Surprisingly, Italy has 28% less people compared to Germany but a staggering 1,800% higher Coronavirus death rate. To many, this is highly perplexing. The number of Corona deaths in Germany is astonishingly low. Why this is the case remains somewhat of a mystery. Not unexpectedly, Germans have started debating the reasons for this. Is it because of the age of those affected, the testing or have Germans just been lucky so far?
Italy had more than twice as many cases as Germany. To be honest, we still know too little, says Richard Pebody (WHO). The case mortality rate is puzzling, he noted. Mr Pegody also warned against comparing countries. The health framework and conditions are different in each country. It is a bit like comparing apples to pears. However, there are still several explanations, all of which play a role and many Germans look to Italy and Spain.
Italy and Spain are already further into the epidemic than Germany. Their first cases may have appeared undetected, occurred much earlier, and the virus probably spread unnoticed in the population of both countries. It takes a while for complications to occur after the infection. Then, many patients are in intensive care for weeks before they die.
Secondly, in many countries very little testing has been carried out and often only the average age of those shown to be infected is known. Among the uncounted cases are likely to be many younger people who have already had the virus but have not experienced any or only mild symptoms. Among those shown to be infected, the average age in Italy is much higher than in other countries, including Germany. Whilst the average age of Corona cases in Germany is 45 years, in Italy it is 63. On the other hand, according to Bloomberg’s Global Health Index, Italians live a much healthier life compared to Germans. And unlike Italy, Germany has only limited post-mortem testing of Corona virus cases.
Germany’s Robert Koch Institute, for example, only counted the age group over 60 for one study. Yet even in this study, the proportion in Germany is well below the Italian figures. 19% of those who were proven to be infected in Germany were over 60 and more than half were between 35 and 59. With regard to Italy, it is important to stress that we are only talking about proven cases.
The age structure of cases is different in both countries. Another unknown is the testing regime in any given country. If more recent cases were tested in Italy, the case mortality would probably be quite different. Yet there is a very aggressive testing strategy in Germany so there are likely to be more mild cases among the total number of confirmed cases.
The better prepared hospitals are, the more lives can be saved. When hospitals are overwhelmed by the number of patients, it is a simple question of how care can be provided and whether doctors can respond to any change in the patient’s condition in the intensive care unit. Three factors are crucial: the number of intensive care beds, sufficient protective clothing, and well-trained staff in the intensive care units.
Italy had 5,000 intensive care beds before the crisis. More have been created since. Britain had 4,100 intensive care beds. In Germany, there are about 28,000. Germany’s number is to be doubled in the near future. Meanwhile military hospitals have been opened to the German public. Overall, experts agree that rigorous testing, isolating infected people, and quarantine for people who have been in contact with infected people are holding back the epidemic. The mortality rate currently is at about 0.4% in Germany.
Meanwhile, there is a drastic reduction in social contacts throughout the country. In the first week of March, about two weeks before Germany’s contact ban was declared, up to three quarters of the population met with friends and relatives only privately. To date, the proportion of those who continue to meet has fallen to about half of the population. The other half follow the government’s Social Distancing request and no longer meet with other people in close contact. 97% support the ban on public events; 95% think it makes sense to close public facilities and borders. A quarter of Germans would welcome a termination of public transport for local and long-distance transport.
As far as everyday work is concerned, the crisis has not brought any significant change for the majority of the population. Just over half of all Germans work on site at their place of employment. One quarter has changed from their workplace office to a home office. Around 10% are exempt from work and continue to receive wages.
The vast majority of those infected in Germany are younger than 60. This is partly due to the many tests that Germany carries out and good equipment to treat the seriously ill patients. However, experts have repeatedly warned that the death rate will continue to rise in Germany even though the number of deaths is always a reflection of what happened some time ago.
On Monday (23rd March), more than 26,000 Germans were infected by the Corona virus. Germany and Italy have a similar age structure, with just under a fifth of the population aged 65 or over. But Germany responded quickly to the virus outbreak. It also tested people with mild symptoms if they had contact with an infected person or were themselves in a high-risk area. Many younger Italians are infected or have been infected without ever being recorded. This also explains the supposedly higher mortality rate caused by the virus there. In Germany, the highest number of deaths were recorded in the most affected states of Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, and North Rhine-Westphalia. Some of these had a chronic disease before being infected by Corona. Several of those infected with Corona virus lived in old people’s or nursing homes.
In Germany, some presume that rising temperatures to be experienced during the coming spring and summer months will only have a small impact on the spread of the virus. Still, epidemic viruses such as influenza are sensitive to UV light and even drought. In addition, many in the population will have built up immunity to the viruses during the winter months. In combination, this contributes to the fact that influenza viruses do not multiply as much in warmer weather.
Germany’s government is trying to slow down the spread of the virus, but not necessarily stopping its spread. This scenario aims to relieve Germany’s health system and protect patients at risk. To curb the virus, researchers have combined a number of measures in their calculations: symptomatically ill people would be isolated, household members should go into voluntary quarantine. In addition, social distancing should be maintained with people over seventy years of age.
Germany believes that if the pandemic is to be consistently suppressed, the number of infections will be kept low in the long term. This however will only work if the entire population isolates itself, regardless of what it means for the economy and people’s social life. If the spread of Covid-19 is slowed down, scientists expect half as many deaths. But even when slowed down, the epidemic will still kill hundreds of thousands of people, globally.
If the epidemic is to be suppressed by means of isolation measures for the entire population, these measures would have to be sustained for 18 months or more. After all, if the measures were relaxed without an available vaccine, the number of people infected would quickly rise again due to a lack of immunity in the population.
If the Corona virus pandemic is slowed down, the need for people in need of intensive care at any one time will decrease by two-thirds. If countries resort to even more drastic measures, hospitals could more easily deal with patients. This would require isolating people with symptoms while schools and universities are to be closed for five months. In addition, everyone would have to limit their social contacts by 75%. These calculations are made without considering the economic price society, business, and capitalism as a whole would have to pay.
Covid-19 survives up to 24 hours and on plastics and stainless steel two to three days. However, the so-called infection dose of the virus is significantly reduced on all surfaces over these periods. According to Germany’s Health Ministry, a lubrication infection is possible. In general however, human coronaviruses are not particularly stable on dry surfaces. So far, there have been no cases in Germany in which people have been shown to have been infected by contact with contaminated objects.
Almost all the infected people have several days of loss of taste. Still, the loss of taste is a comparatively mild and common symptom during respiratory infections. Meanwhile 91% of those infected with Corona had shown only mild to moderate symptoms such as dry cough and fever. In addition, 30% had diarrhea. This is found to be more common than previously thought. At the same time, Germany’s Robert Koch Institute has dampened hopes for an early vaccine against the virus. It considers it realistic that we will have a vaccine by spring of 2021. Still, Germany’s government said that anything that is bureaucratically feasible will be done. Clinical testing periods, however, cannot be shortened. After all, the vaccines should be one thing above all: safe.
In recent days, Germany registered approximately 40,000 infected people. In harsh mathematical terms, the key issue is lethality – the technical term for the death rate, about 0.4% in Germany. Part of Germany’s low death rate is due to very reliable methods of assessing and reporting Corona deaths. In addition, one should take into account how long the outbreak has lasted already. Diseases and deaths do not occur at the same time. Furthermore, there are often large numbers of unknown cases when registering infections.
In Germany, the number of undiscovered cases is likely to be lower than in many other countries. Germany’s Robert Koch Institute regularly points out that in Germany comparatively many people are tested. Many infected people with mild or no symptoms are also recorded. But even beyond statistical distortions, there are explanations related to other differences. This includes the age of the sick. In Germany, Sars-CoV-2 had hit younger people during the SARS epidemics in the early 2000s, while in Italy and Spain the older had had a higher rate of infection.
Smoking is suspected to be another factor. Damaged lungs from cigarette use could favor severe gradients of Covid-19. This link may explain why men, among whom smoking is more prevalent, are more likely to become infected and die more often than women. Differences between Italy and Germany cannot, however, be explained on a blanket basis. Smoking rates in both countries are roughly the same.
The impact of air pollution is also discussed. In northern Italy, the concentration of particulate matter is considerably high. Dirt particles can exacerbate chronic lung disease, making it harder for patients to fight pneumonia.
In the end, three key issues made Germany different compared to Italy. Firstly, Italy’s government waited too long to contain the spread of the Corona virus. Early detection and fast action can successfully restrict the spread of the virus. This is a mistake Germany has largely avoided while other counties seem to make the same mistake. By claiming Corona to be just a little flu and fostering inaction for a staggering six weeks, Donald Trump has aided the spread of the virus in the USA. Similarly, his right-wing populist counterpart Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson initially fancied the out-dated and disproven l’idée fixe of herd immunity. As a typical concept of the nasty ideology of Social Darwinism, herd immunity will, most likely, kill the weak and the elderly until immunity is established. It is unlikely to kill the Eton and Oxbridge trained elite like Boris Johnson himself. Johnson was very recently going around hospitals shaking hands to show that Corona isn’t dangerous. The hypocrisy of right-wing populist leaders towards their very own electorate is mind numbing.
Secondly, for decades Italian fashion companies have imported sweatshop labor from China to manufacture garments. Some of these workers have imported the Corona virus to Northern Italy. There is nothing wrong with workers from China. What is wrong, however, is the right-wing propaganda of protecting Italy’s borders from people in leaking boats (e.g. Salvini), while at the same time allowing capital to operate sweatshops with insufficient hygiene standards, slave wages, and inhuman working conditions. Today, these workers together with elderly Italians have to pay a bitter price for the glamor and profits of Italy’s fashion industry.
Thirdly and finally, there is a difference in the capacity and quality of the health system. Unlike Berlusconi and entourage, German conservatives – from Bismarck to Hindenburg to Adenauer and more recently, Helmut Kohl and “his girl” Angela Merkel – have always favoured the strong state over Neoliberalism’s free market. Countries where neoliberalism has hold sway have damaged their health care system in the course of it. The USA and the UK are prime examples. An insufficient health system is also likely to be particularly relevant in poorer countries. What is certain is that, despite its good health care system, Germany is not immune from more dramatic developments. We are still only at the beginning of the epidemic. However, Angela Merkell has her priorities straight and knows how to take care of her people.
As of March 28, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected over 192 countries and territories around the globe, infecting over 600,000 people and claiming nearly 30,000 lives. In the midst of one of the worst pandemics in recent history, one country still has not publicly confirmed a single case: North Korea.
North Korea closed its borders in January, restricting social activities and placing thousands under quarantine, but it has yet to announce a single confirmed case of COVID-19. On March 27, North Korean health authorities selectively lifted quarantine in some areas exhibiting low infection rates, but thousands still remain confined.
Many are skeptical of the apparent lack of confirmed infections in the North, including USFK commander General Robert Abrams, who is “fairly certain” that the pandemic has spread there despite Pyongyang having declared zero confirmed cases to date. On March 27, the South Korean Prime Minister stated that the outlook for the North is likely “not good”, agreeing with the assessment of South Korean doctors following the situation. They point to Pyongyang’s March 20 announcement regarding the release of quarantine restrictions from 4,000 residents of Pyongan Namdo, 1,430 of Gangwon, 2,630 of Jagangdo and 380 foreigners. Based on these and other compiled data sources, South Korean analysts estimate at least 8,300 cases of COVID-19 in the North, with many potential deaths.
While some experts argue that North Korea‘s healthcare sector is in a better position than many believe due to the relatively high ratio of health workers in the population, the reality is that the North is highly vulnerable to health crises due to having been subjected to a wide range of long-term economic and financial sanctions. These sanctions, which include bans on metal goods that block the entry of a range of necessary medical equipment without special permission, have caused a critical shortage of life-saving supplies. Especially hard hit are the more than 10 million North Koreans–40 percent of the population–who are already in need of humanitarian aid.
Mindful of the grim prospects for the North in the midst of the outbreak, South Korean President Moon Jae-in proposed inter-Korean cooperation in the fields of medicine and public health during his March 1 independence day address. On March 4, Chairman Kim responded by stating that he “wholeheartedly wish[ed] that the health of our brothers and sisters in the South are protected”. On March 22, President Trump sent a letter to Kim, expressing his willingness to help the North battle the coronavirus. While these gestures are positive signs during a time of diplomatic impasse on the Korean Peninsula, they fall short of offering concrete and immediate solutions that can directly help avert the worst possible scenario in the North.
Under international sanctions and self-embargo due to the pandemic, North Korea cannot receive meaningful assistance from the outside, lacks indigenous resources and technology, and is attempting to overcome the crisis on its own. At a time when even wealthy nations such as the US are reaching out for help to fight the pandemic, as evinced by President Trump’s request for South Korean test kits, Pyongyang would be hard-pressed to handle this crisis on its own. In order to prevent devastating consequences of North Koreans infected with COVID – 19, the following steps should be taken immediately:
. South Korea must send COVID – 19 test kits to North Korea as soon as possible.
. The United States must lift unilateral sanctions barring access to food, essential health supplies and medical support to North Korea.
. The UN and international community must authorize the export of essential medical equipment and supplies to North Korea.
In response to President Trump’s request for South Korea testing kits, President Moon pledged “maximum support” for bilateral cooperation to fight the pandemic, and South Korea is currently preparing to export testing kits to the United States. It seems self-evident that South Korea should demonstrate the same commitment to helping safeguard the lives of its brothers and sisters in the North. The two Koreas can look to the precedent set by East and West Germany, who implemented a public health treaty 10 years prior to unification and created a shared system for addressing public health crises. As the PyeongChang 2018 Winter Olympic Games created a historic opportunity for inter-Korea cooperation and led to two US-DPRK summits, inter-Korean cooperation during the pandemic can create momentum for peace, which at this juncture, would realize immediate life-saving dividends.
On March 27, the Financial Times reported that North Korea is clandestinely asking officials from other countries for assistance in waiving international sanctions restricting the shipment of medical supplies. International aid groups working inside the country have been calling for an easing of restrictions as well, warning of the grave human toll that would be exacted by a wide-scale outbreak. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has already urged the waiving of sanctions in order to ensure access to food, essential health supplies and medical support, and UN high commissioner for human rights Michelle Bachelet has called for flexible authorization for essential and medical equipment and supplies, noting that “the populations in [countries under sanctions] are in no way responsible for the policies being targeted by sanctions, and to varying degrees have already been living in a precarious situation for prolonged periods”.
Offers of aid are welcome, but more material and wide-ranging benefits could be realized by selectively lifting sanctions that impact medical equipment and aid in order to at least refrain from further worsening the outlook for a vulnerable population that is already hampered in its ability to respond to the pandemic. It is quite simply the right thing to do.
The same goes for Iran.
Meanwhile, in Israel, the country's former army chief Benny Gantz formed the Blue and White party just over a year ago to provide a viable alternative to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's Likud party. Through three inconclusive elections, Gantz pledged to unseat Netanyahu, suggesting he poses a "threat to democracy" and ruling out partnership in a government led by a prime minister under indictment.
Disgust with Netanyahu and the slogan "anyone but Bibi" were the adhesive that joined Blue and White's three constituent parties. The promise to topple Netanyahu led hundreds of thousands of traditional left-wing voters to abandon the Labor and Meretz parties, handing Gantz a centre-left bloc of 61 seats in the 120-member Knesset in the March 2 elections.
West Bank settler Avigdor Liberman, chair of the right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu party who dubbed Arab Knesset members "a fifth column" recommended to President Reuven Rivlin that he task Gantz with forming Israel's next government even if it entailed support by the Arab Joint List. Anything to get rid of Netanyahu.
The chair of the Yesh Atid party Yair Lapid, Gantz's partner in forming Blue and White, also supported a government backed by the 15 members of the Joint List, including the nationalist Balad and Islamist Ra'am parties.
But when the time came for Gantz to translate the majority garnered by his "anyone but Bibi" bloc into a majority, albeit slim, coalition, his camp began to disintegrate. The first domino to fall was Knesset member Orly Levy-Abekasis, who deserted from the Labor-Meretz ticket on which she ran on March 2.
The chair of the Yesh Atid party Yair Lapid, Gantz's partner in forming Blue and White, also supported a government backed by the 15 members of the Joint List, including the nationalist Balad and Islamist Ra'am parties.
But when the time came for Gantz to translate the majority garnered by his "anyone but Bibi" bloc into a majority, albeit slim, coalition, his camp began to disintegrate. The first domino to fall was Knesset member Orly Levy-Abekasis, who deserted from the Labor-Meretz ticket on which she ran on March 2.
She was followed by the two right-wing ideologues of Blue and White, Knesset members Tzvi Hauser and Yoaz Hendel, who refused to vote for any government not backed by a Zionist majority. Former Israeli army chief Gabi Ashkenazi, whom Gantz replaced in 2011, also joined the dissenters, arguing that a government of 47 Knesset members - 33 from Blue and White, seven from Labor-Meretz and seven from Yisrael Beiteinu - with the external support of 15 Arab legislators, would not be viable.
Gantz, nonetheless, started taking advantage of his parliamentary majority to push through legislation banning a politician under criminal indictment from forming a government - a law that could have ended Netanyahu's career.
Then the coronavirus intervened, and Netanyahu did what he does best. He started fear-mongering, appearing every evening before the cameras, warning of the dire consequences of the pandemic, dredging up the plagues of the Middle Ages and the Spanish flu. And each evening, he ended his performance with a call to Gantz to mobilise for the effort.
The subtext was clear: The state is in a state of emergency. Anyone who prefers to engage in petty politics is at best indifferent to the people's suffering and at worst a coward fleeing the battlefront.
Netanyahu has always harnessed public fear to keep his political career: first, it was the fear of terrorism. Then, Iran's threat to bomb and destroy the Israeli state. And now, the relentless plague. When Blue and White still declined to surrender, Netanyahu injected the Israeli public with another dose of fear.
Last week, a terrifying scenario presented to the health ministry was leaked to some media outlets warning that COVID-19 could kill 20.000 people. To illustrate the threat, Netanyahu announced that Israeli doctors could find themselves in the chilling situation of their Italian counterparts, having to choose who will live and who will die given the mass casualties.
Gantz, nonetheless, started taking advantage of his parliamentary majority to push through legislation banning a politician under criminal indictment from forming a government - a law that could have ended Netanyahu's career.
Then the coronavirus intervened, and Netanyahu did what he does best. He started fear-mongering, appearing every evening before the cameras, warning of the dire consequences of the pandemic, dredging up the plagues of the Middle Ages and the Spanish flu. And each evening, he ended his performance with a call to Gantz to mobilise for the effort.
The subtext was clear: The state is in a state of emergency. Anyone who prefers to engage in petty politics is at best indifferent to the people's suffering and at worst a coward fleeing the battlefront.
Netanyahu has always harnessed public fear to keep his political career: first, it was the fear of terrorism. Then, Iran's threat to bomb and destroy the Israeli state. And now, the relentless plague. When Blue and White still declined to surrender, Netanyahu injected the Israeli public with another dose of fear.
Last week, a terrifying scenario presented to the health ministry was leaked to some media outlets warning that COVID-19 could kill 20.000 people. To illustrate the threat, Netanyahu announced that Israeli doctors could find themselves in the chilling situation of their Italian counterparts, having to choose who will live and who will die given the mass casualties.
Already in February, he took the reins and ordered important and justified measures, such as cutting back on incoming flights, ordering isolation of those flying into the country, instructing people to keep their distance, and imposing a near-total lockdown on the country.
Despite persistent reports about a shortage of respirators and flaws in the testing process, trust in Netanyahu soared. A newly released report by the government watchdog agency showing the state was not properly prepared to deal with epidemics, did not dent Netanyahu's popularity.
In a recent poll, 60 percent of respondents said Netanyahu was performing well in the coronavirus crisis, whereas only 34 percent were pleased with Gantz.
The Blue and White leader was left with two options, both bad. One was to respond to the will of the majority, dismantle the political package he had put together, provide sanctuary to a corrupt politician and abandon some of his voters - a Channel 12 poll found 56 percent of Blue and White voters favoring his decision.
The other option was to swim against the current and head for a fourth round of elections, tainted by the image of a general who had abandoned the battlefront and his troops.
He opted for the first and Netanyahu will go down in history as the first leader who owes his seat to a virus.
PALESTINA
In 2012, The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees warned that the Gaza Strip would be uninhabitable by 2020. Years of a devastating siege and a series of military conflicts taking the lives of thousands struck the enclave with misery and poverty, bringing youth unemployment up to 75% and the economy to its knees. The current healthcare and sanitary system in the Gaza strip are extremely exhausted, lack basic resources, equipment and material that would be necessary not only to fight a major pandemic, but to simply treat normal day-to-day patients. A major outbreak of COVID-19 in the Gaza strip would lead to nothing less than a disastrous effect and would likely cause a death toll higher than all previous military conflicts combined.
On March 26th, 2020, the United Nations announced that it would facilitate the delivery of a total 1200 COVID-19 testing kits to Gaza’s hospitals to help fight the outbreak. Nearly 1636 people who arrived in Gaza via the Rafah Crossing border or the Beit-Hanoun (Erez) checkpoint have been placed in mandatory quarantine in 22 centers around the Gaza Strip, including schools, hotels and healthcare centers. 505 more people are currently in confinement at home. In the Gaza strip, every individual has an average of 0.18 square meters of personal space, which would place Gazans into involuntary clusters of interconnected social networks. One person can easily transmit the disease to scores of family members and neighbors living nearby, in houses that are glued side by side to each other. At one of the most densely populated areas in the world, the average family has nearly 6 members on average and most of the population lives in extended family homes of 20 members and more. More strict measures must be taken to contain the virus or catastrophic consequences will ensue the like of which Gaza has never seen before.
When the news of confirmed cases broke out, Gazans started taking precautionary measures to protect themselves and their family members from infection. However, with the lack of sufficient resources and equipment, Gazans had only one other way to cope with stress: cynicism and dark comedy. From Facebook posts to Twitter hashtags, Gazans reacted to the irony of being advised by the Palestinian Authority not to travel, whilst living under siege and prohibited from doing so for more than a decade. Others reacted with sarcasm to isolation notices to close down businesses and shops and go into confinement, wondering how they would provide for their children when there is little commercial activity in an ailing economy, even before the arrival of the virus in the first place.
In Gaza, over 50% of the entire population is unemployed; the percentage is 75% for the youth, which renders thousands of workers in agriculture, transportation, retail, and other industries desperate (The Israeli GDP per capita is nearly 30 times that of Gaza’s). Unemployment rates are expected to rise due to major lockdowns of commercial and economic activities. Authorities in Gaza have already closed mosques for prayer, shut down events and activities involving any gathering of people; limited entry to Gaza’s seaport for fishermen under tight restrictions and closed street markets. These decisions were seen as a necessary evil to prevent a major outbreak. However, they will present a painful strike to a weak economy. In the absence of an economic rescue plan, more Gazans will suffer.
In the event of a major COVID-19 outbreak in the Gazan enclave, the numbers draw a dark picture: according to the WHO’s Gaza office, there are only 62 ventilators in the Gaza Strip. They represent far less than what is needed to fight off the virus, and many of them currently do not function properly. There are only 2313 hospital beds available for an entire population of over 2 million people, with the capacity dwindling to less than 0.5 hospital beds per 1000 individuals. This compares to over 4.6 beds in Switzerland, 3.3 beds in Italy, and 3 beds in Spain, Europe’s most affected countries by COVID-19. There are currently 60 intensive care units in the entire Strip, 40 of which are currently occupied. The cost of preparing a single intensive-care unit costs nearly $50 000. The cost of a single testing kit is almost $5000. Gazan hospitals do not currently have the financial resources to equip themselves with enough equipment and basic material such as face masks. In short, an outbreak scenario similar to that of Europe or China will be a death sentence to the Gaza strip.
The supply chain will become even more exhausted under an imminent lockdown with major logistical difficulties of transporting food items, medicine and other essentials on a daily basis to families and shops around the Strip. The negative impacts of electricity cuts and lack of accessibility to clean drinking water can be fatal as well. NGOs, private-sector corporations, self-employed workers and students have all increased their reliance on the internet to work from home or study. However, many families around the Gaza strip do not have a smartphone or an internet connection.
In order to reduce the probability of a major outbreak in the Gaza Strip, the international community needs to recognize the difficulties that lie ahead. Hamas’ authority in the Gaza Strip is currently not recognized by the U.S, the EU or Israel. The two main doors of entry into the Gaza Strip are Kerem Shalom and Erez, both of which are under full Israeli control. The Covid-19 outbreak has no consideration for borders, ideology or ethnicity. It transcends them all, it attacks all humans. Israel and Hamas must cooperate with one another to keep each other safe. Israel seems to have already understood the upcoming challenge and therefore it facilitated the entry of testing kits and other medical essential equipment over the past few days into the Gaza strip. On the other hand, Hamas recognized that there could be a political opportunity that it could seize: by proving its ability to contain the virus with responsible measures and a smart management, they could be seen as competent and more legitimate.
However, the COVID 19 outbreak has shown not only Israel and Hamas but also many advanced countries around the world that they should have invested more in healthcare and sanitary infrastructure rather than dedicating entire budgets to defense and warfare. Economic stability is an additional essential factor for containing a virus: Gaza has lost many of its professionals, particularly, doctors and nurses who emigrated abroad due to dire economic conditions.
The COVID crisis has brought into stark relief the vital importance of investment in healthcare as a crucial factor in economic wellbeing at the individual and societal level. The virus knows no borders; as such, it has also underscored the imperative of mutual cooperation, which, perhaps ironically, could create political openings once considered impossible.
BRASIL
Marilena Chauí: Considerações sobre o Manifesto “O Brasil não pode ser destruído por Bolsonaro”.
“Quem sabe faz a hora / Não espera acontecer” (Geraldo Vandré)
Maquiavel dizia que o verdadeiro político é aquele que, na desordem e no tumulto, sabe discernir o momento oportuno para agir. O Manifesto “O Brasil não pode ser destruído por Bolsonaro” é uma convocação para agirmos no momento oportuno.
Seu acerto é duplo. Em primeiro lugar, por propor agir como uma frente nacional contra a irresponsabilidade criminosa de incitação ao homicídio feita por Bolsonaro ao se opor ao isolamento social (imaginando-se aliado e cópia de Donald Trump, acabou isolado pelo mundo inteiro) e sua demora em tomar providências mínimas para assegurar a vida de milhões de brasileiros, procrastinando a liberação de recursos com querelas sobre MPs e decretos.
Em segundo lugar, o Manifesto acerta ao propor a renúncia de Bolsonaro e não seu impeachment, pois este acrescentaria à crise atual mais uma crise (longa e de resultado imprevisível) que abriria espaço para divergências e lutas num momento em que a sociedade brasileira clama por clareza de objetivos e de ações.
Para não esquecer
Durante os últimos 35 anos, vimos surgir e agir uma personagem que, do Alto e à nossa revelia, decidia os rumos do planeta. Essa personagem foi batizada pelos meios de comunicação e pelos economistas de direita com o nome de “O Mercado”, dotado de onisciência e onipotência. Onisciência porque, tendo a extraordinária capacidade de auto-regulação racional, sabe sempre e de antemão os rumos corretos e necessários do capitalismo. Onipotência porque possui um poder incontestável de decisão sobre as ações dos Estados e das sociedades e sobre os corações e as mentes dos indivíduos. Como toda divindade fetichista, “O Mercado” tem reações psicológicas: “está nervoso”, “está calmo”, “está de acordo”, “não está de acordo”, “aprova”, “desaprova”, “recompensa”, “pune”. Em suma, o seu “estado de espírito” repercute nas políticas do planeta e na vida cotidiana dos cidadãos. “O Mercado”, como sabemos, é o apelido do capitalismo neoliberal.
Ora, algo curioso vem acontecendo nas últimas semanas com a expansão do coronavírus ou Covid-19. Nos meios de comunicação, nos debates políticos, nas falas de governantes e nas redes sociais a palavra “mercado” desapareceu como por um golpe de mágica. Jornalistas, políticos, governantes e cidadãos passaram a empregar duas palavras que haviam sido banidas do vocabulário: economia e Estado. Como conseqüência, de repente, não mais que de repente, o vocabulário da socialdemocracia – controle estatal da economia e políticas sociais – é retomado.
Exemplifiquemos com o caso do Brasil.
Sem a menor vergonha na cara, agora é feito o elogio do Bolsa Família (aquele programa que era assistencialismo para os preguiçosos, lembram-se?), do SUS (aquele que Mandetta desativou quase por completo, lembram-se?) e muitos apregoam a necessidade da Renda Básica ou da Renda Mínima (sem que Eduardo Suplicy seja mencionado uma única vez nem entrevistado como o incansável campeão dessa idéia). Por sua vez, o “empresário de si mesmo”, os trabalhadores informais, os desempregados e os moradores de favelas e de rua passaram a receber uma nova designação: “vulneráveis”, como se sua vulnerabilidade tivesse surgido por conta do Covid-19 e não da aliança entre “O Mercado” e o governo neoliberal.
É espantoso o descaramento do uso da palavra “solidariedade” por aqueles que controlam ideologicamente a mídia e a política e que, até um mês atrás, se empenhavam do elogio irrestrito à competição e à “meritocracia”. Além disso, com igual descaramento, o governo federal exige que os cientistas das universidades públicas e dos centros públicos de pesquisa tragam rapidamente soluções para aquilo que deixou de ser “histeria” para ser considerado pandemia, sem que se diga que não houve investimento algum nas pesquisas públicas (lembram-se de Bolsonaro afirmando que pesquisa séria só é feita em universidades privadas e Weintraub cortando as bolsas de pesquisa do CNPq e da CAPES?). Exemplos não faltam se lembrarmos tudo o que foi dito e feito desde o golpe contra Dilma e a prisão de Lula.
Em suma, a referência à mudança de vocabulário e à relação com as políticas sociais é feita aqui no sentido de que é preciso resgatar e unificar por meio dos partidos de oposição as lutas e manifestações de movimentos sociais e populares em defesa de direitos que, desde o governo Temer, se espalharam pelo país, mas eram sempre fragmentadas, esporádicas e sobretudo criminalizadas. Insisto na figura dos chamados “vulneráveis” porque, a despeito da ideologia neoliberal sobre a “nova classe média brasileira”, são eles que constituem, na verdade, o que chamo de “nova classe trabalhadora brasileira”, fragmentada e isolada, carecendo de organizações de proteção, desprovida de uma visão social e política que lhe dê um lugar na luta democrática e socialista. Esse resgate de lutas e essa unificação de classe poderão, agora, encontrar eco na sociedade brasileira em sua rejeição a Bolsonaro.
Para nos ajudar a compreender
Penso que o artigo de Harvey “Política anticapitalista na época do Covid19”, é iluminador tanto sobre a situação planetária do capitalismo e da crise do neoliberalismo – combatido de Santiago à Beirute –, bem como sobre o lugar do Covid-19 na luta de classes, ponto que merece nossa maior atenção e pode guiar muitas das ações propostas pelo Manifesto. Harvey traça com firmeza o panorama planetário do neoliberalismo vitorioso, das lutas contra ele e dos efeitos do Covid-19 sobre ele, assinalando a ironia histórica do surgimento de uma perspectiva socialista no centro do mundo neoliberal.
Também considero importante para nossa reflexão e ação, o artigo de Paulo Capel Narvai, “Bolsonaro e a estratégia da pinça”. Narvai salienta que o que está em jogo não é a pandemia, mas as eleições de 2022. É particularmente significativa sua análise sobre a luta do grupo bolsonarista contra os governadores, que serão responsabilizados pelo péssimo desempenho da economia (o “pibinho” e o “dolão”), e sobretudo sua analise do papel de Mandetta nesse jogo, isto é, do discurso técnico aparentemente oposto ao discurso psicótico de Bolsonaro.
Uma proposta para discussão
Algumas pesquisas, mencionadas por articulistas de A Terra é Redonda e pelo site Brasil 247 indicam que, no Brasil, os mais penalizados pelos efeitos do Covid-19 (tanto do ponto de vista da saúde quanto da subsistência) são exatamente os eleitores dos partidos de oposição, particularmente os de esquerda. Em outras palavras, são aqueles de cujas organizações e lutas nasceram os projetos e programas dos partidos de esquerda, e também aqueles, destroçados pela economia e política neoliberais, que hoje buscam o caminho que define a essência da democracia, qual seja, a criação e garantia de direitos. Os partidos de oposição (esquerda e centro) devem a eles sua presença na política brasileira e por isso faço aqui uma proposta.
O Manifesto, como frente nacional de oposição, apresenta uma lista de ações necessárias a serem exigidas do governo federal, mas essa frente nacional também pode agir diretamente no atendimento emergencial dos que foram os mais atingidos pela destruição dos direitos sociais e por isso são também os mais atingidos, no curto e no longo prazo, pelo Covid19, pois são os que mais dependem dos serviços públicos e das garantias trabalhistas. Proponho que se considere a possibilidade de dirigir os fundos partidários para ações emergenciais, de maneira a deixar claro que o Manifesto é político e social. Isso configuraria uma espécie de governo paralelo? Que assim seja.
Brasil 247
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário