Origin of the COVID-19 pandemic Crisis
The world is currently grappling with a humanitarian and economic crisis due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, the disease has forced countries worldwide to take drastic measures to protect not only their economies but also their national interests. Some countries have totally locked down their economies while others are imposing curfews and quarantine protocols to stop the spread of the disease. The U.S. is no exception as COVID-19 numbers have steadily grown since its first case on January 19, 2020. However, the people have been critical of the country’s response. The government has contradicted with scientists on the strategies required to tackle the problem. Even though the book “Terror, Security and Money” indicts the government for allocating massive resources to counter future threats to national security, the current lethargic response by President Trump’s administration indicates that the government should address the COVID-19 aggressively and with urgency to protect American lives.
Origin of the Crisis
China recorded a cluster of pneumonia cases on December 31, 2019, in Wuhan city. The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission reported a total of 27 cases, and seven were severe. However, the initial cause was unknown, but the cases were all linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The government decided to close down the market on January 1, 2020, and started collecting samples that tested positive for the novel COVID-19 virus. Some of the common symptoms associated with the disease were dyspnoea, dry coughs, and fever. Radiological findings also indicated that there were bilateral lung infiltrates. Later on January 9, 2020, the CDC in China reported that the causative agent for the disease was the novel Coronavirus, and the genome sequence was made public. By January 20 this year, the disease had spread to three other countries: Japan, South Korea, and Thailand, and all the cases were exports from China. After the gravity of the situation became more apparent, China decided to locked down Wuhan and prohibited travel into and outside the city. The disease now got global attention after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 an international public health emergency on January 30, 2020. However, it was not until March 11, 2020, that the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic.
The U.S. declared its first case on January 19, 2020, in Washington. A 35-year-old man returning from Wuhan, China, brought in the virus. The country was already aware of the disease, and the state of Washington had put measures to contain the virus. However, the federal government was slow and indecisive in addressing the threat. From the onset, the administration has been skeptical about the seriousness of the pandemic, and it encouraged Americans to act normally. Unfortunately, the country has experienced tens of thousands of infections and deaths, forcing the government to revise its strategy in tackling the pandemic. However, the U.S. strategy in curbing COVID-19 has been incoherent with different States being at odds with the Federal government concerning issues such as lockdowns.
Pandemics, like terrorism, has been treated as a national security threat. Infectious diseases, if unchecked, have the capability of crippling economies and causing civil unrest. In this context, COVID-19 cases have threatened U.S. national security due to its catastrophic impact on the economy. There has been a loss of millions of jobs while air travel and trade have been adversely affected. Also, protests by civilians against lockdown rules have made it difficult for medical professionals and government agencies to curb the pandemic’s spread. The increasing cases of infection are stretching medical resources to the limit, and if the cases continue to rise exponentially, then the country might experience a humanitarian crisis. Therefore, the government must take deliberate and radical measures to curb the spread of the virus for its national interests and security.
Strategy
The response of the U.S. to the pandemic has contrasted significantly with its contemporaries in the Western world. While countries such as Germany locked down their economies to stop the spread of the virus, the U.S. has been reluctant to take such radical measures. This disjointed response is a result of the complex political system in the country. The states enjoy some level of autonomy from the federal government. Therefore, individual states could adopt a different strategy for dealing with the pandemic compared with the federal government. For example, the state of Washington had already put in place measures to contain and prevent the spread of the virus after its discovery in Wuhan. In contrast, the federal government chose to dismiss the severity of the pandemic and was reluctant to adopt proactive interventions to counter the pandemic. Therefore, the strategy of the federal government at the time exuded willful blindness.
Even though President Trump and his administration had been given adequate information about the pandemic and its consequences on public health by various international and domestic agencies, the government was slow to react. Even after the discovery of the first case on American shores, President Trump and other government officials publicly voiced their skepticism that the disease will have any consequential impact on America and its economy. Besides, the government recently claimed that they were not given adequate information by the Chinese government and criticized the efforts of the WHO to contain the pandemic. The federal government’s reaction appears to be an attempt by President Trump and his administration to absolve themselves from any blame over the current crisis.
Unfortunately, inaction by the government made the country with the highest infections in the Western world. Failure by the federal government to take early warnings seriously has proven to be a missed opportunity to prevent deaths and the spread of infection. Therefore, the federal government’s slow response has exacerbated the pandemic’s impact on the county, compromising its national security through the social, economic, and political implications.
Terror, Security and Money
In the book “Terror, Security, and Money,” analyzes the response of the U.S. after the 9/11 attacks. After the terror attack, the country invested trillions in surveillance and other counterterrorism strategies to secure American shores from future terrorist attacks. However, the book’s authors John Mueller and Mark Stewart, make trenchant criticism of the increase in domestic homeland security expenditure. They state that the government used scaremongering tactics to overblow the threat of terrorism, consequently allocating massive resources to counter the perceived risk of terrorism. However, the U.S. has experienced minimal threat from foreign terrorist groups post 9/11, indicating that investments in securing national security bore fruit, guaranteeing the security and safety of the American public.
The argument raised by Mueller and Stewart is also relevant in the government’s response to COVID-19. However, in this case, the government the government was not as aggressive in allocating resources and formulating policies to mitigate and prevent the spread of the pandemic. There are accusations of President Trump’s administration failing to support states in the fight against COVID-19. In addition, the government downplayed intelligence reports on the issue, and it has not scaled up measures to address such pandemics if they occur in the future. On the contrary, the mainstream media has reported that the President is rolling back some of the recommendations and response strategies established by the former regime. As a result, more Americans are under threat of infection and death, and the American economy is on a downward spiral due to this novel virus.
Counter Argument
Mueller and Stewart argue that the response of the government after the 9/11 attacks was tantamount to overkill. However, the success of the aggressive counterterrorism strategy adopted during the period is evident, as attacks by foreign terrorists have been minimal. On the flip side, lack of bold action during the COVID-19 crisis has exposed Americans to the adverse consequences of the pandemic and affected efforts to reopen the economy. If the government took a similar approach as President Bush after the 9/11 attacks, the country would likely have more success in stopping infections and deaths. The current mishandling of COVID-19 resonates with Mueller and Stewart’s premise that the government misused resources by overfunding its new national security strategy. Their proposition is dangerous since it encourages the government to be complacent even in the face of crisis. However, the government cannot go wrong by overpreparing for a crisis. On the other hand, lack of preparation will end up costing American lives and livelihoods, as is the case with the current crisis. Therefore, the government should be encouraged to spare no resources when preparing for and mitigating any threats to national security.
Conclusion
COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on American citizens and the economy. However, the federal government’s response to the global pandemic has been the subject of criticism, as the number of deaths and infections continue to rise. Even though Mueller and Stewart’s book “Terror, Security and Money” posits that the government misused resources in response to preventing a repeat of 9/11, their theory has been debunked by the current response to COVID-19. Therefore, the lack of a robust policy to counter the pandemic’s threat has exposed millions of Americans to avoidable economic and social challenges.