The virus epidemic is having a major impact. People
are in quarantine in more than 100 countries. Thousands are infected. Almost 5000
have already died. Airlines, cruise ships, retailers, sporting events, hotels,
tourism, schools and houses of worship are taking countermeasures to combat the
spread. Many employees have been urged
to stay and work at home.
A Common
Thread
Pandemics appear to be more frequent and more severe,
although some experts will take issue with that. In the past century we have
witnessed and experienced the Spanish Flu, Aids, Ebola, the Swine flu, SARS, the
Coronavirus and other worldwide health tumults. During the Middle Ages the bubonic plague alone
claimed 50 million lives.
What do these pandemics have in common? They seem to
have a common denominator: human
interaction with animals. The bubonic plague was attributed to infected
rats. The Spanish Flu, which did not originate in Spain, is attributed to human
interaction with birds. Aids is suspected to have come from Africa as a result
of human interaction with monkeys. Ebola has been associated with animal flesh
eaten by humans. The Coronavirus is suspected to have been caused by eating
rats and bats sold at an open food market.
There is no room for politics when it comes to
pandemics. It is also regrettable that folks would use racism, xenophobia and
rumors to criticize the government response to the epidemic. Unless we are
capable of examining and debating the issues rationally, we will not learn much
from the experience and are surely condemned to repeat mistakes.
In all cases, lack of hygiene appears to be the
principal reason for the dispersal of viruses. Unsanitary conditions are found
everywhere but in developing countries they appear to be the worst. Poverty and
local traditions that rely on eating exotic animals seem to compound the
problem. Ignorance is another important factor in the equation.
Fundamental Risks
of Globalization
In an increasingly inter-connected world, a virus in
one country can affect the entire world. Unwittingly globalization has impacted
many supply chains and disrupted world markets and local economies.
Developed countries have ceded self-sufficiency protocols,
seduced by the low cost siren. The search for low cost has reached the
diminishing returns point. Countries would be wise to pay attention to excessive
reliance on imports. Time seems ripe to reconsider national strategic
imperatives; and, it is wise to reduce dependencies.
High tech, biotechnology and manufacturing companies
would be wise to adopt a fallback or backup position to protect their supply
chain. In worst case scenarios companies must consider as a threshold the
ability to continue production using home resources. Increased home capacity
will create jobs and better level the wage field. It might be a cost worthy to be
absorbed. The current crisis has caught many companies flatfooted and unable to
mitigate the situation.
Reliance on India, China and other countries to
provide the U.S. with generic medicines puts at risk millions of Americans who
depend on these drugs for their survival. Cheaper prices become meaningless
when the supply chain dries up. Certain drugs should be included in the
nation’s strategic reserves. The US should have fallback plans to address this
looming risk. China has threatened to stop shipping antibiotics to the US in
retaliation of what it perceives unfair media and government in the US.
China has cornered the market for certain raw
materials and rare minerals. As a result, sections of the US industry are at
risk with their supply chain possibly being shut off during pandemics and wars.
National interests should supersede low cost incentives. Rare minerals should
be included in the country’s strategic reserves.
Globalization can be a conduit to social and climate
cost transfer from one country to another.
A non-compliant country impacts the well-being and security of another. China
and India comprise together about half of the undesirable emissions. Yet in the
Paris Accord they are given a pass on emission restrictions because they have
“special” development needs. This arrangement makes it difficult to have an
integrated strategy to fight climate change.
Proponents of open borders need to open up their eyes,
not just their hearts. Infectious diseases such as measles, mumps and
tuberculosis once eradicated in the U.S, are infecting many citizens as
thousands of people enter the country from developing countries.
Where Next?
It is time for the pendulum to swing back toward the
middle. Let’s reap the economic benefits from globalization but let’s mitigate
the social downside. Prudent planning might increase economic costs but it can make
the nation more secure and less vulnerable to external instability and chaos.
Nations need to set aside the “nice guy” approach to
international relations and support policies that are mutually
beneficial. Striving to be loved has not enhanced national security. What might
enhance it is respect for one another’s sovereignty and national interests.
Lets face it, not all nations will cooperate; some are driven to be competitive.
My good friend and colleague Don Nielson reminds me
that we need to reign in our compulsion to consume far beyond our needs thus
falling prey to the cheapest rather than the better choices. Don also cautions us to place limits to hoarding. Watching folks shop during this period at grocery stores and discount houses
illustrates this phenomenon.