Vaccine Diplomacy

Written By: Elizabeth Khoo Yuk Min (21-U1), Emma Shuen Lee (21-O1), Lay Kai En, Ashley (21-O1), Lim Junheng, Jovan (20-O5) Lim Zi Loong, Zexel (21-E2), Martha Henrietta Soetedjo (20-U2), Murugan Rakshita (21-E1), Ng Teck Zhong (20-E5)

Designed By: Lay Kai En, Ashley (21-O1)

Introduction

With waves of COVID-19 washing over the world today, it is indubitable that vaccines are our liberator of the pandemic. Of course, with the appearance of vaccines comes its related branch of vaccine diplomacy, where vaccines are used as a tool by countries to increase their political clout by improving diplomatic relationships and suffuse their influence. As such, each administered vaccine symbolises a lifeline built upon diplomacies between countries. As the USC Centre of Public Diplomacy propounds, the efforts by so many states to produce and distribute in the world their own, national, anti-COVID vaccines have set in motion a new form of geopolitical and soft power competition.

Background on Vaccine Diplomacy

In the midst of the French Revolutionary War between England and France in 1798, the English physician Edward Jenner discovered the world’s first vaccine, the smallpox vaccine. This discovery brought about the end of an era of plague by the deadly virus, and became widely available in England by 1800. Interestingly, the vaccine was not only kept within the borders of the country, but  even shipped across the channel to its rival country - France.

As Jenner noted in a letter to the National Institute of France, “the sciences are never at war”. The distinction between politics and the lives of many was made clear, and that nations should prioritise the People over all else, regardless of their backgrounds.

Yet now, what we observe may be a far cry from the noble intentions echoed by Jenner. With the prevalence of a globalised yet divided world, how have nations employed vaccines as a means of control and political relations? Is there still compassion behind the countries’ actions in distributing vaccines? And most importantly, how do these political agendas impact the lives of citizens today?

Effectiveness of Vaccine Diplomacy

The most fundamental virtue of vaccine diplomacy is that countries that are less affluent have access to vaccines. Prior to the boom of vaccine diplomacy, there were several concerns regarding equity as affluent countries are better able to afford vaccines for their people, and in some cases even invest in research and development of COVID-19 vaccines, allowing them to have priority in obtaining doses. This is directly in contrast to impoverished countries who struggle with even maintaining a stable food supply. This remains a key concern in the pandemic and the race to vaccinate, as concluded by Duke University’s Global Health Innovation Center. Through vaccine diplomacy efforts, China has sent Sinopharm doses to 13 countries, including Cambodia, Nepal and Sierra Leone, and half a million doses to Pakistan as a “manifestation of their brotherhood”. In a similar stride, Russia has donated Sputnik V doses to Palestine, Syrian and Iran and the USA to Israel, Tunisia and Lebanon. Thus, vaccine diplomacy bridges the inequality gaps pervaded by the pandemic. 

Failures regarding Vaccine Diplomacy

However, there is a limit to the effectiveness of vaccine diplomacy. In some cases, the outcome may not be desirable and may result in failures. China is one of the countries that faces vaccine diplomacy failure, and there are reasons for this consequence.

Firstly, competition. With the outbreak of COVID-19, countries around the world, including the United States and Russia, are racing to develop a safe and effective vaccine, and not just China. The USA, for instance, has the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and Russia, Sputnik V; China is not the only country with effective vaccines. These countries have been jostling for power and influence through their vaccines. Coupled with issues that we shall now further examine, such as the transparency of data, China might be losing in her campaign of vaccine diplomacy.

A second reason for the failure of vaccine diplomacy is due to the low level of trust among global powers. 63% of scholars, government officials and business people said they have "little confidence" or "no confidence" that Beijing will "do the right thing" for the global community, a marked rise from 51.5% in 2019. Those who were "confident" or "very confident" regarding China's intentions fell to 16.5% from 19.6% two years ago. This shows that some countries do not have trust in China, and, by extension, in their vaccines too. These countries would then seek for other alternatives such as western vaccines. In addition, some nations fear that there is a hidden agenda behind Chinese vaccine diplomacy, such as  “to turn Southeast Asia into its sphere of influence”. This results in an unsuccessful attempt of establishing diplomacy between China and those countries.

The general lower efficacy in Chinese vaccines have an efficacy rate ranging between 50.4 percent to 80 percent. This is considered inferior to some Western vaccines such as Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, which have efficacy rates of more than 90 percent. It is natural for countries to select the best vaccine for their citizens. In Kyrgyzstan, some doctors are refusing Chinese-made Sinopharm doses. These doctors opted for Russian vaccines instead, resulting in vaccine diplomacy failure as countries on the receiving end prefer other countries’ vaccines, which have a higher efficacy than Chinese vaccines.

Implications of Vaccine Diplomacy (on the Future)

Assessing the implications of vaccine diplomacy could manufacture a debate on the authenticity of diplomacy behind vaccine distribution, as well as its carefully manipulated benefits. Vaccine diplomacy means that emerging and developing countries are able to obtain vaccines more quickly and under favourable conditions from their friendly neighbours. For the country providing vaccines, it is a strategy to secure spheres of influence. This exclusivity leaves many countries in Latin America, Africa and the MENA region where the virus and its mutations continue to ravage unchecked. For instance, Mexico, being one of the most powerful and strategically important countries in Latin America, receives its shipment of vaccines from India, Russia and China all at the same time. On the contrary, Central America’s poorer countries have to wait in the COVAX line. Thankfully, Guatemala and Honduras benefited from their decision to move their embassies to Jerusalem, and are currently receiving vaccines from Israel.

Vaccines are a multifaceted tool. China slips no opportunity to secure its influence. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte threatened to terminate a military agreement with the United States unless they delivered millions of doses of vaccine: “no vaccine, no stay here”. Only after acting upon this opportunity did China provide the Philippines with its vaccines. This is just an example of China’s consistent plan to fill the void that the US and Europe have yet to provide — a lack of vaccines for the low- and middle-income countries. In fact, considering that the virus is more or less under control in China, this has been a valuable opportunity for China to exercise its soft power and expand its influence through vaccine diplomacy. Yet, what will this all mean in the future? 

Putting aside the political aspect of the vaccine rollouts, some countries like Serbia and Indonesia are accepting vaccines from China as they are the only vaccines available, and their people are desperate for one. Another instance is the Brazilian people’s shifting trust towards Chinese vaccines, when an initial 50% had claimed that they would not take a Chinese vaccine, yet it dropped to 39% a month later as the demand grew. 

The EU pledges solidarity, but it is mere lip service. Former health minister of Rwanda, Agnes Binagwaho, had a clear message for the EU, “Be honest and say: ‘My people first.’ Don’t lie to us and say we are equal.” The US and EU attempt to outdo each other in vaccine protectionism, where although EU had shipped 34 million doses of its vaccines to 31 countries (of which 9 million to the UK, 3 million each to Canada and Mexico, 2 million to Japan), the distribution is well thought to have majority of its exports to countries that could either produce their own vaccines or afford to buy it at market price. Conversely, the US placed strict restrictions on vaccine exportation, with its main supply reserved for the US.

Vaccine diplomacy is manipulated to the interests of the countries producing vaccines, and it  is likely to secure strategic relations internationally, with the exception where vaccine distribution policies soured them.

Conclusion

Vaccine diplomacy is an interesting issue that is extremely timely to discuss, especially in light of the COVID-19 crisis we are facing today. Learning how a simple item like vaccines can quickly be manipulated into a tool for diplomacy and tension is crucial to understanding how political relations can develop into the future world order. As the world braces itself for further ordeals, one fact that we still have to face is that the assuagement of this misery is still not widely propagated throughout the world should countries remain selfish. 

References

1. Divided we fail - Vaccine diplomacy and its implications | Heinrich Böll Stiftung Hong Kong | Asia Global Dialogue. (n.d.). Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. Retrieved May 1, 2021, from https://hk.boell.org/en/2021/04/01/divided-we-fail-vaccine-diplomacy-and-its-implications

2. Ellwood, D. (2021, March 17). Vaccine diplomacy: A new chapter in the story of soft power. Retrieved May 02, 2021, from https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/vaccine-diplomacy-new-chapter-story-soft-power

3. Karásková, I., & Blablová, V. (2021, March 24). The Logic of China’s Vaccine Diplomacy. The Diplomat. Retrieved April 21, 2021, from https://thediplomat.com/2021/03/the-logic-of-chinas-vaccine-diplomacy/

4. Mardell, J. (2021, February 18). The meaning of China's vaccine diplomacy. Retrieved May 02, 2021, from https://supchina.com/2021/02/18/the-meaning-of-chinas-vaccine-diplomacy/

5. Mirza, A., & Rauhala, E. (n.d.). Here’s just how unequal the global coronavirus vaccine rollout has been. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2021/coronavirus-vaccine-inequality-global/

6. Palmer, J. (2021, April 7). China’s Vaccine Diplomacy Has Mixed Results. Foreign Policy. Retrieved April 21, 2021, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/07/china-coronavirus-vaccine-diplomacy-sinovac-sinopharm-mixed-results/

7. Rao, P. (2021, February 22). The history of Vaccine Diplomacy. Retrieved May 02, 2021, from https://takshashila.org.in/the-history-of-vaccine-diplomacy/

8. Riles, J. (2020, November 29). How Much Will It Cost to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine?  Retrieved May 02, 2021, from https://www.healthline.com/health-news/how-much-will-it-cost-to-get-a-covid-19-vaccine#How-much-each-dose-will-cost

9. Tani, S. (2021, February 10). China's vaccine diplomacy fails to win ASEAN support: survey. Nikkei Asia. Retrieved April 21, 2021, from https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/China-s-vaccine-diplomacy-fails-to-win-ASEAN-support-survey

10. Vaccine Diplomacy: A New Chapter in the Story of Soft Power. USC Center on Public Diplomacy. (2021, March 17). https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/vaccine-diplomacy-new-chapter-story-soft-power

11. Wee, S. (2021, January 25). China Wanted to Show Off Its Vaccines. It's Backfiring. Retrieved April 30, 2021, from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/business/china-covid-19-vaccine-backlash.html