By Maria Cheng and Jamey Keaten

When the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic one year ago Thursday, it did so only after weeks of resisting the term and maintaining that the highly infectious virus could still be stopped.

A year later, the U.N. agency is still struggling to keep on top of the evolving science of COVID-19, to persuade countries to abandon their nationalistic tendencies and help get vaccines where they’re needed most.

The agency made some costly missteps along the way: It advised people against wearing masks for months and asserted that COVID-19 wasn’t widely spread in the air. It also declined to publicly call out countries — particularly China — for mistakes that senior WHO officials grumbled about privately.

That created some tricky politics that challenged WHO’s credibility and wedged it between two world powers, setting off vociferous Trump administration criticism that the agency is only now emerging from.

President Joe Biden’s support for WHO may provide some much-needed breathing space, but the organization still faces a monumental task ahead as it tries to project some moral authority amid a universal scramble for vaccines that is leaving billions of people unprotected.

“WHO has been a bit behind, being cautious rather than precautionary,” said Gian Luca Burci, a former WHO legal counsel now at Geneva’s Graduate Institute. “At times of panic, of a crisis and so on, maybe being more out on a limb — taking a risk — would have been better.”

WHO waved its first big warning flag on Jan. 30, 2020, by calling the outbreak an international health emergency. But many countries ignored or overlooked the warning.

Only when WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared a “pandemic” six weeks later, on March 11, 2020, did most governments take action, experts said. By then, it was too late, and the virus had reached every continent except Antarctica.

A year later, WHO still appears hamstrung. A WHO-led team that traveled to China in January to investigate the origins of COVID-19 was criticized for failing to dismiss China's fringe theory that the virus might be spread via tainted frozen seafood.

That came after WHO repeatedly lauded China last year for its speedy, transparent response — even though recordings of private meetings obtained by The Associated Press showed that top officials were frustrated at the country's lack of cooperation.

“Everybody has been wondering why WHO was so praising of China back in January" 2020, Burci said, adding that the praise has come back “to haunt WHO big-time.”

Some experts say WHO’s blunders came at a high price, and it remains too reliant on iron-clad science instead of taking calculated risks to keep people safer — whether on strategies like mask-wearing or whether COVID-19 is often spread through the air.

“Without a doubt, WHO’s failure to endorse masks earlier cost lives,” said Dr. Trish Greenhalgh, a professor of primary care health sciences at Oxford University who sits on several WHO expert committees. Not until June did WHO advise people to regularly wear masks, long after other health agencies and numerous countries did so.

Greenhalgh said she was less interested in asking WHO to atone for past errors than revising its policies going forward. In October, she wrote to the head of a key WHO committee on infection control, raising concerns about the lack of expertise among some members. She never received a response.

“This scandal is not just in the past. It’s in the present and escalating into the future,” Greenhalgh said.

Raymond Tellier, an associate professor at Canada's McGill University who specializes in coronaviruses, said WHO’s continued reluctance to acknowledge how often COVID-19 is spread in the air could prove more dangerous with the arrival of new virus variants first identified in Britain and South Africa that are even more transmissible.

“If WHO’s recommendations are not strong enough, we could see the pandemic go on much longer,” he said.

With several licensed vaccines, WHO is now working to ensure that people in the world’s poorest countries receive doses through the COVAX initiative, which is aimed at ensuring poor countries get COVID-19 vaccines.

But COVAX has only a fraction of the 2 billion vaccines it is hoping to deliver by the end of the year. Some countries that have waited months for shots have grown impatient, opting to sign their own private deals for quicker vaccine access.

WHO chief Tedros has responded largely by appealing to countries to act in “solidarity,” warning that the world is on the brink of a “catastrophic moral failure” if vaccines are not distributed fairly. Although he has asked rich countries to share their doses immediately with developing countries and to not strike new deals that would jeopardize the vaccine supply for poorer countries, none have obliged.

“WHO is trying to lead by moral authority, but repeating ‘solidarity’ over and over when it’s being ignored by countries acting in their own self-interest shows they are not recognizing reality,” said Amanda Glassman, executive vice president of the Center for Global Development. “It’s time to call things out for the way they are.”

Yet throughout the pandemic, WHO has repeatedly declined to censure rich countries for their flawed attempts to stop the virus. Internally, WHO officials described some of their biggest member countries' approaches to stemming COVID-19 as “an unfortunate laboratory to study the virus” and “macabre.”

More recently, Tedros seems to have found a slightly firmer voice — speaking truth to leaders like Germany’s president about the need for wealthy countries to share vaccines or criticizing China for dragging its heels in not quickly granting visas to the WHO-led investigative team.

Irwin Redlener of Columbia University said WHO should be more aggressive in instructing countries what to do, given the extremely unequal way COVID-19 vaccines are being distributed.

“WHO can’t order countries to do things, but they can make very clear and explicit guidance that makes it difficult for countries not to follow,” Redlener said.

WHO's top officials have said repeatedly it is not the agency's style to criticize countries.

At a press briefing this month, WHO senior adviser Dr. Bruce Aylward said simply: “We can’t tell individual countries what to do.”

___

AP Medical Writer Maria Cheng reported from London.

Share:
More In Politics
U.S. To Send $800 Million In Military Aid To Ukraine
President Biden has announced an additional $800 million in military assistance to Ukraine, including artillery, armored personnel carriers, and helicopters. It comes as Russian forces appear to be preparing for a new, aggressive offensive in the eastern part of Ukraine. Paul McLeary, defense reporter for Politico, joined Cheddar to discuss this new round of aid and what it means for the U.S. commitment to arming the embattled country.
Growing Activism Responds to School Book Bans
Activism is growing around the country in response to school boards banning books from shelves that focus on sexuality, gender, identity, or race. Jen Cousins, co-founder of The Florida Freedom to Read Project, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
President Biden Announces U.S. Ban on Russian Oil Imports
As the Russian invasion of Ukraine intensifies, President Biden has announced a ban on importing Russian oil, gas, and energy. To discuss how this ban will impact the war and Americans, Amir Handjani, non-resident fellow at Quincy Institute, joins Cheddar News.
Protesters Around the World Stand with Ukraine
Thousands of protesters around the world are expressing their solidarity with Ukraine against Russia's invasion. Jason Beardsley, national executive director of the Association of the U.S. Navy and national security expert, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
Oil Price Crisis Could Lead to Speedier Push Toward Clean Energy Transition
As gas prices surge amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, other nations could potentially transition faster to using clean energy than previously expected. Philip K. Verleger, a senior fellow at the Niskanen Center, joined Cheddar News to explain how this could be a possibility in the near future. "Part of the reason I think we have this invasion and the tantrum that's being thrown by Russia, terrible tantrum, is because the Russians were trying to slow down the transition," he said. "Ironically they speeded it up."
Impact on Consumers as More Companies Leave Russian Market
Following the invasion of Ukraine, a multitude of Western companies have paused doing business with Russia. PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, and Starbucks are the most recent companies to temporarily cease operations in Russia. Dean of Miami Herbert Business School at the University of Miami, John Quelch, joined Cheddar News to discuss what message this sends to Russia and the Russian consumer. “I would not underestimate the collective strength of all of these multinational companies, essentially coming together to make their collective statement in support of the political statements that have come out of Washington," he said.
Russia-Ukraine Crisis Putting Crypto In The Spotlight
The war in Ukraine continues to reveal heartbreaking gut-wrenching stories. The war in itself is not only devastating but also expensive. Experts estimate that Russia is draining nearly $20 million dollars each day to continue occupying and invading Ukraine. All this could force the country to turn to cryptocurrencies. It's a major turn for the country that briefly considered outlined digital assets entirely, but it could also have serious implications for cryptos. Managing Director at Quantum Fintech Group, Harry Yeh, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
Load More