Quid Pro Quo: Vaccine Diplomacy Vs Global Health

While the West dominates supplies of the much sought-after AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Moderna vaccines, the likes of China and India are scoring diplomatic points with lower- and middle-income countries by pledging donations and sales of their own supplies.

VACCINE DIPLOMACY

What began as “mask diplomacy” with China utilising its capacity to mass-produce and export personal protective equipment for political gain at the start of the pandemic has now evolved into what is known as “vaccine diplomacy”. This phenomenon can be explained as a “country tak[ing] the forefront in the manufacture and distribution of vaccines [in order to] hold a strong reputation as a soft power and…advance its diplomatic influence”.

Until COVID-19, this form of diplomacy was not a common feature in international affairs. However, as we enter the second year of the pandemic, major global economies are taking advantage of the ongoing situation to strengthen ties in emerging markets and elevate their global status and influence.

INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION

With a pledge of approximately half a billion doses of their domestic vaccines to over 45 countries, China is leading the way in this campaign with rollouts already underway in 25 of them. China is specifically targeting the countries that have either been overlooked by the West or offered fewer vaccines than their rich counterparts with its “Health Silk Road” initiative. In doing so, they are hoping to expand their influence in these areas, using goodwill as a means to this end.

India is also exploiting the pandemic to realise its dreams of becoming a “global power”. New Delhi became aware at an early stage that the country’s ability to produce vaccines quickly and cheaply would play a pivotal role in combating COVID. As such, India has utilised this capacity to ship over six million vaccines globally, alongside implementing its “neighbourhood first policy”; prioritising nearby countries like the Maldives, Bhutan, Bangladesh, and Nepal. Interestingly, by introducing this initiative, India has been able challenge China’s expansionism in the area by enabling the beneficiary countries to jumpstart their inoculation programmes faster than if they had waited for the Chinese vaccines. As such, these efforts have gone a long way in mitigating the mistrust that countries like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh share for India, thereby proving the diplomatic worth of this practice

Intense competition between developed countries in the production and distribution of vaccines is a good thing in the global fight against the virus on a superficial level. Nevertheless, this superficial benefit is negated when the strategic interests of the benefactors, and more importantly, the deals by which these poorer nations have secured these vaccines are examined.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND GLOBAL HEALTH CONCERNS

Vaccine diplomacy has added fuel to the East vs West dialogue that is becoming an ever-increasing problem in the modern world. Both sides have been casting doubt on the others’ efforts. The US and the EU have openly questioned China’s motives and warned receiving countries of the possible long-term obligations that may be attached to these handouts. Although it is worth remembering that America and its allies are doing the exact same thing; packaging their vaccines with trade agreements in mind. On the other hand, China has engaged in a mass disinformation campaign seeking to undermine the credibility of western vaccines by bringing their efficacy in question and misquoting health professions to portray them as deadly. While the spin war is nothing new, in the context of the pandemic it could lead to “vaccine hesitation” which could have long-lasting consequences for global health.

Vaccine diplomacy is also being used by China as a vehicle to both manipulate the pandemic narrative and transform its image from an untrustworthy state to an international “saviour”. This is exemplified by recent relations between China and Chile. Last year, the latter had ordered 10 million Pfizer doses from the West but had only received approximately 150,000 by December. Luckily for the South American country, China was ready and willing to offer four million Sinovac doses by the following month. As a result, Chile have become the fifth most vaccinated population per capita in the world in a matter of weeks, effectively refreshing people’s perceptions of China and diluting the memory of their unscrupulous behaviour at the start of the pandemic.   

More worryingly, China is allegedly using vaccine diplomacy to legitimise its expansionism and facilitate its human rights abuses. In terms of the former, it is alleged that in return for 600,000 Chinese vaccines, President Rodrigo Duterte agreed to “tone down public criticism” in the Philippines of China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea. In terms of the latter, it has been said that the Turkish government received vaccines on the condition that the country would implement an extradition treaty that would see Uyghur Muslims being deported to China. Given the recent classification of China’s treatment of this ethnic group as “genocide”, the human rights concerns that arise from this practice are all too clear.

As aforementioned, there are clear global health benefits that can come from vaccine diplomacy. Although, unlike in the past with SARS and smallpox, there is an explicit lack of cooperation between countries which mitigates any possibility or movement towards global unity. Moreover, the likelihood of global health continuing to be an arena for international rivalry and power play should be a concern for us all.