Bill Gates writes for The Economist and I take issue with his post 1945 outlook

In an article on the Economist https://www.google.com.tr/amp/s/amp.economist.com/by-invitation/2020/04/23/bill-gates-on-how-to-fight-future-pandemics Bill Gates has written about the fight against this and the next pandemic.

Bill starts by a deeply insightful comment that the most notable part of this crisis will be what happens from here onwards.

Then he goes on to talk about vaccination technology. While being cautious to underline a late 2021 expectation on that front, he applauds it as the fastest in human history. More importantly, here and in his other recent publications Gates mentions new RNA vaccines that give the body essentially instructions on how to behave rather than adapting through the classic weakened form of virus injection. Then he goes on talking about diagnostic technology and antiviral drugs.

On the multifaceted crisis, his most important non-health technology comment is that this could be a post 1945 world order in which countries would cooperate for rational self interest directly and through global organizations.

A remarkable short piece backed extensively with material that can be found at https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/Innovation-for-COVID but I fail to agree with its conclusion even with the somber Churchill quote to give a flexibility of outcome and bestow a sense of responsibility on decision makers.

I agree with Bill that the most remarkable chapters of this crisis has not yet been written. One should mention the remarkably bad policy choices gyrating from nonsensical ignorance to politics drenched panic of many a government marks a momentous and ugly introduction to this yet unwritten inconclusive-at-the-moment history.

One of the most remarkable facets of the next phase will be the health related factors as he points out. I am not in a position to contest his expectations on that front and I deeply agree with the urgency for richer countries to help out the others in a genuine way. However, I think that he on purpose focuses on the can do positive factors of technological innovation while ignoring altogether the issues of cost, distribution, timing and effectiveness risks associated with the developments he singles out.

Where I differ from Bill Gates in a substantial way is his post 1945 reference of global cooperation and coordination. I do not wish to doubt his good intentions but they sound paternalistic – from the perspective of the less privileged, be it a country or a group of people or anyone of the great majority of ordinary individuals, this has to be backed up with clear commitments and delivery mechanisms to have an effect.

Post 1945 was shaped by the impact of the atom bomb, American power, Russian boots on the ground, Truman in place of Wilson, Clement Attlee replacing Winston Churchill, lessons of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles, erosion of classical imperialism in the face of a new efficiency led mass customization mode and the Great Depression among a lot of other factors idiosyncratic to that epoch.

Yet even then it was discussed whether to carve up Germany or to destroy its industry for good. Little did Americans pay attention to the plight of the effectively bankrupt Britain as they secured eminence for New York and the Dollar in this new era. Similarly global organizations were set up with decisive American influence such as the IMF voting quotas and the UN Security Council make up.

It was to be expected then as it should be expected now that the relative victors that emerge from a crisis will first make sure their positions are consolidated before indulging in benevolence and cooperation.

As for today’s timeline the next year and a half until potential mass vaccination will be period of intense pain on multiple fronts that can easily erode confidence in a greater sense. Even with a hope for vaccination, explicitly ruling out major detrimental virus mutations and assuming second or third waves of infections can be handled at fractional overall human and financial cost; this not so clearly defined interlude will test the political, economic and social order vehemently alongside the healthcare system in general.

I find it hard to surmise this challenge being met with global cooperation. As a naive liberal democrat I espouse the case for globalism, cooperation and coordination as it appears rational and in global self interest. However the realist skeptic in me reminds me that this rational cooperation has not been shown in most of the events in recent history from the Chinese handling of initial virus developments to Italy’s need for medical support, from millions slaughtered in African conflicts to creeping climate change risks and from reckless government deficits to even more reckless financing.

This sadly is not a post 1945 moment. Neither the damage is that great nor the global leadership and its legitimacy is in place. It might be that the end of beginning is still a good time than what is upcoming. Perhaps there is still time to improve the conclusion whenever that is but the interim looks a lot more challenging than Bill Gates lays out.

April 2020, İstanbul