COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International

Cooperation?
Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar1

Abstract
The unsolved riddle of interstate cooperation lies at the
core of subject matter of international relations theory.
Many believe that shocks e.g. wars, natural disasters and
pandemics serve as the triggers of international
cooperation. Basing on these assumptions, after the
outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, many advocates of liberal
internationalism were optimistic about seeing enhanced
cooperation among states in order to respond to this
unique threat. This paper, however, argues that contrary
to such assumptions, COVID-19 failed to serve as a catalyst
for international cooperation. Despite being hit by a
common enemy, states not only failed to mute their
conflicts rather in many regions conflicts were intensified
and faults lines became more visible than before. The
paper digs into the questions that why the neoliberalism
fails to seize the opportunity and what factors led to the
dominance of state behaviour dictated by neoclassical
realist assumptions. It also investigates that how the
future can be foreseen in the context of this scenario. The
paper justifies the central preposition using the framework
of neoclassical realist theory of international relations.

1
Ameer Abdullah Khan is Lecturer at the Department of International Relations,
National Defence University (NDU), Islamabad, and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar is a Professor
at the Department of International Relations, National Defence University (NDU),
Islamabad.
43
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

Key Words: COVID-19, Pandemic, International Cooperation, Conflict,

Neoliberalism, Neoclassical Realism

Introduction

It was in December 2019 that the first cluster of novel COVID-19 was
reported in China and within 10 weeks the virus had spread to 113
states and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organisation
(WHO). The new virus named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) later renamed as Coronavirus Disease-19
(COVID-19) became the biggest news flash of year 2020. The virus gave
a tremendous blow to health care systems of a majority of the states
and caused worldwide economic meltdown because of various
measures taken by the states to stop the spread of the virus. As the
pandemic erupted states quickly enforced strict preventive measures
that included closure of educational institutions, public places,
community centers, tourist spots, non-essential services &factories,
observing strict social distancing rules, and shutting down
transportation etc. However, despite all the efforts the virus led to over
259 million infections and over 5.1million deaths worldwide by the end
of November 2021.2 This put immense pressure on public health
system in many states including the USA, Germany, France, Italy, India,
and Spain; incurring losses worth several trillion dollars.3

2
Celina Tabor, “Troubling COVID Variant on the Rise in South Africa; millions of
Americans return to holiday travel: Latest update,” USATODAY.com, November 25,
2021, Available at:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/11/25/covid-thanksgiving-
travel-vaccinations-tests-travel/8755086002/ (accessed on 27 November 2021).
3
Tom Inglesby, “Make Pandemics Lose Their Power,” in Covid-19 and World Order:
The Future of Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation, eds. Hal Brands and Francis J.
Gavin (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2021), 132.
44
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

As the virus spread, it became evident that the whole world was facing
a common enemy for the first time in modern human history
threatening socio-economic and political fabric of states. From
powerful to weak, from rich to poor, from developed to undeveloped,
every state was threatened alike by the devastation caused by the
virus. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates,
global economy shrunk by 4.4% in year 2020.4 The level of economic
destruction caused by lockdowns can be gauged from the fact that
2009 global economic crisis impacted the world economy by mere
0.1%.5 Aviation industry, oil sector, hospitality and tourism industry,
retail sector, cruises and shipping industry, and industries depending
on transnational supply-chain have been worst affected by the
pandemic in the first 100 days of the pandemic.6

Currently states are presented with an arduous task of

containing the spread of COVID-19. Public health care system in many
states is under immense stress and hospitals flooded with patients
have reached to the maximum capacity. Economic conditions have
been aggravated as a consequence of strict lockdown imposed to stop
the spread of virus. This has also put a stringent barrier against global
forces of economic integration and cooperation thus triggering the
debates on de-globalisation and retreat of economic interdependence
etc. Furthermore, development sector has faced a serious blow
globally. The new mutated strains of virus are more lethal, infectious,

4
“COVID-19 Pandemic Hamstrung Global Economy In 2020; IMF Estimates 4.4%
Contraction,” Business Today.In, December 31, 2020, Available at:
https://www.businesstoday.in/current/world/covid-19-pandemic-hamstrung-global-
economy-in-2020-imf-estimates-44-contraction/story/426598.html (accessed on 4
June 2021).
5
Ibid.
6
Matthew C. Klein, “These Industries Were Hardest Hit in the First 100 Days of The
Pandemic. Where They Are Headed Next,” BARRON’S, June 21, 2020, Available at:
https://www.barrons.com/articles/covids-first-100-days-hit-these-industries-hardest-
heres-how-they-could-recover-51592643600 (accessed on 14 May 2021).
45
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

and resistant against vaccines, thus making its containment even more
difficult. This, if keeps going, can result in decline in life expectancy
thus creating more challenges for states in meeting the UN Sustainable
Development Goals(SDGs). Moreover, some states under the pressure
of economic slowdown lifted lockdowns resulting in more disastrous
outcomes for public health and economy as the subsequent waves of
the virus were more lethal which required equally stringent preventive
measures and controls. So far, the vaccine has created the ‘haves’ and
the ‘have nots,’ where most of the people will have to wait till long in
order to get the required dosages. Many scholars claim that the
pandemic has started reversing the economic growth and interstate
cooperation that kick-started after the Cold War under liberal trade
regimes. The corporate sector has globally responded to the pandemic
by laying off work force and imposing salary cuts to minimise their
losses. The unemployment crossed an unprecedented level
accelerating internal migration, and increasing pressure on job
markets, healthcare systems. Aid packages announced by most of the
governments benefited the corporate elite more than the real
deserving people belonging to the lowest strata of societies. The
pandemic also impacted food security of states by threatening the
supply chains globally and pushing people towards bulk buying. The
trust deficit was widened between states and masses creating political
and security fault lines and threatening democratic structures.

In this backdrop, international cooperation seemed a likely way

out for states. The situation demanded states to join hands and lay
down a framework for cooperation and respond collectively to the
common enemy. However, the unfolding events made it clear that
international cooperation was not possible. States instead got on to
the path defined by the pursuit of self-interest and narrowly defined
version of security. The following passages first describe the causes of
neoliberal optimism and then analyze the empirical evidence that led

46
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

to the death of neoliberal hope. The discussion helps comprehend the

reasons behind the demise of neoliberal hope by analysing the scenario
through the lens of neoclassical realism.

Methodological and Theoretical Approach

This study is based on the deductive reasoning where the assumptions

of neoliberal and neoclassical realism theories are applied on the case
of COVID-19 pandemic to assess the validity of both the theories.
Keeping in view the emerging and continuously developing nature of
the subject, mainly secondary data has been used. Multiple recent
developments have been made part of the reasoning process to
substantiate the argument. The paper uses the theoretical framework
of neoclassical realism to criticise the neoliberal assumptions about the
likelihood of cooperation between states amid COVID-19 pandemic. A
brief analysis of the theoretical framework for the paper is given
below.

Neoliberalism criticises political realism for its undue emphasis

on power politics-based nature of international relations. It refuses to
accept ‘the tunnel view’ of international politics presented by realists
where egoism, survival and power dominate the political arena.
Neoliberals agree with one central preposition of neorealists where
they see international structure as anarchic lacking an overarching
authority to impose the rules of business. According to neorealists and
realists, the absence of functional differentiation and varying
capabilities of states push them towards power politics eliminating all
the chances of international cooperation and lasting peace.
Cooperation, if takes place between states, is temporary mainly aimed
at gaining time for own capacity building and done under the constant
aim of cheating at the availability of opportunity. Neoclassical realists

47
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

take into consideration the domestic political factors too along with the
assumption of anarchic international structure.

Four imperatives of international cooperation, as highlighted by

neoliberals are: increased interdependence,7 increased transnational
interactions,8 spread of democracy,9 and establishment of international
institutions.10 These four conditions not only counterbalance the
condition of anarchy but also maximize the incentive for international
cooperation by reducing the chances of cheating by the states and by
enhancing the profits of cooperation. If states are made a part of
international cooperation, they adapt to the new mode of working by
seeing the real benefits of international cooperation under the
principle of reciprocity.11 Furthermore, increased cost of war had made
states realize the negative consequences of power-based policies thus
pushing them towards cooperation.12 Lastly, neoliberals cite several
issues of transnational nature such as trade, human rights,
environment, and disease etc. that cannot be dealt by a single state
and international cooperation becomes prerequisite to solving them.

7
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence (New York:
Longman, 2012), 265.
8
Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane, “Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy:
Strategies and Institutions,” Cooperation under Anarchy, Vol. 38, no. 1 (1986), 248.
9
Georg Sorensen, Democracy and Democratization: Processes and Prospects in a
Changing World (Colorado: Westview Press, 2007), 153.
10
Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane, “Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy:
Strategies and Institutions,” Cooperation under Anarchy, Vol. 38, no. 1 (1986), 253.
11
Charles Lipson, “International Cooperation in Economic and Security Affairs,” World
Politics, Vol. 37, no. 1 (1984), 18.
12
Arthur A. Stein, “Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World,”
International Organization, Vol. 36, no. 2 (1982), 311.
48
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

Neoliberal’s Optimism

It became evident shortly after the outbreak of pandemic that for the
first time in recent history, human beings were facing a common
enemy. Thus, there was an immediate rise in the hopes for global
cooperation. The pandemic being a shared threat for all seemed like
breaking security dilemma that results out of traditional security
matrix. Every state’s health system was under maximum pressure and
hospitals were being filled with patients. World-wide lockdowns
triggered an economic crisis where millions of people started losing
their jobs while billions faced salary cuts. Across the globe, states were
facing a challenge of saving people from premature deaths, provision
of essential medical equipment and personal protective equipment
(PPEs), and essential medicines to the populations. Availability of face
masks, doctors’ scrubs, hand sanitizers, and ventilators became the
pressing issues that could have only been resolved by increased
international cooperation at regional and global level. Hence, the
looming economic disaster rekindled the liberal dream of international
cooperation as a response to the pandemic by the world community.
Before going into further discussion, it is important to theoretically
understand the basis of neoliberal optimism for international
cooperation.

Neoliberals were quick to assume that outbreak of a COVID-19

like pandemic will serve as a catalyst for international cooperation. It
was expected that states will unite to help each other in order to
control the spread of the pandemic that will serve as a win-win
situation. Similarly, modern complex network of global supply-chain
will put a premium on interstate cooperation. States were expected to
lower trade barriers to compensate for losses inflicted by the lockdown
globally. Furthermore, functionalists were hoping to aid agencies and
scientific community to come to the forefront in the battle with

49
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

governments at their back. Knowledge, material, and medicine sharing

being the immediate need gave rise to the hopes that states will
coordinate their policies under different regimes like the EU, ASEAN,
SAARC, and G-7 etc.13 Similarly, high expectations were attached to the
role of international organisations particularly the UN and its subsidiary
body WHO. Furthermore, neoliberals also expected the conflict to be
muted globally in response to the pandemic expecting the states to act
rationally. Therefore, the UN Secretary-General António Guterres
issued a public appeal for a global ceasefire in March 2020 and
repeated the call in September 2020 during 75th United Nations
General Assembly Session.14 Thus, the whole liberal hope can be
summed up in a sentence, “When the fates of states are bound
together, they must cooperate or pay a very high price.” Basing this
assumption, the overall hopes for enhanced international cooperation
were skyrocketing in the early phase of the pandemic.

The Death of Hope

In the initial phase of the pandemic, a ray of hope was witnessed, as

discussed earlier. In this phase, scientific community seemed eager to
cooperate transnationally and to share knowledge and experiences.
WHO played the anchoring role before being politicised and
undermined. Research communities initially appeared to be
determined to soften the secrecy protocols and enable maximum

13
“Covid-19: Transnational Cooperation and the Epistemic Community,” The
Takshashila Institution, February 12, 2021, Available at:
https://takshashila.org.in/covid-19-transnational-cooperation-and-the-epistemic-
community/ (accessed on 15 June 2021).
14
António Guterres, “Now Is the Time for a Collective New Push for Peace and
Reconciliation,” United Nations: Global Ceasefire Video, 1:54, March 23, 2020,
Available at: https://www.un.org/en/globalceasefire (accessed on 4 June 2021).
50
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

knowledge sharing.15 But as soon as the first wave of pandemic hit

different states with full force, it swept away all the liberal hopes for
international cooperation. The following part of the paper analyses the
collapse of hopes citing different events.

a. Virus and the Role of Media

The first shock to the hopes of cooperation came in the very early
phase of the pandemic when the virus was used by some western
media outlets and political leaders to defame China. Initial coverage of
the virus spread in Wuhan directly targeted the Chinese regime. In
addition, coverage by several western media outlets was criticised by
social media users for being racist in content.16 This kind of response
was in sheer contrast to the role expected by liberal media. Thus, at
the very beginning of the crisis, the whole issue was turned into a
political battle and instead of humanitarian outlook; it became an issue
of national image and defamation of others. Resultantly, when the
virus further spread, it faced a lack of unity in the world community
that was imperative for posing a solid response. It also affected the
attempts to convince the masses for respecting the lockdown and
wearing masks. Anti-mask and anti-lockdown protests in the US were a
definite outcome of such coverage by the white-dominated media.
Hence, the liberal dream of international cooperation was shattered at
the very beginning. The negative role of the media still remains
persistent mostly with targeting the vaccines of one state or another by
negative framing. Mostly, the efficacy of the Chinese Vaccines is being
questioned by the media in western states.

15
Matt Apuzzo and David D. Kirkpatrick, “Racing for Cure, Scientists Unite in Global
Effort,” New York Times, April 2 April 2020.
16
“Global Media Accused of Bias in Coverage of Coronavirus,” U.S. News & World
Report, February 7, 2020.
51
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

b. Role of the Political Leadership

In addition to the media, political leadership in the western world also

played its role in crushing the dream of cooperation. The US President
Donald Trump also became part of the politicisation of the pandemic
by calling the virus as ‘China Virus’17 and ‘Kung Flu.’18 He also called on
the world to hold China responsible for the outbreak of the pandemic.
He used the platform of the UNGA to bash and blame China for the
outbreak of the virus and went a step ahead by withdrawing the US
funding for the WHO. Similar remarks continued to pour in from the US
administration as well as from other western leaders.19 The virus
outbreak also resulted in criticism of Chinese regime by the UK
parliament members attracting condemnation from the Chinese
ambassador in London.20 In addition, response of the UK Prime
Minister Boris Johnson was also sluggish and casual until he himself got
affected by the virus and was moved to Intense Care Unit.21 As the
virus reached to western states, the anti-China sentiments converted
into pandemic politics creating ‘us vs. them’ divide that translated into
divergent response. This resulted in a lack of cooperation and poorly
coordinated policies by the major powers. This onslaught by some
western leaders was responded by the Chinese leadership too. Chinese
president Xi Jinping denounced such narrative and called for enhanced

17
Allyson Chiu, “Trump has no qualms about calling Coronavirus as ‘Chinese Virus.’
That’s a dangerous attitude, experts say,” The Washington Post, March 20, 2020.
18
“President Trump calls coronavirus ‘kung flu,’ BBC News, June 24, 2020.
19
“China’s UK Ambassador Prefers Collaboration to ‘political Virus’ of Scapegoating,”
CGTN, May 6, 2020.
20
Frank Langfitt, “How the Coronavirus Has Strained U.K.-China Ties,” NPR, May 22,
2020.
21
Sam Knight, “Boris Johnson may be a victim of his slow response to the
coronavirus,” The NewYorker, March 27, 2020.
52
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

cooperation over COVID-19.22 President Xi also declared that China had

no intention of fighting either a cold war or a hot war with any
country.23 He reiterated the stance that China was following a peaceful
policy and had no malignant designs either overt or covert against any
state.24 Later on, the UN Secretary General António Guterres in a
message to the members of the UN stated that everything must be
done to avoid a new cold war and warned that the world was moving
in a very dangerous direction.25 Here, the use of term cold war
indicated that the states failed to respond to the crisis in a cooperative
manner. Contrary to the increased international cooperation, conflicts
were further intensified, and states used COVID-19 crisis to settle
political scores with their competitors.

c. Role of the Western Powers

Another argument that explains the failure of the liberal hopes of

cooperation is the absence of leadership role by any of the world
powers. The US President Donald Trump remained stuck in his
‘America First’ policy refusing to play the leadership role.26 Despite
being able to provide many states with the much-needed help in the
early phase, the US was more concerned about stigmatizing China.
There was a hope of change in the US policy outlook vis-à-vis COVID
after inauguration of President Joe Biden as Trump’s successor. This
change of power in the US significantly transformed domestic response

22
“Xi denounces stigmatization of COVID-19 virus, politicization of origin tracing,”
XinhuaNet.com, October 30, 2021, Available at: http://www.news.cn/english/2021-
10/30/c_1310280215.htm (accessed on 2 November 2021).
23
“At U.N., China’s Xi says no intention to fight ‘a Cold War or hot one’ with any
country,” REUTERS, September 22, 2020.
24
“China: Trump 'Spreading Political Virus' at United Nations,” Al Jazeera, September
23, 2020.
25
“UN General Assembly: Guterres warns against ‘new cold war’,” DW, September 22,
2020.
26
“China: Trump 'Spreading Political Virus' at United Nations,” Al Jazeera, September
23, 2020.
53
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

of the US in the fight against the virus. However, the external outlook
did not witness any formidable change. Biden administration continued
the imposition of ban on the export of COVID-19 vaccine related raw
material.27 In April 2021, a temporary ban was imposed on the export
of other medical equipment.28 In addition, the EU also suffered from
lack of coordination and its member states did not stand united.
Rather, every state immediately adopted the egoistic outlook. The
travel restrictions within the EU were a nightmare for the architects of
free movement of goods, labour, services, and capital. Italy criticized
the EU for not coming to its aid in the need of hour as Germany, France
and other states, imposed restrictions on the export of medical
equipment.29 When Italy called for extra supplies of medical
equipment, including masks, Germany and France, alongside other EU
members, imposed limits on the export of PPEs. This was not only a
shock to those who see interstate cooperation oozing out of economic
interdependence but also to those who see democratic states and
societies cooperating with each other because of shared identity,
norms, and ideology. During the pandemic, the democracies were,
instead, fighting over necessary supplies. The most significant of these
events was G-7 Summit 2021. It was expected that members of G-7 will
be able to announce a substantial aid and relief package for the
developing world in the context of pandemic. Though the members
agreed to provide 870 million dosages of vaccine to COVAX

27
Simrin Sirur et al., “US Embargo on Exporting Covid Vaccine Raw Materials and How
It Could Impact India,” The Print, April 21, 2021.
28
“U.S.A. Temporarily Bans Export of Medical Equipment,” Bansard International,
April 20, 2020, Available at: https://www.bansard.com/en/news/usa-temporarily-
bans-export-medical-equipment (accessed on 5 June 2021).
29
Edy Cohen, “Coronavirus Reveals the Lack of Unity at the EU and the UN,” BESA,
April 14, 2020, Available at: https://besacenter.org/coronavirus-reveals-the-lack-of-
unity-at-the-eu-and-the-un/ (accessed on 13 May 2021).
54
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

programme30 but keeping in view the magnitude of the issue and

hoarding of vaccine by rich states, this seems a trivial contribution.
Particularly, with ‘the return of the US’ on the centre stage of G-7 and
world politics, much more was expected than the contribution
promised. Ms. Henrietta Fore, Executive Director of UNICEF,
commented on this contribution by acknowledging the announcement.
However, it was further added, “Much work remains to continue to
ramp up both the amount and the pace of supply to the rest of the
world, because when it comes to ending the COVID-19 pandemic, our
best interests and our best natures align. This crisis will not be over
until it is over for everyone.”31 This statement shows how the onus of
responsibility still remains on the major powers.

d. The false Hope of Muted Conflicts

In addition to this, the hopes of seeing interstate conflicts being muted

also died down during the pandemic. Any rational analysis will
advocate for states muting their existing conflicts to coordinate asolid
response to COVID-19 like pandemic. The same was probably assumed
by the UN Secretary General who repeatedly appealed for a global
ceasefire. However, his appeals like the hopes for international
cooperation were all wasted as conflicts were rather intensified. Some
of the major examples of this include India-China conflict in Ladakh
region, Armenia-Azerbaijan war in Nagorno-Karabakh region, and
India-Pakistan conflict on the Line of Control (LoC) in disputed territory
of Kashmir. In May 2020, when the world was busy fighting the
pandemic, the Galwan Valley in Ladakh started boiling. The conflict

30
“Landmark G7 agreement pledges 870 million COVID-19 vaccine doses,” UN News,
June 13, 2021, Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1093932
(accessed on 23 July 2021).
31
“G7 Announces Pledges of 870 Million COVID-19 Vaccine DOSES, of Which at Least
Half to Be Delivered by the End of 2021,” UNICEF, June 13, 2021, Available at:
https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/g7-announces-pledges-870-million-covid-19-
vaccine-doses-which-least-half-be (accessed on 5 July 2021).
55
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

escalated when over 20 Indian soldiers were killed in a border clash

though both sides claimed no use of firearms.32 The presence of
extremist populist government further intensified the conflict where
nationalist sentiments were used by the BJP regime to divert the
masses’ attention from its then failing response to the COVID-19
spread. As the pandemic got out of Indian government’s control when
over 100,000 cases and near 1000 deaths were daily reported, the
government’s stance against China became harder. The same
sentiments were used against Pakistan as well and violations of LoC
ceasefire by Indian forces reached to an unprecedented level.33
Meanwhile, the delivery of French made fighter jets Rafale was used by
the Indian government and media to create new hype and to flame the
fire of jingoism against Pakistan and China. Furthermore, Armenia and
Azerbaijan went into a war in September 2020 that continued for
almost six weeks.34 The conflict left thousands of soldiers and civilians
killed and injured from both sides. Over a 130,000 Armenians were
resettled after a peace deal brokered by Russia.35 Even though warring
nations and their supporters were all suffering from the pandemic, the
hopes for international cooperation could not materialise. The states
continued fighting and did not lose the opportunity to use force when
it was deemed appropriate and profitable by their decision makers.

e. Vaccine Diplomacy

Diplomacy, as conventionally understood, is the art of negotiations.

After the discovery of COVID-19 vaccine, it was used as a tool of

32
DH Web Desk, “India-China Conflict: A Timeline of Key Events,” Deccan Herald, July
18, 2020.
33
Islamuddin Sajid, “India violated ceasefire 1,595 times in 2020: Pakistan,” Anadolu
Agency, July 7, 2020.
34
“Fighting erupts between Armenia, Azerbaijan over disputed region,” Al Jazeera,
September 27, 2020.
35
“UNICEF says over 130,000 displaced in Karabakh Conflict,” Anadolu Agency,
October 28, 2020.
56
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

diplomacy. On diplomatic as well as media forums, vaccine was used to

project self-image and undermine that of the competitors. India was
initially more vibrant than others to use vaccine diplomacy for the
projection of its image as a new power on the stage of world politics.
Therefore, an overambitious program of vaccine export was started
without a rational assessment of the domestic needs. This greed led to
the later chaos during the second wave of pandemic in India where the
vaccine export program had to be downgraded to a greater extent. This
attempt for self-projection contributed to the global worsening of the
pandemic and emergence of the most lethal Delta Variant. Similarly,
when it came to the approval of vaccine, a clear divide was witnessed.
Chinese and Russian vaccines faced the most resistance from the
western world unveiling the true faces hidden behind the veil of
international cooperation. In addition, non-western US allies are still
reluctant to accept vaccines developed in China and Russia despite
their approval by the WHO.

a. Vaccine Nationalism

Vaccine Nationalism is another major development that has

undermined the hopes of international cooperation. The news of
successful test of vaccine took the world with a pleasant shock as it was
earlier expected that it will take 2 to 3 years to develop an effective
vaccine. Vaccine politics emerged since the very beginning contrary to
the hopes of cooperation. The US, and Germany blamed Russian36 and
Chinese37 hackers for launching cyber-attacks on their research
laboratories to steal vaccine secrets.38 In addition, the level of
knowledge sharing that was being expected by the scientific

36
Chris Fox and Leo Kelion, “Coronavirus: Russian SPIES Target COVID-19 Vaccine
Research,” BBC News, July 16, 2020.
37
“Hackers 'Try to Steal COVID Vaccine Secrets in Intellectual Property War',” The
Guardian, November 22, 2020.
38
“COVID: Cyber attacks Target Vaccine Developers,” DW, December 5, 2020.
57
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

community was also not offered as the state-led politics overshadowed

this domain too. The politics and blame game did not stop even after
the claims of invention of vaccine by the US, the UK, Russia and China
separately. As soon as the vaccine came out, rich states were quick to
stock it e.g. Canada was blamed for stocking five times more vaccine
than what was needed for its whole population.39 As the rich states
have already started immunisation campaigns, the fear of creation of
haves and have nots of vaccine is looming.40 The COVAX (COVID-19
Vaccines Global Access) programme, directed by Global Alliance for
Vaccine Immunisation (GAVI) and WHO, was designed to ensure
equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccine. However, the program was
not very effective. States have been repeatedly criticising the
programme for delay in supply of the vaccine. The programme was
able to distribute meager 31 million doses to 57 countries by the end of
March 2021.41 The accelerating second wave of pandemic in India
created further problems for COVAX as the Serum Institute of India
shifted all the focus on provision of vaccine for domestic consumption.
Another example of vaccine nationalism was witnessed when EU-
AstraZeneca conflict arose on the issue of vaccine distribution.42 EU
states blamed Anglo-Swedish firm for preferring UK and not fulfilling its
commitments towards the EU. Keeping in view these trends, one has to
look at the pessimistic estimate made by the People’s Vaccine Alliance.
It was stated in one of their reports that by the end of year 2022 only
10% population of the poor states will be vaccinated.43 The WHO also

39
“The Haves and Have Nots of the COVID-19 Vaccine,” Al Jazeera, August 9, 2021.
40
David Pratt, “How the Covid-19 Roll-out Is Leading to Haves and Have-Nots,” The
National, January 03, 2021.
41
Emma Farge, “COVAX to set aside 5% of vaccine doses for emergency stockpile,”
REUTERS, March 23, 2021.
42
“EU Lawsuit against AstraZeneca Begins in Brussels Court,” Al Jazeera, April 28,
2021.
43
“Campaigners Warn That 9 out of 10 People in Poor Countries Are Set to Miss out
on COVID-19 Vaccine next Year,” Oxfam International, July 12, 2021.
58
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

warned that such a trend will render all the efforts of curtailing the
pandemic spread as futile and economic restrictions will have to
continue. The emergence of vaccine nationalism is worrisome seeing
the state behaviour since the onset of the pandemic where despite
rational demand for cooperation, there has been inclination towards
competition and suffering more losses. If same behaviour persists in
case of vaccine, the world may face even more difficult times.

b. The Role of International Organisations

Lastly, the role of international organisations shrunk as they failed to

play the role that is expected from them through the lens of neoliberal
institutionalism. The WHO was enjoying relatively higher degree of
respect before the pandemic outbreak. However, it was soon
surrounded by controversies and was blamed by the western media
and some politicians for hiding Chinese negligence in reporting the
pandemic.44 The WHO also came under fire for not including Taiwan in
its reports that discussed pandemic response strategies by states.45
Furthermore, the worst time for WHO came when it was directly
criticized by the US President Donald Trump on the following points:

 First, it was blamed for the lack of efficiency in collecting and

vetting data about the pandemic.
 Second, the organisation was criticised for the tweet in
January 2020 where it quoted Chinese authorities’ claim that
the virus transmission through human contact was not taking
place.
 Third, the organisation came under fire for opposing travel
restrictions.

44
“Coronavirus: Trump accuses WHO of being a ‘puppet of China’,” BBC News, May
19, 2020.
45
“Taiwan says WHO not sharing coronavirus information it provides, pressing
complaints,” REUTERS, March 30, 2020.
59
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

 Fourth, it was blamed for being too much under Chinese

influence.
 Fifth, it faced criticism for late declaration on COVID-19 as
pandemic when it had already spread to 130 states.
 Lastly, the COVAX programme, that was aimed at ensuring
equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccine proved inefficient
as it failed to stop the major states from hoarding the
vaccine.46

Though the investigation of each of these claims will require a

separate study to explain but regardless of the veracity of these claims
what came out as reality was undermining of the prestige and value of
the UN in general and WHO in particular. The US withdrew its funding
for WHO and declared to divert it for other causes.47 In addition to
WHO, SAARC can also be quoted as an example of institutional failure
where India-Pakistan conflict overshadowed the proceedings of SAARC
Corona Virus Conference in March 2020. Pakistan used the platform to
criticize Indian government for lockdown in Kashmir that had been
continuing since August 2019. Pakistan raised serious concerns about
the wellbeing of Kashmiris confined to their homes since the unlawful
abrogation special status of Kashmir. India, in response sabotaged the
conference completely.48 Further, Pakistan also boycotted the meeting
of SAARC Trade Officials that was held in April 2020.49 Apart from WHO
and SAARC, EU also found itself in hot waters due to the pandemic. As
explained earlier, Italy’s complaints against EU significantly
46
Jenny Lei Ravelo, “Is COVAX Part of the Problem or the Solution?,” DEVEX News,
March 11, 2021, Available at: https://www.devex.com/news/is-covax-part-of-the-
problem-or-the-solution-99334 (accessed on 26 June 2021).
47
“Coronavirus: Trump moves to pull US out of World Health Organization,” BBC
News, July 7, 2020.
48
Syed Baqir Sajjad, “Pakistan Rejects Indian Charge of Politicising SAARC Video
Moot,” DAWN, March 21, 2020.
49
Kamran Yousaf, “Pakistan Boycotts India-Sponsored Meeting of SAARC Trade
Officials,” The Express Tribune, April 8, 2020.
60
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

undermined the prestige of the Union and strict lockdowns brought

trade in EU to the lowest level in decades. The lack of coordination
was also visible and EU regulations were conveniently ignored by the
member states. EU failed to timely announce aid package for its worst
affected members thus pushing many states towards announcing
budgetary stimulus programs of their own. Even EU leaders were found
in reluctance regarding issuance of euro bonds for provision of timely
assistance to EU members in need.50 This led to the widening of trust
deficit among EU members bringing bad news for the economic union
after the Brexit shock.

Explaining the Lack of Cooperation

Neoclassical realism theory of international relations provides an

explanation of the failure of states in displaying a cooperative
behaviour during the pandemic. According to realist assumptions, the
basic principles of international politics remain unchanged no matter
what the circumstances. For neoclassical realists, international
relations always present an arena of competition where self-interest
and survival guide policies of the states. This anarchic international
structure coupled with domestic power struggle leaves the states with
the only option of self-help and the same was reflected throughout the
pandemic. Neoclassical realism being pessimistic about the prospects
of interstate cooperation are not surprised by what happened during
the pandemic. They consider international organisation virtually
ineffective, and their success is completely dependent on the sweet-
will of the member states. Therefore, EU, WHO and SAARC, as
discussed earlier in this paper, failed to play the role that was
anticipated by the liberals. In addition, the distinction between high

50
Edy Cohen, “Coronavirus Reveals the Lack of Unity at the EU and the UN,” BESA,
April 14, 2020, Available at: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/coronavirus-
reveals-the-lack-of-unity-at-the-eu-and-the-un/ (accessed on 13 May 2021).
61
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

politics and low politics also became evident when conflicts were
intensified in many regions instead of being muted. Furthermore,
neoclassical variant of realism also explains the impact of domestic
politics on foreign policies in anarchic structure. Thus, the policies of US
president Donald Trump in the election years are better explained. As
the whole efforts of countering the pandemic were state led, it justifies
neoclassical realist emphasis on the primacy of states in international
relations. The realist explanation of egoism also justifies the imposition
of ban by EU members on medical equipment export even though Italy
and Spain were in dire need of such equipment. This behaviour along
with the emergence of vaccine nationalism also undermines liberal’s
emphasis on normative aspect of international relations. Lastly,
neoclassical realist argument about deglobalisation and resurgence of
state control also justifies the imposition of strict lockdown by states.
Across the globe, movement of goods, capitals, services, and labour
was restricted and even within the cities; states were confining the
citizens to their homes. This is all what realists will call a spectacular
display of state power reminding the globalists of the fact that states
and international borders are still relevant.

Conclusion & Way Forward

Though COVID-19 pandemic serves as an ideal model for

implementation of neoliberal assumptions that necessitate
international cooperation in the time of such crises, yet the actual
behaviours of states were in sheer contrast to this. In actuality, the
COVID pandemic not only failed to trigger international cooperation,
but the conflicts were rather intensified and even militarized during
this time. Furthermore, the politics of pandemic revolved around self-
centrism by states. Therefore, the neoclassical realists’ understanding
of international politics can help in finding a way out in this situation.
As this theory explains the causes of non-cooperation among states
62
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Lost Opportunity for International Cooperation?

during COVID-19 pandemic, the same theory can be used to explain a

likely way forward. Domestic politics have been at play during COVID-
19 pandemic as right-wing populist governments in states like the US,
India and Britain tried to downplay the domestic factors behind the
devastation caused by the coronavirus and highlighted the
international factors as the major causes and reasons. However, all this
could not save these states from the enormous losses in terms of lives
and economy. Now when the pandemic is here for over a year with the
fourth wave wreaking havoc in many states, the complete vaccination
continues to be a difficult task to accomplish, as many states have
become aware of the failures of their governments’ approaches. This
became more evident in the US where Donald Trump had to leave the
presidency after the elections. Similarly, egoistic policies of these states
have come under heavy criticism with potential to undermine the soft
power of these states. In this situation, the demands from domestic
politics appear to be changing. Thus, the change of demands will
necessitate a more cooperative policy outlook from the states. India,
particularly after falling victim to the ruthless third wave of the
pandemic has received sympathy and support from different states
including Pakistan and China who are seen by India as adversaries.
Similarly, owing to its failure in managing the pandemic, right wing
Indian government will seek something to sell to the domestic voters.
Thus, the impression of increasing soft power in the shape of
cooperation can serve as an immediate remedy to boost the ego of
ultra nationalist voters. However, in the midst of the new wave of the
pandemic, even such a move seems an unlikely scenario in the future.
The US and European states are also being criticised domestically for
their self-centred approach in responding to the pandemic. As the
immunisation programme in these states will spread and vaccine
production capability will increase, more benefit sharing can be
witnessed. So, the window for international cooperation in the future
is better explained by the neoclassical realists’ assumptions. As per
63
JSSA Vol. VII, No.2 Ameer Abdullah Khan and Dr. Shaheen Akhtar

estimates, COVID-19 is likely to continue in year 202351 till the

immunisation of a majority of world population. Thus, one can expect
the world coming back to normal. However, it will leave the states with
the re-endorsement of the lesson of self-help.

51
Emily Goddard, “Coronavirus may be with us until 2023, expert warns,”
INDEPENDENT, September 6, 2020.
64