Some infectious diseases change the course of world history. The historian William McNeil, in the introduction to his book A World History of Infectious Diseases, stated that he wrote this book “because historians underestimate those anecdotes[that have affected history].” Will the COVID-19 pandemic, which is called a pandemic for the first time in 100 years, turn the tide of history? As we live in 2022, it is difficult to fully appreciate this transition. However, it is necessary to pay close attention to the signs that are taking place in real time. China, which is experiencing the largest outbreak since 2020, is one such sign.
As of April 27, Shanghai, China’s largest economic city, entered its first month of lockdown. As the number of new infections per day, which was only around 100 according to ‘official’ statistics, jumped to 1,000 in March, and about half of them came from Shanghai, the Chinese government decided to shut down the city with a population of 26 million. Since then, the news of ‘this is the world’ has been delivered every day.
The number of new infections in Shanghai, which once exceeded 23,000 a day, has stabilized (?) to a level of around 20,000 after a long-term lockdown. As of April 25, there were 16,950 new confirmed cases. Even when it peaked at over 20,000, the infection rate is very low compared to other countries. However, this is an unacceptable number for China’s ‘zero corona’ strategy.
For two years after being hit hard in Wuhan in early 2020, the Communist Party government has kept mainland China relatively safe from the COVID-19 pandemic. An extreme blocking strategy, dubbed ‘Dongtaecheongryeong’, has worked. It translates as a ‘Dynamic Zero-COVID’ policy. Even if there are only a small number of confirmed cases in the community, the area is sealed and PCR tests are performed on all residents to find hidden infected persons. A confirmed person is confined to a large-scale facility, and not only close contacts but also close contacts are quarantined.
Although it was a measure that caused enormous socio-economic costs, compared to the global trend, ‘zero corona’ emerged as a symbol of the superiority of the Chinese system as the quarantine performance of ‘absolutely few confirmed cases and deaths’ was emphasized. Yan Zhong Huang, a senior researcher at the American Foreign Relations Association (CFR), analyzed the way Chinese politics worked over the past two years based on the rule of the pandemic in an article for Foreign Affair in January of this year. “While the United States and other liberal democracies have consistently preached the failures of epidemic control, they have generated overwhelming public support, at least in the public health arena, and touted this success as a source of national pride.”
The Chinese government has declared victory several times in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. In September 2020, President Xi Jinping held a commendation contest to combat the coronavirus and said, “The significant achievements in the fight against COVID-19 have demonstrated the excellence of the Communist Party of China and the socialist system.” Among them, the declaration of victory in November 2021 is quite crafty. This is because it was around that time that the omicron mutation, which put China’s ‘zero corona’ policy to the test, appeared in South Africa.
Although China has taken an extreme form, China is not the only country on the spectrum of ‘containment’ in responding to COVID-19. Representative examples include Singapore, Australia (Australia), and New Zealand, and Korea’s K quarantine was also on this line. Countries that have suppressed the spread of infection through active quarantine measures and social distancing. However, it has been confirmed one after another that the omicron mutation, which has significantly increased transmission power, is the dominant species in these countries, and that the epidemic cannot be controlled by blocking strategies.
Paradox brought on by ‘Zero Corona’
At the same time, Omicron clearly revealed the rules of the ‘pandemic game’. If there is no end to COVID-19 and the endemic is the final point, it is that at least a certain percentage of the population must acquire immunity for the epidemic to enter a stable phase. This ratio differs depending on each country’s vaccination rate and the number of hidden infected people. In Europe and North America, the prevalence curve was broken when approximately 20-25% of the population was cumulatively infected. In South Korea, the number of new confirmed cases began to decline in mid-March, when the cumulative number of confirmed cases reached about 20% of the total population.
Mainland China is no exception to the rules of this pandemic game. If it is a game where a certain percentage of the population can be ‘goal’, China is at a very disadvantageous position. Im Seung-gwan, an infectious disease specialist, Gyeonggi Medical Center Anseong Hospital Director, explained: “The magnitude of immunity possessed by a specific population group can be said to be the union of ‘natural infection’ and ‘vaccination’. Although the COVID-19 vaccine is less effective in preventing the infection itself, it definitely plays a role in boosting immunity. If you look at it that way, you can say that the two circles of ‘natural infection’ and ‘vaccination’ are very small in China.” As a policy, China used only its own vaccines to vaccinate, but data shows that China’s Sinopharm and Sinovac vaccines are less effective in preventing infection than mRNA vaccines such as Pfizer and Moderna.
Most countries that have adopted the ‘blocking strategy’ raised their hands, but the unimaginable Chinese-style blockade may be powerful. Prior to Shanghai, the Chinese government had the experience of blocking the spread of Omicron by ‘locking down’ Shenzhen, a city with a population of 17.5 million for a week. Earlier, in 2020, the lockdown in Wuhan lasted 73 days. However, even if the epidemic in Shanghai is controlled through the precipitation of an ultra-long period of lockdown, it is highly likely to be only a temporary success in light of the rules of the pandemic game.
Jang Young-wook, associate research fellow at the Institute for Foreign Economic Policy, cited ‘uncertainty’ as the most worrying point about the situation in China. “The biggest problem is that the future is uncertain. Even if caught in Shanghai, the Omicron Embers will spread to other areas. Recently, a case was also found in Beijing, and some areas have been put under lockdown. It is questionable whether such a lockdown is sustainable, but it is unclear whether it will take 10 years or more for China to gain herd immunity to control the epidemic without social distancing if it adheres to its zero-corona strategy.”
The Shanghai lockdown still casts a dark cloud over the global economy. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) revised its global economic growth forecast for 2022 to 3.6%, down 0.8 percentage points from its January forecast of 4.4%, in its world economic outlook on April 19. Following the Ukrainian war, the IMF cited China’s ‘zero corona’ policy as a risk factor for the global economy. If the Chinese economy, which supports the global supply chain as the world’s factory, continues to stand still, the world economy will inevitably falter. Korean companies are already being hit directly. GM Korea shortened the operating time of its Bupyeong 1 plant because Chinese parts did not arrive properly. Several companies with manufacturing plants in Shanghai, such as Amorepacific, are also experiencing difficulties in normal operation.
“The current situation is the fault of the smugglers”
If the Chinese government adopts a strong containment policy and shifts its strategy to ‘with Corona’, will it be a problem that will be resolved? Nancy Chen, professor of economics and management at Northwestern University, wrote in her article Syndicate for Her Project, that China is in a very difficult situation to find an exit strategy. “Chinese political leaders have found it extremely difficult to transition to a moderate strategy,” she said. This is because, without exception, there will inevitably be more confirmed cases and more deaths. The total number (of cases and deaths) will not be as high as in the United States, but it will be difficult for the Chinese, accustomed to expect ‘zero’, to accept an increase in the number of deaths by thousands.” Kim Hyun-cheol, a professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, said the Chinese government was “in a dilemma.” “So far, China has strongly linked success in quarantine with patriotism. When I talk to students from China, there are many views that the current situation is not the limit of the ‘zero corona’ strategy, but the fault of smugglers who secretly spread the virus.”
The Chinese Communist Party faces an important political event this fall. At the 20th Party Congress scheduled for October, it is decided that President Xi Jinping will be re-elected for a third term. The prevailing view is that the high-intensity quarantine will be maintained at least until the party congress. In an editorial on April 11th, the Chinese state-run media, Global Times, said, “It has already been proven that the unwavering zero-corona is the key to victory in the fight against quarantine. The Western policy of ‘with Corona’ is a brutal social pluralism that mass-culls the weak with low immunity.”
While the Chinese Communist Party insists on ‘Zero Corona’, the gap between political slogans and reality is growing day by day, and the suffering of the Chinese people will increase. More and more people are realizing that something is wrong. On April 7th, The New York Times reported that Shanghai residents were becoming skeptical of the government’s quarantine measures, which had emphasized the dangers of the coronavirus, as they suffered from the low-lethality omicron mutation. “(Shanghai residents) have a good understanding of the virus and the disease,” said Dongyan Jin, a virologist and professor at the University of Hong Kong. The Corona 19 epidemic that started in China is turning around and shaking the mainland of China again. The amplitude is even greater than it was two years ago.
© EPN