WHO’s to blame? World Health Organization under scrutiny over its handling of coronavirus

1 / 7
World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus attends a daily press briefing on COVID-19, the novel coronavirus, at the WHO headquaters in Geneva. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 01 August 2020
Follow

WHO’s to blame? World Health Organization under scrutiny over its handling of coronavirus

  • UN agency responsible for global public health has lost its main source of budgetary support
  • WHO faces challenge of convincing donor countries it did not cover up the spread of the virus

DUBAI: Founded 72 years ago, with its headquarters in the Swiss city of Geneva, the World Health Organization (WHO) is responsible for promoting global public health, keeping the world safe and serving the vulnerable.

But as the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) ravages the US and many other countries after originating in China and killing thousands there, the UN agency finds itself at the center of a heated argument, with both its credibility and financial health on the line.

Last week, US President Donald Trump fired the opening salvo when he announced he was going to halt US funding to the WHO pending further evaluation.

At more than $400 million, Washington’s contribution provided 15 percent of the WHO’s 2018-19 budget. By contrast, China, the second largest economy in the world, gave about $86 million during the same period.

The UN agency, which has 194 member states, stands accused by Trump of “severely mismanaging and covering up” the spread of the coronavirus, and of having failed in its basic duty.

In response, Dr Tedros Ghebreyesus, the WHO director-general, said the impact of a withdrawal of US funding will be reviewed and the help of the agency’s partners sought to fill “any financial gaps” and ensure “uninterrupted work.”

“The WHO is not only fighting COVID-19,” he said. “We’re also working to address polio, measles, malaria, Ebola, HIV, tuberculosis, malnutrition, cancer, diabetes, mental health and many other diseases and conditions.”

Ever since the epidemic appeared in China, Ghebreyesus, an Ethiopian microbiologist and the first non-physician and African in the role, has become the WHO’s public face, in the same way that Dr. Anthony Fauci, the US immunologist and long-time director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has become “America’s doctor.”

However, simmering tension between the WHO and influential Republican lawmakers has put Ghebreyesus in an awkward position, with calls being made by policy pundits for his resignation.

Trump of course is hardly the first public figure to blame the WHO of failing to adequately assess the outbreak when it first emerged in the Chinese city of Wuhan.

Among the many actions of the WHO that have raised eyebrows is a tweet on Jan. 14 claiming that preliminary Chinese investigations had found “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission” of the coronavirus.

WHO experts were not allowed to visit China and investigate the epidemic until the total confirmed cases in the country had crossed the 40,000 mark on Feb.10.

So, did the WHO cover up for China? Dr. Theodore Karasik, a senior advisor at Gulf State Analytics in Washington DC, feels both the WHO and China could have undoubtedly done a better job.

“Speed and efficiency are two words that were not practiced at the beginning of the outbreak,” he told Arab News, alluding to the WHO’s many contentious public statements and tweets during the initial stage of the pandemic.

“Not only was the WHO behind the curve because of its refusal to describe COVID-19 as a pandemic, but China is also at fault (for) attempting to cover up the extent of the outbreak.”

He said China “absolutely” should have restricted travel sooner, but other countries as well should have taken preventive measures.

“There is plenty of blame to go around,” Karasik said. “Once again the world is reacting instead of being proactive.

“Funding for the WHO is key at the moment because of the global health emergency. Bureaucratic problems can be taken care of after the crisis is over.”




A staff member checks the body temperature of a student at the entrance of a school as students return to school after the term opening was delayed due to the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak. (AFP)

Once that time arrives, Karasik said, the world could focus on how to restructure the WHO, how to define a pandemic and how to make the UN agency more efficient.

Whether US politicians are willing to hold their fire until the coronavirus storm has passed is an open question, though.

Michael Singh, managing director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said there was a firm consensus in the US capital that China failed to act on early indications of a brewing outbreak, and even took steps to suppress the information.

“While other governments were also slow in marshaling their responses, China’s failure is singular in that it may have cost the world the chance to avert this pandemic altogether by halting the virus spread before it began,” he told Arab News.

“There is far less agreement in Washington and internationally, however, regarding to what extent the WHO should share any blame apportioned to China, though certainly the WHO did itself few favors with its frequent, florid praise for Beijing in forums like the WEF (World Economic Forum) and elsewhere.”

But is cutting WHO funding the best choice at this point of time for the US?

In Singh’s opinion, what is needed is a critical assessment of the WHO’s performance in addressing the COVID-19 outbreak in China and a determination of what reforms Washington and other donors should demand in light of the pandemic.

However, he added: “It will be difficult to gain international support for this amid the pandemic, when most governments — including key US allies whose support would be needed for such an effort — are focused first and foremost on halting the virus’ spread and mitigating its economic impact.”

Indeed, many experts are questioning the wisdom of Trump’s decision to cut funds to the WHO just when it has issued an appeal for $675 million to help battle the pandemic.

“It is unfair to blame one side or the other before an investigation is carried out into the matter,” said Ahmed Al-Astad, a scientific adviser at TRENDS Research & Advisory, an Abu Dhabi-based think tank.

“It is difficult to believe that the WHO covered up, even though it may have been slow to respond. This pandemic caught everyone by surprise, and it is this lack of preparedness that should be blamed.”

But should the WHO have supported travel restrictions much earlier than it did?

In Al-Astad’s view: “The US, China, the WHO, and a lot of other countries around the world were caught unprepared. The blame game seems to be more out of frustration than any concrete evidence.”

As the pandemic continues to cause global havoc, in hindsight “travel restrictions (in China) should have been implemented a little earlier,” according to Al-Astad.

“That would have really helped considering the tremendous amount of connectivity around the world today and there is no other way to stop the spread of this virus. Even if this was done a week earlier, things could have been different.”

While China could have done a better job, the virus quickly spread far and wide, and some countries, especially in Europe, could not prepare themselves adequately, according to Al-Astad.

“I don’t think it would have made much difference if some of these countries learned two weeks or a month before China revealed the details,” he told Arab News.

“On the other hand, there are examples of countries that reacted quickly and saved their people from a major health crisis.




Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (L) Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO) and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres (R) arrive to attend an update on the situation regarding the COVID-19. (AFP)

“The UAE, for instance, imposed a lockdown in time and prevented the virus from spreading very rapidly.”

Whatever the best course of action may be, Al-Astad said cutting funding to the WHO could push it “deeper” into China’s grip.

“The WHO is a global body and its performance, or lack of it, should not be seen from the prism of one country’s reaction,” he said.

“The need of the hour is to strengthen the funding and resources of the WHO, not the other way round.”


UK Supreme Court to rule on landmark legal challenge over legal definition of a woman

Updated 54 min 4 sec ago
Follow

UK Supreme Court to rule on landmark legal challenge over legal definition of a woman

  • Britain’s highest court scheduled to rule whether a transgender person with a certificate that recognizes them as female can be regarded as a woman under equality laws

LONDON: The UK Supreme Court is poised to rule Wednesday in a legal challenge focusing on the definition of a woman in a long-running dispute between a women’s rights group and the Scottish government.
Five judges at Britain’s highest court are scheduled to rule whether a transgender person with a certificate that recognizes them as female can be regarded as a woman under equality laws.
While the case centers on Scottish law, the group bringing the challenge, For Women Scotland (FWS), has said its outcomes could have UK-wide consequences for sex-based rights as well as everyday single-sex services such as toilets and hospital wards.
What’s the case about?
The case stems from a 2018 law passed by the Scottish Parliament stating that there should be a 50 percent female representation on the boards of Scottish public bodies. That law included transgender women in its definition of women.
The women’s rights group successfully challenged that law, arguing that its redefinition of “woman” went beyond parliament’s powers.
Scottish officials then issued guidance stating that the definition of “woman” included a transgender woman with a gender recognition certificate.
FWS sought to overturn that.
“Not tying the definition of sex to its ordinary meaning means that public boards could conceivably comprise of 50 percent men, and 50 percent men with certificates, yet still lawfully meet the targets for female representation,” the group’s director Trina Budge said.
The challenge was rejected by a court in 2022, but the group was granted permission last year to take its case to the Supreme Court.
What are the arguments?
Aidan O’Neill, a lawyer for FWS, told the Supreme Court judges – three men and two women – that under the Equality Act “sex” should refer to biological sex and as understood “in ordinary, everyday language.”
“Our position is your sex, whether you are a man or a woman or a girl or a boy is determined from conception in utero, even before one’s birth, by one’s body,” he said on Tuesday. “It is an expression of one’s bodily reality. It is an immutable biological state.”
The women’s rights group counts among its supporters author J.K. Rowling, who reportedly donated tens of thousands of pounds to back its work. The “Harry Potter” writer has been vocal in arguing that the rights for trans women should not come at the expense of those who are born biologically female.
Opponents, including Amnesty International, said excluding transgender people from sex discrimination protections conflicts with human rights.
Amnesty submitted a brief in court saying it was concerned about the deterioration of the rights for trans people in the UK and abroad.
“A blanket policy of barring trans women from single-sex services is not a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim,” the human rights group said.


Canadian university teachers warned against traveling to the United States

Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

Canadian university teachers warned against traveling to the United States

  • The Canadian government recently updated its US travel advisory, warning residents they may face scrutiny from border guards and the possibility of detention if denied entry

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia: The association that represents academic staff at Canadian universities is warning its members against non-essential travel to the United States.
The Canadian Association of University Teachers released updated travel advice Tuesday due to the “political landscape” created by President Donald Trump’s administration and reports of some Canadians encountering difficulties crossing the border.
The association says academics who are from countries that have tense diplomatic relations with the United States, or who have themselves expressed negative views about the Trump administration, should be particularly cautious about US travel.
Its warning is particularly targeted to academics who identify as transgender or “whose research could be seen as being at odds with the position of the current US administration.”
In addition, the association says academics should carefully consider what information they have, or need to have, on their electronic devices when crossing the border, and take actions to protect sensitive information.
Reports of foreigners being sent to detention or processing centers for more than seven days, including Canadian Jasmine Mooney, a pair of German tourists, and a backpacker from Wales, have been making headlines since Trump took office in January.
The Canadian government recently updated its US travel advisory, warning residents they may face scrutiny from border guards and the possibility of detention if denied entry.
Crossings from Canada into the United States dropped by about 32 percent, or by 864,000 travelers, in March compared to the same month a year ago, according to data from US Customs and Border Protection. Many Canadians are furious about Trump’s annexation threats and trade war but also worried about entering the US
David Robinson, executive director of the university teachers association, said that the warning is the first time his group has advised against non-essential US travel in the 11 years he’s worked with them.
“It’s clear there’s been heightened scrutiny of people entering the United States, and … a heightened kind of political screening of people entering the country,” said Robinson, whose association represents 70,000 teachers, librarians, researchers, general staff and other academic professionals at 122 universities and colleges.
Robinson said the group made the decision after taking legal advice in recent weeks. He said lawyers told them that US border searches can compromise confidential information obtained by academics during their research.
He said the association will keep the warning in place until it sees “the end of political screening, and there is more respect for confidential information on electronic devices.”

 


Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says

Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says

  • More than 3.5 million children in Afghanistan will suffer from acute malnutrition this year, an increase of 20 percent from 2024

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, an aid agency official said Tuesday.
The warning follows the cancelation of foreign aid contracts by President Donald Trump’s administration, including to Afghanistan where more than half of the population needs humanitarian assistance to survive.
Action Against Hunger initially stopped all US-funded activities in March after the money dried up suddenly. But it kept the most critical services going in northeastern Badakhshan province and the capital Kabul through its own budget, a measure that stopped this month.
Its therapeutic feeding unit in Kabul is empty and closing this week. There are no patients, and staff contracts are ending because of the US funding cuts.
“If we don’t treat children with acute malnutrition there is a very high risk of (them) dying,” Action Against Hunger’s country director, Cobi Rietveld, told The Associated Press. “No child should die because of malnutrition. If we don’t fight hunger, people will die of hunger. If they don’t get medical care, there is a high risk of dying. They don’t get medical care, they die.”
More than 3.5 million children in Afghanistan will suffer from acute malnutrition this year, an increase of 20 percent from 2024. Decades of conflict — including the 20-year US war with the Taliban — as well as entrenched poverty and climate shocks have contributed to the country’s humanitarian crisis.
Last year, the United States provided 43 percent of all international humanitarian funding to Afghanistan.
Rietveld said there were other nongovernmental organizations dealing with funding cuts to Afghanistan. “So when we cut the funding, there will be more children who are going to die of malnutrition.”
The children who came to the feeding unit often could not walk or even crawl. Sometimes they were unable to eat because they didn’t have the energy. All the services were provided free of charge, including three meals a day.
Rietveld said children would need to be referred to other places, where there was less capacity and technical knowledge.
Dr. Abdul Hamid Salehi said Afghan mothers were facing a crisis. Poverty levels among families meant it was impossible to treat severely malnourished children in private clinics.
“People used to come to us in large numbers, and they are still hoping and waiting for this funding to be found again or for someone to sponsor us so that we can resume our work and start serving patients once more.”


Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says

Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says

  • EMSC first reported the quake at a magnitude of 6.4

KABUL: An earthquake of magnitude 5.6 struck the Hindu Kush region in Afghanistan on Wednesday, the European-Mediterranean Seismological Center (EMSC) said.
The quake was at a depth of 121 km (75 miles), EMSC said, and the epicenter 164 km east of Baghlan, a city with a population of about 108,000.
EMSC first reported the quake at a magnitude of 6.4.

 


US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports

Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports

  • US officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China to ship goods through their countries and prevent Chinese firms from being located in their territories to avoid US tariffs

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump administration plans to use ongoing tariff negotiations to pressure US trading partners to limit their dealings with China, The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday citing people with knowledge of the conversations.
US officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China to ship goods through their countries and prevent Chinese firms from being located in their territories to avoid US tariffs, the report added.