CORONA PANDEMIC.

What is a coronavirus?

Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans. In
humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the
common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)
and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus
causes coronavirus disease Covid-19.

What is a pandemic?

The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines a pandemic as “an outbreak of a new
pathogen that spreads easily from person to person across the globe.”

According to A Dictionary of Epidemiology, the standard reference for epidemiologists, a

pandemic is “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing
international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people.”

Simply put, a pandemic is the worldwide spread of a new infectious disease. When a new
disease spreads over a vast geographical area covering several countries and continents,
and most people do not have immunity against it, the outbreak is termed a pandemic.The
word is from the Greek ‘pan’ meaning ‘all’ and ‘demos’ meaning ‘people’. It stretches over a
larger area, infects more people and causes more deaths than an epidemic. But the term
refers to the spread of disease, not its potency or deadliness. There is no fixed number of
cases or deaths that determine when an outbreak becomes a pandemic. It, however, implies
a higher level of concern than an epidemic.

What is an endemic?

The term endemic refers to the constant presence and/or usual prevalence of a disease or
infectious agent in a population within a geographic area. It is an outbreak that occurs at a
predictable rate in a certain area or among a set population. Chickenpox is classed as an
endemic as it occurs at a high but predictable rate among youngsters. Endemics remain at a
steady state, but do not disappear from a population. Hyperendemic refers to the
persistent, higher levels of disease prevalence in a particular place.

What is an epidemic?

An epidemic will see a disease rapidly spread among a large number of people in a given
population. During an epidemic the disease will normally spread in two weeks or less.
Epidemics may be the consequence of disasters of another kind, such as tropical storms,
floods, earthquakes and droughts. There have been 14 epidemics since 2010, including the
Ebola epidemic in West Africa, which killed 11,300 people between 2013 and 2016. In 2003,
the SARS outbreak was classed as an epidemic—it killed nearly 800 people.

10 worst pandemics in human history

HIV/AIDS pandemic (at its peak, 2001-12)
Cause: HIV/AIDS

Death toll: 36 million

Currently, there are between 31 and 35 million people living with HIV, the vast majority of
those are in Sub-Saharan Africa, where 5% of the population is infected, roughly 21 million
people. Between 2005 and 2012, the annual global deaths from HIV/AIDS dropped from 2.2
million to 1.6 million.

Flu pandemic (1968)

Cause: Influenza

Death toll: 1 million

From the first reported case on July 13, 1968 in Hong Kong, it took only 17 days before
outbreaks of the virus were reported in Singapore and Vietnam, and within three months
had spread to The Philippines, India, Australia, Europe, and the United States.

Asian flu (1956-58)

Cause: Influenza

Death toll: 2 million

Asian flu was a pandemic outbreak of Influenza A of the H2N2 subtype that originated in
China in 1956 and lasted until 1958. In its two-year spree, Asian flu traveled from the
Chinese province of Guizhou to Singapore, Hong Kong, and the United States.

Flu pandemic (1918)

Cause: Influenza

Death toll: 20-50 million

Between 1918 and 1920, a disturbingly deadly outbreak of influenza tore across the globe,
infecting over a third of the world’s population and ending the lives of 20 to 50 million
people.

What separated the 1918 flu pandemic from other influenza outbreaks was the victims;
where influenza had always previously only killed juveniles and the elderly or already
weakened patients, it had begun striking down hardy and completely healthy young adults,
while leaving children and those with weaker immune systems still alive.

Sixth Cholera pandemic (1910-1911)

Cause: Cholera

Death toll: 800, 000+

Like its five previous incarnations, the Sixth Cholera Pandemic originated in India where it
killed over 800,000, before spreading to the Middle East, North Africa, Eastern Europe and
Russia.

Flu pandemic (1889-1990)

Cause: Influenza

Death toll: 1 million

Originally the “Asiatic Flu” or “Russian Flu”, its first cases were observed in May 1889 in
three separate and distant locations, Bukhara in Central Asia (Turkestan), Athabasca in
northwestern Canada, and Greenland.

Third Cholera pandemic (1852-1860)

Cause: Cholera

Death toll: 1 million

Generally considered the deadliest of the seven cholera pandemics, the third major
outbreak of Cholera in the 19th century lasted from 1852 to 1860. Like the first and second
pandemics, the Third Cholera Pandemic originated in India, spreading from the Ganges River
Delta before tearing through Asia, Europe, North America and Africa and ending the lives of
over a million people.

The Black Death (1346-1353)

Cause: Bubonic plague

Death toll: 75-200 million

From 1346 to 1353, an outbreak of the Plague ravaged Europe, Africa and Asia, with an
estimated death toll between 75 and 200 million people. Originated in Asia, the plague most
likely jumped continents via the fleas living on the rats that so frequently lived aboard
merchant ships.

Plague of Justinian (541-542)

Cause: Bubonic Plague

Death toll: 25 million

Thought to have killed perhaps half the population of Europe, the Plague of Justinian was an
outbreak of the bubonic plague that afflicted the Byzantine Empire and Mediterranean port
cities, killing up to 25 million people in its year long reign of terror.

Antonine Plague (165 AD)

Cause: Unknown

Death toll: 5 million

Also known as the Plague of Galen, the Antonine Plague was an ancient pandemic that
affected Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece and Italy, and is thought to have been either Smallpox or
Measles, though the true cause is still unknown.

The Post-Corona World

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times …
Asad Ejaz Butt

Three months, more than three-hundred thousand dead and nearly three quarters to a
billion affected and the endgame to the worst crisis that humanity has faced cannot still be
predicted.

International governments, development organizations, global healthcare systems and

medical response units are all ‘stunned’. Doctors and health professionals are overwhelmed
by the scale and intensity of the pandemic whose origins are known with little certainty and
whose end no one knows will be what. In a few more weeks, the crisis would hit its peak,
causing severe and irreparable damage to the humanity and the economies and global
systems that were built painstakingly but with a touch of arrogance. Many observers believe
that it’s a wake-up call for humanity; religious clerics think it’s a reprehension for violating
religious injunctions and having forgotten the path of God. Doomsday sellers believe that
the end of the human race is near.

When World War II ended, analysts wrote that the world had become a different place to
live in. Many thought that peace was the logical conclusion of the war and it was the
ultimate state in which humanity shall dwell in the years after the war. It was a world with
several postwar characteristics. The traditional way of looking at the world, its resources
and the international political system had all changed while new systems evolved and
institutions that could keep pace with the rapidly changing world emerged. But what the
war had changed the most was the way countries interacted and looked at the world. There
was a shared sense of existence. Countries were more eager to take responsibility of their
surroundings—the world outside. This came to be known as the new world order; the order
of peace and co-existence. Dispute-resolution mechanisms were erected and international
development organizations, especially in the follow-up to the Marshall Plan, became busy in
using monetary imbalances in favour of the developed world to serve specific political and
economic ends in the developing world. Their aid caused development as well as havoc in
the recipient countries. Results have been mixed but many analysts write that they skew
towards the latter.75884465

Counterintuitively however, deep-seated hatred between states continued to have its place
and animosities intensified. By mid 1950s, the Cold War between the USA and the USSR—
the two leading world powers at the time—began to take shape and achieve ignominious
heights. Each of the two powers wanted its particular brand of politics to emerge as the
pathway to the overarching global order of peace and coexistence. International relations
experts called it the bipolar world. Loyalties were won and bought, countries switched
alliances as both communism and capitalism gained ground. Communism met its ultimate
demise in 1991 with the breakaway of the USSR into several eastern European, Central
Asian and Baltic states. The world became unipolar. It has remained the same in the last
three decades and as George Friedman predicts in his magnum opus “Next 100 Years”, in all
likelihood the United States would remain the global superpower till the close of the 21st
century. He denies predictions that China can become a challenger to the American
superiority by claiming that China’s landlockedness and regional disputes with its East Asian
neighbours would either contain it or cause its downfall, paving the way for the USA to
continue staying on top. Without a doubt, the postwar world was a changed place but was
the peace that it achieved during the early 1950s sustainable? There are several answers to
this question that I shall explore in greater detail hereunder.

The twin attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001 jolted the world order. Although the
world didn’t become bipolar again, it was certain that the containment of conflictual
relations between states, end to brutal use of force and attainment of everlasting peace
would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. Many died in drawn-out conflicts in
Afghanistan, Iraq and thereafter during the Arab Spring. Civil wars in the Muslim world and
on the African subcontinent replaced world wars while non-state actors began to substitute
states. International organizations that were established to keep peace failed and question
marks on their ability to resolve disputes were raised. The world was a changed place after
the wars, but it hadn’t learnt its lesson. Realist interests and right-wing nationalism still
dictated the international political system. In fact, this worsened further in 2015 when
populists started taking over and much of what was achieved collectively and with
consensus by the international community—steps in the right direction towards peace and
collective prosperity—was at the risk of being lost. Countries continued to breed hostilities
against each other, regional disputes escalated, and nationalities, ethnicities and religion
were shaping how states deal with their people and with each other. At the cusp of 2020
now, we have regressed to 1920 when, after World War I, the Treaty of Versailles was being
negotiated. These two seminal events in hindsight aggravated matters, instead of containing
them.b52cb4ea-8878-11ea-8a72-3b4a65ec119d_image_hires_142119

Slightly backtracking to 2019; a weak unipolar world with American hegemony diluted by
the presence of the G20 including the emerging economies (e.g. BRICS). Many countries
including China are trying to break into the American sphere of influence. China is a
contender but for once, not a close one. The size of its economy stands up to that of the US
(as per the World Bank data, China’s GDP has surpassed that of the US in PPP terms) but its
development deficits and political instability may not allow it to challenge the society and
systems that define the modern-day United States. Many would argue that the systems that
define the US are withering away, and the stability upon which the great empire was built
has begun to shake under the influence of the discriminatory and divisive politics of
President Donald Trump. The American society, and the development that it has achieved,
still leads one to imagine a world led by the US in 2050. The Trump’s America is much
different to what it was under Clinton when uniploarism was a recent phenomenon. But,
most of the changes that have occurred under Trump have only resulted in a deteriorated
perception of America around the world and has brought some loss of repute to its voters
who are now seen as somewhat less rational and tolerant. There is very little damage that
Trump may have done to the great institutions and systems that comprise the United States.
The changes that he has brought to the society are no less damaging but their bearing on
the susceptibility of the US to an imminent decline is weak.

Ethnic and colour factionalism and political division in the aftermath of the 9/11 have
rendered the US a staggeringly more polarized society than the one that would have pitched
it favourably toward stability. Two defining characteristics of the US that it clings onto ever
more tenaciously are ‘capitalism’ and ‘democracy’. Not only has it held onto these defining
characteristics of its identity, but ever since the fall of the USSR, has also preached them,
with utmost ease and without much opposition, as the most desirable economic and
political systems to the world. In doing so, it has met large successes in the developing world
where, propelled by foreign aid and international development institutions, its agenda of
sweeping the world over by democracy and capitalism has been an easy business. Both
capitalism and democracy together have lended quite naturally to globalization—a process
by which goods, people, information and culture are allowed to move swiftly across
countries and continents. International trade and laxer visa regimes and immigration
policies became popular facilitators in the process (this, of course, changed drastically under
Trump).1_J-731K3-hHjIwLdkRCDtvA

The developed world benefited most out of this arrangement, followed by some emerging
markets that have now started taking a larger share of the pie, especially ever since the
Eurozone economic crises made it a weaker partner in the deal. The developing world,
which had to become the ultimate beneficiary of the process, has albeit gained, but its gains
are trivialized in the face of the excesses that the US has made. Since opening its borders in
1979, China gained enormously. Today, it has become an economic force to reckon with. For
China, US and several other developed countries of the world, the growth of capitalism,
globalization and their own brand of democracy was a win-win situation. They could make
money from international trade and use the same to advance political agenda.

As the winners celebrated success and rejoiced their victory over all pre-existing political
and economic systems, writers like Francis Fukuyama wrote that it was the end of history.
At the same, cautioners, cautioned; they raised alarm bells over the superficiality of the
international financial system and lack of sustainability therein, underlying capitalist
tendencies like the promotion of consumerism. Some of those cracks prevalent in the
international financial system, globalization and the American-styled democracy have now
come in the open through the outbreak of the novel coronavirus pandemic.

The world today is in a fix. States are announcing stimulus packages in whatever big or small
capacities that they can. The coffers of international organizations are depleting which puts
developing economies at the peril of defaulting once their indigenous funds run out. Many
of these states have tax revenues below 10% of GDP disallowing their respective
governments to enact social safety nets, provide for reasonable health and education
infrastructure and to protect marginalized groups like the elderly, children and the
unemployed. The business community and the private sector entrepreneurs that often
express a strong distaste for the government and hardly ever want to pay taxes are now
looking towards an under-resourced state, which is also the case in Pakistan, to do magic all
of a sudden and attain the multiple ends of safeguarding their business interests by
announcing stimulus packages, protecting their ex-employees through unemployment
benefit schemes and allowing greater tax rebates and refunds so that their enterprise could
rehabilitate as soon as lockdowns lift. The average citizen who also denies paying taxes and
expresses distrust in the state, is now looking towards it for protection against the
unavailability of staple food items and an unexpected loss of income.

It is sad to think that globalization and capitalism has failed many including my friends
Chomsky, Fukuyama, right-wing populists and private sector entrepreneurs. It has left them
at the behest of a state that they advocated was malevolent and ill-meaning. The gods of
fortune today smile at the state. Left-wingers seem to dance and prance from the aisles. It’s
bad

Changing Regional and Global Dynamics due to Coronavirus

Waqas Zulfikar Sangi

Humanity has never before confronted a crisis quite like Covid-19, one that has concurrently
challenged both the limits of public health systems everywhere and the ability of countries
to work together on a shared challenge of transnational security threats. And while its
geopolitical, geo-economic, and geostrategic implications are drastically changing the world
order, and the cradle of liberalism—USA— has done nothing so far to save the dying spirit of
globalism.

Global orders have a tendency to change gradually at first and then all at once; thanks to
globalization and related effects. The question on the credibility of the global institutions,
USA. being a global superpower, and the ideas such as ‘end of history’ thesis are under
threat. Meanwhile, China as the first country to tackle the menace of Covid-19 has proved
that it is not only the democracy that ensures the public well-being and safety domestically
and globally, but authoritarianism can also do it in a better way. Is this a resurgence of an
alternative political ideology? Is the world moving towards yet another nationalism? Do we
still need super-sonic missile systems and nuclear weapons? Is Covid-19 more harmful than
the looming threats of climate change? Let’s analyze the impacts of Covid-19 on global
power dynamics.

Globalization: an end or more interdependency?

The new corona-virus is appearing to be an enormous stress test for globalization. As

serious supply chains break down, and nations reserve medical supplies for domestic use
only and air blockade to preserve territorial and national integrity, the crisis is demanding
the reassessment of the interconnected global economy. Not only has globalization allowed
for the rapid spread of contagious disease but it has also fostered deep interdependence
between private companies and nations making the world more vulnerable to the virus [as it
was the Chinese cheap labor that frequently traveled all around the world under the vision
of Xi’s new globalization—BRI]. However, it is also the same globalization that has been
saving the world. For instance, China under its mask diplomacy is filling the power vacuum
of the leading superpowers. Globalization has now become an inevitable phenomenon. The
only way to save the earth is to learn the art of living together.deglobalization-localization-
lego-globe-ben-fearnley

USA: a wounded tiger in the search of global credibility

Throughout its history, the United States has had visionary, charismatic leadership at the
time of great crises: George Washington during the revolution and the American war of
independence, Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great
Depression and World War II. Richard Nixon during the communist Soviet’s resurgence with
his containment policy, Eisenhower’s ‘Atom for Peace’ initiative for the peaceful use of
nuclear energy. Nonetheless, Trump, due to his conservative, polarized and racist ideology,
unfortunately, has not proved himself to be anywhere close to such a leader. The ‘America
first’ slogan has made the US a wounded tiger that isn’t fit to protect the jungle anymore.
Covid-19 has further cemented the argument that the populism leads to a catastrophic state
of affairs. Trump’s negligence towards the pandemic has made the US a country with
maximum deaths leaving even the Italy behind. Although US foreign policy now under
Trump is nationalism-oriented, yet it is ready to go to any means to stop the rise of China.
When the entire world is busy tackling the virus; Trump is pronouncing it as ‘just another flu’
and now it is facing the music. USA must come out of IRAN, and NORTH KOREA-phobia, it is
high time USA prioritized the non-traditional security threats in its international agenda or
else the world would soon lose its faith in the USA’s credibility.29coronavirus_editorial-
superJumbo-v7

China: the new sphere of influence

Although China hid the crisis from the world in its critical early days yet it has again emerged
from the ashes to play its responsible role on the world stage. China’s mask diplomacy is
filling the holes left by the USA and consequently helping China to mold globalization, soft
power, and public opinion in its favor. China is rising peacefully. The way it has been rising
according to its strategic culture—Silently, and cooperatively. Xi’s other achievement after
neutralizing Hong Kong protests is the saving of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the
pandemic crisis. He once again is using the notion of civilization-state and nationalism to
stay in power. Covid19 is helping China to alter the liberal world order as ‘Confucian World
order’. Citizens of Italy have replaced the EU flag with China’s red flag, the region which was
once considered ‘kingdom of globalism and capitalism’ is now influenced by the ‘reds’. The
containment policy seems to be against the USA now. Covid19 did no harm to BRI, Chinese
soft power, regionalism, and neoliberalism instead it has further consolidated the Xi’s
thought.

Nationalism versus the globalism: let the fight begin!

The Covid19 has unleashed a debate: whether the world need nationalism or the globalism?
The answer is ambiguous. But one thing is for sure, the world would surely go for
regionalism and nationalism. The political leaders due to their inefficiency have learned the
art of blaming abstract globalization and immigration inflow towards their respective
countries. Nonetheless, the pandemic is now further helping them to support their
authoritative notion of sealing the borders. However, the leaders around the world must
understand that the spirit of globalism could only save them from the curse of corona-virus
and other non-traditional security threats.coronavirussurveyhealthhabits

Technology: a good servant and a bad master

The emergence of Artificial intelligence has changed the course of almost everything. The
21st century appears to be a competing arena for ‘data’ which could be used as a tool for
staying in power. The algorithms would be used to maintain the personal health statics,
record, surveillance of all the individuals over the cost of healthy life. And the same data
would be manipulated by the strongmen for extending their power base. Gone are the days
when authoritarians used to have millions to spy in the city, social media has made it easy
for them. The global agenda for using technology as a blessing is missing, making it
vulnerable to power-mongers. Covid-19 is undoubtedly going to help them all.

Fake news and propaganda: controlling minds is controlling the world

Covid19 has also helped fake news to strengthen its roots to distort the image of truth. TV
channels are busy in telecasting the fake news about the virus’ outbreak. The conspiracy
theories in such times when humanity is crippling for its survival could bring the world on
the verge of another global war. Soon the pandemic is going to be over but the culture of lie
and fake news is going to stay with us.

The third world countries: money makes the mare go!

Covid19 would now work as an eye-opener for the poor nations. The biggest challenge here
is to China to help its fellow BRI countries and regional key players of Asia such as Pakistan,
India, and Bangladesh to materialize its dream of ‘Asia for Asians’. The war-torn regions are
now on the biggest hit of the virus. It was only Pakistan that agreed to help Afghanistan
when even the USA, and India abandoned it. Similarly, the Palestinians’ responsibility lies
upon Israel’s shoulders, Syria’s on Russia and Turkey, Iraq’s on Iran, and Africa in the sphere
of influence of China. This might be the biggest test of their temperament and spirit of a
collective good. No country has, however, emerged as victorious in this game of morality.
reporting-the-impact-of-covid-19-og

Failing global institutions: the feeble organizations amid the geopolitical rivalry

The United Nations is silent and politically biased under Antonio’s leadership. The World
Trade Organization (WTO) hasn’t been able to reduce the tariff barriers on the medical
items. World Health Organization (WHO) presents a useful global plane but lacks a global
consensus to agree upon. European Union (EU) faces existential threats and has altered the
essence of its very foundation by closing borders to their neighbors for the first time in
generations. The geopolitical rivalry has made global organizations weak and toothless. The
only country responsible for this entire mess in the global arena is the USA. First the
Jerusalem episode, then the maximum pressure policy on Iran, covert operation to kill
Qasim Sulemani- the former commander in chief of the Iranian Quds force, hasty
withdrawal from the war-torn areas and now the global indifference towards the non-
traditional security threats. In the backdrop of all this chaos, the institutions must work on
their financial system as to get rid of biased approached and dictation of a single hegemonic
player.

Not too late: humanity would survive

The world in these crucial times has to make a firm decisions. Staying with democracy or
authoritarianism? Believing in global institutions or dismantling them all? Playing global
responsible role or upholding the notion of nationalism? Ending trade barriers on medicines
or adopting protectionist trade policies at the expense of their local industry? Every decision
taken today would shape our future for generations to come. Stay home and stay safe ev

Coronavirus Rattles World Order.

In March 23, United Nations Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, issued a passionate cry
for a “global ceasefire,” asking countries to put down their arms and collectively combat the
coronavirus pandemic which, in his words, is “the true fight of our lives”. Yet, even if armed
conflict were to dissipate, it appears that Covid-19 has only magnified and expanded existing
fractures in world politics. At this critical juncture, in which the global community is acutely
vulnerable to the squabbles of great power politics, world leaders and countries have
further entrenched the deep-seated faultlines within international relations.

Coronavirus Rattles World Order logo1The “sickness of war,” as Guterres puts it, has long
been an indelible feature of geopolitics, and is unlikely to loosen its grip, even in the face of
a global pandemic. US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping have
repeatedly traded punches in an escalating trade war since January 2018, when Trump first
imposed tariffs on solar panels and washing machines. It was estimated that the trade war
cost the US roughly 300,000 jobs and $40 billion in lost exports. Furthermore, US companies
had to pay an additional $46 billion in tariffs, while US consumers were forced to spend
roughly $800 more per year due to increased prices. Similarly, it cost China $35 billion in lost
exports. Given the two countries’ interdependency, wherein 60 percent of all exports from
China to the US are products manufactured by American firms in China, this trade war was
mutually destructive. Hence, in January 2020, Trump and China’s Vice Premier Liu He signed
the US-China Phase One trade deal, under which both countries agreed to lower tariffs. It
was seen as a landmark event that signalled the beginning of a more cordial and mutually-
beneficial relationship. During the ongoing pandemic, Trump said that countries were
“working well together” when he believed that numbers in the United States and China
were going down, and he, in fact, praised his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping’s ‘strong
leadership’. However, once the falsehood of his proclamations was uncovered, and numbers
in the US began rising exponentially, he quickly changed his tune by blaming China
(apparently, in order to deflect criticism from his mishandling of the crisis). Soon, Trump and
his administration began parroting the ‘Wuhan Virus’ and ‘Chinese Virus’ narrative ad
nauseam. Furthermore, at the G-7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, the countries failed to
formulate a joint statement due to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s insistence that the
statement refer to Covid-19 as the ‘Wuhan Virus’. The other leaders refused to do so, as
they considered the term to be divisive at a time where greater cooperation was required.
However, expecting unity without a price under the Trump administration is naïve at best.
China, too, has not backed down in the face of this verbal onslaught by the US leadership.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian initiated a war of words with US President
Donald Trump when he tweeted a conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was introduced to
Wuhan, the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, by the US military. Zhao told reporters
that “no conclusion has been reached yet on the origin of the virus” and that those who say
it originated in China have “ulterior motives”. Another Chinese foreign ministry spokesman,
Geng Shuang, said that the Trump administration’s repeatedly calling it the Chinese or
Wuhan Virus is a “despicable practice” that ‘disrespects’ science and the World Health
Organization (WHO). While both countries insist that the trade deal signed in January
remains in place, the volatility of US decision-making under Trump leaves the said
agreement and Sino-American relations in a precarious position. Similarly, after Donald
Trump withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as Iran
Nuclear Deal, in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on Iran, the latter slipped into the deep
recesses of a crumbling currency, skyrocketing prices and increasing unemployment. Trump
hopes that the intensification of sanctions, through a ‘maximum pressure’ strategy, will
force Iran to renegotiate the terms of the nuclear deal. The crippling impact of US sanctions
has been magnified during the Covid-19 pandemic, during which Iran is struggling to acquire
masks, gloves, protective clothing, medicine and medical equipment, or even receive
humanitarian aid. While the US did offer aid to Iran, some have suggested that this olive
branch is simply an arm-twisting measure to force Iran to accede to American demands on
the nuclear deal. Thus, like a cornered tiger, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei refused
the US’ poisoned chalice of aid. However, he didn’t stop there. Like Zhao Lijian, Khamenei,
too, spouted unfounded conspiracies, saying that US doctors and therapists would only
come to Iran to see the “effect of the poison they have produced in person” and that the
virus “is specifically built for Iran using the genetic data of Iranians which they have obtained
through different means.” Thus, rather than ushering in a new era of cooperation and
compassion, the US has used the coronavirus pandemic to advance its existing policy
objectives, while Iran’s leadership has retreated even further into a greater state of volatility
and paranoia, thus eliminating the possibility of meaningful dialogue and a symbiotic
relationship. The Trump administration has also gleefully pounced on this opportunity to
cement its hardline immigration stance. With the closure of its southern border, where
asylum-seekers are being turned away without a right to a court hearing or an investigation
into the validity of their applications, Trump has finally achieved one of his campaign
promises: stopping immigration from the south. And even without a border wall!
Admittedly, such measures are necessary given the current situation; there is no other
alternative. However, the administration’s declaration that it is doing this for the asylees’
own good, by not “incarcerating them in closed facilities, where the disease can quickly
spread,” is questionable, to say the least. The Trump administration’s concern for asylees’
‘own good’ never stopped it from expanding the operations of border detention centres
along the southern border. It never stopped it from separating children from their families
and placing them in squalid conditions and in standing-room-only cells with no hot meals.
Nor did it bat an eyelid to the rampant sexual and physical abuse in these detention centres,
where mumps, measles, chickenpox, the flu, and scabies are commonplace. Furthermore,
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, said, “During this pandemic, a number
of health challenges arise when illegal immigrants arrive at our northern and southern
borders and are taken into immigration custody.” Similarly, Trump’s campaign sent out a
message to supporters reading: “Pres. Trump is making your safety his #1 priority. That’s
why we’re closing BORDERS to illegals.” While limiting entry to the US is a crucial
component of disease control and prevention, the administration has frequently framed
such policy decisions with an emphasis on controlling illegal immigration rather than on
protecting public health, perhaps indicating that it is using the coronavirus as a pretext to
achieve existing policy objectives. This anti-immigrant sentiment has seen a resurgence in
Europe as well, where the coronavirus has propelled a new wave of far-right white
supremacy. In Germany, the neo-Nazi group Die Rechte, The Right, says that borders should
have been sealed off weeks ago to all “non-Europeans”. In Ukraine, the far-right Azov
movement said that Covid-19 “generally isn’t the fault of white people” and that ethnic
minorities in Italy are to blame. In Italy, far-right opposition leader Matteo Salvini blamed
Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte’s government for allowing a boat carrying 276 African
migrants to dock in Sicily. Although no cases in Italy have been traced back to any of these
passengers, Salvini called for “armor-plated” borders. The governor of Veneto, one of Italy’s
hardest-hit regions, compared the “hygiene” and “cultural training” of Italians, who,
according to him, have a habit of “taking a shower, of washing, [and] of washing one’s
hands often”, with the Chinese, who he said “all eat live mice or things like that.” In
addition, Hungary’s leader, Viktor Orbán, who has long campaigned against non-European
migrants, exclaimed, “We are fighting a two-front war, one front is called migration, and the
other one belongs to the coronavirus, there is a logical connection between the two, as both
spread with movement.” These calls for border closures, driven in large part by anti-
immigrant sentiment rather than concerns for public health, have also been echoed by
Austria’s Freedom Party; Spain’s far-right Vox party leader, Santiago Abascal; and Marine Le
Pen, the leader of France’s far-right National Rally party. The underlying motives of such
attitudes were laid bare by the Identitarian Movement in Germany, who unfurled “DEFEND
OUR BORDERS” banners in Berlin. In a social media post about the demonstration, the group
wrote, “Whether because of the [coronavirus] or the onslaught of thousands of illegal
immigrants, […] border protection is a legitimate and effective way to protect a population.”
Russia, too, has used the coronavirus epidemic to fall back on its tried and trusted strategy
of sowing mistrust, instability, and panic by ratcheting up its disinformation campaigns to
undermine the power and influence of Western powers. Thousands of accounts have been
posting bogus claims that the virus was bioengineered by the US’ Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) to “wage economic war on China” and “push anti-China messages”.
Coronavirus Rattles World OrderssGiven the influence of Russian “discourse saboteurs” on
the 2016 US presidential election, the impact of these obfuscations of the truth on public
health outcomes during the ongoing coronavirus pandemic is potentially catastrophic.
Moreover, considering the propensity for Chinese and Iranian leadership to advance these
conspiracy theories, either to deflect criticism from themselves or to support their
confirmation biases of American puppeteering, they can have dire consequences for
diplomatic relations as well. In response to this potentially insurmountable threat, the UK
government created a special unit to combat Russian disinformation. Likewise, the Trump
administration accused “Russian malign actors” of creating thousands of fake Twitter,
Facebook, and Instagram accounts to “threaten public safety by distracting from the global
health response”. A monitoring team from the European Union’s (EU) diplomatic service,
too, collected “80 examples of disinformation” from “Pro-Kremlin media outlets”. They
argue that these outlets wish to “aggravate the public health crisis in western countries”
and “undermine public trust in national healthcare systems.” As for India, in the months
leading up to the coronavirus crisis, China and India were both involved in reciprocal
maritime posturing, wherein China was forging closer ties with Pakistan to undermine
India’s influence in the Arabian Sea and across the Indian Ocean. Therefore, while BJP’s
State unit president in Bengal, Dilip Ghosh, may not be a very high-ranking official, his
comments that the “coronavirus infection started from China”, and that “[China] has
destroyed nature”, and that the coronavirus is “God’s revenge” against China may be seen
as a continuation of these bubbling tensions between the two countries. In fact, the Chinese
Consulate in Kolkata “strongly condemned” Ghosh’s “erroneous”, “ridiculous and
irresponsible statement that is totally contrary to basic common sense”. Given the growing
discord between India and China, the burgeoning bonhomie between Trump and Modi, and
the deepening anti-China sentiment among India’s public during the ongoing pandemic, a
continued propagation of anti-China narratives from Indian government officials—and the
continued disintegration of Sino-Indian ties—is not entirely unlikely. During the recently
held G-20 Virtual Summit, leaders unequivocally called for a new era of globalization, in
which countries take a collaborative approach to usher in a ‘reformed multilateral’ order.
However, given that the coronavirus crisis has only forced countries to retreat further into
their shells, pursue existing policies with greater ferocity, and engage in vitriolic name-
calling, it seems unlikely that this pandemic will force countries to construct a more
cooperative international political framework.eryone! times for the world but a moment of
v

How Coronavirus is Remaking Democratic Politics

Philip Stephens

The state is back. Long live globalisation. Coronavirus is remaking democratic politics. The
paths out of the crisis will present liberal democracies with a choice between authoritarian
nationalism and an open global order founded on co-operation between states.

Watching nations seal their borders and governments assume draconian powers to combat
Covid-19, the temptation is to expect the worst. Compare the shambling performances of
US president Donald Trump and the informed statesmanship of New York governor Andrew
Cuomo, and you can see reasons for optimism. Competence shines through at moments of
crisis.

For politicians, everything but coronavirus is now trivial. Right or left, whatever their
election platforms, pledges or governing programmes, the present generation of political
leaders will be judged on their handling of the pandemic. One or two may slip through, but
emergencies on this scale do not leave many hiding places for bluffers and hucksters.

The return of government to centre stage marks the close of an era in which power and
responsibility migrated from states to markets. The response to the pandemic has seen
democratic leaders assume powers unprecedented outside wartime. The pandemic was a
consequence neither of globalisation or capitalism. But it has exposed the limitations of
unfettered markets — witness the competitive bidding for scarce resources in the US
healthcare system.

The crisis has made a bonfire of other orthodoxies. To watch governments throw trillions of
dollars into the fight to prevent economic collapse is to appreciate just how absurd was the
preoccupation of recent decades with balanced budgets, public deficits and debt-to-GDP
ratios. Of course, governments must set sustainable limits for spending and borrowing, but
the era of fiscal fundamentalism has passed.shutterstock_1678060957-1500x757

The eventual bill for the defeat of coronavirus will be colossal. At some point the debts will
have to be repaid. With luck, however, the context will be a rational discussion and
rebalancing of the respective responsibilities of government, private business and citizens.

The financial crash of 2008 proved a lost opportunity for change. The result was rising public
discontent and the spread of angry populisms of right and left. Coronavirus leaves no room
for a second hesitation. Voters across most advanced democracies are paying a price in
weak healthcare systems for ideological devotion to small-state, low-tax economics. Liberal
markets have a long-term future only if they rest on political consent.

The easy conclusion is that the pandemic will prove to be a gift to the populists and a
prelude to a lurch towards authoritarian nationalism. The return of the state can be held up
as proof that the populists were right all along about global elites. Closed borders are the
only safeguard against the outside world. The powers that states have now assumed to fight
the pandemic fit the public’s preference for security over freedom.coronavirus-successes-fp-
guide-1920x1080-1

The disinformation campaigns run by Vladimir Putin’s regime in Moscow promote just such
a message. The pandemic is cast as the work of decadent western capitalism — a crisis born
of untrammelled globalism and enfeebled western democracy. The relative success of
authoritarian regimes in beating the outbreak speaks to their innate superiority over the
west’s liberal democracies.

The narrative has a superficial attraction. The draconian shutdowns ordered by China’s
president Xi Jinping undoubtedly helped to bring the initial outbreak under control. Beijing is
now relaxing the restrictions. The snag is that the same political absolutism provided the
incentive for Chinese officials to conceal the earliest cases. As to Russia’s claims of its own
success, the jury is still out. And the Republic of Korea has shown how a determined,
efficient democracy can suppress the virus.

To the extent that any good can be said to flow from such a deadly catastrophe, it is in the
pandemic’s capacity to restore the worth of competence and honesty in democratic politics.
Mr Trump’s delusional bluster about how he is defeating the “Chinese” virus is defied daily
by the escalation in new cases. It marks out a widening divide between the White House
and the state and local authorities — Republican and Democratic alike — that are
confronting the pandemic. Polls show Americans giving the president the benefit of the
doubt, for now. But the reckoning cannot be delayed indefinitely.
In Europe, political leaders have regained the attention, and where they have shown grip,
the confidence of electorates. Straight-talking has worked. Italian prime minister Giuseppe
Conte, French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Angela Merkel have all
won strong public support for harsh measures to suppress the pandemic.

http___com.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaws

There is nothing inevitable about the restoration of faith in good government. The failure of
the European Union to show any real measure of solidarity in supporting Italy’s desperate
fight against the virus shows how easy it is even for those who preach internationalism to
retreat behind national borders. The compelling logic of enhanced global co-operation is no
guarantee of action. And, yes, the pandemic will impose a heavy cost in terms of lost
economic output and disrupted trade.

That said, coronavirus promises to open a door to the rehabilitation of government, to a

more equitable political and economic settlement, to the restoration of faith in democratic
politics and to renewed global co-operation. The question is whether the politicians choose
to walk through it.ictory for the global left.

Coronavirus and Global Economy

There are growing apprehensions among financial experts that coronavirus outbreak and
the economic fallout it has sparked could plunge the world economy into a recession.
Having largely ignored COVID-19 as it spread across China, global financial markets reacted
strongly when the virus spread to Europe and the Middle East, stoking fears of a global
pandemic. Since then, risks have been priced so aggressively that some fear a recession in
the global economy may be a foregone conclusion. Italy’s decision to put much of its
prosperous north—including its financial capital, Milan—on semi-lockdown, along with an
escalating outbreak in the United States and a precipitous crash in oil prices, is forcing
economists to reassess their predictions for how the virus will hit growth.

He world appears to be on the brink of a sudden recession. The economic disruption caused
by the coronavirus might put an end to what has been a heady decade on the world stock
market since, after the 2008 global financial crisis, low interest rates and quantitative easing
became the new normal. Markets are registering massive falls of up to 10%, unprecedented
since 2008. Billions of dollars are vanishing. The world bourses recently witnessed a Black
Monday, all over again.
At the start of this year, things seemed to be looking up for the global economy. True,
growth had slowed a bit in 2019: from 2.9% to 2.3% in the United States, and from 3.6% to
2.9% globally. Still, there had been no recession, and as recently as January, the
International Monetary Fund projected a global growth rebound in 2020. But the new
coronavirus, COVID-19, has changed all of that.

Early predictions about COVID-19’s economic impact were reassuring. Similar epidemics—
such as the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), another China-born
coronavirus—did little damage globally. At the country level, GDP growth took a hit, but
quickly bounced back, as consumers released pent-up demand and firms rushed to fill back
orders and re-stock inventories.

It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that this new coronavirus is likely to do much
more damage than SARS. Not only has COVID-19 already caused more deaths than its
predecessor; its economic consequences are likely to be compounded by unfavorable
conditions—beginning with China’s increased economic vulnerability.Coronavirus and
Global Economy34

China’s economy has grown significantly more slowly in the last decade than it did
previously. Of course, after decades of double-digit growth, that was to be expected, and
China has managed to avoid a hard landing. But Chinese banks hold large amounts of non-
performing loans—a source of major risks.

As the COVID-19 outbreak disrupts economic activity—owing partly to the unprecedented

quarantining of huge subsets of the population—there is reason to expect a sharp
slowdown this year, with growth falling significantly below last year’s official rate of 6.1%.
During the recent meeting of G20 finance ministers, the IMF downgraded its growth
forecast for China to 5.6% for 2020—its lowest since 1990.

This could hamper global growth considerably, because the world economy is more
dependent on China than ever. In 2003, China constituted only 4% of global GDP; today,
that figure stands at 17% (at current exchange rates).

Moreover, because China is a global supply-chain hub, disruptions there undermine output
elsewhere. Commodity exporters, including Australia, and most of Africa, Latin America, and
the Middle East, are likely to be affected the most, as China tends to be their largest
customer. But all of China’s major trading partners are vulnerable.

For example, Japan’s economy already contracted at an annualized rate of 6.3% in the
fourth quarter of 2019, owing to last October’s consumption-tax hike. Add to that the loss of
trade with China, and a recession—defined as two consecutive quarters of shrinking GDP—
now seems likely.Coronavirus and Global Economy344

European manufacturing could also suffer considerably. Europe is more dependent on trade
than, say, the United States, and is linked even more extensively to China through a web of
supply chains. While Germany narrowly escaped recession last year, it might not be so lucky
this year, especially if it fails to undertake some fiscal expansion. As for the United Kingdom,
Brexit may finally have the long-feared economic consequences.

All of this could happen even if COVID-19 does not become a full-blown pandemic. In fact,
while the virus is proliferating in some countries, such as South Korea, a high infection rate
is not a prerequisite for economic hardship. The specter of contagious disease tends to have
a disproportionate impact on economic activity, because healthy people avoid travelling,
shopping, and even going to work.Coronavirus and Global Economy

Some still cling to growth optimism, rooted in recent trade agreements negotiated by US
President Donald Trump’s administration: the “phase one” deal with China and the revised
free-trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. But while those agreements are far better
than they would have been had Trump stuck to the hardline positions he once defended,
they do not represent an improvement over the situation that prevailed before he took
office; if anything, their net impact is likely to be negative.

Consider the “phase one” deal with China: not only does it leave in place high tariffs; it also
remains fragile, owing to a lack of credibility on both sides. In any case, its impact is likely to
be limited. China may not be able to deliver on its promise to purchase an extra $200 billion
worth of goods from the US, and even if it does, that is unlikely to translate into higher US
exports. Instead, those exports will simply be diverted from other customers.

While global recessions are exceedingly difficult to forecast, the odds of one—particularly
one characterized by less than 2.5% growth, a threshold set by the IMF—now seem to have
risen dramatically. (Unlike advanced-economy growth, global growth rarely falls below zero,
because developing countries have higher average trend growth.)Coronavirus and Global
Economy;p,l;,

So far, US investors seem unconcerned about these risks. But they may be taking too much
comfort from the US Federal Reserve’s three interest-rate cuts last year. Should the US
economy falter, there is nowhere near enough room for the Fed to cut interest rates by 500
basis points, as it has done in past recessions.

Even if a recession does not materialize in the near term, Trump’s approach to trade may
herald the end of the era when steadily rising international trade (as a share of GDP)
buttressed global peace and prosperity. Instead, the US and China may continue on the path
toward economic decoupling, within the context of a broader process of de-globalization.
COVID-19 did not place the world’s two largest economies on this path, but it could well
hasten their journey along it.
Fate of Populism in Post-Covid-19 World
Fatima Razzaq

Political trends had never been this synchronized until the turn of 21st century when the
entire world saw a whole new lot of politicians rising around the globe. These world leaders,
labelled populists, gained more power in years to come. The 9/11, economic crisis of 2008,
and the migration crisis of 2015 whipped fear and created wedges among people as well as
peoples. These events provided fertile grounds for sowing seeds of unilateralism and
prompting disdain for traditional democracies, bureaucracies, science, accepted protocols
and existing system—the very characteristics of populism. Thus, mentioned crises became
gateway for bolstering populism.

Once again, the home to almost 7.8bn human beings and several other species is hit by an
unexplored and somewhat unknown virus resulting in a crisis of the scale, unheard in
modern era. Whereas previous crises strengthened populists every time, this crisis has
divided historians and intellectuals over the fate of populism. First camp sees populism
crumbling in the near future and its members are exploring and exposing the limits of
populism. Other camp comprises of those who expect this political trend to gain more
strength and continue in post-Covid-19 world with even more ardour. Ones belonging to
latter group are paying much attention to the similarities between the reasons and impacts
of this crisis and that of previous ones which typically ushered populist thought.

Before assessing fate of populism in post-Covid-19 world, it is pertinent to brush-up few

concepts like understanding populist thought and knowing the reasons and ways crisis
situation leads to populism. It is also essential to analyze and compare efficacy of state-level
responses – approved by different populists and non-populist world leaders – in the wake of
current virus outbreak. Finally, it can be investigated that how different aspects of populism
will be weakened or strengthened in this virus-hit
world.7043573c67614083a3c84e7a30113832

To understand the populist thought thoroughly, it must be made clear that terminologies
like populism and populist are not strictly defined. But these terms are used mostly in a
negative sense – the way capitalism and communism had been used since Bolshevik
Revolution by contending blocs. Anyhow, in “Populism: A Very Short Introduction”, Cas
Mudde gave most acceptable schematic of populism in a scientific manner. According to
Mudde, populists see their society being separated into two antagonistic groups – “the Pure
People” and “The Corrupt Elite”. Former group sees latter one as the reason for various
social as well as economic ills. This division and grouping could be at national, international
or any other level. Similarly, reasons for this division could range from social class to religion
to ethnicity. This is very much in accordance with the “versatility,” Professor Nadia Urbinati
of Columbia University has recognized with the phenomenon of populism. This discussion
infers that populist agenda can be furthered in an environment where lives and livelihoods
of one section of a society are endangered by other section. Mainstream politicians seem
oblivion to this situation and then populists come forward vowing to take measures to allay
fears of pure people. Moreover, social experimentation has revealed that populist leaders
are generally anti-liberal; promote anti-elitism; disregard science; disdain traditional
democracies, accepted manners, protocols and pluralism; and tend to make direct contact
with their people carrying bundles of false promises.1590783905970

Different crises endanger different aspects of life and thus raise different kind of populist
thought. Populist leaders cash this fear in their rhetoric to fuel the fire and create wedges
among people. For example, first major crisis of the ongoing century – 9/11- made
westerners fearful of Muslims and indicated rise of populists on both sides of Atlantic. For
this anti-Muslim and anti-Islam propaganda, “Clash of Civilizations” provided theoretical
base to western leaders. Similarly, 2008 financial crisis divided people on the basis of social
class where economists, policymakers and bankers were held responsible for all the
economic problems. Financial insecurity and frustration gave way to the rise of populists of
the kind who promised fixing economy in all aspects. Anyhow, immigration crisis made
public forget this genre of populists when they looked around to find more inward-looking,
anti-immigration leaders. Though, purpose remained the same – saving jobs for working-
class. Thus, different crises – one after the other- set the stage for newer kinds of populism
every time.

But is just a crisis enough to trigger rise of populism? NO. Instead, prevalent global
economic and political systems play undeniably huge role. For example, globalized capitalist
world brought ills of uneven wealth distribution and threat to cultural identity. Mainstream
political leaders paid little attention to these issues or they had no concrete plans to tackle
these problems. Rising concerns among working class created dividing lines in a society
where business and working classes stood poles apart. Anyhow, dawn of the financial crisis
(2007-08) strengthened this division. In such situation, to get to higher echelons of power,
populist leaders used tools provided by democratic system: freedom of speech and public
representation. So it was not just crisis but conditions created by existing system that
heralded arrival of populism.

pray-for-the-world-coronavirus-concept-vectorNow, let’s start analyzing if Corona virus

outburst has made the environment suitable for rise of populism or not.

Populists hate democratic setup, bureaucracies and constitutional institutions. They like
authoritarianism which allows taking actions swiftly, and mobilizing huge resources without
any resistance. In post-Covid-19 world, these aspects of populism are more likely to be
favored. This point can be validated by comparing actions of different democratic and non-
democratic governments to save their nationals from Corona virus. China, despite being
origin of Corona virus, controlled the situation in an effective manner. Brutal but effective
lockdown placed 11 million Wuhan residents in quarantine which was later extended for
whole Hubei province of 50 million. But supply of food and other essentials was ensured
during lockdown period. Effective healthcare measures were also taken by building hospitals
overnight and sending over 42,000 doctors and paramedics to Hubei province. On the other
hand, world’s largest democracy, India, responded to this crisis in a poor manner by not
enacting any support system and putting the responsibility of spread of virus on the most
vulnerable of their society. And when Modi-led government ordered nation-wide lockdown
on 24 March for 21 days, states sealed their borders, businesses were closed and Indians
were barred from moving. According to The Guardian, around 120mi rural-to-urban
migrants took to the roads with their kids tied to their backs and domestic stuff bundled on
their heads. To add salt to injury, even grocery and medical stores were not allowed to
open. TS-Populism-HeroComparison of policy measures, adopted by democratic-India and
authoritarian-China in the wake of virus outburst, will bolster political stance of populist and
help them bring forward in political arena. Moreover, chances of social unrest and violence
are looming amid this crisis, as UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, has warned. These
social problems will also compromise performance of democratic system and bring a tinge
of authoritarianism into administrative setup while boosting populist ideology.

In addition, populists prefer unilateralism and virus outbreak seems to rupture multilateral
system which stood at the heart of liberal system. This crisis has the potential to affect the
mechanisms of cooperation and inter-dependence among world nations negatively. For
example, after virus wreaked havoc in some European countries and weaker South asked
frugal North to join hands to create Corona bonds, a clash of interests was observed among
Eurozone finance ministers. Italian prime minister went as far as to say “If we do not seize
the opportunity to put new life into the European project, the risk of failure is real.” This
indicates vividly that cooperation blocs could be hurt amid this crisis. Threat has not passed
yet and existence of this union will be threatened again and again after this epidemic ends.
IMF chief has warned that global economy is less likely to recover fully in 2021. Moreover,
war-torn Arab and African nations will plunge into a new cycle of extreme poverty. In such
scenario, many Arabs and Africans will try entering European continent and Europeans
would like to keep them out. Intra-Europe disputes over entry and distribution of refugees
will also arise. So it is highly predictable that more nationalist, anti-immigrant and inward
looking forces will arise not just in Europe but throughout the world. In other words,
amalgamation of different crises in post-Covid-19 is predictable which will accompany a
heightened wave of populism.unnamed

Populists also target international law and legal institutions as major tools for exploiting
common people at the hands of global elite. Covid-19 seems ready to weaken, if not
destroy, many important Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs). For example, integrity
and role of WHO is challenged after president Trump blamed WHO for being too deferential
to China. Mr. Trump also complained that despite the fact China suppressed information
about Corona virus outburst, WHO is praising China for its arrangements and policies for
tackling the situation. Blame game amid this crisis and emerging bipolar world order will
weaken IGOs further in days to come. Moreover, people will lose their trust in these
multilateral organizations. So those politicians will have higher chances of winning state
offices who vow to take matters in their own hands totally instead of taking policy directions
from IGOs. This also infers that in post-Covid-19 world, more inward looking, populist
political class will gain strength.

Cas Mudde’s definition of populism tells that creation of two antagonistic groups lies at the
heart of propagation of populism. So it is imperative to see if two antagonistic groups are
generated after Corona virus outbreak to push populism ahead or not. Currently, one can’t
find a definite party to hold responsible for the outbreak and spread of this deadly virus so
“corrupt” and “pure” people can’t be identified. Instead, A multi-directional blame game has
ensued; world is made to hear a long list of conspiracy theories. That’s why, anti-Chinese,
anti-Asia, anti-migrant and multiple other feelings are noticed after virus outbreak and no
two definite sides are identifiable until now. These feelings have been demonstrated by
American, European, and British public when they attacked immigrants, Asians and people
of Asian descent accusing them for spreading Corona virus. Political class of the two most
powerful nations has also contributed in this spat but without bringing the world close to
any conclusion regarding the culprit. Moving away from USA-China blame game and
considering state-level scenario, different victim parties can be identified in different
countries. For example, Muslims are blamed and harassed in India on the account of
spreading Corona virus. But this narrative is not appreciated by international media and
world leaders. So, until now, no specific community, nation or ethnic group has been
accused worldwide for spread of Corona virus.

Populism vector illustration. Flat tiny leader manipulation persons concept. Disinformation
strategy to lie crowd. Political fake news approach ideology. Trump demagogy speech
power to persuade nation

While pole creation hasn’t taken place until now, we need to see if this is going to happen in
near future or not. For this, world order and foreign policies of world powers at the time of
9/11 are to be compared with that of now. At the time of 9/11, Western world was united
and they had prepared their public psychologically to stand against “Islamic Civilization”, as
Noam Chomsky opines. Russia also pledged to back USA on this issue and, in fact, President
Putin was among first foreign leaders to talk directly to President Bush. Same was the case
with China which sided with USA against Taliban. As all regional and global powers of that
time were on the same page, voluntarily or forcibly, one narrative was furnished and
adopted. This is why after 9/11 anti-Muslim sentiments precipitated very quickly and poles
were created soon after twin towers were hit. Contrary to this scenario, Corona virus
outburst has created rifts among western countries on the issue of funding, policing and role
of international organizations like WHO. Moreover, at global-level analysis, China and USA –
both comparable in economic and political power – stand in contending blocs now. Both are
trading barbs and blaming one another for the creation and spread of Corona virus. So this
division among western nations and confrontation of major powers in political arena will
hinder consolidation of one universal narrative regarding creation and spread of this virus
and thus formation of contending groups.

It has been seen that Corona virus outbreak has made the conditions ripe for fungal growth
of populism but it is also necessary to know the performance of existing populists and thus
the fate of populism. For the purpose, overall governance and legislation, policy making
amid crisis and its results need to be gauged. While different world leaders decided to fight
against a common foe differently, neglected healthcare systems of populist regimes stung
them badly. For example, Covid-19 could have wreaked little havoc in USA if Obama’s
‘Affordable Care Act’ (ACA) would have been fully in place. Populists always put business
and defense on priority list at the cost of social safety nets. Moreover, differences between
Centre and States or Provinces are not surprising in populist-led countries. Populists, holding
higher offices in federal governments, could not coordinate strategically with
state/provincial governments leading to discords. These discords, verily, hampered smart
and swift actions after virus outbreak. Downplayed threat of virus (e.g. Brazil), delayed
responses (e.g. USA), and declarations assuring their fellow nationals to be disease-resistant
(e.g. Mexico) worsened the situation. On the other hand, many non-populist leaders took
strict and painful measures in time to dodge more dreadful circumstances. For example,
New Zealand announced state of emergency on 25th March and imposed lockdown on 26th
March when there were just 205 confirmed or probable cases of Corona virus nationwide.
On the other hand, Italy’s nationwide lockdown began on 9th March when tally of Covid-19
patients had crossed 9,000. So it can be said that delayed response and inefficient
governance strategies of populist leaders after virus outbreak exposed their reality and that
of populism also.

From the discussion, it can be concluded that in post-Covid-19 world populism will
strengthen its foothold. Democracy is less likely to be considered as best form of
governance. Economic and political issues will encourage nationalists and unilateralists.
Social problems will push governments to take authoritarian actions. Mechanisms of inter-
state cooperation will also be affected. Anyhow, as two globally recognized antagonistic
groups, in the wake of Corona virus outburst, are missing, any universal populist agenda is
less likely to be adopted. In such situation, fate of populists is to be decided at national
level. Each individual populist will formulate one’s own rhetoric and buy faith in accordance
with local situation. If this happens then upcoming populists will have ideologies conflicting
with one another’s. They will not praise one another the way it had been done just before
the virus outbreak. For example, Trump praising Boris Johnson or Matteo Salvini wishing to
become Italy’s Trump. And so Urbinati’s versatility will be experimented in space for the first
time at a large scale.

In post-Covid-19 world, conditions are good for the growth of populism. So media and
mainstream politicians need to accept the challenge of not letting populists takeover the
system further. They can expose flawed governance of populist leaders after virus outbreak.
They should not deny new problems arising after this crisis. Instead, they should formulate
and present practical strategies for these problems and ensure unbiased talk on media