NEW DELHI: Remember Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organisation, accused of helping cover up the origins of the coronavirus in China? Well, he’s on track to win a second term, unusually without the support of his own country Ethiopia (because he accused it of human rights violations in Tigray).
How did this come to pass? Dr Tedros’ tenure at the WHO has been marred by controversy over his agency’s handling of the pandemic, the delay in notifying the spread of the virus and the reluctance to probe the origins of the virus in China. The accusation is that he deferred to Beijing as quid pro quo for the latter’s backing in May 2017 that saw him take over as WHO chief. A case of ‘you scratch my back, I scratch yours’.
Two other points are worth noting: China (at least publicly) is not supporting him this time but the heavyweight European Union (EU) is, with Germany and France tweeting their support. Did China and the EU strike a deal on Tedros? It’s plausible given the huge trade they enjoy (EU-China $700 billion, Germany-China over $250 billion, France-China $63 billion). The EU has described its relations with China as “principled, practical and pragmatic, staying true to its interests and values.”
The other point in favour of Tedros, he had no competition, meaning there was no second candidate in the fray when the deadline ended last week. So Tedros had a walk through! This is odd. One would presume that the post of WHO DG is a highly coveted one, yet there was no competition. So did China pull back knowing the EU is supporting their candidate? Perhaps. Or did China not support him because of its close ties with Ethiopia and the considerable investments it has made there? We may never know. But with him in the saddle at the WHO for five more years, the truth about the Coronavirus may never emerge.
There is a larger issue here: the overweening presence of Chinese nationals in key UN agencies. Take the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), which is headed by Houlin Chao, a Chinese national elected secretary general in 2018. His four-year term ends later next year and he could seek a second term. Sitting where he is, Chao who has been in the ITU for many years, is in a position to push China’s telecom standards and equipment into countries where communications are seriously deficient, as in Africa. This is despite worldwide concerns that Chinese equipment contains malware.
Chinese nationals also head the Food & Agriculture Organisation, UN Industrial Development Organisation and the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). In the case of the last, the current secretary general is from Colombia but his predecessor was Dr Fang Liu from China, the first woman secretary general who had two three-year terms that ended in May this year. U.S. media reports say one of her first acts after taking over was to exclude Taiwan from the body, shutting it out from all discussions on aviation safety and other important matters.
According to a report by Gateway House, the Mumbai-based think tank, Chinese deputies are present in nine other agencies including the IMF, World Bank, UNESCO, International Maritime Union and World Meteorological Organisation. Where it does not have people, it uses its deep pockets to build influence, as in the international Labour Organisation, UNDP, Universal Postal Union and so on.
China was also able to leverage its influence to enter the UN Human Rights Council last year in April despite the widely reported controversies over its treatment of Uyghurs and Tibetans.
Fox News claimed recently that the number of Chinese nationals working in UN agencies was over 1,300, an increase of 68 per cent in the ten-year period ending in 2019. Since 2015, China has sponsored 32 UN Junior Professional Officers and 590 other professional staff. These numbers are less than U.S. nationals in the world body but they are seen to reflect a greater effort to exert influence over UN agencies (27 countries take part in the programme, not India).
The odd point here is that the leading donor to the United Nations is the U.S., which heads only three bodies: World Bank, World Food Programme and UNICEF.
But as the Gateway House report notes, “China’s contributions to UN organizations have risen steadily over the past decade making it the second largest contributor. Importantly, almost 90 per cent of voluntary contributions to the WHO are from the EU nations but unlike China, the U.S. and EU are not focused on placing their nominees in pivotal positions.”
Case in point: last year China offered to relinquish Cameroon’s debt if they supported Beijing’s candidature to head the World Intellectual Property Organization! The U.S. was able to prevent that, ensuring a Singaporean got the job.
The Gateway House report warns that China has a measured strategy in place to influence or control UN agencies. It shows the inadequacies of the world body in the face of “China’s aggressive geopolitical and economic machinations”.
Some lessons for India: a first step would be to increase the funding for UN agencies. India has emerged as a major philanthropic contributor with successful programmes directed at Afghanistan and Africa. This strategy needs to get sharper with the focus on India broadening its diplomatic footprint and leading its own multilaterals (such as the International Solar Alliance with the aim of mobilizing $1000 billion by 2030 for massive deployment of solar energy; or the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, a trillion-dollar initiative to raise awareness, generate knowledge, enhance use of codes and specifications while building such infra etc).
A more recent initiative is Prime Minister Modi’s call for an international project ‘One Sun One World One Grid’, leveraging time zone differences across geographies to ensure 24×7 availability of solar power “as the sun never sets for the entire earth”.
Important that India draws in as many countries as possible (even China), for in numbers lies strength and the ability to influence and mould behaviour and policies. This is a long-term effort. More immediate goals would be to challenge China’s stewardship of the ITU when elections are held next year and mobilise opinion to revisit the UN charter and reassess its relevance and efficacy.
[/vc_column][/vc_row][/tdc_zone]
