#Sponsored

Monday, August 3, 2020

'China is powerful now': Beijing's aggressive global stance sparks wave of nationalism. As China comes under attack abroad, nationalist sentiment at home is being stoked – at the expense of other voices

A protester shouts pro-China slogans outside the US Consulate General in Chengdu
A protester shouts pro-China slogans outside the US consulate in Chengdu

or days, the US consulate in the Chinese city of Chengdu was not just a site for curious onlookers but for residents eager to express pride in their country. Some waved the Chinese flag while others set off fireworks. In one video, a woman said she was “extremely happy” to see the consulate close. “We have kicked out one more hub for spies!” she said, smiling as she pointed at the building.

In another video, widely circulated on Chinese social media, a CNN reporter attempting to broadcast is drowned out by a group belting out a patriotic Chinese song. The crowd sings cheerfully, if discordantly: “Praising our beloved motherland as it goes towards prosperity and power.”

Residents noted how different the scene was to one in 1999, when thousands of Chinese protesters descended on the US embassy in Beijing, after the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Crying and pelting the building with eggs, stones, and any other objects they could find, demonstrators were angry at the US but also frustrated at how little their government could do to retaliate.

“Our country is not like before. We can do more than just make statements, we can actually take action,” says Wu, 25, who lives in Chengdu and visited the consulate on its last day on Monday, snapping a few photos to keep. “Back then China couldn’t afford to offend the US, but China is powerful now and not afraid of American imperialism.”

As China finds itself under attack abroad as a result of its increasingly aggressive global stance, nationalist sentiment at home appears to be growing stronger. Officials have honed support with the usual tools of propaganda and patriotic education, as well as new tactics, such as “wolf warrior” diplomacy, characterised by aggressive attacks on the country’s foreign critics.

Yet, cultivating a sense of nationalism that puts China increasingly at odds with much of the western world, also threatens to make current frictions more intractable, driving it closer to conflict with countries such as the US, its main rival. Beijing is locked in disputes with the UK, Australia and Canada over issues from Huawei to Hong Kong, and has blamed the US for those tensions.

“On both sides, the nationalist sentiment is stronger than ever before. There is no doubt that antagonistic nationalism has dramatically increased to a level that many have never seen,” says Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations and director of the centre on American studies at Renmin University of China. “This may mean the government policies will become more antagonist towards each other.”

Nationalism has long been a double-edged sword for the Chinese leadership – useful to bolster the ruling party’s standing but dangerous when emotions run too high. Anti-Japanese protests over a territorial dispute in 2012 turned into a riot, with residents in Shenzhen flipping and smashing Japanese cars. An editorial in the state-run China Daily at the time said: “This type of ‘patriotism’ will never receive applause.”

In the years since, Chinese officials have promoted nationalism rooted in “positive energy”, a general outlook of optimism and confidence in the country. Meanwhile, they have further narrowed the space for public discussion with more censorship and regulation of the internet, including detaining users.

“The Chinese government has increasingly leaned on nationalist rhetoric to justify its rule, while also keeping grassroots nationalism on a much tighter leash,” says Jessica Chen Weiss, associate professor of government at Cornell University and author of the book, Powerful Patriots: Nationalist Protest in China’s Foreign Relations.

“To some extent, the government has been able to use tough talk and bluster to appease domestic audiences, but swagger has real downsides for China’s foreign policy objectives.”

Pro-China activists step on photographs of US President Donald J. Trump and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, outside the US Consulate in Hong Kong

Pro-China activists step on photographs of Donald Trump and secretary of state Mike Pompeo outside the US Consulate in Hong Kong. Photograph: Jérôme Favre/EPA

To people like Liu, 50, who runs a software company in Beijing, this has meant that nationalist views appear more prevalent than they truly are among the general population.

“Because of these controls, the voices that are allowed are the nationalist ones. So they are louder and recently, they are becoming more and more extreme,” he says.

As someone who depends on access to the US and other countries for his work, he has watched the deteriorating relationship with the US with dismay. He believes that many, like him, are worried and do not want to see their country so combative.

“We are really despairing because we can’t express our views. It’s like we are on a train that has lost control and there is nothing we can do but let it barrel forward,” he says.

Still, Chinese leaders may also not wish to see things out of control. Chinese state media have kept a close lid on topics such as a recent border clash with India, an incident that could easily have caused a wave of national anger. Chinese officials, while loudly condemning the US for ordering the Chinese consulate in Houston to close, have limited threats to promising an “equal response” to US actions.

“Chinese authorities were quick to clamp down on any sign of protest outside the US consulate in Chengdu, reflecting Beijing’s apparent desire to retaliate in a way that shows resolve but does not accelerate the current death-spiral in US-China relations,” says Weiss.

As the deadline for the Chengdu consulate’s closure loomed on Monday, consulate staff rushed to clear the compound, including a garden planted by American and Chinese stuff. A banner with the words, “Thank you, Chengdu, 1985-2020” was ordered. At dawn, the American flag was lowered for the last time.

Wu arrived that night, hours after the consulate was officially shut. It was late and the street, blocked off by police, was quiet but a crowd remained. Most were looking at the scene or taking photos.

Wu, who had come to “witness history”, says there was still a feeling of unease about the closure. Born and raised in Chengdu, a place known for being laid-back and more open, he believes his city has always been friendly to foreigners.

“I think most people feel this is a little negative. Even though we closed the consulate, we still feel some regret. The relationship between China and the US shouldn’t be like this.”

Manila walks fine line between Beijing and Washington in South China Sea. Maintaining amicable ties with the Philippines has become equally important to the US and China as tensions rise Anti-American President Rodrigo Duterte’s shifting positions indicate a difficult balancing act between the powers

A child holds the national flags of China and the Philippines during President Rodrigo Duterte’s visit to Beijing in October 2016. Photo: Reuters
Under its vocally anti-American President 
Rodrigo Duterte
, the Philippines has emerged as a focal point between China and the US in their continuing contest for dominance in the region.

After years of cosier ties between Manila and Beijing, at the expense of the Philippines’ traditional alliance with the US, Duterte last month appeared to signal a retreat from his anti-Washington stance by reversing an earlier decision to scrap a key military agreement with the US in June.

While analysts say Duterte is unlikely to change his policy on China any time soon, 
the shift to reinstate the Visiting Forces Agreement
 – which gives legal status to US troops stationed in the country – underlines the difficult balancing act the Philippines must strike in its dealings with the two powers.
As tensions have flared between China and the US, the Philippines has become part of their strategic confrontation amid Beijing’s growing aggression in the resource-rich 
South China Sea
 – also one of the world’s busiest shipping routes – where China’s claims to most of the waters are disputed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

Washington needs the support of Manila and other key partners in Southeast Asia in its efforts to push back on Beijing’s ambitions in the region. For China, maintaining ties with the Philippines is equally important amid its rising confrontation with the US.

The US took a stronger stance in the middle of July when Secretary of State 
Mike Pompeo declared support for the 2016 ruling by an international tribunal
 which rejected most of Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea.

It was a historic victory for the Philippines, which took the dispute to The Hague, but China has never accepted the decision. Beijing said the latest US policy statement on the issue “deliberately stokes territorial and maritime disputes”.

The Philippines backed the US stance, calling on China to accept the ruling. In his State of the Union address on Monday, Duterte argued the Philippines was “neither beholden nor a pawn to anyone” in the South China Sea, but also made clear the country was not prepared to go to war over its competing claims with Beijing.

“China is claiming it,” he said. “We are claiming it. China has the arms, we do not have the arms. So, it is simple as that. They are in possession of the property.”

In addition to their rivalry in the South China Sea, China and the US both have clear trade and investment interests in their relations with the Philippines.

Beijing has long sought to increase its leverage in the maritime disputes and related ongoing discussions for a 
code of conduct
 in the South China Sea by winning over its Southeast Asian nations on the economic front.
China has wooed the Philippines with investments under its 
Belt and Road Initiative
 – Chinese President Xi Jinping’s signature development strategy – and was its top trading partner last year.
On the other hand, Washington has sought to counter growing Chinese influence in the region with its 
Indo-Pacific strategy
 which includes more frequent freedom of navigation exercises in the contested waters.

The US and the Philippines have deep historical ties, with a mutual defence treaty dating back to 1951 and a military relationship which has continued since the closure in 1992 of the American naval base at Subic Bay and the Clark Air Base in Luzon.

On taking office in 2016, Duterte pivoted the Philippines towards Beijing, vowing to set aside the tribunal finding in exchange for Chinese investment. In October that year, he travelled to Beijing for a meeting with Xi and declared “America has lost now” and he had “realigned myself in your ideological flow”.

In February Duterte made his biggest move in distancing the Philippines from its historical ally when he announced the termination of the Visiting Forces Agreement.

It was an angry response to the revocation of a US visa for a former police chief who helped to lead Duterte’s bloody war on drugs, although the official reason was to diversify foreign relations.

The move – which US Defence Secretary Mark Esper described as “unfortunate” – complicated Washington’s efforts to push Beijing into following international law in the region.

Months later in June – after resistance from within his government – Duterte reversed course. Foreign Minister Teddy Locsin said the decision to reinstate the agreement was a response to “vast and swiftly changing circumstances of the world in a time of pandemic and heightened superpower tensions”.

Derek Grossman, senior defence analyst at the Washington-based think tank Rand Corporation, said Beijing was likely to be increasingly concerned that the Philippines could turn anew to the US to hedge against Chinese assertiveness – particularly as Manila had officially endorsed the US shift in its South China Sea policy.

“That said, Duterte’s latest statement – that China controls the South China Sea – seems to have been timed to throw cold water on the notion that the Philippines is once again happily conducting alliance relations with the US,” he said.

“As we know well, Duterte is extremely anti-American and has been seeking ways to diversify Filipino foreign and security policy away from over-reliance on the US.”

Public sentiment in the Philippines has long been pro-US, but Grossman said there had recently been a “further souring” of opinion on China, for reasons “ranging from suspicions about coronavirus, the South China Sea, illicit Chinese activities in the Philippines such as gambling and human trafficking allegations and potential distrust for Belt and Road projects in the Philippines.”

Jeffrey Ordaniel, assistant professor of international security at Tokyo International University, said Beijing was wary of any strengthening of treaty commitments between the US and the Philippines, noting that their mutual defence treaty covered the South China Sea.

“The Philippines’ South China Sea policy has been largely determined by Duterte’s parochial concerns, characterised by his deep-seated anti-US sentiments and favourable view of China,” he said.

“The weakening or strengthening of the US-Philippine alliance is obviously an important determinant of how far China could continue to push the envelope in the South China Sea.”

Ordaniel said Duterte was unlikely to change tack on his approach to China, but noted the strongman leader had less than two years left in office.

“The 2022 election will be pretty significant for China and the US. Many are expecting or hoping for the pendulum to swing back – for the Philippines to align itself again with America.”

India Scrutinizing Russian SU-57 Stealth Jets As Makers Struggle To Fulfill Orders Earlier, Russian Minister of Industry had confirmed on June 27 that a contract for the procurement of 76 Sukhoi Su-57 aircraft, Russia’s first indigenously designed and built fifth-generation stealth fighter jet, has been concluded between the Moscow and United Aircraft Corporation.

Sukhoi Su-57 - Wikipedia

Russian Sukhoi-57 (SU-57) makers are having a difficult time to fulfil Kremlin’s order for 76 SU-57 stealth jets.

The stealth jets first flew in 2010, but due to delays in production until 2018, the 10 SU-57 prototypes were marred with “inadequate and incomplete sensors, incomplete fire-control systems and self-protection suites, no operational integrated avionics and unreliable engines,” aviation expert Tom Cooper writes.

The twin-engine for SU-57 is built at the Komsomolsk-on-Amur aircraft plant in the Russian Far East. According to a report in Forbes by David Axe, Sukhoi originally planned to hand over the first two production-standard SU-57s in late 2019 and two more in 2020. But the December 2019 crash of one of the jets compelled the company to halt the work on the program.

Earlier, Russian Minister of Industry, Denis Manturov, had confirmed that a contract for the acquisition of 76 Sukhoi Su-57 aircraft, Russia’s first indigenously designed and built fifth-generation stealth fighter jet, has been concluded between Moscow and United Aircraft Corporation.

Last year, Russia deployed pairs of SU-57s to Syria for what it claimed were combat trials. However, there’s no evidence to prove that the fighters actually flew front-line missions.

“Shortly following the 2018 deployment, the Kremlin cancelled production of the SU-57 after the 28th copy, effectively cancelling the program. But Russian President Vladimir Putin in mid-2019 dramatically revived the program, announcing a plan to buy an additional 48 copies,” wrote Axe.

As reported earlier by the EurAsian Times, the SU-57 fighter jet is designed to have supercruise, supermaneuverability, stealth, and advanced avionics to overcome the prior generation fighter aircraft as well as ground and naval defences.

Russia is marketing a number of high-end combat jets to India and alongside continued sales of MiG-29 and SU-30MKI fighters. New Delhi could also possibly purchase the Yak-130 fighter-trainer and the MiG-35 next-generation medium fighter jet.

India has shown some interest in Russia’s Su-57 next-generation heavyweight fighter, although the aircraft is yet to enter service in the Russian Air Force. New Delhi is likely to wait and assess its performance before making any commitments.

Experts stated that the possibility remains that India could seriously consider purchasing an initial batch of ‘off the shelf’ Su-57 jets from Russia to evaluate their capabilities – before entering into a contract for joint production.

Russia's Su-57 jet lands in Turkey for Technofest - Military ...

According to the author, now the company plans to deliver all four fighter jets in 2020. “These are challenging tasks that will truly mobilize us,” Sergey Chemezov, CEO of Sukhoi’s umbrella company, told state media in late 2019. COVID-19 pandemic may push the delivery dates even further.

However, Sukhoi workers are optimistic about delivering SU-57 on time. “The new aircraft is complex,” deputy workshop head Viktor Passar said, citing “composite sheathing, the latest technologies, the highest quality requirements.” “But we also have highly qualified personnel in our workshop,” Passar added.

The author also stated that several years after building the SU-35, managers at Komsomolsk-on-Amur are setting up SU-57 production in the plant’s Shop 45. He added that managers modernized the docking ramps and upgraded the rigs for building air-intakes and engine nacelles. They also shifted airframe work from Shop No. 7 to Shop No. 45, placing as much as possible of the SU-57 assembly in one space. “Before that, there were colossal losses of time,” said Artem Oshchepkov, the Shop No. 45 supervisor.

WHO leader is stuck between feuding China and US. It's a situation 'rock star' Tedros has spent his life preparing for

The WHO, headquartered in Geneva, has long needed more funding and reform -- and the virus presents an even greater challenge.

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was watching late-night television when he saw a hospital boss criticizing him and Ethiopia's Health Ministry, which he was leading at the time, for doing a terrible job. Instead of responding with a furious diatribe, as some political leaders might when watching their detractors on TV, he contacted the man, Dr. Kesete Admasu.

"Tedros called him in and said, well, if you have ideas and you're critical get in here and help us fix it, and made him Deputy Minister, which gives you a sense of his leadership style in bringing in the smartest and the best and empowering them," United States diplomat Mark Dybul, a professor at the Georgetown University Medical Center and co-director of the Center for Global Health Practice and Impact, told CNN.
"He took one of the worst ministries of health in the world, transformed it into one of the best, had to make very difficult political and health decisions and moves to make that happen," Dybul said.
Today, Tedros -- who is usually known by his first name, as is typical in Ethiopia -- is again facing harsh criticism as he tries to balance powerful interests and reform a troubled institution facing a monumental challenge. Some believe that if anyone can change the World Health Organization and help the world deal with the coronavirus pandemic, it's him.
"I think he's doing an incredible job," Peggy Clark, Executive Director of the Aspen Global Innovators Group who has worked closely with Tedros, told CNN. "I think that he is managing the situation as well as he can, even with the kind of ridiculous position that the US is taking at this time."
US President Donald Trump has regularly attacked WHO during the pandemic, blaming it for multiple failures and alluding to China's alleged influence at the organization as he moved to withdraw tens of millions in funding and, eventually, US membership.
Tedros has mostly reacted to these onslaughts with equanimity, but earlier this month condemned a "lack of leadership" in fighting the pandemic and made an emotional plea for global unity.
And when US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo claimed the Director-General had been "bought" by China, Tedros pushed back harder, calling the comments "untrue and unacceptable."
Tedros said that what "should matter to the entire international community is saving lives," adding that WHO would not be distracted.

'Rock star in the health world'

It is this single-minded determination that has characterized Tedros's rise to global fame, with the WHO Director-General known for his passion and drive, say observers.
In a speech before he was voted in for a five-year term in May 2017, Tedros said that when he was seven, his younger brother died "from one of the many child killers in Africa," Science Magazine reported. Tedros said that could easily have been him, and it was "pure luck" that he was now on stage running for a global leadership position. He said he was committed to reducing inequality and ensuring universal health coverage because he had grown up "knowing survival to adulthood cannot be taken for granted, and refusing to accept that people should die because they are poor."
His path soon became clear. As a child living in Eritrea, then a region of Ethiopia, the WHO filtered into his consciousness, Tedros said in a speech last year. "I remember walking through the streets of Asmara with my mother as a small boy, and seeing posters about a disease called smallpox. I remember hearing about an organization called the World Health Organization that was ridding the world of this terrifying disease, one vaccination at a time."
After gaining a biology degree from the University of Asmara in 1986, he began working for Ethiopia's Ministry of Health and studied in Denmark, which opened his eyes to the value of universal healthcare. In 1992, he received a WHO scholarship for a Masters degree at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, before completing a PhD in community health at the University of Nottingham in 2000.
His thesis on malaria in the Tigray Region, where he grew up, was "outstanding" and "innovative," his former supervisor wrote in a letter to The Lancet medical journal supporting his bid for the WHO job. "A lasting memory of that collaboration was Tedros' innate ability to mobilize and inspire communities towards better health," wrote Peter Byass.
Tedros became head of the Tigray Regional Health Bureau and spent a year as a minister of state before serving as health minister from 2005 to 2012. "There were really only a handful of ministers of health, globally, who were really doing exceptional work in the developing world, and one was Minister Tedros," said Clark.
He found fame for "showing the way to a new era in world health," in the words of former USAID Administrator Ariel Pablos-Mendez, particularly through his bold vision to hire 38,000 young, female community health workers in every village in the country to deliver basic family planning, child health and malaria care.
His work helped to reduce child mortality by two-thirds, HIV infections by 90%, malaria mortality by 75% and tuberculosis mortality by 64%, according to his WHO application.
"Tedros became kind of a superstar. He was a rock star in the health world, and everybody loved him, not only because he was really so charismatic and brilliant but also because as a man, he really was setting up for family and children and women; it was very unusual," said Clark.
Clark believes Tedros's health worker program made a profound difference to a poor country, and he announced similar priorities around universal healthcare, women and children and health emergencies on taking office at WHO.
Many leaders in developing countries were dependent on wooing donors, said Clark,"but Tedros was so revered and beloved, he could literally walk into a room with donors and walk out with a multimillion-dollar check."
Teshome Gebre, then the Carter Center's Ethiopia representative for health programs, visited Tedros with his US bosses in 2006 to solicit help with tackling neglected tropical diseases. In a remarkable turnaround, Tedros instead persuaded them to donate $35 million to his malaria program, arguing that this was more urgent, life-saving work aimed at impoverished, marginalized people.
"They were extremely impressed with the way he really presented his arguments, his business case was so compelling," Teshome told CNN.
"This is for me one of the most memorable experiences that I have ever had with Dr. Tedros. I think I can say in my lifetime, I have never seen this kind of completely unexpected outcome."

The diplomat

Tedros's ascension to leading WHO is groundbreaking on several fronts. He is not only its first African Director-General but also the first non-physician to lead the global health agency.
He has strong support from the continent, where South Africa in particular faces a battle to contain the virus.
On April 8, Tedros said he had been receiving death threats, abuse and racist comments, but brushed them off. "I'm proud of being black," he said. "I don't give a damn."
The former Ethiopian government minister has many influential friends and supporters.
He said when the whole black community or Africa was insulted "then I don't tolerate it, then I say, people are crossing the line."
His stint as Ethiopia's Minister of Foreign Affairs between 2012 and 2016 saw him refine his diplomatic skills, persuading 193 countries to commit to financing the Sustainable Development Goals under the Addis Ababa Action Agenda.
He forged a friendship with former US president Bill Clinton through the Clinton HIV/AIDS Initiative, he has backing from tech tycoon Bill Gates, and he is on close terms with leaders including French President Emmanuel Macron and South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa.
Stars including Lady Gaga, Jimmy Fallon and John Legend have also rallied around the WHO.
But some doubt Tedros precisely because of his diplomatic aptitude.
There were concerns when he was running for WHO leadership over his connection to an authoritarian government, one that Teshome concedes was "not very democratic."
Georgetown University professor Lawrence Gostin, a supporter of Tedros's WHO leadership rival David Nabarro, told CNN he was worried at the time because of Ethiopia's "abysmal human rights record."
Gostin -- director of the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, now a WHO Collaborating Center -- had reservations over alleged cover-ups of cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia, which Tedros denies.
Teshome agrees Tedros was "not transparent enough," but observed that "if he does otherwise, he will be fired from his position."
Gostin now speaks with Tedros regularly and calls him an "extraordinarily good" leader, and "one of the strongest director-generals in recent memory."
Tedros inherited what The Lancet called a "bruised and apologetic" WHO after its poor response to the 2013-2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa. The organization was bureaucratic, politicized, and underfunded and reform was desperately needed.
Tedros's success in containing the Ebola epidemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was widely praised. "Unlike most director-generals, he leads from the front," said Gostin. "He was on the ground, and probably, in harm's way."
WHO spokeswoman Margaret Harris was in the DRC at the time, and recalls Tedros genuinely participating on those visits, talking to local people and taking selfies with anyone who asked. When a public health emergency was declared, Tedros called in from the DRC, said Gostin.
"I give him a lot of credit for putting everything on the line. He's a very passionate man, he cares a lot and I think it shows. You can absolutely feel the sting of his wrath, and I have, but you can also hear the compassion."
Gostin recalls accidentally sending Tedros a text meant for his wife, saying he missed her. "'I love you too Larry, it's always good to hear from you," Tedros joked in reply.

The US-China issue

Many describe Tedros as humble. Teshome says Tedros is "not an authoritarian kind of guy," calling him "humorous, down to earth, very respectful to people."
But the Trump administration is not alone in its concerns about how Tedros deals with autocratic leaders.
In October 2017, Tedros picked Zimbabwe's then-president Robert Mugabe as a WHO goodwill ambassador -- quickly reversing the decision following an outcry.
Critics have questioned whether WHO is independent enough, pointing to Tedros's effusive praise of China's pandemic response and recirculation of China's statements that there was "no clear evidence" of human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus on January 14.
Gostin doesn't believe WHO knew China was being misleading, but says it could have responded better.
"I would have said, this is what the Chinese government is informing us about this outbreak and we have no way of independently verifying it," said Gostin.
Tedros, he added, believes that "it's better to use quiet diplomacy behind the scenes rather than criticize the government publicly."
Tedros has not been as full of praise for the effective pandemic response of Taiwan, a territory that China has successfully blocked from WHO membership, said Gostin. "Politics are at play. There's no doubt about it," he said.
But he acknowledges that Tedros did avoid antagonizing the Chinese government.
"He probably does read strongmen leaders like [Chinese President] Xi Jinping well, because if he publicly criticized China, it might have pushed China to be less cooperative and less transparent, and defensive. And he was trying to coax them from inside. And more than coax, he was actually quite firm with the Chinese government early on behind closed doors -- but it was at a cost to the reputation of the WHO."
The agency's image also suffered when it did not advise against travel to China. Tedros said at the time: "Such restrictions can have the effect of increasing fear and stigma, with little public health benefit."

WHO the world deserves

The truth is that WHO's power is limited. Unlike other epidemics, coronavirus has ravaged wealthy and poor countries alike, and leaders started taking independent action early in closing borders or enforcing measures without recourse to WHO.
"The world has the WHO it deserves. And the reason I say that is because it funds the WHO pitifully, about the size of one large US hospital; WHO has no control over two thirds of its budget, and no organization can succeed that way ... when anything goes wrong, they don't get political backing, they get blamed," said Gostin.
WHO's public messaging has at times felt confused. Concerned about low-income countries and a lack of personal protective equipment, it didn't recommend universal mask use early on. WHO delayed in declaring coronavirus a public health emergency even though there is no international standard for what a pandemic is. "It hurt them politically," Gostin said. "But it did not change the trajectory of the pandemic one iota."
However, despite the devastation of the virus and serious charges laid against WHO, Tedros has become a household name and a leading figure on the world stage.
The 55-year-old father of five is now a familiar face at regular news conferences, doling out warnings and vital guidance for the world. His at times emotional statements that there will be "no return to the old normal" and that this is the "worst global health emergency ever" are likely to appear in history books.
Dybul says Tedros has rapidly reoriented WHO from its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, by placing staff in countries where health problems are, much as he did in Ethiopia, making the WHO able to respond rapidly to Ebola and the coronavirus. "He learns extremely well, and very quickly. He's incredibly smart, and he adapts," said Dybul.
He said claims WHO should have spoken sooner on asymptomatic cases, for example, were unfounded as there was only limited evidence. "They do rapidly sift through data; he's keeping in a very technically sound strong leadership role, which is not easy to do during the middle of a global crisis," said Dybul.
"He was able to mobilize the availability of test kits, so that countries could have them available rapidly. He put together the network for vaccines, that is a global network for vaccine trials, which only WHO can do ... they're providing daily important technical support to countries so that they can put in place the test trace and quarantine approaches."
Had the US accepted the test kits from WHO, Dybul believes it could be in a very different position.
The dispute between the US and China is of course complex, but Tedros is trying to get on with the job as the future of the world hangs in the balance. The future of WHO is also at stake. How the agency fares in helping to distribute vaccines, a mission that first piqued Tedros's interest in childhood, will be crucial. It is a challenge that demands much of an organization with little real power.
    The US election could decide whether the WHO will lose its biggest donor, or becomes stronger and empowered thanks to funding and political support from a change of government.
    At the center of the chaos is a man whose life has been leading to this moment: Tedros.

    What Will Happen if the Coronavirus Vaccine Fails? A vaccine could provide a way to end the pandemic, but with no prospect of natural herd immunity we could well be facing the threat of COVID-19 for a long time to come. by Sarah Pitt

      There are  over 175  COVID-19 vaccines in development. Almost all government strategies for dealing with the coronavirus pandemic are base...