Sunday, April 5, 2020

Blame the Chinese Communist Party for the coronavirus crisis

As the coronavirus pandemic sweeps the globe, one fact is increasingly clear: The Chinese Communist Party caused this crisis.
From the moment the coronavirus emerged in central China, Beijing has acted in a way that made a pandemic possible and then inevitable. It covered up what was happening in Wuhan. It silenced whistleblowers who sought to warn the world. It stole medical supplies from other countries, even while claiming the sickness was no big deal. 
At every stage, the Chinese Communist Party has lied. Now at least 50,000 people have died. And the number is growing by the minute.
Beijing’s culpability is the result of its oppression — its “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” The only way to stop a spreading sickness is to spread information even faster, giving people and countries the facts and the time to prevent a pandemic. China’s rulers made that impossible. Starting in December, communist authorities cracked down on anyone talking about the coronavirus.

China's censorship 

When a brave doctor warned his peers online, he was summoned by police in the middle of the night and forced to write a “self-criticism” — a classic communist method of silencing dissenters that forces them to confess supposed crimes. When Chinese journalists wrote about the sickness, their work was censored. When average citizens took to social media to share the facts, they were silenced. Beijing did everything in its power to prevent the outside world from figuring out what was really going on.
The truth was terrifying, although largely unknown beyond China’s borders. U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that China systematically hid the real number of sick people, as well as the number of deaths. Sure enough, in mid-January, Beijing still claimed that only a few dozen people were infected with the coronavirus. The real totals of people infected and deaths were likely far higher, as my organization was already hearing from dissidents within China. 
Beijing’s lies lulled the world into a false sense of security. By concealing the extent of the coronavirus, China caused other countries to assume the situation was under control, or at least that they had more time to prepare. A senior White House official pointed out that Chinese data caused the medical community in the United States to think “this was serious, but smaller than anyone expected… we were missing a significant amount of the data.”
Ultimately, China’s incomplete picture led to insufficient plans in other countries. But Beijing’s omissions and lies didn’t just include the number of infected people. They also covered up the nature of the coronavirus itself. In doing so, Beijing violated international treaty obligations to which China is a signatory, including the International Health Regulations (2005).

If they had just been honest

Beijing denied until January 20th that human to human transmission was occurring. Yet at the same time, Chinese officials and state-owned companies were urgently acquiring bulk medical supplies —especially personal protective equipment like masks and gloves — from AustraliaEurope, and around the world. Put simply, Beijing hoarded the world’s life-saving resources while falsely claiming that people’s lives weren’t at risk.
The results have been tragic. China’s actions made other countries less able to contain coronavirus outbreaks. In some cases, those outbreaks were perhaps already underway but unknown, because China lied about the sickness’ spread. By that point, a pandemic was only a matter of time.
Now the world is facing upheaval unseen since the Second World War. Whole countries are shut down. Borders are closed. Economies are unraveling. Governments are mobilizing for an extended struggle. Billions of people are terrified.
But all of this was preventable, if the Chinese Communist Party had just been honest.
If Beijing had allowed doctors in China to raise the alarm and contain the threat, the virus could have been stopped in its tracks.
If Beijing had accurately described how the virus spread, people from New York to New Delhi could have prepared accordingly.
If Beijing had given the real number of infected people and deaths, other countries would have recognized the danger, and taken necessary steps.
But Beijing wasn’t honest. It lied. It is lying still. As a result, more than a million people are sick, and millions could die before the year is out. 
Their blood is on the Chinese Communist Party’s hands. If the coronavirus crisis proves anything, it’s that communism — its logic, its brutality, its incompetence — is still a grave threat to the entire world. 
The sooner communism is swept into the dustbin of history, the safer we’ll all be.
Marion Smith is executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation in Washington, D.C. Follow him on Twitter: @smithmarion

Saturday, April 4, 2020

Can You Be Forced to Quarantine or to Stay Home? Your Questions, Answered

Although quarantines are considered a measure of last resort, “police powers” give states, counties and even cities broad authority to make residents stay home.

States and local governments across the United States have issued some variant of stay-at-home orders covering more than half of all Americans. They range in severity from pleas to avoid gatherings and to stay indoors combined with business closings to mandatory orders with severe consequences, as in Hawaii, where violators face a $5,000 fine or up to a year in jail.
Rare in modern history, quarantines were fairly common in ancient times, before medicine stemmed the ferocious spread of contagious diseases. The very word quarantine is rooted in the Italian words quarantenara and quaranta giorni, or 40 days, the period of time that the city of Venice forced ship passengers and cargo to wait before landing in the 14th and 15th centuries to try to stave off the plague. Quarantines have often generated tensions between protecting public health versus respecting individual rights.
Here are answers to some common questions about how quarantines are imposed and enforced in the United States in the wake of the coronavirus.
The legal authority to impose quarantines or shelter-in-place orders on individuals is rooted in the “police powers” granted broadly to states, counties and cities to protect public health. That means for most Americans, a state or local stay-at-home order imposed to prevent the spread of the coronavirus will be far more important than any federal order.

When it comes to the federal government, it can impose quarantines under the Public Health Service Act for two main reasons: to prevent the spread of communicable disease into the United States or between states.
Although President Trump has said he would like to reopen the country by Easter, it is not clear that he has the power and authority to do this. The police powers held by states to protect public health came before the Constitution and it did not change them, said Lawrence O. Gostin, a professor at Georgetown University Law School who specializes in public health law. Mr. Trump, for example, could not go into a state and order a business to start operating, experts said.

A quarantine is designed to isolate someone sick or at least known to have been exposed to a contagious disease, whereas a stay-at-home order is meant to promote social distancing and thus lower the number of infections.

Quarantines are considered a measure of last resort when no preferable means is available to halt the spread of a deadly communicable disease. “We do not want to restrict people’s liberty unless it is necessary, unless we cannot achieve the public health end with less draconian measures,” said Wendy E. Parmet, the director of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University.

No, the laws vary by state and even locality. Some 40 states updated their quarantine laws after fears spread over a possible broad anthrax attack in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to Professor Gostin., He is the author of a legal template called the State Emergency Health Powers Act, which many states adopted in whole or in part. Some states retain antiquated regulations on their books.

It is a bit of a gray area. It often seems voluntary until the person involved tries to leave, at which point health officials are likely to make it compulsory, experts said. The rules are notoriously hard to confirm because county governments often do not publish their regulations online.
The bottom line, however, is that if a quarantine is not enforced and other people catch the fatal disease as a result, the local government could be held liable, Mr. Gostin said. “Thinking about this as purely voluntary is wishful thinking.”

Again, laws vary by state, but those who ignore the rule could face fines or jail time. Logic dictates that draconian enforcement would be difficult and often counterproductive. No local law enforcement agency would likely compound its problems by throwing a quarantine scofflaw with a deadly communicable disease in among its jail population.

Local authorities often have some form of enforcement power, but usually try gentle persuasion to convince people that it is for their good and the good of the community. An infected person blatantly ignoring an order might be forced to go into medical isolation — that is, some form of locked hospital ward.

Experts worry that many Americans might think they have the right to go someplace local like the supermarket without considering the consequences for others. “We have lost this tradition of the common good and social responsibility to each other and that could be a big problem in America,” Mr. Gostin said.

States should have some manner of appeal process, and some require a court order from the outset. If there is no medical tribunal or other means for a second opinion, ultimately anyone could challenge a quarantine order in court through a writ of habeas corpus.
Quarantine laws tend to be controversial because they are akin to jail time, using the coercive power of the state to tell people that they have to stay confined, even if in their own homes.
The C.D.C. rewrote its quarantine guidelines in 2017 and they have never been tested in court. The Supreme Court has also never dealt with an infectious disease quarantine case, Mr. Gostin said.
Under C.D.C. rules, the federal government must test those confined within 72 hours and define the length of stay from the outset — two weeks for the coronavirus because that is the incubation period for the disease.

The most famous recent test case was Kaci Hickox, a nurse who was initially quarantined involuntarily at Newark Liberty International Airport in 2014 upon returning from West Africa, where she had worked with Ebola patients.
After a few days, she was allowed to return to her home state of Maine but ordered to remain in isolation. Having tested negative for the virus, Ms. Hickox sued and the judge rejected the quarantine order.
With the help of the A.C.L.U., Ms. Hickox also sued New Jersey, which resulted in a settlement that gave arriving passengers more rights, including the right to appeal the decision and to seek legal advice.

The most glaring hole in American quarantine laws, experts said, is that there is no guaranteed salary. An employer could even fire a quarantined employee. President Trump has said that his administration would address financial relief for people quarantined.
If you are separated from the community for the public good, the government should provide medical service, essential medications, food and other social support if you need it, Mr. Gostin said.

They generally help slow the spread of the disease but sometimes do not depending on the disease and the conditions of the quarantine, experts said. In China, that seemed to decelerate the exponential spread of the virus, they said, whereas holding passengers on the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan appeared to create a kind of petri dish with more people infected.

The United States government lacks the broad authority to impose the sweeping quarantine seen in China, where some 70 million people were confined in the largest such effort in history. Italy, which has a more centralized government, attempted to lock down the entire country. But in the United States neither federal nor state law contains the powers for such expansive measures, Mr. Gostin said.
In addition, the United States does not really have the logistical systems in place to guarantee the distribution of medical services, food and other necessities to people under quarantine.
New York State decided to deploy the National Guard in New Rochelle, a New York City suburb and the center of a significant outbreak, to help provide those kinds of services and to help scrub public spaces clean. The center of the city is considered a “containment zone,” but it is not under quarantine.
The measures being implemented now around the globe are the most sweeping since the 1918 influenza pandemic.

In the United States, quarantines have been extremely rare. The last federal quarantine was in the early 1960s against a suspected smallpox outbreak. Instead the C.D.C. tends to issue health warnings, like advising pregnant women to avoid Southern Florida in 2016 during an outbreak of the Zika virus.
In earlier times, there were frequent legal quarantines, dating back to at least the early 18th century. The fact that they often targeted minority immigrant communities is a key reason that civil libertarians are leery about giving the government wide powers today.
Two of the most notorious cases occurred during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
In 1900, the city of San Francisco tried to impose a quarantine on Chinatown, arguing that a diet of rice made people more susceptible to bubonic plague than the more American diet of meat, and demanded that its residents submit to an unproven vaccine, according to Howard Markel, the director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the University of Michigan. Residents sued under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees due process and equal treatment under the law, and won.
In New York City, which once deployed health police armed with billy clubs and powers of arrest, an outbreak of typhus among Russian Jewish and Italian immigrants on the Lower East Side prompted the authorities to confine some 1,200 people on North Brother Island off the Bronx for several months in 1892.
Perhaps the island’s most infamous resident ever was Mary Mallon, known as “Typhoid Mary,” an Irish-born cook who infected dozens of people in New York, killing some of them, by changing jobs frequently and refusing to stop working as a cook.
Mr. Markel cited in his book “Quarantine” an example of the sense of sweeping power held by the authorities at that time, when they thought it was in the public interest to impose a quarantine.
Asked to testify in Congress about quarantining hundreds of immigrants on the island in 1892, Cyrus Edson, the New York City’s sanitary supervisor, responded, “We may take possession of the City Hall forcibly and turn it into a contagious disease hospital if in our opinion it is necessary to do so.”



Friday, April 3, 2020

(转) 新冠病毒全球大流行:我们缺乏的只是疫苗?

又一次的开学典礼付诸东流,这一次春天的典礼是因为新冠肺炎,上一次冬天的典礼是因为香港动荡。不少朋友问我怎么没有看到我在新冠肺炎下的演讲、观点和文章?近两个月里,好文何止上百上千?有多少从疫情中央发出的令人潸然泪下的亲身经历?有多少发自内心的自省和思考?有多少对国家未来的焦虑和期许?我们已经好久没有经历过这样的场面,在同一个时刻、为同一个人、为同一件事发出我们谦卑的声音,吹起我们的口哨声?而这都是为了同一个目标,希望类似的悲剧可以再少些;希望我们无需生活在不必要的恐惧之中;希望这个民族无论何时都是被人敬重的。

这当然是一场灾难。庚子鼠年以超出所有人的想象力,开始了这一场天灾,但这也是一场人祸。根据英国南安普敦大学的研究,如果武汉提前三个星期开始狙击这一病毒,仅中国受感染的数目就可以减少95%。当然这只是一项研究,而现实与数字模型之间存在的距离有时可以是如此之大!如果武汉封城之后欧美各国不会如此傲慢,而是积极合作应对,今天的欧洲和美国或许就不会面对这样的人道危机!在全球面临这样的大灾难面前,相反,我们看到的是自私与自大、嘲讽与指责、恐惧与推卸,甚至阴谋论甚嚣尘上,代替了理性的思考和应有的反思。面对这样的世纪疫情大流行的恐惧,我们缺乏的远非控制疫情的疫苗!

我们缺乏常识;我们缺乏见识;我们缺乏透明度;我们缺乏同理心;我们缺乏担当;我们缺乏反思……

我们缺乏常识

在这场疫情席卷全球时,新冠肺炎也成了阴谋论的温床。短短的一个多月时间里,有武汉病毒研究所病毒外漏的“泄毒之说”,有美国驻武汉领事馆留下八个可疑生化毒物箱的“种毒之说”,有美国参议员柯顿指控毒源来自大陆生化实验室的“放毒之说”,有武汉军运会期间美国兵“播毒之说”,莫衷一是。我从一开始就对阴谋论存疑,我总觉得人性虽恶,但人类的恶行还不至于如此匪夷所思。有些指控,稍微求证,就知道是胡言乱语。美国驻武汉总领事馆位于武汉新世界国贸大楼第47楼,后院在哪里?生化毒物箱又如何埋在地下1.5公尺处?谎言哗众取宠,但信者众!如果病毒来自中国的生物基因作战实验室,对病毒的认识和控制还会那么难吗?这样低水准的阴谋论竟然畅行全球!其实只要有基本常识,反智的阴谋论就不可能大行其道。

我们缺乏常识也因为我们常常以偏盖全,信息不对称。意大利专家雷穆齐(Giuseppe Remuzzi)表示早在去年11月份,意大利北部就有人染上高度疑似新冠肺炎的不明肺炎。中国的一些媒体第一时间就报道了意大利是源头的说法,让不少中国人信以为真。中国的记者还纷纷打电话去采访,他对自己早先的采访被断章取义非常不满,并指出这是教科书式的“宣传手段”。但之后他纠正中国媒体的说法,并没有被广泛报道。他还在另一个场合表示,武汉可能早已出现新冠肺炎感染,期间有大量中国人从武汉来到意大利,令意大利出现了疑似案例,由于一切来自中国的信息都不透明,才令疫情失去控制的黄金时机。其实意大利北部温州的人很多,而一月的时候,除了武汉,温州疫情也很严重。在中国就有专家因看到浙江有人感染之后,强烈建议武汉必须封城。

疫情刚爆发时,有不少人总在那里质问,美国每年季节性流感死了成千上万人,无人恐慌,世界各国没有切断和美国的联系,但美国为何要切掉和中国的联系?这是否过度反应?是否歧视中国?是否违反世界卫生组织的指引?但季节性流感有疫苗,死亡率只有新冠肺炎的十分之一,这样的事实很多人并不了解。如今看到疫情蔓延全球,纽约成为另一个武汉,大家应该可以明白每年在美国发生的季节性流感和新冠肺炎之间的根本不同。

我们缺乏常识是因为我们受制于我们有限的知识和见识,无法认识事物的真相;我们缺乏常识也是因为我们面对恐惧而惊慌失措,无法理性地看待自媒体时代所获得的虚假资讯;我们缺乏常识也是因为我们的立场和偏见挡住了自己的视线,无法走出原有的认知。

我们缺乏见识

同样在欧美各国,不少人还真的将新冠肺炎和季节性流感等同起来,根本不把新冠病毒当回事,酿成今日欧美各国沦陷的惨痛教训。在发生新冠肺炎这样的全球公共医疗危机时,不要说普通人,即便全球最顶尖的传染病专家对病毒都缺乏足够的认识,束手无策,无法预见其发展方向,至多只能依靠模型做出推算,但最终和现实也可能相距甚远。在疫情初期,不要说西方的专家,即便内地最顶尖的传染病专家都不认为这次疫情比“非典”严重。因香港的特殊地位,香港大学的专家学者敢于发声,袁国勇教授早在1月3日就警告香港政府,这次疫情极为严重,香港特区政府早在1月7日就宣布把“严重新型传染性病原体呼吸系统病”列为须呈报的疾病,卫生部门有权强制隔离怀疑患者。管轶教授是香港大学新发传染性疾病国家重点实验室主任,最早发出疫情将失控的警告。

香港因2003年受“非典”的沉重打击,大家记忆犹新,不少香港人对新冠肺炎都非常恐惧,也出现了抢购潮。但在香港的西方人对此的反应就大为不同,包括香港大学中的白人学者也觉得这是类似流感的病毒,只不过传染率和死亡率高而已。这种判断一度让我觉得香港是否过度恐慌了,特别是香港医务人员以罢工逼迫政府封关的举动过激,违背了医务人员救死扶伤的伦理底线。疫情初期在香港街上也基本看不到有多少西方人戴口罩,所以在西方的华人因为担心感染病毒戴口罩也被视为怪物,不被理解还算次要,还受到白眼和歧视,甚至遭人毒打。因为在西方的文化里,只有得病的人才戴口罩,而你得病了就不该出现在公众的地方。其实西方人这样的行为也是因认知受限,而诉诸暴力的不法之徒更是蔑视人权。

这次疫情在欧美的迅速蔓延终于让西方意识到新冠病毒不只属于亚洲人,他们原先冷眼旁观,以为白种人可以刀枪不入。甚至欧美的不少医学专家初期都低估了这个疫情的风险,从意大利大意失荆州,到英国的“群体免疫”,再到美国的全线沦陷,在一定程度上都和他们对这个病毒的有限认知有关,说难听点就是无知。因此政府不敢与普通民众的认知相左,轻易做出封城的决定。医学界本身也存在完全对立的看法,直到伦敦帝国理工学院流行病专家尼尔·弗格森团队的研究报告做出了令人恐惧的预测之后,英美两国政府才改变被动的应对策略。这份研究报告警告,如果英美两国不积极应对,英国将会有超过50万的人死亡,而美国将有220万人死亡。即便如此,牛津大学的研究团队在此之后还是得出截然不同的结论,认为新冠病毒在英国已经传播了一个多月,大约一半人口已经获得了实质的群体免疫能力。

全球在应对这个新型病毒的侵袭时,因为知识不足,做出了不少错误的判断。在疫情初期,对病毒的严重性难以做出正确的判断,在获得人传人的证据之后才被迫做出武汉封城的决定。但同时也因为认知不足,人的见识有限,影响了我们应对病毒的策略。东亚地区有“非典”的惨重教训就极为重视,西方民众对新冠病毒的认知则不同,完全放任。

我们的见识常常受限于我们的生活经历和环境,但我们不可能亲临其境去认知每一件事物,因此获取全面的信息就变得至关重要。不幸的是我们因防火墙无法获得客观的信息,因处在同温层里拒绝不同的信息,更不要说我们因缺乏透明度难以接收真实的信息。

我们缺乏透明度

回首往事,不少人都低估了疫情的危害!但是,在疫情还没有开始蔓延时,如果做到信息公开透明,如果吹哨人不被劝诫、警告、和惩罚,或许新冠肺炎全球大流行的历史会改写。许多在武汉不该发生的事一定不会发生,武汉的牺牲就不会这么大,中国百姓的牺牲也就不会这么大。

从中国最早处理新冠肺炎的不当做法,到世界卫生组织迟迟未对全球发出最高级别的警告,到欧美各国的迟缓应对行动,都和缺乏透明度有关联。这次疫情如此迅猛扩散的第一责任人当然是武汉当局、湖北当局,他们对公众隐瞒信息甚至掩盖真相,引发了民众的不信任,国际社会不少人甚至怀疑中国的死亡率造假。中国最为受伤的就是因封锁和隐瞒信息,导致疫情的控制受到延误,遭到国际社会诟病、排斥和指责。武汉封城之后,中国的经济和民生受到重创的举措和牺牲也因此大打折扣,对中国的负面影响其实刚刚浮现。

美国政客在中国疫情最严重的时刻,颇有隔岸观火的看客心态。特朗普为了选举,为了股市不下跌,不影响经济,就是不愿承认疫情迟早会冲击美国。他本以为关闭了来往中国的航线,切断了来自中国的人流就万事大吉了。他还不让邮轮上受感染的游客在美国下船,就是要制造美国本土病毒感染者很低的假象。但这样的做法和一切以稳定为首要的考虑有何区别呢?在疫情终于席卷美国之后,他也是不断大事化小,尽量降低疫情所带来的冲击和影响,甚至在感染人数还在不断攀升时竟然表示美国的经济活动在复活节就可以恢复正常!所幸美国有独立的媒体,在白宫可以直接和总统公开叫板,不让政府传播的不实消息当道。在白宫记者会上,美国媒体公开质疑特朗普的抗疫政策不当,当场质问总统为何不停地使用“中国病毒”这样的歧视性字眼。

早在1月20日,当我确认这将是一场公共卫生灾难时,我就第一时间在我的朋友圈里转发了管轶教授对疫情的“悲观”看法。但他的科学分析在内地被视为耸人听闻,有人甚至借他的“逃跑说”对他进行人身攻击,但正是这样客观的信息才有助于我们了解事实真相,了解这一公共卫生危机已经去到了多么危险的境地!其实在发生类似新冠肺炎这样的危机时,面对太多的不确定性,要阻止谣言,信息的透明就显得尤为重要。

除了刻意隐瞒信息,还有虚假资讯泛滥。全球数百名科学家2月上旬出席日内瓦“世卫论坛”,讨论新型冠肺炎疫情,学者就感叹他们不得不面对两条战线作战,除了应付病毒大流行,还要应付虚假资讯大泛滥 ,而应对虚假资讯泛滥比抗疫本身还艰难。网上流传最广最快的往往就是耸人听闻的假消息和渲染成见的看法,这些不实的信息,有恶意造谣,有断章取义,导致非理性的反应和恐慌,甚至制造混乱和分化。世卫顾问隆基尼(Ira Longini)和香港大学医学院院长梁卓伟曾提及全球三分之二的人口有可能感染新冠病毒,但网上的信息都忽略了“如果传播未加抑制”的假设,特意将最坏的可能性无限放大,引起不必要的恐慌。

在任何一场公共危机发生的时候,政府是不可能靠屏蔽信息来阻止危机的蔓延。恰恰相反,这只会造成危机的进一步恶化。即便在上个世纪的苏联时代,对切尔诺贝利核泄露的隐瞒最终给人类带来了一场世纪大灾难,更何况我们已经身处社交媒体如此发达的时代!

面对全球疫情大流行,信息披露和信息对称有助于我们了解不同地域,在不同的文化和背景下的不同应对策略和措施。不管是对疫情的判断,还是应对疫情的方法,各国都有不同的理解和做法,相互之间不仅不该嘲笑,反而应该借鉴。我们因条件限制无法获得全面的信息,但至少可以换位思考,从他者的角度看问题,避免幸灾乐祸的看客心理。

我们缺乏同理心

疫情爆发之后,各国不仅有不同的认知过程,而且在获得相同的认知之后所采取的应对也并不相同。武汉封城的消息传出之后,西方的反应也是两极,有称这样的举措是流行病专家的天堂,而这只有在威权国家才能实现,民主国家只能羡慕。但也有一些西方国家看到中国面临的困境,在疫情刚刚爆发时,也带有事不关己高高挂起、甚至幸灾乐祸看笑话的心态来看待中国的抗疫,还把病毒与中国的国民性和低劣文化相联系。

各国抗疫的做法离不开其体制、文化、历史等因素。在中国,一声令下,举国体制立马见效,整个国家有如一部机器,全力抗灾,所有其它事情都要靠边站,甚至做出牺牲,包括在“准战争”状态下个体的权利和自由,其它病人可否受到正常的医疗救助,都不是最重要的考虑。事实证明,这样的牺牲确实巨大,但这一抗疫历史上未曾经历过的举措,一座上千万人口的大城市被封城两个月的战略最终是奏效的。

中国的牺牲阻止了疫情蔓延,可歌可泣。即便如此,可圈可点之处也多如牛毛,野蛮作业的现象也并非个别。中国人不喜欢美国指手画脚,那别的国家难道就喜欢中国这么做?一些自媒体对别国状况一知半解,充满无知、偏见和轻蔑,非要说人家不会抄作业。看看东邻日本,和韩国的做法也不同,连大面积的检测也没做,情况也不算太坏!日本的人口密度还超过中国!但日本人平时的生活和卫生习惯,你又了解多少?其实就是华人社会的香港、澳门、台湾、新加坡等地的处理方式都不同,当中新加坡的所谓“佛系”防疫措施相当成功让不少人大跌眼镜。

新加坡从“重灾区”到“模范生”,表面上看去似乎选择了“佛系”的抗疫策略,曾引来不少怀疑、甚至嘲笑。新加坡防疫成功是有原因的,其策略可以概括为:最快反应、最早防范、最有系统、最严惩罚、最少折腾、最缺恐慌。新加坡一度是仅次于中国病例第二高的国家,同时人口稠密,还是国际交通枢纽。但新加坡政府反应迅速且效率高,最早限制来自中国的人流,并实施了对不同人群的休假令和居家隔离令。“非典”之后建立起来的疫情警报系统立即派上用场。新加坡国家传染病中心集先进的检测、治疗与实验研究为一体,马上研发并合作生产了快速病毒检试剂,有健全的检测体系,保证了疑似患者尽快得到治疗,避免了疫情的传播,加强了民众的信心。新加坡缺乏口罩生产能力,不鼓励大家戴口罩,但政府还是快速购买了五百万个口罩派发到每家每户,安抚民众。新加坡有充足的医疗资源,类似于中国的发热门诊就有873个,相当于北京发热门诊的11倍。我很早在朋友圈里就转发相关的信息看好新加坡的做法,甚至比香港还成功,没有发生香港排长队争口罩、抢厕纸的“奇观”。但话说回来,香港的恐慌是基于香港曾在2003年“非典”时曾遭重创的惨痛历史,以及香港和内地每天有大量的人员来往这一事实。

韩国这次的抗疫模式在西方更是受到肯定,法国总统和瑞典首相等多国政要甚至致电韩国讨教。但韩国对疫情的控制到底有何魅力?为何西方愿意到韩国取经和复制韩国模式呢?韩国也曾面对与中国相同的困境,但两国在大范围发生疫情之后,采取了类似的抗疫战略,新增病例曲线迅速被压平。但西方在看韩国的经验时,特别看重韩国没有因疫情出现压制言论和信息受阻的现象,没有因禁令影响民众的行动和自由,国家的经济更没有受到太大的冲击。韩国的经验可以归结为:早干预、早准备、早检测、早跟踪、早隔离、早观察。韩国的企业早就判断病毒迟早会扩散到韩国,第一时间就研发出检测试剂盒,获得政府的紧急审批投放市场,检测过程只需十分钟,几小时内可以出结果,准确率超过98%。韩国单日可检测近两万人,检测率全球之冠,已有120多个国家争相从韩国进口测试盒。韩国政府还迅速修订法律,网站和手机都可以追踪病发者,一旦有新病例,就可以获得信息和警报。

好的经验当然可以抄,可以借鉴,但不必过分地显耀自己的成功,这只会让人反感。己所不欲,勿施于人。现在中国不准外国人入境,这是因为中国不能再冒第二次疫情失控的风险,于情于理都不是自私自利。同样,疫情爆发初期,香港、新加坡、意大利、美国等地对中国人封关、撤侨也是同理,人家也同样不愿意看到疫情蔓延,为何那时就可以攻击别人是恶意制造恐慌,是对中国背后插上一刀呢?美国在欧洲疫情严重之后也禁止欧洲人前往美国,最后连英国这个小兄弟也进了入境限制名单。日本现在对包括中国、韩国、美国、欧洲在内的国民入境都采取十四日隔离的政策。疫情初期,中国民众对日本的态度发生了180度的大转弯,曾经被我们骂得一无是处的大和民族似乎对中国很友好、很善良,向中国捐赠各类物资,而对美国政府的表现极为不满。其实抛开美国民间和企业的资助不提,为何一定就要期待和中国正在打贸易战的特朗普政府对你友好呢?而对中国最早锁国的是朝鲜、俄罗斯、越南等国!

在疫情袭击的恐惧中,我们更不可以幸灾乐祸地嘲笑别人的行为,透过渲染别国的疫情失控来展现自己的英明和伟大,而忘记了自己并没有走出险境。美国和意大利的报纸上密密麻麻的讣告,看去令人悲伤和沉重,恰恰彰显了人性的一面。中国不少媒体将意大利和美国医院中的尸体的照片无限渲染,而失去亲人的武汉人前去领取骨灰盒,为了正常的悼念发出的哀思和照片却消失了。我们当中总有人不愿正视自己的创伤,不可忍受将苦难、悲剧和丑恶呈现在他们面前的人,将读者高达五千万的“日记”视为恶毒、无耻,却又如此钟情地展示“纽约医院尸满为患”、“纽约穷人疫情之下被迫乘坐地铁上班”、“英国政府勒令医生封口”这样的文字和照片。广东一个企业老板竟然建议厂家做假测温枪卖给美国,让感染者越来越多,辽宁有餐厅门外贴出横幅祝贺美日疫情扩散,就不单单是没有同理心了,而是无知的反人类言论。

如果我们可以同样毫无顾虑地拷问自己,犹如如此心安理得地对他人提出质疑,我们的心智就一定不会萎缩,我们兴许也就有了希望。如今,我们甚至无法正常地伸出舌头,道出自己的甜酸苦辣,又何必如此居高临下,带着幸灾乐祸的病态,刻意营造似是而非的场景,来彰显那虚幻的优越感?!但我总是固执地坚信,一个人、一个国家、一个民族只要勇于承担起苦难中的责任,最终一定是会得到别人的理解和赞许的。

我们缺乏担当

在这次疫情中最常听到的一个字就是甩锅,这场“甩锅大战”从武汉封城的那一刻开始就不断上演,从当地的医疗机构,到各级政府官员,到中国疾病控制中心,大家都在问,疫情失控和蔓延的责任在谁?

中国在“非典”之后耗资11亿,搭建了全球最大的传染病疫情和突发公共卫生事件网络直报系统,过去15年间持续监测39种法定传染病。这个全球最快速的疫情上报系统,可以在短短两小时内将疫情上达北京,中国最高的疾病防疫专家在2019年曾经表示中国绝不会重演“非典”悲剧。但话音刚落,这个耗费巨资的系统并没有在这次病毒蔓延中发挥功效。或许我们永远都无法知道真相,但有一点很清楚,专业判断在明哲保身、没有承担的官僚系统中被冷冻了,生命的价值也同样在个人权力的棋盘上被抛之脑后。

这场疫情最大的讽刺是,全球最大的两个经济体在面对这场世界公共卫生大危机时,竟然上演了一出极为相似的闹剧。几乎每天陪同特朗普在白宫见记者的美国传染病首席专家福西不谄媚权贵,不介意道出与他旁边的总统立场不同的看法,其独立的专业精神不受政治的左右,但他的专业判断也同样被美国总统束之高阁。疫情在中国蔓延恶化之时,美国的科学家就发出警告,但美国疾病防疫中心、美国食品和药物管理局、美国卫生和公共服务部似乎都没有看到采取行动的紧迫性,更何况美国总统特朗普本人了。特朗普向来蔑视科学和专业的意见,联邦政府被一群科学怀疑论者把持。而特朗普就喜欢看极右的福克斯电视台,曾与中国同行舌战的女主播Trish Regan就鼓吹疫情是民主党的阴谋,而特朗普本人就是一个阴谋论者。他同样不信任主流媒体,不停地和主流媒体在白宫记者会上唇枪舌剑,甚至当众侮辱记者。特朗普也不重视来自情报机关的报告,警告疫情的严重性被中国低估和隐瞒,以及疫情将会蔓延全球。此外,特朗普对玩政治的兴趣多过抗疫,为了竞选就是不愿承认疫情迟早会冲击美国,他对疫情轻描淡写的原因也是因为民主党主政的纽约州、加州、华盛顿州受到重创,但共和党的红州并未受到太大的影响。纽约时报在3月28日刊登万字文,以“美国错失的一个月”为题,分析了美国因检测技术落后,法规不配套,白宫领导无方,政府官僚作风,导致美国失去了疫情防控的黄金30天。

美国的科技和医疗发达,美国的医疗开支占GDP的比例最高,达到了近18%,但美国至今的表现为何令人大跌眼镜?无法早期进行检测是疫情蔓延的元凶,美国疾病防控中心也不是不作为,但为何会发生这样灾难性的失误呢?这和欧美社会对新冠肺炎的轻视有相当大的关联。中国在修正了前期隐瞒疫情的错误之后,武汉封城的快速行动,为整个国际社会控制疫情争取了难得的宝贵时间。随后东亚各国和地区也纷纷采取行动,大体上都取得一定的成效,制止了新冠病毒的蔓延。遗憾的是,由于对疫情的认知存在极大的偏差,欧美国家都没有及时采取适当的应对措施,欧洲和美国先后演变成疫情的重灾区。此次疫情的另一个中心意大利,也只不过停飞了前往中国的航班。而美国早在1月3日就获得了中国的通报, 但美国和其它欧洲国家一样一直心态超然,觉得自己远隔重洋,“非典”只在东亚流行,便以为此次新冠肺炎也同样会局限在东亚地区。

而疫情在美国开始蔓延后,这场“甩锅”大战竟然也蔓延到国际社会,中美两国爆发了令人捧腹的唇枪舌战。中国外交部的新任发言人在推特上怀疑美军在武汉播毒,特朗普亲自上阵,恶意地称新冠肺炎为“中国病毒”。病毒起源地的争论凸显了各方意图透过“甩锅”来推卸应有的责任,其实起源地何罪之有?而美国国务卿蓬佩奥在特朗普改口之后,还坚持要将武汉病毒写进七大工业国外长的公报里,而被其它国家拒绝。美国自己浪费了一个多月的时间,疫情失控,特朗普却只会将矛头转移,掩盖自己抗疫能力的失误!更为严重的是,“中国病毒”经过他的大嘴巴,在推特里一天又一天地在说,传遍全球,造成了美国等地歧视亚裔人的犯罪上升。美国联邦调查局的一项全新研究,警告全美针对亚裔人的仇恨犯罪案件数目,因新型冠状病毒疫情的扩散而飙升,危及美国的亚裔社群。连新加坡总理李显龙在接受美国有线电视新闻网CNN采访的时候,不仅感慨美国失去了领导世界战疫的能力,而且惊叹这两个世界大国竟然可以如此低水平地进行“口水战”。

从亚洲到欧洲到美洲,昔日繁忙的大都会因这场疫情,生活已经停顿。这场疫情不仅暴露了我们制度的缺陷、系统的脆弱、和人性的罪恶,全球已经跌入新一轮的金融市场大动荡和全球经济大衰退,但不幸的是,我们不仅没有进行反思,却依旧在那里自我陶醉和自我撕裂!

我们缺乏反思

一场史无前例的病毒大流行正向全球各个角落冲撞,死亡笼罩着这个星球。但面对这场突如其来的天灾,其中多少人祸是可以避免的呢?

封口vs封城:围绕着这场人道危机的争论焦点从一开始就从这里展开。如果没有发生“封口”事件,新冠肺炎的蔓延是否会有另一个结局?我们无法知道答案,但我们知道至少不会如此惨烈。问题在于一个经济如此发达的国度,为何依旧无法实现一个开放社会所需要的基本条件;一个自信的社会为何难以拉响危机来临的警报声。而这并非个别和单一现象,这有如隐藏在我们社会中的毒瘤和顽疾,总是如此粗暴地压制善意的提醒和批评。

在危机抵达临界点之后义无反顾的“封城”行动,尽管惨烈,却也是迫不得已的孤注一掷,但我们并非事事都一定要以牺牲个体的代价来实现宏大的目标,文明是体现在对每一个生命的关怀上的。“封口”可以令一个民族、一个国家在全球失去信用和信任,即便在“封城”的巨大牺牲之后,受感染和死亡的官方的数据还是被质疑。扪心自问,为何中国常常成为这类被怀疑的目标与对象?一个真正开放的社会,和一个透明度高的社会,一定可以勇敢地面对真相并向大众提供真相。所幸,在疫情重击下,中国也出现了难得一见的媒体松绑现象。

另一方面,西方也常常从固有的认知出发,用有色眼镜看待中国的“封城”行动。在这场抗疫中,与东亚各地在武汉“封城”之后迅速进入作战状态完全不同,欧美各国不仅负面看待中国的“封城”行动,而且没有从中国的“封城”行动中嗅出危机的严重程度。

傲慢vs自大:这让我们再次活生生地看到了傲慢与无知,欧美各国普遍将最初在武汉出现的新病毒归结为黄种人的病。日本副首相兼财务大臣麻生太郎2月份曾在G20财长的一次会议上主动表示援助意大利和西班牙,却自讨没趣,欧洲国家非常不屑。意大利副总理后来在G7财政会议上更直截了当地表示,这是黄种人才会得的病,和他们西方人没有关系。无怪乎,意大利一度成为中国之外感染者最多的国家。特朗普的傲慢与自大终于在疫情横扫美国之后,被迫承认美国将面对比第二次世界大战还要惨重的死亡。

然而与西方的傲慢相对应的则是在中国自媒体的世界里无时不在的自大,在那里你只有看到中国成了全球抗疫的英雄和救世主,所有的悲剧都活脱脱地变成了赞歌的素材,而忘记了病毒是从武汉开始向全国和全球蔓延的。这样的自大在中国抗疫初现曙光之后,更是变成了对他国肆无忌惮的嘲笑。而最新的对象就是感染新冠肺炎人数最多的美国,却忘记了美国拥有强大的科技力量和发达的医疗体系,仅ICU(重症监护室)的床位数量就远远超过中国。而“傲慢”与“自大”这对孪生兄弟却拥有一个共同点:偏见。

吃野味vs戴口罩:在有关病毒源头的吃野味文化,以及防止病毒扩散的戴口罩文化的讨论中,我们也看到了类似的偏见。2003年“非典”之后中国人的确没有从中吸取惨痛的教训,及时关闭野味市场,不少人因而将此次病毒的爆发与中国人喜爱吃野味的文化联系在一起。这样的看法有其道理,中国人是时候改变吃野味的生活习俗。有趣的是,中国网民反而找出了纽约上流社会吃野味的视频,一时之间在朋友圈中疯传,证明美国人不过是五十步笑百步。不过这几年比较严重的传染病,包括中东呼吸综合症和甲型H1N1流感病毒并非源自中国。

另一方面,亚洲人戴口罩以防止病毒扩散基本是共识。但西方人,即便是生活在亚洲的西方人也不喜欢戴口罩。在西方,视口罩为病人标志的观念还带来了对亚裔人的歧视。在欧美各国生活的亚裔人处在戴口罩被歧视,不带口罩怕染上病毒的天人交战中。但在这次疫情重击欧美之后,戴口罩抵抗病毒的认知终于慢慢开始在欧美被接受了。

自媒体vs主流媒体(赞美vs批评):在疫情的报道上,中国的主力军是自媒体,不管是赞歌,还是批评,自媒体带有更多的主观性和情绪性。而在许多其它地方,报道疫情的主力是主流媒体,力求客观。特别是美国媒体,其角色是监督政府,且喜欢监督全世界的政府,多数又是自由主义倾向,所以特朗普也反感美国主流媒体。但只有在美国这个国家,CBS记者胆敢在白宫怒怼总统为何要使用歧视性的“中国病毒”;NBC的记者质问特朗普吹捧效果未经证实的抗疫药物是否给美国人虚假的希望,并指美国数百万人活于恐惧中;纽约时报驻京记者张彦(Ian Johnson )的“观点”文章,指出中国为美国赢得了时间却被美国白白浪费了;纽约时报的社论公开谴责特朗普政府官员的言词加剧了对亚裔的种族仇恨。

中国自媒体里那个发自纽约的抗疫日记,作者声称其素材全部取自美国媒体的公开报道,而非道听途说,语带双关。的确,当纽约成为美国的武汉时,我每天在美国电视新闻上看到的几乎全是“负面”消息。每一个活生生的人离开人世时的凄惨故事;病人因缺乏医疗设备无法获得及时医治的悲剧;医务人员面对死亡威胁战斗在第一线几乎崩溃的场面;停留在街边装满尸体的冰冻车和医院走廊里运尸袋的场景;质问白宫何时可以确保医疗设备运抵现场的愤怒;受到病毒感染威胁下美国海军官兵的呼吁;失去工作的普通人无法交付房贷的忧虑。在这里你看到的是恐惧,是担忧,是悲伤,在这里你听不到任何赞歌。

威权vs民主:这次全球抗疫的叙事已经成为中国模式和西方模式之争,甚至上升到威权还是民主体制在抗疫中哪个更有成效的争论,但不少人却忘记了无论何种体制都有其成功与失败的经验与教训。在欧洲成为重灾区之后,德国的死亡率却一直很低,这或许与日耳曼民族的自律有关。在亚洲处于恐慌的时候,日本并没有跟随中国封城、没有跟随韩国大面积检测,但也没有像欧美发达国家那样失控,这或许与大和民族的自律和生活习惯有关。如果将抗疫简单地看成是中国体制的胜利,那么韩国、日本、新加坡、香港、台湾等地又是何种体制?无疑,中国自上而下的动员力量,让全球看到了中国体制战胜疫情的超强能力,但自下而上的公民社会的应变和调整能力在纽约成为疫情重灾区之后,同样令人刮目相看。

纽约在中央公园、体育场迅速建起方舟医院,并加快对受感染疑似人员的检测。来自全美的六万多名医务人员主动报名成为自愿者,自发前往纽约支援人手不足的医院,“捷蓝”航空免费载送这些医护人员“上战场”,酒店免费提供住宿,企业慷慨捐赠急需的防护用品和医疗设备,但没有企业对这些行动发稿、做公关、高调宣传。即便美国总统面对新冠肺炎的反应丑态百出,但这个国家所幸不是一个人说的算,受疫情影响最大的纽约州、加州、华盛顿州都不理睬他的狂言妄语。而美国的体制也决定了联邦政府对州一级政府的事务不可干涉,即便特朗普想对纽约和临近的两个州“封城”,但纽约州州长公开反对,使得特朗普不得不放弃这一想法。特朗普随心所欲,疫情还未控制,就要求复活节恢复经济运作,但疾病专家和媒体则公开和他唱对台戏。因此,应对病毒需要在一个自下而上的公民社会里,民众敢于承担公民应有的责任和义务。

在全球面对这场前所未有的大灾难时,我们需要理性地思考人类的失误和失败,而非指责和推卸。这场大灾难离落幕之日还有漫漫长路,但这场天灾与人祸也给人类提供了一次难得的反思机会。在这场疫情结束之后,或许全球终将明白这不是“中国病毒”,是各国必须共同面对的“世界病毒”,病毒恰恰因我们人类的傲慢、自大、和自私而四处肆虐。在这个全球化被污名化的时代,尽管国与国的界线依旧分明,但病毒绝不会只在一国的边境线内停留。我们比以往任何时候都更需要有全球的视野和全球的胸怀,我们必须学会如何合作去共同应对前所未有的挑战。

庚子年常常是灾难之年,但或许也是转折之年。在新冠病毒横扫全球之后,这不应该是我们重拾孤立的时刻,而是通向一个不一样的全球化新时代的新起点。

Tuesday, March 31, 2020

Why China Must Be Held Accountable for the Coronavirus Pandemic

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is waging a ferocious, global propaganda campaign designed to deflect blame for the origin and spread of the COVID-19 outbreak from Wuhan, China. Moreover, Beijing is trying to take advantage of the pandemic to increase its global standing and influence. There are three main reasons why the world must hold the CCP accountable for the first global pandemic in a century.

Morality

The first reason the CCP must be held accountable for the pandemic is that morality demands it. General Secretary Xi Jinping’s regime has refused to accept responsibility for allowing the epidemic to spread uncontrolled, first in Wuhan, then throughout China, and finally beyond its borders to the rest of the world. Chinese officials knew of the seriousness of the pandemic as early as December, yet waited weeks to begin restricting travel, allowing millions of Wuhan residents to visit relatives elsewhere in the country and abroad for Lunar New Year celebrations, spreading the virus as they went. British scientists have argued that if Beijing had acted just three weeks earlier, it could have reduced the spread of the virus by 95 percent.
We also know that in the time before the outbreak’s seriousness became apparent outside China, the CCP destroyed laboratory samples and punished the brave doctors and citizens who tried to warn their countrymen and the world about the pathogen, while refusing foreign offers of help. We are almost certain that Beijing dramatically underreported the number of deaths in Wuhan, and is no longer reporting new infections in China. Leaked photos have shown huge lines of Chinese waiting for the cremated remains of their loved ones in Wuhan, and widely shared calculations on social media of crematoria activity estimate up to 46,000 deaths in Wuhan alone, far above the country’s official death toll of just 3,300. Riots are breaking out as people desperate to leave Wuhan’s Hubei province are stopped at internal checkpoints.
In short, the CCP, which for years has claimed to be a responsible member of the global community, showed its true colors when this crisis hit. It can no longer be denied that Xi’s regime is a danger to the world. Justice demands it be held morally culpable for its dangerous and callous behavior.

Global Governance

The second reason that Beijing must be held accountable is a political one: The CCP’s actions have gravely undermined global political governance. As legal expert James Kraska has noted, China was morally and legally bound, as a party to the 2005 International Health Regulations, to “provide expedited, timely, accurate, and sufficiently detailed information to [the World Health Organization] about . . . potential public health emergencies” such as the coronavirus. Instead of doing so in this case, Beijing actively misled the WHO about the crucial fact that the pathogen was transmitted between humans. The result is that Xi can no longer credibly claim the CCP adheres to international law, and that the corruptibility of long-standing intergovernmental organizations such as the WHO is more apparent than ever.
Moreover, despite being portrayed as a selfless provider of medical aid to other affected countries, Beijing is actually reaping hundreds of millions in profits by selling equipment to panic-stricken governments abroad. Much of that is useless and is being returned by Spain, the Czech Republic, and Malaysia, among other countries. This sort of thing is typical of the least altruistic regime on earth, and worse may be on the way: Xi’s government will likely expect political favors from the countries it has “aided” during the crisis, the same way that aid recipient Greece was pressured to block an EU statement on Chinese human rights in 2017.
Those who believe that good global governance, however flawed, is an important tool for maintaining international peace and for contributing to development and growth should be appalled at how the CCP is undermining the liberal international architecture and suborning global institutions to its will. The normalization of such misbehavior cannot be allowed to stand.

Protecting against the Next Deadly Pathogen

The third reason Beijing must be held responsible is to prevent another pandemic from ravaging the world in the future. As we saw in the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Dallas, Texas, and are seeing again now, the era of globalization has allowed once-isolated pathogens to leap across national boundaries. Dr. Anthony Fauci of the CDC is among many who have pointed out that Italy has been devastated by the Wuhan coronavirus partly because it hosts a huge number of Chinese tourists as well as workers in the northern manufacturing regions where the virus emerged. In all, 310,000 Chinese live in Italy, and many returned there after visiting China for the Lunar New Year, spreading the virus to their adopted home country. This was, again, the fault of CCP officials, who failed to implement the proper travel restrictions despite knowing of the outbreak’s seriousness.
If Beijing escapes blame for its failure to curb the coronavirus pandemic, its lies, and its attempts to cover up the pathogen’s seriousness — or, worse yet, if it actually earns global plaudits for its actions — then no country will feel the need to be honest with the world when another epidemic breaks out, and the same deadly fiasco will repeat itself. Meanwhile, an emboldened CCP will grow only more aggressive and repressive, having learned that it can fool and bully the world into submission. Quite simply, if nation states do not understand that there will be repercussions for such malfeasance, then our globalized world will suffer more coronavirus-style pandemics in the future.
Beijing freely chose to deny the truth of COVID-19, and its governing malpractice and incompetence helped unleashed a pandemic on the world. For the sake of morality, political governance, and the future, the world must speak truth to power, remember the facts, and condemn the CCP’s actions.

特朗普将如何输掉与中国的贸易战

 编者:本文是 保罗·克鲁格曼于2024年11月15日发表于《纽约时报》的一篇评论文章。特朗普的重新当选有全球化退潮的背景,也有美国民主党没能及时推出有力候选人的因素。相较于民主党的执政,特朗普更加具有个人化的特点,也给时局曾经了更多的不确定性。 好消息:我认为特朗普不会引发全球...