estern countries have taken varying approaches to combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, but most have made the same serious mistake: planning for a long-term fight with the virus while awaiting a vaccine or treatment. Several East Asian countries acted differently, treating the virus as eradicable and implementing containment and eradication strategies that allowed them to avoid lengthy shutdowns while effectively managing outbreaks. instead of treating COVID-19 as eradicable hoping for a quick vaccine or effective treatment. Unless Western countries begin seriously pursuing eradication strategies, they will struggle to successfully reopen, risking months of economic uncertainty and potential global isolation.
Differing Approaches to the Coronavirus Threat
The virus spread simultaneously through East Asia and Europe during February, but European governments did little to prepare while East Asian governments took a proactive approach. By March it was apparent the virus was loose in Italy and Germany. German Chancellor Angela Merkel gave a rare televised speech on March 18, bluntly outlining the risks from the virus and admitting that most of the population would likely contract it. The speech was also a blunt admission of defeat. Germany and other European countries would adopt long-term ‘bend the curve’ strategies meant to slow the virus's impact until a vaccine arrived. They initiated lengthy, damaging nationwide shutdowns to limit viral transmission and conserve hospital bed space.
North and South American countries struggled to acknowledge the virus's threat and implement any strategy. The United States, Mexico, and Brazil all but ignored the virus’s existence until too late and today still lack full, centralized responses.
Contrast this with some East Asian countries who, armed with epidemic experience and a healthy distrust of the upbeat information coming out of China, immediately deployed policy tools meant to contain and eliminate the virus rather than mitigate it. Those East Asian and a few Oceanic countries are near to eliminating the spread of the virus without lengthy lockdowns while avoiding the high case and mortality counts of Western countries.
The most common measures successful countries have implemented are rapid testing and tracing (South Korea and Vietnam), central quarantine (separating the infected into government run facilities or hotels which reduces in home virus transmission), constant virus surveillance via tracking apps, intrusive traveler screenings to eliminate imported cases, and transparent government communication. Western countries all but avoided most of these tactics at the beginning, condemning themselves to long struggles with the virus.
Western countries show little willingness to adopt eradication strategies. France recently asked its citizens to get used to living with the virus, while a symposium of German scientists proposed a two-phased adaptive strategy meant to manage a long term low case load with the possibility to eliminate the virus. Sweden is letting the virus run its course with minimal restrictions while the United States is reopening its economy despite no improvement in its handling of the virus.
Forecasting Differing Outcomes
American and EU countries are central to global tourism, finance, and business. If the virus becomes endemic to them, restrictions on movement to and from these countries – including mandatory testing and two-week quarantines for arrivals – will discourage travel between them and countries which have largely eradicated the virus.
Sectors requiring direct travel will suffer the most. Tourism makes up a substantial chunk of many Western economies, comprising an estimated 3.9% of the European Union’s GDP and almost 3% of the United States’ GDP. If the coronavirus becomes endemic in these countries, their economies will be vulnerable to travel alerts or bans from virus-free countries. Economies more heavily reliant on tourism, like France or Spain, are particularly vulnerable. Further, universities which receive substantial income from international student enrollment will be hit when students from virus-free countries are steered away or barred from enrolling.
The political ramifications of maintaining such travel restrictions will be significant as well. Countries like the United States or United Kingdom will resent having travel terms dictated by China or smaller allies like South Korea, Taiwan, or Australia. The United States could attempt to strong-arm countries to lower risk warnings or remove travel bans. Even if such tactics are successful, news of its mishandling of the outbreak will likely keep tourists away. Mini travel-blocs, already forming in and around the European Union, could threaten the integrity of existing borderless areas like the Schengen Zone despite efforts to keep the zone relevant.
Larger EU countries like Germany are pushing neighbors to open their borders. Italy is signaling that it will be open to European tourists by June but could close borders in the event of a second wave of infections. In the United States many states are reopening their economies while international travel restrictions remain in place. All of this is happening, however, under the reality that the virus is only spreading slower than before with many of these countries still counting thousands of new coronavirus cases daily. There remains significant risk of second waves of infection, a problem even South Korea must contend with. This possibility of viral resurgence threatens nations’ ability to permanently reopen their borders.
Meanwhile, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and possibly other regional neighbors are already emerging as the first truly open travel bloc. Most of these countries have gone days or weeks without even imported cases of the virus.
If a second wave of the virus does come, not only will East Asian and Oceanic countries be primed to avoid it, but they won't need to reevaluate their borders or travel arrangements with each other. Western countries won't be so lucky and could be forced to re-close borders. In the post-COVID-19 world, the reemergence of global travel begins with East Asia. Western countries should adapt their COVID-19 strategy now because waiting out the virus won’t just be costly. It will also be isolating.
a global affairs media network
Can the West Reopen Without Eradicating the Coronavirus?
June 8, 2020
W
estern countries have taken varying approaches to combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, but most have made the same serious mistake: planning for a long-term fight with the virus while awaiting a vaccine or treatment. Several East Asian countries acted differently, treating the virus as eradicable and implementing containment and eradication strategies that allowed them to avoid lengthy shutdowns while effectively managing outbreaks. instead of treating COVID-19 as eradicable hoping for a quick vaccine or effective treatment. Unless Western countries begin seriously pursuing eradication strategies, they will struggle to successfully reopen, risking months of economic uncertainty and potential global isolation.
Differing Approaches to the Coronavirus Threat
The virus spread simultaneously through East Asia and Europe during February, but European governments did little to prepare while East Asian governments took a proactive approach. By March it was apparent the virus was loose in Italy and Germany. German Chancellor Angela Merkel gave a rare televised speech on March 18, bluntly outlining the risks from the virus and admitting that most of the population would likely contract it. The speech was also a blunt admission of defeat. Germany and other European countries would adopt long-term ‘bend the curve’ strategies meant to slow the virus's impact until a vaccine arrived. They initiated lengthy, damaging nationwide shutdowns to limit viral transmission and conserve hospital bed space.
North and South American countries struggled to acknowledge the virus's threat and implement any strategy. The United States, Mexico, and Brazil all but ignored the virus’s existence until too late and today still lack full, centralized responses.
Contrast this with some East Asian countries who, armed with epidemic experience and a healthy distrust of the upbeat information coming out of China, immediately deployed policy tools meant to contain and eliminate the virus rather than mitigate it. Those East Asian and a few Oceanic countries are near to eliminating the spread of the virus without lengthy lockdowns while avoiding the high case and mortality counts of Western countries.
The most common measures successful countries have implemented are rapid testing and tracing (South Korea and Vietnam), central quarantine (separating the infected into government run facilities or hotels which reduces in home virus transmission), constant virus surveillance via tracking apps, intrusive traveler screenings to eliminate imported cases, and transparent government communication. Western countries all but avoided most of these tactics at the beginning, condemning themselves to long struggles with the virus.
Western countries show little willingness to adopt eradication strategies. France recently asked its citizens to get used to living with the virus, while a symposium of German scientists proposed a two-phased adaptive strategy meant to manage a long term low case load with the possibility to eliminate the virus. Sweden is letting the virus run its course with minimal restrictions while the United States is reopening its economy despite no improvement in its handling of the virus.
Forecasting Differing Outcomes
American and EU countries are central to global tourism, finance, and business. If the virus becomes endemic to them, restrictions on movement to and from these countries – including mandatory testing and two-week quarantines for arrivals – will discourage travel between them and countries which have largely eradicated the virus.
Sectors requiring direct travel will suffer the most. Tourism makes up a substantial chunk of many Western economies, comprising an estimated 3.9% of the European Union’s GDP and almost 3% of the United States’ GDP. If the coronavirus becomes endemic in these countries, their economies will be vulnerable to travel alerts or bans from virus-free countries. Economies more heavily reliant on tourism, like France or Spain, are particularly vulnerable. Further, universities which receive substantial income from international student enrollment will be hit when students from virus-free countries are steered away or barred from enrolling.
The political ramifications of maintaining such travel restrictions will be significant as well. Countries like the United States or United Kingdom will resent having travel terms dictated by China or smaller allies like South Korea, Taiwan, or Australia. The United States could attempt to strong-arm countries to lower risk warnings or remove travel bans. Even if such tactics are successful, news of its mishandling of the outbreak will likely keep tourists away. Mini travel-blocs, already forming in and around the European Union, could threaten the integrity of existing borderless areas like the Schengen Zone despite efforts to keep the zone relevant.
Larger EU countries like Germany are pushing neighbors to open their borders. Italy is signaling that it will be open to European tourists by June but could close borders in the event of a second wave of infections. In the United States many states are reopening their economies while international travel restrictions remain in place. All of this is happening, however, under the reality that the virus is only spreading slower than before with many of these countries still counting thousands of new coronavirus cases daily. There remains significant risk of second waves of infection, a problem even South Korea must contend with. This possibility of viral resurgence threatens nations’ ability to permanently reopen their borders.
Meanwhile, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and possibly other regional neighbors are already emerging as the first truly open travel bloc. Most of these countries have gone days or weeks without even imported cases of the virus.
If a second wave of the virus does come, not only will East Asian and Oceanic countries be primed to avoid it, but they won't need to reevaluate their borders or travel arrangements with each other. Western countries won't be so lucky and could be forced to re-close borders. In the post-COVID-19 world, the reemergence of global travel begins with East Asia. Western countries should adapt their COVID-19 strategy now because waiting out the virus won’t just be costly. It will also be isolating.
