SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Technicians in Belgium, a country that takes a leading role in the fight against viral infectious diseases, work on a candidate vaccine against the novel coronavirus on June 17, 2020, in a brand new biotech lab established to perform Covid-19 diagnostic tests. (Photo: Olivier Matthys/Getty Images)
'Nonsensical and Madness': Outrage After Trump Excludes US From WHO-Backed Global Vaccination Cooperation Pact
The administration's latest decision regarding vaccines and global cooperation denounced as "more self-inflicted damage."
Sep 01, 2020
Provoking a flurry of critical reactions from health experts and lawmakers, the Trump administration announced Tuesday afternoon that it will not participate in the "global effort to develop, manufacture, and equitably distribute a coronavirus vaccine, in part because the World Health Organization is involved"--a decision the Washington Post said "could shape the course of the pandemic and the country's role in health diplomacy" going forward.
The purpose of the Covid-19 Vaccines Global Access (Covax) Facility is to "speed vaccine development and secure doses for all countries and distribute them to the most high-risk segment of each population," explained the Post.
While more than 170 countries are in negotiations to participate in Covax, Judd Deere, a spokesperson for the White House, told reporters that "The United States will continue to engage our international partners to ensure we defeat this virus, but we will not be constrained by multilateral organizations influenced by the corrupt World Health Organization and China."
The Post described the decision as a "doubling down by the administration on its bet" that the U.S. will win the so-called "vaccine race."
Yet by foregoing the opportunity to "secure doses from a pool of promising vaccine candidates," the Trump administration is pursuing a "potentially risky strategy," the newspaper reported.
Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University told the Post that "America is taking a huge gamble by taking a go-it-alone strategy."
Senator Chris Van Hollen tweeted that "Trump's go-it-alone strategy has already given us the highest death toll in the world. At his inaugural, he spoke of 'American carnage' and he now seems determined to make it a reality."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding called it an "absolutely terrible" decision that "will hurt us in the long run." Akin to "shooting ourselves in the foot," he said that "turning down an insurance policy during a pandemic is nonsensical and madness."
In addition to the domestic risks, Trump's decision could have negative international ramifications, too.
"The idea behind Covax is to discourage hoarding and focus on vaccinating high-risk people in every country first, a strategy that could lead to better health outcomes and lower costs," but "U.S. nonparticipation makes that harder," the Post explained.
One potentially catastrophic scenario acknowledged by the Post is that "a U.S. vaccine does pan out, but the country hoards doses, vaccinating a large number of Americans, including those at low risk, while leaving other countries without."
Virologist Angela Rasmussen tweeted that "'America First' doesn't apply to pandemics. Viruses don't observe national borders. If anyone is at risk, we all are. Refusing to cooperate with other countries on vaccines will kill people."
On the other hand, if Covax does result in a reliable vaccine developed elsewhere in the world, the U.S. and its people could be left out of enjoying the benefits and protections of such a success.
Wajahat Ali of the New York Times summarized the Trump administration's latest decision regarding vaccines as "more self-inflicted damage."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Kenny Stancil
Kenny Stancil is senior researcher at the Revolving Door Project and a former staff writer for Common Dreams.
Provoking a flurry of critical reactions from health experts and lawmakers, the Trump administration announced Tuesday afternoon that it will not participate in the "global effort to develop, manufacture, and equitably distribute a coronavirus vaccine, in part because the World Health Organization is involved"--a decision the Washington Post said "could shape the course of the pandemic and the country's role in health diplomacy" going forward.
The purpose of the Covid-19 Vaccines Global Access (Covax) Facility is to "speed vaccine development and secure doses for all countries and distribute them to the most high-risk segment of each population," explained the Post.
While more than 170 countries are in negotiations to participate in Covax, Judd Deere, a spokesperson for the White House, told reporters that "The United States will continue to engage our international partners to ensure we defeat this virus, but we will not be constrained by multilateral organizations influenced by the corrupt World Health Organization and China."
The Post described the decision as a "doubling down by the administration on its bet" that the U.S. will win the so-called "vaccine race."
Yet by foregoing the opportunity to "secure doses from a pool of promising vaccine candidates," the Trump administration is pursuing a "potentially risky strategy," the newspaper reported.
Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University told the Post that "America is taking a huge gamble by taking a go-it-alone strategy."
Senator Chris Van Hollen tweeted that "Trump's go-it-alone strategy has already given us the highest death toll in the world. At his inaugural, he spoke of 'American carnage' and he now seems determined to make it a reality."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding called it an "absolutely terrible" decision that "will hurt us in the long run." Akin to "shooting ourselves in the foot," he said that "turning down an insurance policy during a pandemic is nonsensical and madness."
In addition to the domestic risks, Trump's decision could have negative international ramifications, too.
"The idea behind Covax is to discourage hoarding and focus on vaccinating high-risk people in every country first, a strategy that could lead to better health outcomes and lower costs," but "U.S. nonparticipation makes that harder," the Post explained.
One potentially catastrophic scenario acknowledged by the Post is that "a U.S. vaccine does pan out, but the country hoards doses, vaccinating a large number of Americans, including those at low risk, while leaving other countries without."
Virologist Angela Rasmussen tweeted that "'America First' doesn't apply to pandemics. Viruses don't observe national borders. If anyone is at risk, we all are. Refusing to cooperate with other countries on vaccines will kill people."
On the other hand, if Covax does result in a reliable vaccine developed elsewhere in the world, the U.S. and its people could be left out of enjoying the benefits and protections of such a success.
Wajahat Ali of the New York Times summarized the Trump administration's latest decision regarding vaccines as "more self-inflicted damage."
Kenny Stancil
Kenny Stancil is senior researcher at the Revolving Door Project and a former staff writer for Common Dreams.
Provoking a flurry of critical reactions from health experts and lawmakers, the Trump administration announced Tuesday afternoon that it will not participate in the "global effort to develop, manufacture, and equitably distribute a coronavirus vaccine, in part because the World Health Organization is involved"--a decision the Washington Post said "could shape the course of the pandemic and the country's role in health diplomacy" going forward.
The purpose of the Covid-19 Vaccines Global Access (Covax) Facility is to "speed vaccine development and secure doses for all countries and distribute them to the most high-risk segment of each population," explained the Post.
While more than 170 countries are in negotiations to participate in Covax, Judd Deere, a spokesperson for the White House, told reporters that "The United States will continue to engage our international partners to ensure we defeat this virus, but we will not be constrained by multilateral organizations influenced by the corrupt World Health Organization and China."
The Post described the decision as a "doubling down by the administration on its bet" that the U.S. will win the so-called "vaccine race."
Yet by foregoing the opportunity to "secure doses from a pool of promising vaccine candidates," the Trump administration is pursuing a "potentially risky strategy," the newspaper reported.
Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University told the Post that "America is taking a huge gamble by taking a go-it-alone strategy."
Senator Chris Van Hollen tweeted that "Trump's go-it-alone strategy has already given us the highest death toll in the world. At his inaugural, he spoke of 'American carnage' and he now seems determined to make it a reality."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding called it an "absolutely terrible" decision that "will hurt us in the long run." Akin to "shooting ourselves in the foot," he said that "turning down an insurance policy during a pandemic is nonsensical and madness."
In addition to the domestic risks, Trump's decision could have negative international ramifications, too.
"The idea behind Covax is to discourage hoarding and focus on vaccinating high-risk people in every country first, a strategy that could lead to better health outcomes and lower costs," but "U.S. nonparticipation makes that harder," the Post explained.
One potentially catastrophic scenario acknowledged by the Post is that "a U.S. vaccine does pan out, but the country hoards doses, vaccinating a large number of Americans, including those at low risk, while leaving other countries without."
Virologist Angela Rasmussen tweeted that "'America First' doesn't apply to pandemics. Viruses don't observe national borders. If anyone is at risk, we all are. Refusing to cooperate with other countries on vaccines will kill people."
On the other hand, if Covax does result in a reliable vaccine developed elsewhere in the world, the U.S. and its people could be left out of enjoying the benefits and protections of such a success.
Wajahat Ali of the New York Times summarized the Trump administration's latest decision regarding vaccines as "more self-inflicted damage."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.