washingtonpost.com

Americans at World Health Organization transmitted real-time information about coronavirus to Trump administration

Karen DeYoung

9-12 minutes

---

A number of CDC staffers are regularly detailed to work at WHO in Geneva as part of a rotation that has operated for years. Senior Trump-appointed health officials also consulted regularly at the highest levels with the WHO as the crisis unfolded, the officials said.

The presence of so many U.S. officials undercuts President Trump's charge that the WHO's failure to communicate the extent of the threat, born of a desire to protect China, is largely responsible for the rapid spread of the virus in the United States.

The administration has also sharply criticized the Chinese government for withholding information.

But the president, who often touts a personal relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping and is reluctant to inflict damage on a trade deal with Beijing, appears to see the WHO as a more defenseless target.

Asked early Sunday about the presence of CDC and other officials at the WHO, and whether it was "fair to blame the WHO for covering up the spread of this virus," Deborah Birx, the State Department expert who is part of the White House pandemic team, gently shifted the onus to China, and the need to "over-communicate."

"It's always the first country that get exposed to the pandemic that has a — really a higher moral obligation on communicating, on transparency, because all the other countries around the world are making decisions on that," Birx told ABC's This Week. "And when we get through this as a global community, we can figure out really what has to happen for first alerts and transparency and understanding very early on about … how incredibly contagious this virus is."

Following a Trump-hosted video conference of the leaders of the Group of Seven industrialized nations on Thursday, a White House statement said "much of the conversation centered on the lack of transparency and chronic mismanagement of the pandemic by the WHO."

The group's focus on the global health organization during the call stemmed largely from Trump's announcement two days earlier that he was freezing all U.S. funding for it, saying donors would be discussing "what do we do with all of that money that goes to WHO." The United States provides up to $500 million a year in assessed and voluntary contributions, significantly more than any other nation.

In statements following the G-7 call, however, other leaders emphasized the need to build up the WHO, rather than tear it down.

French President Emmanuel Macron "expressed his support for the WHO and underscored the key role it must play," according to a statement from his office. German Chancellor Angela Merkel "made clear that the pandemic can only be defeated with a strong and coordinated international response," her spokesman said. "In this context, she expressed full support for the WHO as well as a number of other partners."

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas warned that the WHO "cannot be weakened or in any way be called into question politically. … Every inch that the U.S. withdraws from the wider world, especially at this level, is space that will be occupied by others — and that tends to be those that don't share our values of liberal democracy," he said.

Canada, Japan and the European Union — all of whom participated in the call — also issued strong statements backing the organization.

A G-7 statement issued after the call supported the need to review WHO performance. "We cannot have business as usual and must ask the hard questions about how [the pandemic] came about," British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, standing in for virus-stricken Prime Minister Boris Johnson, said. But he stressed a post-crisis review should be "driven by science."

In announcing the funding cutoff, Trump charged last week that the WHO parroted incorrect Chinese statements and "failed to investigate credible reports … that conflicted directly with the Chinese government's official accounts." He criticized "the inability of the WHO to obtain virus samples" that China continues to refuse to supply.

A Senate aide who has tracked the issue said "there was clearly an effort" by China "not to provide transparent data and information" in the early stages of the outbreak.

"We were looking to WHO to provide that information, and they did not. It was unclear as to whether they didn't get that transparency from the Chinese, or that they chose not to share what they did get under pressure from the Chinese," said the aide who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.

But some noted that the WHO has no power to compel member governments to do its bidding.

The organization "has no intelligence capabilities, and no investigatory power," said Daniel Spiegel, who served as ambassador to the United Nation's Geneva-based organizations, including the WHO, for the Clinton administration. "They should have been more skeptical about what the Chinese were telling them, but they're totally at the mercy of what governments provide."

Among his complaints, Trump seems most aggrieved by the initial WHO failure to support his Jan. 31 decision to partially ban incoming travel from China. Days later, at a meeting of the WHO executive board, Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said there was no need to "unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade" to halt the spread of the disease. That message reiterated what he had said before Trump's announcement, after meeting with Xi in Beijing.

Trump called Tedros' statement "one of the most dangerous and costly decisions from the WHO. … They were very much opposed to what we did," he said last week. "Fortunately, I was not convinced and suspended travel from China, saving untold numbers of lives."

International public health experts have long debated whether border closures helped stem the spread of infectious diseases, or worsen the situation by blocking cooperation among countries. But many, including Antony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases and a leading member of the administration's coronavirus task force, have said it was probably helpful in this case as the efforts of individual countries to contain and mitigate the virus were outpaced by its rapid global spread.

On Saturday, Trump said without elaboration that "we're finding more and more problems" with the WHO. Speaking at a White House virus briefing, he said the administration was "doing some research" on "other ways" to spend money originally intended for both the WHO and the National Institutes of Health, which he said was "giving away $32 billion a year."

The meaning of Trump's reference to NIH, whose fiscal year 2020 budget totals $41.6 billion, was unclear.

The administration's 2019 Global Health Security Strategy advocates increased cooperation with the WHO and other international health organizations. But although the United States has a three-year seat on the WHO executive board, expiring in 2021, the post has remained vacant. Last month, Trump nominated Assistant Secretary for Health Brett Giroir for the position.

U.S. participation in the range of Geneva-based U.N. organizations is supervised by the State Department's Bureau of International Organization Affairs, whose assistant secretary left office last November after the department's inspector general issued a sweeping condemnation of his leadership, including "political harassment" of career officials deemed insufficiently loyal to Trump. It is currently headed in an acting capacity by a deputy.

But below the level of political appointments, communication between the U.S. government's public health bureaucracy and the WHO has continued throughout the Trump administration.

In addition to working at WHO, on assignments first reported Saturday by Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, CDC officials are often members of its many advisory groups. The emergency committee advising the organization on whether to declare "a public health emergency of international concern" during deliberations in mid to late January included Martin Centron, director for CDC's Division of Global Migration and Quarantine.

When China eventually agreed to let a joint WHO mission into the country in mid-February, it included two U.S. scientists among 25 national and international experts from eight countries, although the Americans were not permitted to visit the "core area" in Wuhan.

From the beginning of the outbreak, CDC officials were tracking the disease and consulting with WHO counterparts. A team led by Ray Arthur, director of the Global Disease Detection Operations Center at CDC, compiles a daily summary about infectious disease events and outbreaks, categorized by level of urgency, that is sent to agency officials.

Arthur, according to a CDC official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, has participated in the CDC daily "incident management" calls, discussing information he learned from WHO officials.

Information is passed up the chain of command from CDC to the Department of Health and Human Services in daily reports and telephone discussions, this official said.

Any information of a sensitive nature about the growing outbreak was and continues to be shared by CDC officials with other U.S. officials in a secure facility located behind the CDC's Emergency Operations Center at its Atlanta headquarters.

In the early days of the virus response, those officials included HHS Secretary Alex Azar. Information about what the WHO was planning to do or announce was often shared days in advance, the CDC official said.

Anne Gearan and Yasmeen Abutaleb contributed to this report.

 

newsweek.com

As U.S. investigates Wuhan lab leak theory, senior China researcher says allegations are "malicious, impossible"

Benjamin Fearnow

6-7 minutes

---

As United States intelligence agencies continue their investigation into the source of the COVID-19 spread, the vice director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology spoke out Saturday to defend the Chinese government and his laboratory from allegations that the coronavirus originated in Wuhan.

Yuan Zhiming, who is also the president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Wuhan Branch, broke the lab's silence after Trump administration sources last week said China and the World Health Organization (WHO) were being investigated for a potential coronavirus cover-up. China's foreign ministry on Thursday told reporters the WHO found "no evidence" the outbreak started at the Wuhan laboratory, and Yuan blasted allegations of intentional misuse or creation as "malicious" and "impossible."

The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Tuesday that American intelligence indicates the coronavirus most likely spread naturally versus it being manufactured in the Chinese laboratory, which has ties to foreign government money including the U.S. and France. The Chinese government has done little to provide confidence in the veracity of its publicly revealed coronavirus case and death statistics, particularly after reports they silenced doctors, falsely blamed the U.S. military and botched their initial 2019 response.

Hoping to dismiss similar allegations, Yuan appeared on a Chinese state television network and said that U.S. politicians and "conspiracy theories" are mistakenly "connecting the dots," because the Institute of Virology and the P4 laboratory, one of Asia's most advanced, are both in the city of Wuhan.

"The director of the Galveston National Laboratory in the United States made it clear that our laboratory is just as well managed as labs in Europe and the U.S.," Yuan said. "I think it is understandable for people to make that association. But it is a malicious move to purposefully mislead the people" to think that the virus escaped from [our Wuhan] labs.

"They have no evidence or logic to support their accusations. They are basing it completely on their own speculations," Yuan added.

As the Washington Post had reported, diplomatic cables from 2018 revealed U.S. embassy officials were concerned that poor safety procedures at China's Wuhan lab--which was testing coronavirus strains in bats--could potentially lead to outbreaks in the future. The Associated Press reported that more than 3,000 people were infected with COVID-19 during the crucial six days between when authorities knew about the outbreak and their official announcement, based on internal records obtained by the news wire.

During the White House's Coronavirus Task Force press briefing Saturday, Trump reiterated that he believes the Chinese government has been skewing their coronavirus data and stats since the start of the outbreak. "We're not number one, China's number one. China's ahead of us by a lot, they are way ahead of us in terms of death. It's not even close - you know it, I know it, they know it. But you don't want to report it."

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, recently said at a news conference at the Pentagon: "It should be no surprise to you that we've taken a keen interest in that, and we've had a lot of intelligence take a hard look at that. And I would just say, at this point, it's inconclusive. Although the weight of evidence seems to indicate 'natural.' But we don't know for certain."

Last Wednesday, President Donald Trump said the U.S. is trying to determine whether the coronavirus emanated from the Wuhan lab before spreading throughout China in December 2019. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanded that Beijing "needs to come clean" on the coronavirus source. A U.S. intelligence community official who spoke to Newsweek Friday said the U.S. government agencies have "not collectively agreed on any one theory" about COVID-19's origin.

Fox News quoted several anonymous sources last week within the Trump administration who said patient zero is thought to have worked at the Wuhan lab and contracted the virus from a bat. The report cited one U.S. source who said cooperation between the WHO and the communist Chinese government may be "the costliest government of all time" -- something their foreign ministry denied flatly Thursday.

Trump announced this week he is considering halting U.S. funding to the WHO as an investigation into wrongdoing proceeds, before accusing the international organization of "severely mismanaging and covering up" the coronavirus origin. Yuan said Saturday that the Wuhan lab -- or humans as a whole -- don't have the capability "or have the know-how to create such a virus." The Wuhan lab vice director said he is hopeful that scientists around the globe can work with Chinese researchers to find the pathogen's true trajectory.

"I have been in managing laboratory biosafety and scientific research projects for years, I know it is impossible," Yuan continued. "But I also believe that so long as the pandemic continues, this kind of speculations and disharmony will not fade away. Scientists around the world are joining forces to publish in academic journals. I hope these conspiracy theories will not harm the cooperation of scientists and affect their fight against the pandemic."

As United States intelligence agencies continue their investigation into the source of the COVID-19 spread, the vice director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology came forth Saturday to defend the Chinese government and his laboratory from allegations the coronavirus originated in Wuhan.HECTOR RETAMAL, JOHANNES EISELE / AFP/Getty Images

 

strategic-culture.org

An Alchemist Explains to Joe Sixpack: 'COVID-19 Alters America's Hidden 'War' Forever'

Alastair Crooke

15-19 minutes

---

A perception 'gap', so wide, you could sail a Cruise Liner through it. On the one hand, we have the looming spectre of recession; a major loss of jobs, and of earnings cratered (some 80% of the global workforce has seen their workplaces closed, or partly closed, as a result of the virus crisis), and on the other hand, the shocking non-sequitur of the U.S. Fed reporting that, despite the crisis, 'the average consumer expectation for higher stock-market prices one year hence has now surged to 47.7%, the highest on record'.

ZeroHedge wryly comments, "Right … because with his job gone, his $400 dollars of emergency savings just spent on a roll of toilet paper, his bank preparing to foreclose on his home, all while a deadly virus lurks in every corner, all Joe Sixpack can think of – is how to get his 'money on the sidelines' into the stock market – since it is about to soar to all-time highs. And so, thanks to the Fed's now grotesque interventions in all capital markets … as the economy slides into a depression, it is only 'logical' – we use the term loosely – that expectations of higher stock prices have never been higher."

A freak result, devoid of serious consideration? No. Actually, the paradox rather neatly ties together what is implicit, from that which has been explicit in U.S. policy, both domestically, and in terms of its foreign policy.

In foreign policy – in the post-Covid era – we see tensions with China ratchetting higher. The U.S. already is engaged in a full-spectrum info-war to blame China for the virus (and to divert criticism from the U.S.' lack of preparedness). China, recalling the earlier 'Century of Humiliation' visited on it by western states, and sensing some inherent racism in the taunts, inevitably is responding unusually assertively.

In a recent episode of soul-searching by an Obama National Security adviser, Ben Rhodes has written of GW Bush's speech (in wake of 9/11): "Our War on Terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated". He further defined the nature of the conflict by saying, "Americans are asking, 'Why do they hate U.S.?' They hate what we see right here in this chamber – a democratically elected government". To have this unfathomable event framed in a way that fitted neatly into the American narrative that I'd grown up with in the 1980s and '90s, was reassuring, Rhodes admits.

He later (in the article), says that he had been naïve, and swept along by his emotions, at seeing New York's Twin Towers cascade down into dust – and was roused by Bush's fiery rhetoric. Mr Sixpack probably feels similarly: He too, had been told that America's economy was strong and booming, until the virus flew into it, despatching America's economy into free fall. Shocked and angry, Joe probably hopes that America will 'Give it to them' (the Chinese that is, "they", whom the narrative suggests were responsible for it).

That is the explicit – in conjunction with Trump's Trade War, triggered ostensibly by China's 'hijacking' of America's commercial assets.

The 'unsaid' in this narrative is an old story of warfare. Destroy your enemy's supply-lines to weaken him. In Britain in 1891, a small circle of the inner élite was formed, in secret, around Cecil Rhodes, the South African diamond millionaire, and Lord Rothschild. Its members aimed to renew the bond between Britain and the U.S., and they believed that ruling-class men of Anglo-Saxon descent, rightly sat at the top of a hierarchy built on predominance in trade, industry, banking and the exploitation of other lands (much as America's élites do today).

This élite harbored a deep-rooted fear however, that unless they acted decisively, British power and influence across the world would be eroded, and replaced by that of a burgeoning Germany. In the years immediately after the Boer War, the decision was reached: The danger had to be addressed. And 'war' with Germany was planned: initially as a severing of its supply-lines; a propaganda 'war' casting Germans as child-eaters, and through diplomatic containment.

Narratives were harnessed to this objective, and the historian, Paul Vincent, tellingly recreates the atmosphere of jubilation that surrounded the outbreak of the war that was truly the fateful watershed of the twentieth century. H.G. Wells, for instance, gushed: "I find myself enthusiastic for this war against Prussian militarism … Every sword that is drawn against Germany is a sword drawn for peace." Wells later coined the mendacious slogan "the war to end war".

Britain, from the onset of war in 1914, imposed a tight naval blockade on Germany. By preventing food from being imported into the country, the British brought starvation and malnutrition to large masses of the German people. German submarine warfare was a desperate response to the British blockade—a blockade so effective that it threatened to force the Germans out of the war.

Fast-forward to today: The uprooting, and 're-patriating' of China's supply-lines back to America (given new fuel now, from the discovery that so many of America's basic medical needs are 'made in China'); seizing the commanding heights of technology; building out, militarily, into Space; mobilizing Europe against China; sanctioning China's external sources of energy, and casting China as the virus-demon – all form today's toolbox for what threatens the Anglo-élite.

Perhaps the resident 'Alchemist' at ZeroHedge, will take Joe Sixpack aside, and quietly say to him: "Look, Joe, Covid-19 is merely a virus – an invisible organism. You can't see it. You cannot 'make war' on it. When the British began imagining Germans as demonic monsters to be destroyed, they ended by not only destroying European culture, but also any commitment to the Ancient World's notion of Virtù or Homeric heroic conduct.

In their place, successive generations embraced relativism, nihilism, brooding pessimism and resentment. And from the massive, warring, governments' intrusions into every facet of civil society, arose the German Kriegssozialismus that was to become the model for the Bolsheviks. Again, as Vincent points out, "the British achieved control over their economy, unequalled by any of the other belligerent states: But everywhere state seizure of social power, was accompanied and fostered by propaganda lies, unparalleled in history, to that time".

But why (asks Joe) did you smile so enigmatically when I said that I might buy stock (shares) on credit provided by my broker, to try to recoup my loss of earnings, as a result of the Coronavirus?

"Well", says the Alchemist, "I was thinking of the 'hidden 'war', and how a virus 'out of nowhere' has changed its course, for good".

"What do you mean?", queries Joe.

"You recall how you said that the U.S. economy was fundamentally the strongest in the world? Well that's not quite true. Sometime ago, U.S. growth began to falter, and the Authorities opted for a debt-driven, consumer-led economy. Money was printed (as credit), and – normally – a lot of new money or debt in circulation, would have created inflation (such as we had during the Reagan Administration).

"How we managed this difficulty (apart from regularly re-jigging the price index), was by the so-called 'China Trade'. China was then in the midst of its Industrial Revolution: they sent cheap products to Walmart. They effectively subsidised the middle classes, by giving U.S. a standard of living – access to cheap consumer-goods – which otherwise, we could not have afforded. And better still, they recirculated the monetary proceeds back to Wall Street, through buying U.S. Treasury bonds.

"The point here, was that in so doing (buying our debt), the Chinese allowed U.S. to shrink our created, new-money 'footprint', by exporting U.S. dollar debt out of harm's way – to Emerging Markets. We have lent out $13 trillion in this way, thus repressing the domestic money footprint.

"These little 'tricks' were necessary to avoid inflation. But the inflation threat was mitigated also, in another way. All this new money was used to 'financialise' and leverage 'everything', from healthcare to education. They blew 'bubbles'.

"This gave U.S. a simulacrum of 'growth' – but money-printing did not make the dollars available to you, I'm afraid, Joe. They got stuck in the financial system and were hoarded. You may have noticed that times were getting less rosy. But that was also a result of the U.S. business model, which has always prioritised capital formation and allowed labour costs to take the strain, or be eased-down by off-shoring labour costs to overseas.

"Ah, but what of the 'hidden war' that you spoke about. How does that fit in?", asks Joe.

"You recall what I said earlier about Britain fearing that it could not stay at the pinnacle of international power forever? And seeing Germany somehow coming together, and building-out towards the East, in order in order to rival Britain? Well, China some years ago, stopped re-circulating the proceeds from the China Trade back to Wall Street, and instead started building-out towards Central Asia. It began spending the proceeds of the 'China Trade' building the Belt and Road, instead. As Germany had threatened to rival Britain, China was on a path to rival America.

"This posed a problem for the U.S.: firstly, how now to finance that China Trade; and secondly – not least – how to let the middle classes' down gently, from the loss of their 'China Trade' 'subsidy', and avoid a 'revolt' inside the U.S. The blowing of the housing 'bubble' was intended – at least partly – as the offset.

"Equally problematic for U.S. was that the Chinese-Russian Eurasian project, was intended to channel trade – in a hugely important sphere, including energy and raw materials – not via our channel – the dollar – but rather, away from it. The dollar has been 'squeezed' by the de-dollarisation crowd since at least 2007.

"Hence all the 'tricks' in the toolbox that I outlined earlier. But it got worse: We have tried to keep all the oil sales in the world going through the dollar (sanctioning non-compliant producers, creating instability of supply etc.), but scattergun of sanctions just brought everybody into our jurisdiction, and made their financial systems subject to arbitrary U.S. Treasury threat. The world doesn't want to do that anymore. The revolt grew.

"This, in essence, was the 'hidden war'. And it was not going so well: The U.S. Treasury – simply – was running out of further bubbles to blow. Finally, it had resorted to blowing the 'everything bubble' to maintain the appearance of a strong economy; but as this structure became ever bigger, more leveraged, more complex and thus opaque – so it became less stable. The Coronavirus 'pin' popped the bubble – forcing Washington to deploy unlimited money-printing, and to bailout simply, 'everything' (which is the inevitable 'logical' response to an 'everything bubble', I would imagine)", said the Alchemist.

"Then, what happens now" blurts out Joe, alarmed: "Will it end in war, like in the 19th Century?"

"Possibly, but probably, not", responds the Alchemist calmly. "China is too powerful, but its economy inevitably will have been weakened too. More likely, America will continue the struggle against China (and Russia) through proxies, such as in Venezuela, or in the Middle East. (Iran though is a special case, on account of Israel)."

"At the end of WW1, European economies had been partly shut down by the war – and there were huge dollar debts owing to the U.S. Today, western economies are in partial lockdown due to Covid-19. And national debts today are similarly, more or less, at levels associated with (real) wartimes. And there is the $13 trillion – owed by emerging markets, and for which repayment in full, now must be viewed as problematic.

"After WWI, there was no debt forgiveness (no debt jubilee), just a pass-the-parcel practiced by the European states, as they tried to off-load their debts onto others. To find an exit, some hoped that austerity could fix the problem. But others did resort to 'helicopter money' (much as the U.S. is so doing, in its response to the Covid-19 lockdown). The gold-backed German Reichsmark became the unbacked Papermark. Initially, the Reich financed its war outlays, in large part, through issuing debt. But From May 1923, the quantity of Papermark started spinning out of control. Wholesale prices skyrocketed. By 1918, you could have bought 500 billion eggs for the same money you would have to spend, five years later, for just one egg. The Papermark was scrap value.

"With the collapse of the currency, unemployment was on the rise. Hyperinflation had impoverished the great majority of the German population, especially the middle class. People suffered from food shortages and cold. And political extremism was on the rise. This is a real risk, since all the earlier Treasury gigs to suppress inflation are no longer available.

"So what might Washington do – especially about the $13 trillion debt owed by EMs?", pleaded Joe. "Why don't they reform the system?"

"We don't know what they will do", sighed the Alchemist, "but the signals suggest that the Central Bankers are toying with a new global, reserve digital crypto-currency – against which EMs (and the U.S.) might devalue their currencies. (The former governor of the Bank of England has hinted at something like this). It might never happen. The type of 'crypto' the Central Bankers have in mind is one giving the authorities complete control: no real money, just a credit at the central bank with ATMs spitting out only what the central banks determine. And no, there will be no real reform – only 'mumbleswerve'. But that – dirty money, lots and lots of it – is another story. Transparency is not an option.

"So, you would advise me not to buy stocks?", asks Joe.

"No, I wouldn't Joe. It seems that Trump now wants to bail out the American Middle Class in a different way. I know you, like many others, like to check out daily their 401K (stocks held as a future pension provision). And if it's up, they are happy; if not they are gloomy. So Trump is trying to blast-up markets, with a wall of freshly printed money – and bailouts unlimited.

"The President has taken full control of the (nuclear) button that controls the global supply of money, in dollars. He has control of the Treasury which has completed its take-over and merger with the Fed. How things work is that Congress authorises $450 billion in a CARES bailout. The Treasury gives it to the Fed as its stake – and then instructs the Fed to multiply that stake, by a factor of ten (through printing fresh money). The $450 billion becomes $4.5 trillion and is handed over to a friendly Hedge Fund – Blackrock – to distribute. And the details of the distribution are all tied up in confidentiality clauses and opacity. Trump becomes a secular Croesus: he can 'print' as much as he wishes. Nothing to stop him. Will be able to contain himself?

Joe sighs.

"So, the question then, Joe, is – is it really feasible for the market to soar when maybe half the economy is semi-furloughed, and inherentvalue is plunging?

"As I mentioned earlier, money 'printing' does not always make dollars available. Liquidity is being provided to the U.S. banks: yes, but the problem is not so much liquidity; but one of potential default – especially on the $13 trillion owed overseas. So there is a massive scramble by those overseas debtors for dollars, with which to pay interest, and capital repayments, as they become due – and that means the dollar will soar (for now). It is the dollar strength that brings to world to its nadir (just like the 1930s). It is the dollar system that is the really big problem. This virus will either prick the dollar bubble and collapse it in an inflationary spiral downwards – or, the CBs will be forced to find some other solution (though God knows what!)

Joe sighs again.

"I'm afraid Joe, that I may not have been much help to you – sorry".

 

foxnews.com

US, Canada have funded Chinese lab eyed as likely source of coronavirus outbreak

Tyler Olson

7-9 minutes

---

Both the United States and Canada have sent money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Chinese lab that multiple sources tell Fox News is suspected of being the likely source of the coronavirus pandemic -- with the Canadian funding coming as recently as last month.

Fox News reported Wednesday that, according to sources, there is increasing confidence the novel coronavirus likely escaped from the Wuhan laboratory, where it was being studied, with a worker spreading it to the larger population.

CORONAVIRUS: WHAT TO KNOW

In a news release from early March, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research announced millions in funding to research and develop tools such as vaccines and tests to combat the coronavirus. One project that got $828,046 from the agency was aimed at developing a rapid coronavirus test "using isothermal amplification and CRISPR technology." Among the organizations on the project was the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

"The collaborative research is conducted by a multi-disciplinary team of virologists, chemists, infectious disease specialists, front-line practitioners, and public health researchers from the University of Alberta, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, and Wuhan Institute of Virology (China)," a backgrounder detailing where the Canadian government's grant money was going reads. "Our team members in Wuhan who currently perform the standard diagnostic tests will lead this effort."

In this Tuesday, March 10, 2020, photo released by China's Xinhua News Agency, Chinese President Xi Jinping talks by video with patients and medical workers at the Huoshenshan Hospital in Wuhan in central China's Hubei Province. (Xie Huanchi/Xinhua via AP)

SOURCES BELIEVE CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK ORIGINATED IN WUHAN LAB AS PART OF CHINA'S EFFORTS TO COMPETE WITH US

The Canadian news site Rebel News first reported on the grant.

This comes after recent reports, including from the Daily Mail, of millions of dollars in U.S. government grants funding research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in recent years, news that has upset multiple members of Congress.

"There is zero doubt that the Chinese communist government has American blood on its hands. They put American lives at risk by covering up the origin and scope of the coronavirus crisis," Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz. told Fox News Thursday.

She continued: "The NIH must immediately stop deploying American tax dollars to China for this dangerous research. I'm also leading congressional efforts to ensure no coronavirus relief payments—intended to help American taxpayers and businesses—are misspent in China. The Chinese government must be held accountable for this crisis."

According to public documents compiled by the White Coat Waste Project and shared with Fox News, The Wuhan Institute of Virology has been involved with research funded by $7.1 million worth of U.S. government grants from the National Institutes of Health as it has participated in projects in collaboration with U.S. institutions. One grant for research on bat coronaviruses has received $3.7 million and another grant involving injecting viruses into mice's brains got $3.4 million.

It is not clear exactly how much U.S. funding went directly to the Wuhan Institute of Virology because it worked in collaboration with other institutions on the projects funded by the American grants.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology also has official approval from the National Institutes of Health to conduct taxpayer-funded research on animals in what is called "Animal Welfare Assurance" issued by the Public Health Service.

CORONAVIRUS COVERUP UNDERSCORES CHINA'S TIGHT GRIP ON WHO, UNITED NATIONS

"The U.S. government's spending spree that we've exposed at the notorious Wuhan Institute of Virology is outrageous and unacceptable," Justin Goodman, the White Coat Waste Project's vice president for advocacy and public policy told Fox News. "Taxpayers should never be forced to bankroll China's hazardous bio-agent experiments, which put human life around the world gravely at risk. We'll continue to work with our advocates and Congress to put an end to this egregious misuse of Americans' tax dollars."

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., has spoken out against the U.S. funding of the Chinese institute, including in an appearance on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" this week.

"I'm against funding Chinese research in our country, but I'm sure against funding it in China," Gaetz said, calling for an end to such grants. "The NIH [National Institutes of Health] gives a $3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology [and] they then advertise that they need coronavirus researchers and following that, coronavirus erupts in Wuhan."

As Fox News reported Wednesday, the suspicion surrounding the lab comes from classified and open-source documents and evidence, sources said. Sources emphasized -- as is often the case with intelligence -- that it's not definitive and should not be characterized as such. Some inside the administration and the intelligence and epidemiological communities are more skeptical, and the investigation is continuing.

What all of the sources agree on is the extensive cover-up of data and information about COVID-19 orchestrated by the Chinese government.

The recent revelations about U.S. and Canadian funding for the Wuhan Institute of Virology come after The Washington Post reported earlier this week that State Department officials had expressed grave concerns in recent years about the safety of the Chinese lab.

"During interactions with scientists at the WIV laboratory, they noted the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory," a January 2018 State Department cable obtained by the Washington Post reads.

STATE DEPARTMENT LEAKED CABLES RENEW THEORIES ON ORIGIN OF CORONAVIRUS

The cable argued that the United States should give Chinese researchers at the Wuhan lab more support because its research on bat coronaviruses was important and dangerous. The lab had already been receiving assistance from the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch.

Fox News reported Wednesday night that the virus research was part of China's efforts to show that it could identify and combat coronaviruses as well as or better than the U.S.

China then undertook an extensive cover-up of information about the virus in an attempt to shield its origins from public scrutiny. Doctors and journalists were "disappeared" warning of the spread of the virus and its contagious nature. China moved quickly to shut down travel domestically from Wuhan to the rest of China, but did not stop international flights from Wuhan.

 

Nigel Farage: Trump's right. The WHO is not fit for purpose

newsweek.com

Nigel Farage: Trump's right. The WHO is not fit for purpose | Opinion

Nigel Farage On 4/16/20 at 12:55 PM EDT

7-8 minutes

---

President Trump's aversion to the World Health Organization has been obvious for some time, so it was no surprise when he announced that the US would stop funding it. His decision has prompted a predictable chorus of complaints and howls of despair from all the usual suspects, but for multiple reasons these must be ignored.

First, let's consider the track record of the WHO's director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a man who has behaved appallingly during the Covid-19 crisis. While a microbiologist and a malaria researcher, he has no known professional medical training—and yet he is in charge of the United Nations agency which is responsible for global public health. Even if the world had not been struck by coronavirus many would, on this evidence alone, question his fitness for this particular post. But his lack of appropriate credentials are not the half of it.

Formerly, Tedros served as a minister under Ethiopia's prime minister and president, Meles Zenawi, whose repressive regime had close links to Beijing. Tedros was also on good terms with another China apologist, Zimbabwe's tyrannical president Robert Mugabe, and in 2017 he even installed Mugabe as a WHO goodwill ambassador (a decision that was reversed after protests from human rights groups). His political background therefore raises legitimate questions about his objectivity in the current pandemic. His actions in recent weeks have merely confirmed his strong admiration for China.

In January, he visited China and met with President Xi Jinping. On his return, he praised the Communist state for its "transparency", despite it having covered up the true extent of Covid-19 by silencing doctors who wanted to alert the public to the outbreak. Chillingly, it has been reported that three journalist whistleblowers—named as Chen Qiushi, Fang Bing and Li Zehua—remain missing two months after trying to inform the world of the true scale of the outbreak in Wuhan. Although senior figures from the WHO, including Australia's Professor John Mackenzie, have called China "reprehensible", Tedros has continued to heap praise on Xi and on his country, saying it should be "congratulated" for protecting "the people of the world". He even told colleagues he was "very impressed and encouraged by the president's detailed knowledge of the outbreak."

Time after time, Tedros has made statements urging other countries not to close their borders to Chinese visitors and has glorified China for setting "a new standard on outbreak control". Yet it now seems to me that the WHO has, through such sheer imbecilic irresponsibility, actively helped to spread this disease around the world.

Trump is right—neither Tedros nor the WHO is fit for purpose. It's just a shame that Trump didn't go further by calling for the abolition of the WHO. It cannot convincingly claim to be politically neutral and its policy platform appears to be up for sale to the highest bidder. For a global health outfit, it has some terribly unhealthy habits.

Disturbingly, in the very week that Trump has challenged the WHO, the British government has decided to signal its virtue to the world by giving it a further £75m. Naturally, this has earned high praise from Tedros himself. As far as I am concerned it simply shows that the influence of China's money and its relentless propaganda war have taken in not only the WHO, but also most Western governments.

At the same time, the Chinese technology firm Huawei has been having a busy week in Britain. Despite mounting opposition from politicians and campaigners, it is poised to help build the U.K.'s 5G data network. Having received criticism recently, its U.K. boss, Victor Zhang, wrote an open letter emphasising the key role Huawei already plays in the U.K.'s data network and – in a sickeningly condescending move – reassuring people that it is "focused on keeping Britain connected" during the "unprecedented" coronavirus pandemic.

Zhang said that data usage has increased by at least 50 percent since Covid-19 first reached the U.K., placing "significant pressure" on telecoms systems. He stated: "During this pandemic our engineers – designated 'essential' workers – are striving around the clock to keep Britain connected". He then launched into a lecture whose central message was that excluding his company in our 5G network would do a "disservice" to U.K. consumers.

While I and many others feel angry at the sheer arrogance of Zhang's statement (and fearful of the consequences of Huawei's presence in the U.K.'s infrastructure) I am sure it was met with nods of approval in Downing Street. Also this week, the Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, successfully satisfied Beijing that Britain will not politicize the coronavirus crisis in a way that would have an adverse effect on China.

Huawei's other big announcement of the week in the U.K. has been the unveiling of its newest board member, Sir Mike Rake, a former President of the Confederation of British Industry and such an enthusiast for the European Union that he once advocated Britain joining its single currency, the Euro. As I reflect on this, I am convinced that the same group of people who sold Britain out to Brussels now appear intent on allowing this country to be taken over by Beijing.

The only crumb of comfort I can find at present is that when Boris Johnson recovers from his own brush with coronavirus, and is back at work full-time, he will still have to face the 36 Conservative MPs who last month used a parliamentary vote to voice their belief that Huawei's involvement in the U.K.'s 5G expansion should cease. Indeed, as this row brews over the summer, I suspect the number of rebels in Johnson's own party will increase. With this in mind it is significant that the former Conservative Foreign Secretary, William Hague, this week expressed his concerns that the U.K. has become too dependent on China. It seems that for ventilators, face masks and many other products, we are almost entirely reliant on this Communist regime.

Donald Trump apart, the extent to which China has already infiltrated the West's political systems and ruling classes means that real reversals of policy after this crisis are less than likely. However, there is still one group of people who can decide whether China attains the global dominance it clearly craves: consumers. In the final analysis, it is not governments that do business, but individuals making their own choices with their money.

With this in mind, I pledge today that as far as is humanly possible, I will not knowingly buy a product that is made in China from now on—certainly not while this barbaric regime is in place. If tens of millions of people have the same view, then we will win. If not, then China will rule the world, and no doubt our politicians will applaud from the sidelines.

Nigel Farage is senior editor-at-large of Newsweek's "The Debate" platform.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own.​​​​​

 

COVID-19 Isn’t Turning Europe Pro-China (Yet)

thediplomat.com

No, COVID-19 Isn't Turning Europe Pro-China (Yet)

By Erik Brattberg and Philippe Le Corre for The Diplomat

11-14 minutes

---

Features | Diplomacy | East Asia

China's muscular coronavirus PR campaign in Europe may end up backfiring.

A man fixes the Chinese flag in front of boxes with protective suits and masks in Vienna, Austria, March 20, 2020.

Credit: AP Photo/Ronald Zak

Ever since the World Health Organization declared Europe the new epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic on March 13, China has seized the opportunity to provide relief to some of the worst-hit European countries as part of a concerted PR offensive aiming at polishing up the Communist Party's image internationally and — above all — domestically. Although China's aid offers have generally been welcomed by those leaders struggling to contain the outbreak, it is still far too early to conclude that Beijing is actually winning over any European hearts and minds. As Chinese diplomacy in Europe is becoming more brazen — and in some cases even aggressive — the opposite may well turn out to be true.

Already dubbed by some "mask diplomacy," the fast Chinese response to the coronavirus outbreak in Europe is an undeniable fact. Since mid-March, planeloads of Chinese medical teams, masks, and ventilators have arrived at European airports. For example, on March 13, only two days after the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in Italy reached 10,000, a team of Chinese medical staff from the Chinese Red Cross landed in Rome. Also on board the plane were 30 tons worth of coveted face masks and respirators in boxes draped with the Chinese flag.

Meanwhile, Spain, which is now replacing Italy as the epicenter of the virus in Europe, has agreed on a deal to purchase over half a million masks, 5.5 million test kits, and 950 respirators from Chinese vendors who have significantly upped their production. Other European countries that have received substantial Chinese help include Greece, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Austria, and Serbia. Chinese tech billionaire Jack Ma has also pledged to donate 2 million masks to Spain, France, Italy, and Belgium. Meanwhile, Huawei, the Chinese telecom giant currently bidding for major 5G contracts across Europe, has donated over 2 million face masks to Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, and Poland.

Besides in-kind medical assistance, China has also stepped up its diplomatic outreach in Europe. On March 13, Chinese officials hosted a video conference with their counterparts from the so-called 17+1 group of countries in Central and Eastern Europe to share lessons about combating the virus outbreak. A similar call took place a few days later between Chinese health officials and 10 European countries including France, Portugal, and Denmark. President Xi Jinping has also personally called leaders in Italy, Spain, France, the United Kingdom, and Serbia to discuss cooperation over the virus as part of a "health silk road."

On top of this, China has also engaged in more sinister disinformation and propaganda campaigns across Europe through some of its media outlets. Italy has been particularly targeted. For example, a tweet from the newspaper Global Times cast doubt over the origin of the virus, suggesting it came from Italy. Another tweet from a Chinese official spokesperson actively relayed a false story of Romans thanking China while playing its national anthem from their balconies. An Italian newspaper reported that China is also pulling from the Russian playbook by deploying armies of Twitter bots to spread its coronavirus propaganda. On its official website, the Chinese Embassy to France has started shamelessly attacking medical workers for "failing to assist dying patients" and "abandoning their jobs" at EHPAD nursing homes. Since August 2019, the embassy has been run by a hardliner, Lu Shaye. This follows a trend of more aggressive Chinese diplomacy in Europe over the past year against those it disagrees with.

This follows a trend of more aggressive Chinese diplomacy in Europe over the past year against those it disagrees with.

It is not surprising that China is stepping up its PR offensive in Europe amid the coronavirus. The above-mentioned activities serve multiple purposes for Beijing. First, they enable China to deflect attention away from the fact that the virus originated in Wuhan and that Chinese officials initially denied its existence. Second, at a time when the West is struggling to contain the virus, China wants to leverage its own supposedly successful response to the outbreak and present its governance model based on social control, harsh confinement, and surveillance in a more favorable light. Third, China is utilizing these new diplomatic tools to boost its soft power profile and promote itself as a generous and responsible international actor. Although the main purpose is to rally Chinese citizens behind the Communist Party following a major domestic social and health crisis, it also presents an opportunity for China to strengthen its ties with Europe – a key priority for Beijing. The strategic relevance of Europe is further amplified by the escalating competition and trade war between Beijing and Washington under President Donald Trump and the need to improve access to European technology and market while undermining a coherent common transatlantic pushback.

So far, China's assistance efforts appear to have garnered only isolated successes. Unsurprisingly, leaders from the most affected European countries are among the most appreciative. For example, Italy's embattled Foreign Minister Luigi di Maio posted a video on Facebook welcoming the Chinese aid and praising China for its "solidarity spirit." Meanwhile, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez praised China and said his country would draw from the Chinese experience of managing the virus. The most striking praise for China has come from Serbia's President Aleksandar Vučić, who in a televised address announcing a state of emergency referred to China as "the only country that can help."

However, there is less certainty that these efforts will cause any long-lasting improvement to China's image in Europe. In fact, there are several reasons why China's current PR drive might backfire. First, after a wobbly initial start, a more coordinated common European response to the coronavirus is now finally shaping up. As a result, China is denied the opportunity to exploit the lack of European solidarity and present itself as the only actor capable of assistance. Further, using an explicit fact-based counternarrative to help assess China's claims, the European Commission has issued statements noting that "France and Germany have combined donated more masks to Italy than China." Echoing the same message, French President Emmanuel Macron also added a call for "Europe-bashing" to end.

Second, efforts to push back against Chinese propaganda and disinformation in Europe are now underway. For instance, the EU's high representative for foreign policy, Josep Borrell, has referred to the response to the coronavirus as a "global battle of narratives" and accused China of "aggressively" pushing false messages. Following his comment, Huawei decided to scale down its European mask donation program for fear of becoming embroiled in a wider geopolitical powerplay. In another example, a unit in the External Action Service normally devoted to debunking Russian disinformation has recently documented a series of Chinese coronavirus propaganda narratives in what appears to be a copy of the Russian disinformation playbook in Europe. The European Council on March 26 acknowledged the need to engage in the communication battle, saying it will "counter disinformation with transparent, timely, and fact-based communication."

Third, reports of faulty Chinese medical equipment and supplies have triggered outrage. Countries such as Spain, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic have already returned Chinese-made test-kits. Problems with Chinese-made masks have also been reported in several countries. These concerns will likely feed long-standing European distrust of Chinese product safety standards. Once the coronavirus crisis is over, they may also give a boost to those voices calling for less European dependency on China for security reasons. The European Commission has already issued new guidelines for the implementation of a common EU investment screening framework specifically mentioning the protection of critical European medical assets. The EU is also wary of a repeat of the post 2008 financial crisis, which led to opportunistic Chinese investments in key European infrastructures. Similarly, Macron has voiced support for adding medical supplies to the list of strategic sectors where Europe needs more "sovereignty."

Fourth, the skepticism toward China among both European elites and the public is not likely to change, as it is driven by deeper economic and political concerns about China's rise. Some Italian voices, for example, have reacted strongly against China's push – sometimes asking for "war damages" instead. If anything, it underscores the more hawkish European position enshrined in an EU strategy paper on China from a year ago, which referred to the country as a "systemic rival." In fact, the EU-China relationship, which was already facing a difficult road ahead, could actually be further negatively impacted by coronavirus fallout. The regular EU-China summit has already been cancelled and it is unclear whether the planned EU27 leaders' meeting with Xi Jinping in Germany scheduled for September can take place. The prospect for the key deliverable for that summit, a potential bilateral EU-China investment treaty, was already looking shaky and now seems even more remote.

In short, China may well score some brownie points in Europe in the short term, especially among more populist leaders, but its PR offensive is unlikely to fundamentally transform its image. If Beijing was serious about improving its standing with European governments, it would have to do far more than symbolic deliveries of aid and photo-ops — including being more transparent about its own handling of the virus, avoiding the politicization of medical assistance, stopping the spread of disinformation and propaganda, and engaging constructively in multilateral institutions. It should also invest in partnerships with Europe on science and trade that are not just one-way.

China's shortcomings, however, do not mean that European leaders should be complacent about the challenge posed by China's latest diplomatic push. If the brazenness of the Chinese diplomacy push in Europe becomes a permanent fixture of its foreign policy after the pandemic, more robust European action will be vital. Meanwhile, Europe must seek to increase solidarity with affected countries such as Italy, better publicize what assistance they are actually providing to neighbors, and push back more firmly against false Chinese narratives and disinformation.

Erik Brattberg is director of the Europe Program and a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington

Philippe Le Corre is a fellow-in-residence at CY Cergy Paris Université and ESSEC Business School, as well as a nonresident senior fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

 

telegraf.rs

Vucic speaks about Church's request: Have no doubt that I will support doctors and life

4-5 minutes

---

14/04/20 |  21:14  ≫  21:17

The president of Serbia spoke about current topics

Foto: Printscreen/RTS

President of the Republic of Serbia Aleksandar Vucic says that the worst situation is still in Cuprija when it comes to the coronavirus epidemic, but that the entire district of Pomoravlje is not far behind. He also spoke about the details of his phone conversation with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

He said that a curfew would be imposed from Friday at 5 pm until Tuesday at 5 am.

New measure for pensioners

"We are looking for a way to allow them to come out at least three times a week, that is, to set aside 8 hours within the curfew because they must not be in contact with others. And it should not be an hour or two, but a time of 8 or 6 hours within which they will be able to walk half an hour and a maximum of 300 meters from their place of residence," he said.

"As far as pensioners are concerned, of course they are losing patience after a month in their apartments and houses. But we did it to save their lives," said Vucic, adding that he is happy that the majority of pensioners understand this measure.

The Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) request

The Serbian president said he spoke with the patriarch on Saturday and that they had a different conversation.

"The only thing I can guarantee you is that I will try to talk to the patriarch tomorrow again, but don't have any doubt that I will support the doctors and life. But we have no intention of arresting bishops and the clergy," said Vucic.

"Our enemy is the virus, not the one who is trying to fight the virus," Vucic said. He also said that when it comes to the Gerontological Center in Nis, the director is not the only culprit, but also the children of the persons who live there.

"I ask people to understand this and to help us on this issue. To understand this and to deal with it, to try to save lives," said the president of Serbia.

Conversation with Xi Jinping

The president of Serbia said spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping for the first time on the phone.

"I asked him to let us to buy more medical devices, not because we need it, but because I want us to feel safe. I received assurances from the Chinese president that he would consider my request. Even if things got worse, which I don't think they will, we must have everything. Evn with all my concern, you could see the part that is optimistic," said Vucic.

Hotspots

"When you go toward Aleksinac, Nis and Leskovac, that's the situation. And, the whole Rasina District is our biggest hotspot. Now Pozarevac is also becoming a big problem because of the people who came from Italy. The south, southeast and east of Serbia are becoming a real hotspot. It's not good to have one infected person anywhere, but things are under control," said Vucic, adding that Belgrade is near the average, which means that the measures have produced results, but, he says, not sufficiently.

(Telegraf.rs)

Telegraf.rs zadržava sva prava nad sadržajem. Za preuzimanje sadržaja pogledajte uputstva na stranici Uslovi korišćenja.

 

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE PANDEMIC – published in Serbian daily “Politika” on 25.3.2020

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE PANDEMIC – published in Serbian daily "Politika" on 25.3.2020

31/03/2020 od Nebojša Katić

Paradoxical though it might sound, to the Western political and economic establishments, COVID-19 is a gift. The pandemic will invariably have devastating economic consequences, but a financial crisis was inevitable and imminent even before it emerged. The start of this crisis was evident back in September 2019. The pandemic will now serve as a convenient cover-up of this fact, whilst inconvenient questions will be swept under the rug. In this way, the new financial crisis will not be blamed on the economic model of the West, which has not changed one iota since the Big Recession of 2008/2009. Nor will it be blamed on brutal austerity measures, nor on the stagnating incomes of the majority of workers. Nor on the shameless neglect of the astronomical rise in inequality. No, the system is working perfectly – it's this new virus, see, that's to blame. Western nations, as well as those aspiring to their example, will now have the perfect excuse to continue implementing their destructive economic and social politics for another decade, at least. People's endurance will be tested to its limit, as we are manipulated into believing that the sole purpose of existence now is merely staying alive, and little more. There is a systematic whipping up of hysteria which has brought the world into a state of collective paralysis, thereby enabling every totalitarian experiment to be carried out with no resistance. All big economic crises, since the triumph of neoliberalism in the 80s through to today, have been brought about the same way – a combined and unchecked massive increase of public, state and corporate debt. In the second half of 2019, global debt reached an incredible $250 trillion[1] and surpassed 320% of global GDP. Both figures are far higher than they were in 2008 when a crisis on an unprecedented scale occurred. The system has been practising short-termism for a decade now – money is constantly being printed, whilst interest rates are being held lower than ever before seen in modern times. Debts can only be paid off by incurring new ones, however, the unsustainable growth of corporate debt is beginning to collapse the financial system from within. In the US, a serious cash-flow crisis last September catalysed yet further printing of money on an enormous scale. International organisations, as well as global media, feigned ignorance. And then the virus came. Unlike previous crises which were essentially crises of demand, the one we are experiencing today is simultaneously a crisis of both demand and supply because a large part of industry (particularly services) has ceased. That particular combination is usually seen only in periods of economic sanctions and wartime. Many countries in the West right now intend to print several trillion dollars, euros, pounds, etc. – and that's just for starters. No one will question this enormous injection of new money. No one will notice that during crises, money inexplicably seems to appear and is always available for bank and corporate bailouts. It is always available for acquiring weapons, for carrying out military exercises and brutal military interventions. It is only ever unavailable for social welfare, for medical equipment, for health- and care-worker salaries, for academic research and education. Western systems are excellent at „creating" financial derivatives, tools for time-wasting by way of social media and various Hollywood-branded brain-washing, soul-destroying materials. They only falter when it comes to caring for human beings – when they need protecting with facemasks, ventilators, increased hospital capacity, medicines and other tangible remedies. After the pandemic has passed and the dead have been counted, a new wave of economic victims will emerge. Big banks and corporations will be bailed out, but everyone else will be reeling from irreparable damage. Unemployment will soar and the most vulnerable will be hardest hit – the millions who have neither health nor social insurance, nor savings – only debt. No one will count the victims of poverty, nor will we see daily tolls of the affected and dying as a direct result of it. This crisis will yet again impoverish small and weak economies. Capital, which is already fleeing developing countries, will withdraw even faster. Developing economies will be on their knees as they become incapable of rescuing their own citizens and industries. No one will notice how powerful countries that are subsidising their own companies with trillions, using the pandemic as a cover, are plainly breaking the basic market rules – rules that they created. And then these same countries, along with the IMF, will offer „aid" in the form of credit, thereby handing already indebted countries a new financially obliging noose. In exchange for "coloured paper" – dollars and euros – developing countries will continue trading their tangible, real assets – manufactured goods, property and resources. Domestic experts, lovers of the small state and a free market, will painstakingly explain that this is by no means daylight robbery, no, this is merely the West magnanimously investing its hard-earned savings. Unfortunate and incompetent governments will fall for the same old tricks and trust the same advisors. As for the lowly citizens, they will be grateful just to have survived and still be breathing, albeit suffocating financially. I'm afraid that those kind souls who believe that we will learn something from this pandemic and experience a sort of catharsis or rebirth, are fooling themselves. After the pandemic, the world will be even more ruthless and cruel. [1] In the previous version it was wrongly stated that the debt was  350tn.

View article...

foxnews.com

Dr. Nan Hayworth: Falling coronavirus projections — Trump's strategy is working

Nan Hayworth

5-7 minutes

---

Projections for the eventual U.S. death toll from COVID-19 have fallen sharply, a testament to the success of a combination of aggressive measures, most notably stringent social distancing, that have been undertaken throughout the country.

This wonderful news is a reminder that Americans can make miracles happen — thanks to their own determination, and to the tireless leadership of a president with remarkable foresight who's assembled a team of the world's best experts to guide and facilitate our response to the pandemic.

The federal government, state governments, entire industries and all our citizens have mobilized to do everything they can to conquer COVID-19.

The first major blow against the disease was struck by President Trump in January when he imposed restrictions on travel from China. This decisive step has been credited with sparing millions of Americans from exposure to the virus, buying crucial time we needed to delay the wave of severe illness now familiarly known as the "curve."

It's been estimated that without any mitigation efforts by either state or federal governments, up to 2.2 million Americans would have died from COVID-19. President Trump's travel restrictions on China were joined subsequently by bans on travel from Europe, the United Kingdom and Ireland, further limiting the introduction of the novel coronavirus from abroad.

More from Opinion

Concurrently the White House Coronavirus Task Force, first convened in January, developed guidelines for all Americans to follow while coordinating with state and local leaders to devise targeted responses to the distinctive situations faced in each part of the country.

The task force's work has been informed consistently by evidence and scholarly analysis. From diagnostics and contact tracing to therapeutic interventions, to rates of hospitalization and mortality, data generated daily in ever greater quantity and diversity have yielded predictive models and guided both planning and action.

Based on the best evidence and analysis to date, in mid-March, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) warned that COVID-19 could kill up to 1.7 million people in the U.S. A model developed around the same time by the Council on Foreign Relations and Resolve to Save Lives predicted that between 163,500 and 1.6 million Americans could die from the pandemic, on the assumption that about 50 percent of our population would contract the disease.

As President Trump has rightly noted, the death toll from COVID-19 is a figure that no one could ever be happy about. It is also true that every life spared as we "crush the curve" is a miracle worth celebrating

To maximize the nation's precautions against reaching such a peak on the coronavirus curve, President Trump and his team announced: "15 days to slow the spread."

By April 1, the aggressive multifaceted attack against COVID-19 at the federal and state levels had moved the worst-case predictions downward: the White House announced that the U.S. could expect between 100,000 and 240,000 coronavirus-related deaths by the end of the outbreak. Wisely, the president extended social distancing guidelines for another 30 days.

Further progress was evinced on April 7, when projected mortality fell significantly in a widely respected model from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), to between 49,431 and 136,401 American coronavirus deaths, with a median of just over 80,000. A day later the IHME's median was adjusted downward again, to about 60,000.

The first couple of weeks of April have also demonstrated how rapidly our health care providers have adapted both outpatient and inpatient care according to clinical experience with COVID-19. Recent reports show coronavirus hospitalizations across the U.S. to be far lower than expected, with a notable days-long fall in new hospitalizations in New York, where the pandemic has struck hardest. The state now projects a need for roughly 20,000 to 30,000 beds, compared with the 110,000 that Gov. Andrew Cuomo had previously said would be needed.

Regrettably, the president's critics seek to turn even unambiguously good news into something sinister: MSNBC host Chris Hayes, for example, floated the outlandish conspiracy theory that the administration had deliberately inflated previous counts to make the revised projections look better.

Hayes' resoundingly ridiculed hypothesis is decisively refuted by experts, including Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, leaders of the Coronavirus Task Force, who have described how the nation's steadily evolving response to COVID-19, and the volume and speed of data collection, influence models' assumptions and predictions day by day.

As President Trump has rightly noted, the death toll from COVID-19 is a figure that no one could ever be happy about. It is also true that every life spared as we "crush the curve" is a miracle worth celebrating — as is the extraordinary partnership among government, enterprise and our citizens to fight a crisis of unprecedented magnitude and speed, an effort the president has led ever since news of the virus first emerged on the world scene.

 

theguardian.com

Coronavirus diplomacy: how Russia, China and EU vie to win over Serbia

Shaun Walker

7-9 minutes

---

First, the Chinese came to Belgrade, with planeloads of equipment and six medical experts to help coordinate national coronavirus policy. An emotional Serbian president kissed the Chinese flag in gratitude and slammed Europe for its lack of assistance.

Then came the Russians, who flew in less crucial but nevertheless welcome resources on military jets with much media fanfare.

Finally the Europeans came, pointing out that they had been there all along and had funded significantly more than Russia and China put together.

In Serbia, a candidate country for eventual EU accession that has also courted Moscow and Beijing in recent years, the intersection of competing "coronavirus diplomacies" is highly visible.

As the pandemic gathers speed, major players are looking to use soft power and aid to fulfil their foreign policy goals. For the EU, it's trying to prove that talk of European values and solidarity is not just empty words. For China, it's changing the narrative to present the country as the solution to coronavirus, not its cause. For Russia, it's using more modest resources for maximum effect, with Russian military vehicles driving through Italy or a planeload of equipment despatched to the US partly produced by a sanctioned company. The Americans, focused internally under the Trump administration, have largely been absent from the coronavirus diplomacy game.

In Serbia, it all started on 15 March, the day president Aleksandar Vučić declared a state of emergency. It was the same day that a statement from European commission president Ursula von der Leyen appeared to suggest a ban on exporting medical supplies from the bloc. This infuriated Vučić and led to an emotional outburst.

 

A group of Chinese doctors inspect a makeshift hospital for coronavirus patients at the Belgrade Fair. Photograph: Oliver Bunic/AFP via Getty Images

"European solidarity does not exist. It was a fairy tale. I have sent a special letter to the only ones who can help. That is China," Vučić told the nation. He asked China for supplies, equipment and advice on fighting the pandemic, and soon after, a plane landed in Belgrade.

"It was not exactly what we would want to hear from a government that claims it is doing its utmost to join the EU," said one European diplomat based in Belgrade. But even in Spain and Italy there has been anger at the lack of a coordinated European response to coronavirus, and for those outside the bloc like Serbia, the rejection was felt even more strongly.

"The EU was initially a bit slow and clumsy. This is what happens very often with the EU, of course it cannot be as fast and interventionist in the way China or Russia can be," said Milena Lazarević of the European Policy Centre in Belgrade.

China was happy to step into the gap. Serbian officials say the Chinese experts, who have remained in the country, are now running the government's coronavirus policy. Unlike most of Europe, Serbia is following the Chinese model of isolating even mild cases of coronavirus in large field hospitals, rather than trusting people to self-isolate.

The Chinese also recommended an absolute lockdown such as the one that had been implemented in Wuhan, said one Serbian official. This was rejected on the basis that the Serbian public would not accept it, but strict curfews have been put in place, and those over 70 are confined to their homes at all times.

A promised mass-testing regime is not yet up to speed and reports suggest the testing procedure is chaotic. But Serbian officials are hopeful that implementing the strict Chinese measures early will mean the country avoids a large-scale epidemic as seen in western European countries. As of Sunday, Serbia has 3,380 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 74 deaths.

Russia also sent aid, mainly disinfectant solution for hospitals and apartment block entrances. Back in Moscow, opposition figures have griped that the Kremlin has been sending equipment abroad for propaganda gain, while doctors at home lack basic supplies. In Serbia, the help was welcome, though there was a sense that the fanfare around the deliveries may outweigh their actual use.

Since Vučić's outburst, the EU has also been working hard to showcase the ways in which it has helped Serbia. The EU delegation in the country noted that more than €200m (£176m) of grants and €250m of loans have been provided to help build and equip medical facilities over the past two decades. An EU-funded laboratory, initially designed to do quality control tests for milk and other food products, has been repurposed as a coronavirus testing lab. A further €93m of funds has been pledged by the EU over the short and medium term to fight coronavirus and its effects.

The coronavirus situation is in many ways an extension of the previous battle for hearts and minds in the Serbia. A survey carried out last December showed that many Serbs believed Russia or China to be the country's largest donor over the past two decades, while in fact the EU had given about 100 times more than either.

"In times of crisis, a plane with emergency materials may have a big public effect but the structural work in the health sector for many years is easily forgotten," said the European diplomat.

Vučić has since also praised European aid, but the big Chinese gestures are likely to stick in the public memory. The prime minister, Ana Brnabić, has said she wants to build a monument to Serbian-Chinese friendship when the pandemic is over, while a billboard in Belgrade, paid for by a pro-government tabloid, has a simple message: "Thank you, Brother Xi."