China and the war of words

The US President Donald Trump has said his administration is conducting investigations into China’s “accountability” for the virus and considering seeking damages. It is possible that Trump is upping the ante to deflect attention from his government’s handling of the disease – which included a bad gaffe about disinfectants – in what is after all an election year.

But other voices have joined the fray – among them, those in Germany, France, Britain and Australia.

It is not clear how damages can be extracted from China, which seems at this juncture more like a wishful dream rather than a real possibility.

But Beijing’s response to calls for investigations into the origins of the virus – which have swung between extreme aggression and playing a virtuous victim – is finding little support outside its zealous ideological base. For one, the evidence is mounting that controls of information slowed the Chinese response to the coronavirus outbreak, thereby assisting its spread in other parts of the world. For another, decisions such as revising the number of deaths in Wuhan, up by 50 per cent, has consolidated suspicions of suppression of data, despite the claim there was no concealment and that this was done “based on facts”.

Its strong exchange with Australia, which also called for an investigation into COVID-19’s origin, signalled the power it wields today on the global stage; at the same time, it reflected a strategy of being combative in its bid to control the global narrative about the pandemic. China’s ambassador in Canberra responded by suggesting there could be consumer boycotts of Australian produce, hinting at the possibility of economically coercive steps. And the state-run media had a field day, with the influential Global Times, regarded as the voice of the government, suggesting that Australia is like “a bit of chewing gum stuck on China’s shoes. Sometimes you have to find a stone to rub it off.”

As the world’s principal manufacturing hub, Beijing understands it is too enmeshed in global supply chains; it will take a lot for the world to economically disentangle itself from China, even more for countries such as Australia, which owes a considerable amount to China for its economic well-being. But it remains to be seen how some countries in the world, particularly China’s nervous neighbours, view a belligerent Beijing in a post-pandemic world. Already, there is a huge buzz that India may be a big beneficiary in a world that is looking for alternative investment destinations. Whether this is much too optimistic, only time will tell. But it will remain wishful thinking unless New Delhi clears up investment bottlenecks and makes huge improvements in infrastructure.