Yuval Noah Harari thoughtfully examines the issues around the rush to put in place technological surveillance-based responses to COVID-19 pandemic management, and governments’ pivot to nationalistic solutions to problems which are essentially global in nature.
Read more
New security issues presented by global warming, and now, pandemics, constitute existential threats. They go to the heart of national security, showing that the scope of national security policy needs to transcend traditional defence and law enforcement models by comprehending climate change, human security against pandemics, environmental degradation, food security, water shortages and refugee flows – to identify just a few issues.
Read more
David McCoy makes some important observations on the relationship between the scientific and non-scientific elements of COVID-19 decision-making; the inherent limitations of modelling – particularly when dealing with a novel virus about little is known.
Read more
In government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, Evgeny Morozov sees a ‘feast of solutionism’ being unleashed. [W]e can see two distinct strands of solutionism in government responses to the pandemic. “Progressive solutionists” propose that timely, app-based exposure to the right information could “nudge” people to behave in the public interest, while “punitive solutionists”, by contrast, want to use surveillance infrastructure to monitor and manage daily activities. The risk, he argues, is that the pandemic will supercharge the solutionist state, … creating an excuse to fill the political vacuum with anti-democratic practices.
Read more
The choices made by governments are not based on science, but policy, that mixture of ideology, politics, and pragmatism. Governments are operating on the basis of choices between a range of possible outcomes produced by modelling. That is, projections built on a range of assumptions and suppositions. Governments should not be able to avoid scrutiny and accountability for their actions by leaning on the authority of science.
Read more
There is a growing chorus calling for smartphone proximity technology to fight COVID-19. But smartphone tracking may not solve the problem, and contact tracing applications raise difficult questions about privacy, efficacy, and responsible engineering of technology to advance public health.
Read more
Two possible paths to ending the pandemic exist, neither of which is guaranteed. In either case, the first step is to reduce the rate of new infections by social distancing; by drastically reducing contact between individuals. Another crucial component is diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 infections.
Read more
In an article in The Guardian, David Runciman shows how the pandemic has removed “one layer of political life to reveal something more raw underneath”. He writes, “As Hobbes knew, to exercise political rule is to have the power of life and death over citizens. The only reason we would possibly give anyone that power is because we believe it is the price we pay for our collective safety. But it also means that we
Read more
The UK’s biological security strategy, published in 2018 to address the threat of pandemics, was not properly implemented, according to a former government chief scientific adviser. Professor Sir Ian Boyd, who advised the environment department for seven years until last August and was involved in writing the strategy, said a lack of resources was to blame. Other experts said there was a gap between pandemic planning and action, and that the strategy had stalled.
Read more
A moral dilemma is a situation in which a person is faced with two mutually exclusive choices and urgent reasons to choose each of them. Choosing between saving human lives and saving business ventures poses no such moral dilemma; lives and money cannot be equated. And yet this kind of zero-sum thinking has never been an impediment to individuals focused on political or financial aspirations no matter the human cost.
Read more
COVID-19 presents a moral crisis – a choice between ethically unpalatable options. Choosing a strategy of mitigation over suppression strikes a particular balance between expected loss of life and maintaining economic activity. Accepting the real possibility of a greater loss of lives than otherwise might occur has a ‘dirty hands’ feel about it. Leaders and institutions will need to prepare themselves for the opprobrium that will come from confronting such moral dilemmas.
Read more
Martin Wolf focuses on the choices decision-makers face, writing that COVID-19 is not just an economic challenge, it is an ethical one. Discussing the debate between suppression and mitigation strategies, he asks ‘Could a health calamity that is unacceptable in China be acceptable in the UK or US?’
Read more
In a Deutsche Welle opinion piece published 23 March 2020, Frank Hofmann calls for recognition by European and international leaders that multilateral crises cannot be resolved unilaterally; for political leaders to realise that they have an obligation to reverse the relapse into unilateral answers to the coronavirus crisis; and for resistance to the pursuit of policies of discrediting the work of international institutions by nationalists and populists throughout the world. He notes that there was
Read more
The Electronic Frontier Foundation argues that before the public allows their governments to use new dragnet location surveillance powers to contain the COVID-19 outbreak, governments must explain to the public how these systems would be effective in stopping the spread of COVID-19.
Read more
Jonathan Freedland reflects on the speed at the which the national life of the United Kingdom has been completely transformed by coronavirus – and on the emerging questions and divisions. Divisions that came down to the government’s preference for the voluntary over the compulsory; a social libertarianism approach that may prove to have been just too cavalier.
Read more
Published by Transparency International on 19 March 2020, this article looks at the importance of transparency as governments around the world face shortages of medical supplies, prioritising of access to medical services, and allocation of relief funds. It is essential that transparency, openness and integrity are maintained and extended across the health sector. It is vital that emergency powers are exercised only for the purposes for which they were granted. Since many normal oversight and
Read more
Writing in The Guardian, George Monbiot sees some common threads in the approaches to COVID-19 of the UK, US and Australian governments. The worst possible people are in charge at the worst possible time. In the UK, the US and Australia, the politics of the governing parties have been built on the dismissal and denial of risk. Just as these politics have delayed the necessary responses to climate breakdown, ecological collapse, air and water pollution,
Read more
Seeping faintly through the pronouncements and policies of some government responses to the coronavirus pandemic are the vapours of older belief systems; a whiff of utilitarianism, the scent of social Darwinism, and the fetid reek of eugenics. Examination of the UK government’s ‘herd immunity’ pandemic response suggests that it is not too farfetched to connect contemporary politics with these ostensibly outdated ideas.
Read more