RAPORT DIN TRANSEE - 24 MARTIE 2020 - 5 | publicatii - Politica La Est
rachman.jpeg

RAPORT DIN TRANSEE - 24 MARTIE 2020 - 5

Mihail E. Ionescu
III 
Teza Rachman care a iritat – se pare- cel mai mult comentatorii a fost aceea care califica drept o performanta ceea ce a reusit China comunista  sa realizeze in combaterea virusului : “But China did indeed confine some 60m people in Hubei province to their homes, while imposing movement controls on hundreds of millions more. And, for now, this seems to have worked. Nicholas Christakis, a Yale professor, expressed a widespread sentiment when praising China for ‘an astonishing achievement from a public health point of view’.”. Iar de aici, pentru acesti comentatori a califica pe Rachman un ‘ mole’ al Beijingului nu a fost decat un pas; la fel a fost si a socoti  o asemenea concluzie ca afirmarea convingerii/ opiniei   ca in acest fel se declara comunismul/autoritarismul ca fiind superior democratiei , mai mult ca in  inclestarea geopolitica cu Occidentul , China trebuie déjà privita ca invingator.
 
Nu este rostul aici a proba in prea multe cuvinte  ca nu astfel este desfasurata ‘analiza Rachman’ si desprinse concluziile autorului. Dar cateva cuvinte despre profesorul N. Christakis – care a “ exprimat un sentiment larg raspandit “ privind aceasta opinie -  trebuie spuse. Mai intai, profesorul Christakis este o somitate in domeniul virusologiei, preda la Yale, are  cercetari solide in domeniu, cu rezultate remarcabile, este  implicat in multe proiecte internationale , inclusiv in colaborare cu cercetatori din China ,consultat de presedinti de tara si de alte autoritati inalte din intrega lume in problematica virusologica, inclusiv Covi-19.[1]
 
Intr-un ‘sir’ de tweet-ere pe propriul cont ( nu mai putin de 35 la numar ) profesorul de la Yale, de origine grec,  scrie urmatoarele pentru a explica succesul chinez, evidentiind foarte clar trasaturile principale ale actiunii intreprinse de  regimul de la Beijing in scopul de a birui calamitatea :
@NAChristakis
China has a collectivist culture and an authoritarian government, so its success fighting COVID-19, while deeply impressive, will not be easy to reproduce elsewhere. The USA must prepare to combat the virus using tools at its disposal. It will not be easy. 18/
4:20 PM · Mar 9, “[2]
Iar – avand in vedere cele spuse mai sus si exprimand pozitia lui clara fata de regimul chinez ( ‘autoritar’ )-  in legatura cu citarea sa in ‘analiza Rachman’ in acelasi ‘sir/thread’ scrie:
@NAChristakis
How Beijing reframed the coronavirus narrative. I’ve been very clear re China’s government being authoritarian and its failings. But COVID19 control was dramatic. @gideonrachman doesn’t spare our political leaders either. https://ft.com/content/20ab52d8-676a-11ea-800d-da70cff6e4d3?campaign=march20&segmentID=09d3ed8b-33db-132b-eb60-c9f2617cc2e5… | @financialtimes
(not 34:) /35”[3] .

Asadar, ca Rachman nu iarta nici liderii occidentali  in ce priveste esecurile in privinta controlului asupra coronavirusului  .
 
Trebuie spus de la inceput ca multi dintre cei care au facut comentarii la ‘analiza Rachman’ au realizat rapid ca se incheaga articulatiile unei noi campanii de opinie instrumentata  pentru a contracara tezele expuse ( asa se explica si multele atacuri la adresa analistului de relatii internationale ) sau ceea ce unii au inteles ( sau inventat ) din ele. Pe de o parte, adversarii lor  au facut cunoscut ca stiu ca se afla in fata unei campanii de manipulare, atunci cand considera ca o ‘ironie’ faptul ca nu are logica:
How ironic if a virus which stemmed form China and spread to the world because of Chinese incompetence and failed system of governance would result in China becoming stronger! I would like to believe otherwise.”[4]
Iar altul completeaza:
That’s what their new propaganda campaign is aimed at and that’s why it must be countered and exposed.”[5]

Mai mult ,unii comentatori arata chiar cine banuie a fi initiatorul acestei campanii, chiar incercand sa intoarca argumentul ca Chinei ar trebui sa i se solicite reparatii ‘ de razboi’  , invocand   subrezenia argumentelor utilizate:
            “ Just because no-one (except Trump) is saying much against China right now, doesn't mean it won't come./…/  Too many countries are firefighting for now..... there will be plenty of time later on -- with few hundred thousand dead -- to discuss where the blame lies. Even if they would rather not confront the questions,  publics in democracies will force politicians to identify and apportion blame..... the reckoning will come, but not yet....” [6]
            Sau, referitor la  aceste ‘ reparatii de razboi’ eventual de solicitat Chinei pentru ‘vinovatia’ sa in extensia globala a pandemiei  , dau replica prin fapte istorice imputabile altora ( veridice sau nu ) :
            “Sure, right after the US makes reparations for the American H1N1 that originated in New Jersey that has caused a global death toll of 575,400 as of 2012.Would love some reparations for the 2008 US subprime mortgage crisis turned Global Financial Crisis too, caused by greedy US banks and irresponsible American homeowners.[7]
            Se invoca chiar argumente in acest sens, nu se stie insa cat de adevarate:
            “According to CDC (official source, not Wikipedia):‘Where did the 2009 H1N1 flu virus come from? The 2009 H1N1 influenza virus (referred to as ‘swine flu’ early on) was first detected in people in the United States in April 2009’[8]

Infruntarea de tip geopolitic intre o tabara ‘pro-chineza’ si una ‘antichineza’ este insa evident. Opiniile exprimate de comentatori iau cu rapiditate una dintre aceste pozitii.
 
Efortul de contracarare /demontare a acestei campanii de manipulare bazata pe vinovatia Chinei  recurge la incercarea de a a demonstra falsul principalelor trasaturi ale acesteia, precum ‘ originea’ virusului:
Using a single example to imply that the whole country monitoring on the virus is meanless.   Virus exists in this planet more than human are. They transform and mutate constantly. If you bring the compensation issue, how about the HIV which kills one human being every 6 seconds. It spread  in the US BTW. It is a public health issue that people around the world are facing. Not political or ideology any more. How to coordinate global medical resources, control its spreading, transform temporary factories for manufacturing the most need supplies, share the experience on the clinical treatment, etc.”[9]
 
Sau  se continua acest effort de contracarare prin a proba teza adversa privind  transparenta autoritatilor chineze in  comunicarea pe plan international  a  datelor privind epidemia:
The head of Wuhan central hospital sounded the alarm in December by posting information on the new virus on WeChat.  Her interview on WeChat , suggesting an opportunity for Chinese authorities to take early action, was later deleted from WeChat and she was silenced by local officials. See this article in the South China Morning Post:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3074622/coronavirus-wuhan-doctor-says-officials-muzzled-her-sharing”.[11];
              In directia ‘ transparentei’ chineze este invocata si o cronologie  a evenimentelor:
“Since you were so adamant about the timeline, let’s check some facts. It was 2 days between the “whistleblower” and an WHO investigation, and 5 days until it was declared as a new form of coronavirus by China, and then another 2 weeks when the whole city of Wuhan was locked down.
Meanwhile, Trump were busy with his impeachment, reelection and downplaying the whole thing as a hoax.
Regarding the spread of the disease, US CDC official stats show that among infected persons repatriated into the US, 3 were from Wuhan and 46 were from the Diamond Princess cruise ship.
*************
Dec. 30, 2019 – Dr Li sent a private message to his friends about a mysterious disease and asked them to keep it private. It was leaked.
Dec. 31, 2019 – China reported a cluster of pneumonia cases associated with the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan.
Jan. 1, 2020 – Huanan Market is closed for environmental sanitation and disinfection. World Health Organization asks for information to assess risk.
Jan. 3 – Case numbers grow to 44 in China, with 11 severely ill.
Jan. 7 – Chinese officials confirm illness is a new form of coronavirus. CDC establishes a COVID-19 Incident Management System.
Jan 23 - China announced that it will locked down the entire city of Wuhan and its 11 million people.
*** By this time, there was one infected case in the entire US ***
Jan. 4 to Feb. 4  – US President Trump focuses on his impeachment trials and reelection campaign.
Feb. 5 - US President Trump acquitted of his impeachment charges.
Feb 5 - US restricted flights from China with wide exemptions.
Feb. 28 - US President Trump called the coronavirus the “new hoax” by democrats in his S.Carolina rally.
Mar. 5 - Larry Kudlow on CNBC urges Americans to “stay at work”
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html
https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/03/coronavirus-timeline-how-the-coronavirus-spread-from-cases-in-china-to-ohio-in-less-than-three-months.html
https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3049910/coronavirus-crisis-how-death-li-wenliang-doctor-and-ordinary
https://www.businessinsider.com/five-times-the-trump-administration-downplayed-the-coronavirus-2020-3#their-new-hoax-1[12]
            Raspunsul vine numaidecat din tabara cealalta, adverse : The main problem appears to be that for about 3 weeks, Chinese officials prevented qualified whistleblowers in Wuhan from sounding the alarm.  It has been estimated that this cost 95% of the infections and deaths JUST IN CHINA. So how about the world outside China?”. [13]  
            Cineva  face deosebirea intre regimul comunist  si societatea chineza, cu omul obisnuit :
 “No bat-eating, no Communist Party, and NO COVER-UP - no Wuhan virus see this article in the South China Morning Post about a senior doctor in December at Wuhan central hospital who tried to raise the alarm about a new virus but was silenced by Party officials:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3074622/coronavirus-wuhan-doctor-says-officials-muzzled-her-sharing” .[14]
 
Dar, dincolo de aceasta infruntare propagandistica ( sunt acuze de implicare a ‘trolilor’, chinezi sau/si  de ‘stanga’ ) exista si fideli pro- China  atat in ce priveste  nevinovatia chineza , dar si  relative la temeiul istoric al victoriei Chinei ( nu a regimului ) impotriva pandemiei. Din aceasta perspectiva, interventia lui Paul A. Myers, pe care o citam in intregime, este elocventa prin unicitatea ei:   
“Re: ‘state capacity and a collective culture are the two uniquely strong characteristics of China’s political system . . .’

Succinct and on-point, particularly the strength of the collective culture. These will make China a strong presence in the coming decade. The broad strategy that China is deploying is also coming into view. It is essentially indirect. Avoid direct confrontation with America and its increasingly obsolete and somewhat irrelevant militarized power and America's mind-blowing arrogance in the use of tariffs and in particular economic sanctions. Instead Beijing deploys Chinese trade and economic power in third-country regions. While American power has been failing in the Greater Middle East for a generation, China has established a significant and growing positive economic and trade preference in the region. While America has been mismanaging its relationships with Europe to a fare-the-well, China has been building up positive relationships and increased economic presence. Similar initiatives are going on in Latin America and Africa. The Americans throw rocks at the Chinese and America's neighbors Canada and Mexico strengthen their relationships across the Pacific based upon mutually beneficial economic relationships. Trump has personally undermined the confidence of every Far East democratic ally in American wisdom, steadfastness, and resolve. That perception has now spread even further than the worldwide political contagion. And it is not just the personal ignorance of Trump and the propaganda-based public relations by which the plutocracy which put him in power, but the fact that the US Senate has now continued its century-long tradition of failing institutionally to be a constructive supporter of an American international presence and an utter institutional failure to support democratically supported governance to advance broad American public interests domestically or internationally. It's a plutocratic institution -- top to bottom and in both parties. In particular, it has killed social democracy in America every chance it has had for half a century. Why mention the Senate? Simple. To show the decline is baked into the structure of the US constitutional system. It is neither representative nor democratic in an age that demands nothing less to be truly ‘advanced.’China is the first rival adversary that the US has ever faced that significantly more population and potential for scale than America has. It is a different arena for the Americans. China's relative advancement has always been assured by China's own efforts and America was always going to be a relatively smaller piece of a larger world society. But what is coming in this decade is a sharp decline in both relative and absolute power and influence. America is not going to be quite America -- for both Americans and its friends. “[15]
 
             Cum se poate observa , intreaga pledoarie pro-sinica a lui Myers este facuta prin comparatie cu esecurile SUA si biruintele Chinei: geopolitice, culturale, etc. 
 
            Intrebat de ce nu emigreaza in  China atat de laudata de el , Myers  raspunde:
           

Staff members line up today at attention as they prepare to spray disinfectant at Wuhan Railway Station.
            “Don't have to. My overseas ethnic Chinese, Mandarin-speaking wife (from Jakarta and Singapore) gives me the line every day on China and Southeast Asia. I'm comfortably indoctrinated. The elite in California is increasingly Asian. The Beach Boys thing is in the rear view mirror.”  
            Ceea ce I se pare fi o explicatie suficienta.
            Dar teza Myers- in traducerea noastra: schimbarea geopolitica déjà s-ar fi produs in favoarea Chinei, fiind vorba de timp pentru formalizarea ei – este  atacata in propriul fundament. Anume ca este prea devreme sa fie prezisa o schimbare geopolitica in sistem , mai mult chiar ca ea ar putea sa nu aiba loc, evolutiile avand a lua poate o turnura anti-China : It's too early to predict any geopolitical shifts. It may easily end up backfiring for China, we simply don't know that yet. If I were to bet on one thing: global supply chains will be dramatically reconfigured in the wake of this crisis. To give one example: There is only 1 producer (Covidien in the US) of Paracetamol left in the western world. Europe's last plant closed in 2009. Not that Paracetamol will cure this epidemic, but it serves as a red flag. We will therefore see on-/near- or back shoring of critical industries on a considerable scale... China will not necessarily be the beneficiary of this. To be frank, the West brought this upon himself, by complacency, greed and arrogance. /.../”.[16] Iar alt comentator propune , nu atat sa fie evitat dependenta de China pentru anumite bunuri, cat  “to turn China into a country we can all live with, by supporting those who wish to remove the regime of Xi Jinping, their repression, their lies and all their evil works. A distinction must be drawn between most Chinese, on the one hand, and the evil few on the other, most of whom are known as the Chinese Communist Party. “  [17]

Timpul, subliniaza alt cititor , va arata care sistem este mai bun in jugularea pandemiilor , cel chinez sau cel “ concursului de popularitate’ , cum  denumeste pe  cel democratic: Who cares about the results of a popularity contest? China likes to claim that it has a system whereby their government executive are selected on merit, much like the rest of the civil service. Whether you believe them on that or not is not the point; the point is, it's a fundamentally different way of doing government than the West's popularity contests. And the question is, which is the better at containing pandemics? Only time will tell - but right now, it looks like the China system has got a better hold on things.”[18]
 
 Asadar, istoria merge inainte si are avantajul ‘regulii epilogului’ In cazul acesta  in ce priveste combaterea pandemiilor .
 
Ca o concluzie generala: geopolitica se intrepatrunde cu aparitia si evolutia ucigatoarei pandemii pe care o strabate acum umanitatea, iar rezultatele acesteia- economice, politice si sistemice - incep a fi private de pe baricadele a doua tabere opuse. Ceea ce nu este deloc pozitiv pentru a pune capat actiunii virusului ucigas, cat mai repede si fara pierderi ireparabile.
 
 
[1] Iata o notatie de pe contul sau de twitter din 23 martie 2020:
 Nicholas A. Christakis Retweeted
Prime Minister GR
@PrimeministerGR
Had a very interesting conversation with  @NAChristakisabout our action plan for COVID-19 and our health system. We're basing our strategies on sound scientific advice, and Greece is very privileged to have such eminent scientists to call upon, wherever they may be.
10:05 PM · Mar 23, 2020·” https://twitter.com/PrimeministerGR/status/1242180621784494087
 
[5] Ibidem, 3 recomandari
[6] Ibidem, 4 recomandari
[7] Ibidem, 5 recomandari
[8] Ibidem, 1 recomandare
[9] Ibidem, 3 recomandari
[10] Ibidem , 5 recomandari
[11] Ibidem , 5 recomandari
[12] Ibidem, 2 recomandari
[13] Ibidem , 5 recomandari
[14] Ibidem, 3 recomandari
[15] Ibidem, 8 recomandari. Myers primeste si o lauda exponentiala: “Excellent comment which beats the original article. Role as FT staffer awaits”  ( 3 recomandari )
[16] Ibidem , 8 recomandari
[17] Ibidem
[18] Ibidem, 5 recomandari

Comentarii

Nu exista niciun comentariu

Postarea comentariilor dupa trei luni a fost dezactivata.