(JERUSALEM) — Israel’s defense minister apologized on Sunday for the Israeli police’s deadly shooting of an unarmed Palestinian man who was autistic.
The shooting of Iyad Halak, 32, in Jerusalem’s Old City on Saturday, drew broad condemnations and revived complaints alleging excessive force by Israeli security forces.
Benny Gantz, who is also Israel’s “alternate” prime minister under a power-sharing deal, made the remarks at the weekly meeting of the Israeli Cabinet. He was sat near Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who made no mention of the incident in his opening remarks.
“We are really sorry about the incident in which Iyad Halak was shot to death and we share in the family’s grief,” Gantz said. “I am sure this subject will be investigated swiftly and conclusions will be reached.”
Halak’s relatives said he had autism and was heading to a school for students with special needs where he studied each day when he was shot.
In a statement, Israeli police said they spotted a suspect “with a suspicious object that looked like a pistol.” When he failed to obey orders to stop, officers opened fire, the statement said. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld later said no weapon was found.
Israeli media reported the officers involved were questioned after the incident as per protocol and a lawyer representing one of them sent his condolences to the family in an interview with Israeli Army Radio.
Lone Palestinian attackers with no clear links to armed groups have carried out a series of stabbings, shootings and car-ramming attacks in recent years.
Palestinians and Israeli human rights groups have long accused Israeli security forces of using excessive force in some cases, either by killing individuals who could have been arrested or using lethal force when their lives were not in danger.
Some pro-Palestinian activists compared Saturday’s shooting to the recent cases of police violence in the U.S.
(LONDON) — Thousands gathered in London’s Trafalgar Square to express their outrage over the death of a black American while in police custody in Minnesota.
Demonstrators clapped and waved placards as they offered support to U.S. demonstrators.
The crowd gathered despite government rules barring crowds because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
(BEIJING) — The mouthpiece newspaper of China’s ruling Communist Party said Saturday that the U.S. decision to end some trading privileges for Hong Kong “grossly interferes” in China’s internal affairs and is “doomed to fail.”
The Hong Kong government called President Donald Trump’s announcement unjustified and said it is “not unduly worried by such threats,” despite concern that they could drive companies away from the Asian financial and trading center.
An editorial in China’s official People’s Daily newspaper said that attempts at “forcing China to make concessions on core interests including sovereignty and security through blackmailing or coercion … can only be wishful thinking and day-dreaming!”
Trump’s move came after China’s ceremonial parliament voted Thursday to bypass Hong Kong’s legislature and develop and enact national security legislation on its own for the semi-autonomous territory. Democracy activists and many legal experts worry that the laws could curtail free speech and opposition political activities.
China had issued no official response as of late Saturday, but earlier said it would retaliate if the U.S. went ahead with its threat to revoke trading advantages granted to Hong Kong after its handover from British to Chinese rule in 1997.
“This hegemonic act of attempting to interfere in Hong Kong affairs and grossly interfere in China’s internal affairs will not frighten the Chinese people and is doomed to fail,” the People’s Daily said.
In Hong Kong, small groups of Beijing supporters marched to the U.S. Consulate on Saturday carrying Chinese flags and signs protesting “American interference in China’s internal affair” and calling Trump “shameless and useless.”
Elsewhere in the city, youthful activists including Joshua Wong held a news conference to welcome Trump’s announcement and try to downplay any economic fallout.
Tensions between the U.S. and China over Hong Kong have increased over the past year, with the U.S. defending pro-democracy protesters who clashed with police last year and China vilifying them as terrorists and separatists.
“It is now clear that Hong Kong is caught in the middle of major China-U.S. tensions,” said Tara Joseph, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong. “That is a real shame for Hong Kong and it will be a challenge in the months ahead.”
Joseph said there were many unanswered questions about how the trading relationship will unravel and predicted that “it won’t be like flipping a switch.”
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo set the stage for Trump’s announcement by notifying Congress on Wednesday that Hong Kong no longer has the high degree of autonomy that it is guaranteed under the “one country, two systems” framework.
Trump said Friday that his administration would begin eliminating the “full range” of agreements that had given Hong Kong a relationship with the U.S. that mainland China lacked, including exemptions from controls on certain exports.
“China has replaced its promised formula of one country, two systems, with one country, one system,” he said, echoing statements by pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong.
A Hong Kong government statement accused Trump and his administration of smearing and demonizing the government’s duty to safeguard national security and called allegations that the security law would undermine individual freedoms “simply fallacious.”
“President Trump’s claim that Hong Kong now operated under ‘one country, one system’ was completely false and ignored the facts on the ground,” the statement said.
Separately, Hong Kong Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng told reporters that it was “completely false and wrong” to say the territory was losing its autonomy.
She also criticized the U.S., saying “any other state that tries to use coercion or whatever means with a view to interfering with the sovereign right of a state to pass its own national security law is arguably infringing on the principle of non-intervention under public international law, and that is not acceptable.”
Washington’s response could include U.S. travel bans or other sanctions on officials connected with the crackdown on last year’s pro-democracy protests, including members of the Hong Kong police force.
“Whatever attempt at suppressing or intimidating Hong Kong officials there may be, I think it won’t succeed, because we believe what we are doing is right,” said John Lee, Hong Kong’s secretary for security.
China decided to impose a national security law on the city after successive Hong Kong governments were unable or unwilling to do so themselves because of stiff public opposition. The one attempt to do so in 2003 was abandoned in the face of major protests.
Beijing’s resolve to move forward appears to have been hardened by the months of anti-government protests last year and a determination to prevent them from coming back this summer.
(WASHINGTON) — The European Union on Saturday urged President Donald Trump to rethink his decision to terminate the U.S. relationship with the World Health Organization as spiking infection rates in India and elsewhere reinforced that the pandemic is far from contained.
Trump on Friday charged that the WHO didn’t respond adequately to the pandemic and accused the U.N. agency of being under China’s “total control.”
The U.S. is the largest source of financial support for the WHO, and its exit is expected to significantly weaken the organization. Trump said the U.S. would be “redirecting” the money to “other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs,” without providing specifics.
The head of the EU’s executive arm urged Trump to reconsider. “The WHO needs to continue being able to lead the international response to pandemics, current and future,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said. “For this, the participation and support of all is required and very much needed.”
The WHO wouldn’t comment on the announcement but South African Health Minister Zweli Mkhize called it an “unfortunate” turn of events.
“Certainly, when faced with a serious pandemic, you want all nations in the world to be particularly focused … on one common enemy,” he told reporters.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas called Trump’s decision the “wrong signal at the wrong time.” He said Berlin would have “intensive discussions” with Washington to try to convince the U.S. government to reconsider.
“The number of people infected worldwide is increasing and the crisis is spreading,” Maas told Germany’s Funke media group. “We can’t tear down the dike in the middle of the flood and build a new one.”
In China, where the virus outbreak began, only four new confirmed cases were reported Saturday, all brought from outside the country, and no new deaths. Just 63 people remained in treatment.
After judging the situation there now safe, a chartered flight carrying 200 German managers back to their jobs landed in Tianjin, a port city east of Beijing. A flight carrying another 200 was due in Shanghai on Thursday.
“I’m really happy that business is starting again,” said Karin Wasowski, a Volkswagen employee, before boarding the flight in Frankfurt. “I’ve been working from a home office but that is, of course, something completely different to being there.”
More than 5,200 German companies operate in China, employing more than 1 million people.
“This is an important step to reconnect China’s and Germany’s economies,” said Jens Hildebrandt, executive director of the German Chamber of Commerce in North China, which helped organize the flights. “It is our common interest to contribute in helping the economy return to normalcy and pre-virus levels.”
Close to 6 million coronavirus infections have been reported worldwide, with more than 365,000 deaths and almost 2.5 million recoveries, according to a tally kept by Johns Hopkins University. The true dimensions are widely believed to be significantly greater, with experts saying many victims died without being tested.
As some countries have lowered the rate of infections, they have moved ahead with relaxing restrictions while keeping a close eye on developments.
In South Korea, credited with one of the most successful programs to fight the pandemic, 39 new cases were reported Saturday, most in the densely populated Seoul metropolitan area where officials have linked the infections to warehouse workers. Authorities have maintained the phased reopening of schools in the hope that the recent transmissions could be contained quickly.
Elite sporting events will be allowed to resume in England starting Monday, but without spectators. It paves the way for the planned June 17 return of the Premier League, the world’s richest soccer competition.
England’s deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam warned that despite the easing, the situation overall remained precarious. “I believe this is also a very dangerous moment,’’ he said. “We have to get this right.”
India registered another record single-day jump of 7,964 cases and 265 deaths. That put total cases at 173,763 with 4,971 deaths and 82,369 recoveries, according to the health ministry.
The government had been expected to end a 2-month-old nationwide lockdown, but instead extended measures in so-called containment zones — areas that have been isolated due to coronavirus outbreaks — through June 30.
However, India will allow all economic activities to restart in a phased manner outside those areas starting June 8, according to the Home Ministry. A ministry directive said that includes places of worship, hotels, restaurants and shopping malls.
Russia recorded nearly 9,000 new cases overnight. The national coronavirus task force said Saturday that 4,555 Russians have died of COVID-19 and 396,575 infections have been recorded. The relatively low mortality rate compared with other countries has prompted skepticism.
The U.S. has been worst hit by the outbreak, with more than 1.7 million cases and almost 103,000 deaths.
Cities and states are under increasing pressure to reopen, however. The latest figures from the U.S. Labor Department brought to 41 million the running total of Americans who have filed for unemployment since shutdowns took hold in mid-March.
But there have been worrying signs that as restrictions are eased, some people are not adhering to social distancing guidelines.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s office said Saturday that as things stand with America’s pandemic situation, if Trump decides to go ahead with the Group of Seven summit in the U.S. as he has suggested, she would not attend in person.
At the Vatican, Pope Francis recited a special prayer for the end of the pandemic in his biggest post-lockdown gathering to date, joined by a sampling of frontline workers.
_____
Rising reported from Berlin. AP reporters from around the world contributed to this report.
(BERLIN) — Chancellor Angela Merkel will not personally attend a meeting in the U.S. with the leaders of the world’s major economies if President Donald Trump goes ahead with it, unless the course of the coronavirus spread changes by then, her office said Saturday.
After canceling the Group of Seven summit, originally scheduled for June 10-12 at Camp David, Trump said a week ago that he was again considering hosting an in-person meeting of world leaders because it would be a “great sign to all” of things returning to normal during the pandemic.
Immediately after that announcement, Merkel suggested she had not yet made up her mind on whether to attend in person or by video conference, but her office told the dpa news agency she has now made a decision.
“As of today, given the overall pandemic situation, she cannot commit to participating in person,” her office said. It added that the chancellor would continue to monitor the coronavirus situation in case things change.
(JOHANNESBURG) — As Minneapolis burns over the police killing of George Floyd and shock and disappointment in Africa grow, some U.S. embassies on the continent have taken the unusual step of issuing critical statements, saying no one is above the law.
The statements came as the head of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, condemned the “murder” of Floyd and said Friday the continental body rejects the “continuing discriminatory practices against black citizens of the USA.”
Africa has not seen the kind of protests over Floyd’s killing that have erupted across the United States, but many Africans have expressed disgust and dismay, openly wondering when the U.S. will ever get it right.
“WTF? ‘When the looting starts the shooting starts’?” tweeted political cartoonist Patrick Gathara in Kenya, which has its own troubles with police brutality. He, like many, was aghast at the tweet by President Donald Trump, flagged by Twitter as violating rules against “glorifying violence,” that the president later said had been misconstrued.
Mindful of America’s image on a continent where China’s influence has grown and where many have felt a distinct lack of interest from the Trump administration in Africa, some U.S. diplomats have tried to control the damage.
The ambassador to Congo, Mike Hammer, highlighted a tweet from a local media entrepreneur who addressed him saying, “Dear ambassador, your country is shameful. Proud America, which went through everything from segregation to the election of Barack Obama, still hasn’t conquered the demons of racism. How many black people must be killed by white police officers before authorities react seriously?”
The ambassador’s response, in French: “I am profoundly troubled by the tragic death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The Justice Department is conducting a full criminal investigation as a top priority. Security forces around the world should be held accountable. No one is above the law.”
Similar statements were tweeted by the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Uganda, while the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya tweeted a joint statement from the Department of Justice office in Minnesota on the investigation.
We are deeply troubled by the death of Mr. George Floyd in Minneapolis. The U.S. Department of Justice is conducting a full criminal investigation as a top priority. Law enforcement officials must be held accountable in every country.
— U.S. Embassy Nairobi (@USEmbassyKenya) May 29, 2020
African officials also were publicly outspoken last month over racism in China, when Africans complained of being evicted and mistreated in the city of Guangzhou amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
At the time, the U.S. was quick to join in, with the embassy in Beijing issuing a critical security alert titled “Discrimination against African-Americans in Guangzhou” and noting actions against people thought to be African or have African contacts.
Now the Africa-facing version of the state-run China Daily newspaper is tweeting footage from Minneapolis with the hashtags #GeorgeFloydWasMurdered and #BlackLivesMatter.
This week, Latin America outstripped both the United States and Europe to officially register more daily new cases of coronavirus, earning the Americas the dubious distinction of becoming the world’s newest epicenter of the global pandemic crisis, according to the World Health Organization. The pandemic is shifting from the developed world and into the developing world—that should worry a whole lot more people than it currently does.
Why It Matters:
Latin America benefitted by being a few months behind the initial outbreak, giving it some time to register the scale of the challenge to come and prepare accordingly. Of course, different countries still took the threat more seriously than others, which can be partially seen in the case and fatality rates to date… but that isn’t the whole story. While virtually every country in the region has instituted social distancing measures to combat the health crisis and some degree of government stimulus to combat the accompanying economic crisis, the effectiveness of both ultimately depends not just on the size and quality of these emergency measures taken, but each country’s contexts (political, healthcare, social, and economic) going into this crisis. No one should be surprised that Argentina is struggling with the economics given its precarious financial position even before the pandemic, or that Peru is struggling with healthcare following decades of underinvestment in health infrastructure (despite one of the region’s most proactive responses to coronavirus).
Each of these countries has a unique story to tell. But this pandemic exposes and speeds up many of the problematic existing political trends in the region. Latin America’s new middle class, largely created by the last two decades of globalization-fueled growth and some conveniently-timed commodity super cycles, was already fed up with endemic inequality and corruption, and for years of being promised good public services that never materialized. That was a massive problem before the global economy started slowing down, and it didn’t disappear when the global economy cratered. And if you think that an unprecedented economic squeeze was what these countries needed to undertake serious reform, then you haven’t been paying attention to Latin America these last few decades.
In the early phase of this crisis, the priority has been given to the health considerations; but as the economic hits mount (and lockdowns become harder to both maintain and reinstitute, a problem not just for Latin America but many developing countries where social distancing simply can’t be enacted given population densities and living conditions in poorer areas), economic considerations will start winning out. This guarantees the region a prolonged bout with coronavirus, which will take a serious toll on both countries’ health care capacity and their economies. The same arguments currently being had over reopening and lives vs. livelihoods as in the U.S. will dominate Latin American politics for weeks and months to come.
What Happens Next:
Let’s start with the easy part—Latin American government finances are about to take a hit, both from the decline in tax revenue associated with lockdowns and the resources drawn for much-needed economic stimulus to keep economies afloat. Central banks and treasuries in Latin American countries simply can’t sustain the type of government stimulus that their European and North American counterparts can. That means more corporate and income taxes down the line, but that might not be enough to stave off defaults and sovereign credit rating downgrades—we’ve begun to see this in Argentina; Ecuador, Brazil and Mexico are also countries to watch.
A wave of defaults across developing markets will have a real impact on the state of the global economy, a greater concern when that global economy is itself under duress. It will also make it a more challenging economic environment for governments to address the legitimate criticisms of corruption, inequality, and anemic economic growth that have been driving the region’s politics for the last few years.
And this is an immediate political crisis for the region, as the continent has plenty of elections coming up over the next couple of years; if frustrations continue to run high, we may be looking at another anti-establishment wave. The flip side is that with so many elections on the horizon, very few governments will want to undertake painful economic reforms to balance budgets; it’s easier just to give into demands to spend more and figure it out later.
That’s painting in broad brush strokes; it’s also worth watching how specific countries are faring.
In Argentina (roughly 15,000 cases and 500 deaths), the country has already begun making its way through its ninth sovereign credit default. The economics are going to get worse, and being on the financial brink has real inflation threat. President Alberto Fernandez is up in polls for now in response to a strong initial health response, but that popularity will take a hit along with its economy. Just as concerning is the returning influence of vice president (and former president) Cristina Kirchner on economic talks.
When it comes to Brazil (roughly 440,000 cases and 26,750 deaths), no democratically elected world leader has been more destructive to their country’s coronavirus response than Jair Bolsonaro, which is saying something. The country has seen two capable health ministers go in less than a month, and the political crisis is further fueled by the possibility of impeachment charges against Bolsonaro for non-Covid-19 related matters. A decentralized governing system and assertive governors taking necessary measures has mitigated matters somewhat, but Brazil has some real healthcare struggles ahead, especially as testing remains relatively low and complicates reopening efforts.
In Chile (roughly 87,000 cases and 890 deaths), social unrest before coronavirus forced the government to offer rewriting the constitution in a bid to appease protestors. The strong crisis response by the government has given them a temporary boost in the polls, but the underlying issues—like widespread inequality—continue to run deep, and will reemerge as long as the economic struggle drags on. And Chileans will have plenty of chance to voice their concerns with local and national election (and that constitutional referendum) all scheduled over the next year and a half.
For Colombia (roughly 25,500 cases and 850 deaths), President Ivan Duque is up in the polls, but that boost is probably short-lived as the economy begins to tumble (exacerbated by that ill-timed oil price war). Colombia’s fiscal realities also seriously limits the amount of government stimulus that can be injected into the economy. In this type of environment, it will be hard to pass needed fiscal reforms, and could lead to an anti-establishment choice in 2022 presidential elections.
Ecuador (roughly 38,500 cases and 3,300 deaths) looks to be getting a new IMF program, but when you’re applying for IMF programs, you’re already in trouble. Ecuador will remain in a precarious economic and social condition as evinced by recent protests. The good news is that they have elections in Feb 2021… which is also the bad news depending on your political orientation.
Mexico’s (roughly 81,400 cases and 9,000 deaths) Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador started with high popularity, and his lackluster response to the coronavirus (there still remain legitimate questions of the veracity of official government tallies, and testing isn’t where it needs to be for reopening safely) will surely cost him some of that, but overall he remains broadly popular given his anti-corruption fixation and the fresh memory of his predecessors. But the Mexican economy will take a hit these next few weeks and months, which will make him feel the pressure and try to centralize more power to push through his decidedly not-market-friendly policies.
Peru’s (roughly 142,000 cases and 4,100 deaths) President Martin Vizcarra’s response to coronavirus has been admirable on the health side, but there’s only so much you can do following decades of healthcare mismanagement. And while Vizcarra isn’t responsible directly for the limited health capacity, it’s now his problem, alongside the economic crisis that typically accompanies coronavirus. All of which boost anti-establishment politicians heading into April 2021 elections.
As for Venezuela (roughly 1,300 cases and 11 deaths), it has so far had a limited coronavirus impact… which is pretty much the only thing the country has going for it at the moment (that sudden oil price war didn’t do it any favors, either). Nicolas Maduro is still likely to remain in power, but times of uncertainty make leaders grip the reins more tightly.
The One Major Misconception About It:
That Latin America is a uniformly bad story when it comes to coronavirus. Uruguay (roughly 800 cases and 22 deaths) and Cuba (roughly 2,000 cases and 82 deaths) have some of the best results when it comes to containing coronavirus, not only compared to Latin America but the rest of the world. Got to give credit where credit is due.
The One Thing to Say About It on a Zoom call:
The lives vs livelihoods debate is a real one… but for the developing world, that same debate can also be recast as having to choose between a short-term vs. a long-term crisis. As coronavirus continues to spread across developing and emerging government, more governments will be faced with no-win situations like these.
Most countries that have seen their COVID-19 cases explode in the last month—Sweden, the U.K. and the U.S.—have received fierce criticism from epidemiologists for their resistance to the tough social distancing measures necessary to stem the spread of the new coronavirus. For Peru, which now has theworld’s second-highest per capita infection rate,it’s a different story.
Peruvian president Martín Vizcarra declared anational state of emergencyon March 15, when the country had just 71 confirmed cases of COVID-19. The order closed Peru’s borders and banned Peruvians from leaving the house except to access essential goods or perform essential work. It was one of the earliest quarantines in Latin America, and came in before lockdown orders in France, the U.K., and other European countries that were at the time far ahead of Peru in their contagion curves.
But it hasn’t worked as hoped. By May 28, Peru had nearly 142,000 cases of COVID-19 and 4,099coronavirus-related deaths.It’sthe third highest toll in Latin America, a region which has become the new epicenter of the pandemic in recent weeks,led by its two largest countries, Brazil and Mexico.
Speaking on May 23 as he extended most quarantine measures until the end of June,Vizcarra saidthat Peruvians needed to do more to keep to follow the rules of lockdown and avoid “individualistic” and “selfish” behavior.
But public health experts say living and working conditions in the country of 33 million—where a fifth of people live ononly around $100 a month—has made it near impossible for many Peruvians to comply with quarantine measures. Meanwhile, some government measures have backfired, inadvertently leading to bigger gatherings of people.Here’s what to know about how COVID-19 spread in Peru, despite quarantine measures.
How did the coronavirus spread so much during Peru’s quarantine?
The virus has been spreading fast in Peru ever since the country confirmed its first case on March 6. The country surpassed 1,000 cases 25 days later, and 10,000 cases two weeks after that, on April 14, according toReuters. Some 70% of cases are concentrated in Lima, the sprawling coastal capital which is home to a third of the population. Iquitos, in the Peruvian Amazon,the world’s largest city that cannot be reached by road,has also been hit hard.
The problem is that for many in the South American country, life is still structured in a way that makes it difficult for many people to avoid close contact with others, says Ivan Hidalgo Romero, academic director at the Institute of Government and Public Management in Lima. “The government’s [quarantine] strategy works for the 30% of Peru that is employed in the formal sector, that’s been growing economically,” he says. “But there’s another 70% of Peru, which is informal, that doesn’t have access to basic services of health, education, nutrition, or to pensions and financial safety nets.”
Staying home for long periods of time is impossible for the 44% of households that do not have a refrigerator, according toa 2018 government survey, with families needing to leave the house regularly to access food. As a result, busy food markets have become a hub of infection. In late April, when authorities shut down one of Lima’s more than 1,200 food markets andperformedrapid discard testson traders, 163 of 842 came back positive.
Carlos Garcia Granthon– Fotoholica Press/LightRocket/Getty ImagesMunicipal police guard the doors of a food market closed for sanitary measures, due to Covid-19, in a neighborhood of the Lima on May 27.
Forgoing several months work is even harder for Peruvians than it has been for people in wealthier countries like Italy, China and the U.S., which have shuttered their economies. More than 70% of Peruvians work for cash in the informal sector, with little job security and no possibility of sick pay. Working from home is impossible for the vast majority. Around43% of the workforce is employed in agriculture or heavy industry,while construction and tourism make up the large bulk of the services sector. Less than a third of households have a computer.
“We’re seeing the measures designed in the capital colliding with the reality of the country,” Hidalgo says.
The government has given poorer families grants of around $220 each to help them weather the crisis—part of a massive economic response package that willcost 12% of Peru’s GDP. But critics say the distribution of that aid has contributed to spreading the virus. Most poorer Peruvians don’t have bank accounts, so recipients have needed to go to banks in person to collect their money. “This generated queues at the banks since dawn, without any respect for physical distancing,” Nora Espiritu, a doctor and health researcher wrotein The BMJ, a British medical journal,
How is Peru’s healthcare system coping with COVID-19?
It’s struggling.Ernesto Gozzer, a former director of Peru’s National health Institute a professor of Global Health at Cayetano Peruvian University, says the system is reeling from “at least 30 years” of underinvestment.“We started in this outbreak with a system that wasn’t prepared. That’s why the government tried to rapidly implement this bold quarantine order, even though it’s not an easy thing to do in Peru.”
Gozzer says the government has moved fast to boost capacity in the healthcare system. “Before February we had only around 100 ICU beds in the country. In March that doubled to 200. And now we have 1,000.” The government says they will double that number again, to 2,000, over the next month.
Health minister Victor Zamora Mesía has been blunt about the challenge facing his country. In an interview withLa Republicanewspaper, he compared Peru to Spain, a comparatively wealthy nation, about 1.5 times the population of Peru, that saw overcrowding in hospitals despite starting with roughly 8,000 ICU beds.“IfSpain was overwhelmed, imagine the effort we’ve got to make here.”
Nationwide ICU beds with ventilators in Peru’s hospitals are 85% full, according to the government. But with health care facilities unevenly distributed, some parts of the country, likethe northern Amazon region of San Martin, have just a few beds left or have run out altogether. In mid-May, the president of Peru’s Society of Intensive Care Medicine said thatICUs in Limawere no longer admitting older patients, instead taking in younger ones who had a higher chance of survival. (Otherhealth officialslater said that decisions were made on a case by case basis and not on age alone). In some places—like isolated Iquitos—a shortage of basic medicines has led toprice speculation in pharmacies.“We are at our limit,” Gozzer says.
Ernesto Benavides – AFP/Getty ImagesHealth workers protest for the lack of security equipment demanding the resignation of Peruvian Health Minister Victor Zamora with a sign reading No to the abandonment of healthcare outside the Edgardo Rebagliati public hospital in Lima on May 13, 2020.
How is the government responding to the increasing infections?
Police have been cracking down on people breaking quarantine rules, but working without personal protective equipment (PPE),thousands of officers have fallen sick themselves. Going forward, the priority for security forces will be enforcing health protocols at food markets, President Vizcarra said May 22. He also announced an extension of quarantine measures until June 30. But certain businesses, including salons and food delivery services are now allowed to reopen.
The government said May 25 that the number of new infections is leveling off in Peru, in what Vizcarra calls a “non-flat plateau”. But the following day the WHO included Peru in alist of Latin American countrieswhere the rate of infection is “still accelerating.” The number of new infections per day has topped 5,700 since May 26, with a peak of 6,154 on May 27.
Zamora Mesía, the health minister, has been clear that the economy is also a major consideration in easing quarantine measures. According to anational telephone survey, 30% of Peruvians have lost their jobs since the lockdown began.“The impact on employment and the increase in poverty and extreme poverty translate into hunger, which also affects health,” he told La Republica. “We have to restore a balance at some point, and this is the first step: we begin to cautiously move the economy, in a way that doesn’t inflict a blow on what we’ve gained in health.”
How is the rest of Latin America coping with the coronavirus?
COVID-19 was slower to spread in Latin America than in Asia, Europe and the U.S. But this month has seen a spike of cases across the region, and as of May 28 the region accountedfor 40% of daily deaths from the disease. It’s an alarming figure for a region with high rates of inequality and poverty, underfunded health systems, and highly urbanized populations.
Latin American governments have mounted drastically different responses to the pandemic. Leaders in some countries, like Mexico and Brazil, have resisted efforts to shut down the economy and performed very few tests for the virus. Other countries, from relatively well-off Chile to poorer Honduras, have implemented strict lockdowns. But even with such responses,analysts saylimits on state aid and large informal economies have made it harder for Latin Americans to abide by quarantine orders, as in Peru.
Hidalgo says the next few months may bring a moment of reckoning for the region’s governments. Many Latin American countries have experienced rapid economic growth over the last two decades, but some have failed to channel that prosperity intostrengthening the social safety nets and health systemsthat are now proving crucial to keeping COVID-19 at bay. “The pandemic is going to reveal how much governments have really invested in creating infrastructure for the poor and for the general population,” he says. “Every country will see their reality laid bare.”
When Eric Freeland, 34, started coughing at the end of March, he didn’t think much of it. But when his symptoms grew worse, Freeland’s mother began to worry. Freeland is a Native American living with his family in the Navajo Nation in the southwestern U.S., where access to healthcare is limited. He is also diabetic, putting him at greater risk to the coronavirus.
When Freeland’s breathing became short and stuttered, his mother drove him to the nearest hospital where within minutes of arriving, he lost consciousness. He awoke three weeks later, hooked up to a ventilator, from a medically induced coma.
“We’ve had epidemics before. We’ve had viruses before. In general, we’ve had a lot of things attack us before,” says Freeland, who has since recovered fully. But this is “the worst case scenario.”
The Navajo Nation, home to more than 173,000 people and spans across parts of Utah, New Mexico and Arizona, has been hard hit by COVID-19, with4,944 confirmed COVID-19 infectionsin the community and 159 deaths as of May 29. Before the pandemic, the nation already faced a host of challenges, with up to40% of people not having access to running water in their homes and 10% not having access to electricity. But despite the outbreak, the Navajo Nation has received little support from the federal government. “The efforts for battling COVID-19 were solely the Navajo Nation’s doing,” says Jonathan Nez, the President of the Navajo Nation. “There was little federal assistance when we were going through the peak of the crisis.”
The Navajo Nation is not alone. While Indigenous communities and cultures vary greatly in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, they face similar challenges when it comes to health problems and accessing medical care. The close to 10 million Indigenous people in these four countries who are descendants from the original inhabitants of their countries, havehigher rates of chronic health issuesmaking them more susceptible to severe COVID-19 cases.
And yet, they say, federal funding to these communities continues to be insufficient.The COVID-19 stimulus law passed by the U.S. Congress mandates $8 billion for relief to Native American communities, but they had to sue the Treasury Department to access the funds. The support only began reaching the Navajo Nation in mid-May, long after the outbreak had started.Delays in distributing funding left frontline workers without proper protection and forced the Urban Indian Organization to close some of its health facilities due to a shortage of critical resources.
In Canada, where the government pledged to spend $216 million to protect Indigenous Canadians (who make up4.9% of the population),experts pointed out it would only amount to only around $142 per person.The funding also does not go to Indigenous people living outside of Indigenous reserves, who make up over half of Canada’s Indigenous population. This prompted the Congress of Aboriginal People in Canada to file afederal court applicationon May 13, alleging that the government’s COVID-19 assistance is “inadequate and discriminatory.” (Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has since announced $54 million to support off-reserve Indigenous people.)
Despite the lack of government support and limited resources, Indigenous communities are implementing public health measures to effectively curb the spread of the virus within their communities. Although the Navajo Nation hasone of thehighest infection rates per capitain the United States, surpassing New York and New Jersey, the community is testing far above the national average of4.9%, with 15.64% of its population having been tested. “We are using our own sovereign ability to govern ourselves,” says President Nez.The community also implemented some of the strictest lockdown measures in the country after an outbreak began in their community, mandating that no one leaves home unless they are essential workers or there is an emergency. They say that has helped curb the spread of the virus. “The reason the Navajo Nation has managed this crisis isn’t because of the federal government,” President Nez says. “It’s because of us.”
Mark Ralston—AFP/Getty ImagesA sign promoting social distancing sits near the Navajo Nation town of Chinle during the 57 hour curfew imposed to try to stop the spread of the Covid-19 virus through the Navajo Nation, in Arizona on May 23, 2020.
Indigenous communities have long received worse care during pandemics and witnessed higher mortality rates than the rest of the population. The New ZealandMāori mortality rate during the 1918 Spanish flu was7.3 times higher than the non-Indigenous mortality rate. During the H1N1 Swine Flu outbreak in 2009, Indigenous Canadians accounted for17.6% of deathseven though they account for only 4.3% of the country’s population.
“Historically, we have not been treated well when it comes to pandemics,”says Chief David Monias of the Pimicikamak Cree Nation in northern Manitoba. “While the rest of Canada received services [during previous pandemics], we were just left to die.”
The lack of federal support for Indigenous communities is particularly dangerous, given that these communities—who face higher rates of chronic illnesses—are more vulnerable to COVID-19.
In Australia,50% of Aboriginal peoplelive with one major chronic disease such as cancer, cardiovascular or kidney disease and nearly 25% have two or more chronic ailments. “If you look at Indigenous Australians, they have onset of kidney and cardiovascular disease earlier than non-Indigenous Australians,” says Jason Agost, an epidemiologist focussed on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health. In Canada, First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities have alower life expectancythan the national average and in the United States, the mortality rates for preventable diseases such as asthma or diabetes arethree to five times higherfor Native Americans.
While experts say there is no single reason for why Indigenous populations face poorer health outcomes, Stephane McLachlan, a researcher looking into effective responses to COVID-19 for Indigenous populations says it can be explained by “the long standing impacts of colonization” which have left Indigenous people poorer on average and lacking access to nutritious food, clean water and adequate housing.
As well as higher rates of chronic illnesses that make them more vulnerable to the coronavirus, Indigenous communities often cannot implement precautionary measures to stop the virus spreading rapidly.
In Canada, at least61 First Nations communitieshave not had access to safe drinking water for at least a year. While some non potable water sources can be effective for washing hands, theCanadian governmentsays that communities on a “Do Not Use Advisory” should not use tap water for washing hands. “The government keeps telling people to wash their hands,” Meredith Raimondi, a senior manager from the United States National Council of Urban Indian Health. “But how are Indigenous people supposed to do that when they don’t have clean water?”
For many Indigenous people living in overcrowded homes, social distancing or isolation is also impossible. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are16 timesmore likely to be living in an overcrowded house than non-Indigenous Australians.
This was the case for Freeland, who like many Native Americans, lives with his extended family. Both his parents fell ill with the virus after he contracted it. “So many of us live in close quarters,” he says. “By the time my symptoms started to show, it was too late.”
Keep up to date with our daily coronavirus newsletter by clickinghere.
Indigenous people also disproportionately struggle to access medical services if they do fall ill with COVID-19. Some Indigenous communities live in remote areas where governments have notinvested in health infrastructure, resulting in people having to travel hundreds of miles to reach the nearest medical facility. In Northern Canada, many communities cannot be accessed by road and require planes or boats. Some remote communities in Australia only have a single nurse present on the ground, with doctors consulting patients over the phone.
“So many Native Americans have to drive for hours to see a doctor or get to a grocery store,” Freeland says, noting that he is lucky he lives within close proximity to hospital facilities. “I wouldn’t have made it if, like other Native Americans, I had been a little further away.”
David Wallace—The Republic/USA Today Network/Sipa USANavajo Nation President Jonathan Nez, center, and Isaiah Tsosie, right, an office specialist with the Coyote Canyon chapter, move food for distribution in Coyote Canyon, N.M., on the Navajo Nation on May 15, 2020.
For all the challenges Indigenous communities face—from a lack of federal funding to higher rates of pre-existing comorbidities that increase vulnerability to COVID-19—these communities have taken matters into their own hands. They say Indigenous led-responses are the key to mitigating the impacts of the virus.
“Money is a good start but it’s not the whole story,” says Shannon MacDonald, a Canadian Indigenous physician and deputy chief medical officer for First Nations Health Authority, a health service delivery organization in British Columbia. “It’s about communities having the ability to respond within the communities.”
BecauseIndigenous people often face systemic racismwhen seeking out medical attention, MacDonald says that “some of our community members are reluctant to access services unless it’s absolutely necessary.” Indigenous health providers, who understand Indigenous cultures, have proven to be better equipped to develop culturally-sensitive public health responses for these communities.
Indigenous-led responses have already proven to be successful, and in some cases, more effective than federal responses.
The Lummi Nation, a sovereign Native American community in the Pacific North-West have been preparing for COVID-19 since the virus appeared in China, gathering additional medical supplies including test kits and creating the country’s first field hospital. The Nation declared a state of emergency on March 3, 10 days before the Trump Administration did and has implemented health measures including social distancing, drive-through testing, essential good deliveries for the elderly and phone call consultation with doctors. The Lummi reservation, home to 5,583 people, has had40 cases as of May 2—an infection rate in line with the national average.
In Australia, Aboriginal communities have been less affected by the virus than anticipated, which experts attribute to having Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander public health practitioners and researchersplay a pivotal rolein leading response efforts that are culturally sensitive. Aboriginal-led health services ensured that public health messages were communicated to communities in their local languages. Aboriginal communities also protected themselves bycamping out in the bushto protect elders. Like manyIndigenous Nations in Canada, some Australian Aboriginal communities also shut their borders before the federal government did to avoid disease transmission.
“We can’t be waiting for the government to decide,” says Myrle Ballard, a Canadian Indigenous researcher studying effectivehealth responses to COVID-19 for Indigenous communities. “We Indigenous people know what is best for us.”
Please send any tips, leads, and stories tovirus@time.com
By passing the resolution to develop legislation to “safeguard national security” in Hong Kong in its rubber stamp parliament, Beijing initiated “political mutual destruction” for itself and Hong Kong. Beijing’s plan to rein in Hong Kong—defying a worldwide outcry—is revenge on the democratic movement in Hong Kong which has been protesting since March 2019. It is also retaliation against the U.S. for passing the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act 2019.
On 27 May, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a statement certifying that Hong Kong no longer warrants differential treatment under U.S. law. At the same time declaring, “No reasonable person can assert today that Hong Kong maintains a high degree of autonomy from China, given facts on the ground.” He also filed a report to the Congress, in accordance with the Act, grounding from the fact that Beijing assert its right to interpret all laws in Hong Kong in November 2019; the Liaison Office’s claims that it was exempted from Article 22 of the Basic Law in April 2020; and the national security law announced last week. He further added that the deployment of tear gas and the mass arrests and the dispatching of the People’s Armed Police into Hong Kong, all constituted a violation of the Basic Law and the Sino-British Joint Declaration. President Donald Trump will later have to invoke the U.S.-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 to respond with appropriate measures, possible approaches range from economic relations, to restrictions on immigration to cultural and educational exchanges.
The U.S. response to the events over the last year signifies that it has shifted from an appeasing “change for trade” to an unyielding foreign policy towards China. From the 1980s, the free world had been hoping China would liberalize and democratize itself as trade rapidly grew between it and the world. It was a false belief that opening up the Chinese market would lead to opening up of the Chinese mindset. However, such optimism has proved to be in vain.
The special arrangement under which the U.S. treats Hong Kong differently from China on politics, trade, commerce, and other areas, stems from Hong Kong maintaining sufficient autonomy. As a holdover from its time as a British Colony, Hong Kong has a different legal and economic system. Now as Beijing tightens its grip over the city, depriving Hong Kong of its last little bit of freedom and autonomy, the basis of that special agreement is compromised. Therefore the U.S. has every right to change its policy towards Hong Kong, regardless of Beijing’s snarling about “foreign intervention” and its attempts to use Hong Kong as a bargaining chip.
Beijing has long taken advantage of Hong Kong to gain access to foreign capital and other state-of-the-art technology products. Hong Kong, enjoying special legal treatments, is the favourite channel for mainland Chinese to ship funds offshore in defiance of Beijing’s control on cross-border capital flows, taxation and corruption inspections. Distrusting their own currency, many Chinese find the Hong Kong Dollar, which is linked to the U.S. Dollar, to be more reliable. Chinese companies have swarmed into Hong Kong, pretending to be “Hong Kong companies,” amid the Sino-American trade war. Leaders in Beijing continue to reap the benefits of this arrangement while the freedoms of Hong Kongers deteriorate.
Roy Liu—Bloomberg/Getty Images.A couple across from illuminated skyscrapers on Victoria Harbor in Hong Kong on May 28, 2020.
Hong Kong has long proven its strategic role in the China-U.S. dynamics. The city can be used as a loophole against the free world if the special status remains unchanged while the city is totally subject to authoritative China. The act of inserting this new national security law in a top-down manner now risks all the benefits Beijing could and did exploit, but it is all of Beijing’s own doing. Beijing is dragging Hong Kong into a “political mutual destruction” that will costs us a high price, yet the hit is necessary.
As Hong Kong loses its special status, Beijing will lose its trump card against the free world. In response to American pressure, Beijing’s short-term reaction will be more forceful. It will further crack down on the political protest movement— targeting activists, electoral candidates and legislators who have participated in international advocacy. Yet, China’s economy will be hindered in the long run, even though China will surely pretend that it is “business as usual.” It remains to be seen how severe Washington’s measure regarding Hong Kong will be, but the global repercussions facing China in the aftermaths of the pandemic will also have a serious impact on its economy.
The U.S. termination of the city’s special status is aimed at stopped Beijing’s rogue behaviour and encouraging it to reverse course on Hong Kong. The prosperity of Hong Kong is based on its autonomy, not Beijing’s dictatorship. Beijing decision will drive our city into dire straits in all aspects—the stock market may plunge, unemployment numbers may rise and foreign businesses may flee. But at the same time we must acknowledge there is no room for a prosperous Hong Kong without adequate amount of freedom and human rights protection.
