“Given the extraordinary pandemic circumstances, and the actions undertaken by China (export to EU of medical officers, supplies, etc.), and the EU (e.g. unilateral statement of Germany keeping all medical supplies for itself, even if it does not need them). How do these actions shift the world of international affairs, and what other analysis could be drawn from them? (dispersion among EU members, individual countries, not a so called union; China as the saviour of the EU).”
As with any extraordinary circumstance (e.g. a financial crisis, an influx of migrants, etc.), Covid19 has brought back to the forefront the many divisions that exist under the EU framework. Social and economic cleavages between the Northern and Southern European countries; not to mention between the West and the East, have existed since prior to the European project. But that should not negate their importance in maintaining the strength and stability of the EU. The very fact that after 27 years, the same surface issues continue to exist and impact the 27 signatory countries is evidence that the EU still has a long way to come. To expand, a union should have a more universal response to any threat that impacts even just two or three of its members, much less every one of them. Yet, in the past few months, we have witnessed a lack of cohesion in the response of EU countries to a seemingly universal threat. Thus, demonstrating how crises such as Corona have not brought on new divisions between countries but have emphasized the existence and need to tackle those issues which have been present for decades. In this sense, the actions taken have not resulted in an immediate global shift but have instead laid the groundwork for some major changes to take place.
Before we can tackle what major changes are likely to take place, we must consider one of the main catalysts for such changes: China. As mentioned in the question, China has taken some extraordinary steps to combat the impact of Covid19 on its image. And while Xi has made a great effort to portray himself and his administration as the ‘savior of the EU,’ we’d be lying if we said he didn’t fit the part of the serpent much better than that of the savior: cunning and deceptive, depicting his self-interests as those best for a greater humanity. While Beijing waits for Brussels to eat the fruit of its labor, Xi has been hard at work in other countries to ensure China is seen as a source of competence, reason, and generosity during these troubling times; undoubtedly a difficult battle to win when the troubles began (and continue) in your country…
Given China’s PR challenge and the EU’s solidarity challenge; among other challenges, there is a greater likelihood for certain shifts to occur at a global scale, including:
- A shift towards multipolarity
- A shift towards totalitarianism
- A shift towards sweeping social unrest
Evidence towards each of these shifts has become increasingly prevalent as the Corona pandemic has progressed. First, the United States has continued on the path of isolationism with its actions towards fighting the pandemic alone; defunding the WHO and vowing to keep a vaccine to itself. This on top of the EU’s institutional problems and China’s image issue has left space for ‘middle level countries’ to begin making an impact at an international scope (see New Zealand, Australia, Taiwan, South Korea and others). Second, the pandemic has given leaders the freedom to enact whatever restrictions they deem fit for fighting Corona; regardless of the social, economic and even legal implications they may entail. Such expansive executive power has become seemingly easy to hold and difficult to lose, setting many on the road to totalitarianism. Third; partially as a reaction to the second, social unrest is sweeping the world with protests against lockdown measures (USA); protests in favor of lockdown measures (Brazil); protests against government actions prior to and during the pandemic (Hong Kong, Middle East); and protests against systems (BLM movement).
As observed, these major shifts in the international arena are already starting to take place as the extraordinary circumstances we currently live in have allowed. That said, such changes will continue (and be supported by new shifts) should certain actions also continue:
- The weakening of the EU
- The undermining of international institutions
- The persisting of isolation (as both a foreign and domestic policy)
As we discussed at the beginning, the EU has experienced grave divisions between its member states that have only become more evident during the Corona crisis. A weakened European Union will be more susceptible to global changes; regardless of the nature of the shifts. Opposingly, a stronger, more unified EU will basically act as a buffer to sudden shifts; specifically, those which cause the most amount of change or conflict as the EU holds a deep desire to keep the world as stable as possible. Thus, a weakened or all-together collapsed European Union would not only make it easier for immediate change to occur, but would also be a source of such changes (e.g. a more multilateral world leading to new power blocs).
Unfortunately, the EU is not the only institution that has been overlooked and undermined in the Corona crisis (and the months preceding it). Organizations such as the WTO and the WHO are increasingly seen as useless and unable to enact real change in international affairs as neither has an arm for ensuring their decisions are enforced, much less respected. The continued lack of support for such institutions will undeniably make the world more susceptible to sudden shifts as their lack of support reflects a lack of cooperation among nations and an increasing spirit of self-preservation.
Finally, the world of international affairs is likely to be more prone to major changes should isolation continue in domestic and foreign policy. At a national level, continuing to keep people isolated will continue to destroy the economy, heighten inequalities, and dismantle many of the rights we’ve grown to assume. At an international level, remaining isolated post-pandemic will prolong economic recovery, limit the ability to acknowledge and overcome inequalities, and provide little to no accountability to uphold human rights.
Ultimately, the actions taken by many countries- including the EU and China- have not resulted in any sudden shifts in the international arena. They have, however, laid the groundwork for more major changes to occur with less backlash in less time. How quickly these shifts take place and to what extent will largely depend upon whether Covid19 truly renders the EU and other international institutions useless. If it does, it will pave the way for isolationist and authoritarian leaders to ‘save us’ from the next threat.