countries worst hit by the pandemic, presents the worst example. Travellers from Iran comprise overwhelmingly religious tourists, some of whom may have visited the holy city of Qom, considered one of the worst centres from which the virus has enveloped Iran. At the Taftan border crossing, the returnees were herded together without any precautionary measures and then some of them allowed to travel to their homes in the rest of the country. The alarm was raised by Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah, whose province so far has reported the highest number of cases. An interesting sidelight on this issue was thrown up when reports said Special Assistant to the Prime Minister Dr Zafar Mirza was pulled up by Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan for travelling to Taftan to oversee arrangements for the quarantine of returnees from Iran on the grounds that this was a provincial remit. This reflects a failure on the part of the PM to grasp the gravity of the problem, which potentially is not less than a national catastrophe, requiring all authorities, federal and provincial, to pull together to combat the threat without quibbling about jurisdiction. The pandemic’s rapid spread globally after it first emerged in Wuhan, China, should have alerted the Pakistani authorities to the danger. However, so far, with the exception of Sindh whose Chief Minister, Syed Murad Ali Shah has led from the front, the authorities in the rest of the country have responded to the crisis haltingly, with delays, and despite some efforts, inadequately. Hospitals throughout the country appear unprepared for the possibility of being inundated with corona virus cases, to the detriment of these institutions’ ability to treat the other patients that throng their corridors, particularly public sector hospitals. Doctors and nursing staff in many of these institutions have been protesting inadequate safety equipment such as protective suits. The markets have seen a radical drop in customers, while some panic has persuaded people to stock up on things of everyday use in anticipation of the total lockdown of public places, which so far is at best, with the exception of Sindh, a partial and patchy measure. Unfortunately, as often happens in such situations, some unscrupulous people have been trying to exploit the crisis by hoarding, smuggling and overpricing items much in demand, such as face masks and sanitisers. It is by now almost axiomatic that the impact on the global economy (and Pakistan’s) could tip the world into recession. Although some emergency funding on soft terms is being offered by the World Bank (WB), Asian Development Bank (ADB), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other international financial institutions, the former two having committed to providing US dollars 238 million and 350 million, respectively, it remains to be seen in Pakistan’s case whether adequate funds are available to make the necessary arrangements of equipment (especially testing kits and ventilators) to prevent a major health catastrophe.

It seems obvious by now that the government needs to arrange the wherewithal on a countrywide basis for testing for the virus, quarantining those discovered to have been infected, and find the right balance between the need to ensure public safety by a lockdown and the day-to-day needs of the public. Businesses are beginning to close down to prevent gathering people within the same space. While this could entail some hardship for the poor and other classes of working people, social safety nets may have to be put in place and expanded to mitigate economic hardship. Finally, it is citizens who must rise to the challenge by practicing social distancing and avoiding public spaces and unnecessary travel outside their homes. This unprecedented global pandemic may change forever the way we live our lives, but there is hope if we learn from the success of China, the country originally struck by the corona virus, in bringing the pandemic’s spread to a halt and rolling it back.