Global healthcare is mutating. A new global health order is emerging. This order will be chiselled by the combined might of healthcare patents, solutions and research of global healthcare leaders. Not long ago, such a global order was shaped by the developed capitalist economies. But, tomorrow, the World Health Organisation (WHO), which is keen on releasing itself from the clutches of China, will shape the new global health order. The writing is there on the wall.

Gifted and Godly States

This theory gives rise to a few questions. Will the meditech leaders remain part of the new Allies in future? Will China and its cohorts be behind the new healthcare Axis? Sure, the colour and the complexion of the new global health order will be influenced largely by nations which can churn out quick pandemic responses and meditech solutions continually, pandemic or no pandemic, crisis or no crisis.

Which are these nations? They will be the ones with an army of pro-active public healthcare experts and a wide network of professional private healthcare providers. Their sizes will not matter, but their healthcare-delivery swiftness will matter in the new global health order.

The Tyranny of Supply Chains

As this new global health order takes shape, health-centric states will get active in exploring new sources for medical supplies. New supply chains will be formed for sourcing bulk drugs, ancillaries, antibiotics and supplements. Uppermost in the minds of health-centric states will be the urgent need for building strategic reserves and disruption-proof supplies of vital drugs.

Signs of this build-up happening are already visible on the horizon. For instance, recently, a programme was launched in Europe for generating round-the-year pandemic responses and for whittling down over-dependence on China. Determined, health-centric states will move ahead from here to fight supply-chain tyrannies in healthcare.

De-politicising Central Banks

Healthcare tyranny-hating states apart, nations with medical breakthroughs, rigorous testing protocols and widespread contact-tracing will jump in to determine the new health order. These competent nation states will usher in global healthcare solidarity and lay down healthcare rules for the new global health order.

Alongside, present and potential healthcare leaders among nations will move ahead to make their central banks more autonomous and de-politicised. Their central banks will be armed with authority to tap synergies between proactive monetary policies, democratic relief packages and just-in-time pandemic controls. This will call for transparency.

So, a good pandemic and healthcare management will mean managing pandemic situations democratically, sharing healthcare patents impartially, generating pandemic-prevention responses continually and building post-pandemic healthcare grids for the underprivileged relentlessly. Nations with such health management practices will make up the who’s who in the new global health order.

Isolation of China in WHO

As a new global healthcare order emerges, seismic changes will shake WHO and alter global healthcare order equations permanently. The signs are already there. America has slashed aid to the WHO. India has been elected to the Chair of WHO’s Executive Board.,Executive%20Board%20in%20January%202021. Australia has been asking for an inquiry into Covid origins. China’s isolation in the global health order will increase as days go by.

How lasting will be China’s isolation? This will hinge on how soon WHO is able to make its processes open, its budgets realistic to reflect ground realities and its activities transparent. In turn, this will depend on how willingly WHO members open up their treasuries for facilitating mandatory assessments and financing WHO’s healthcare budgets. When WHO’s members rise up to these challenges, it will mark the beginning of an era of attitudinal changes in WHO. Such attitudinal changes will usher in global healthcare consensus and co-operation.

Less Susceptible to Manipulation

To build on this healthcare consensus, WHO members should demand its headquarters be shifted from Geneva to a location in sub-Saharan Africa. More, they should insist on reorganising WHO into smaller territorial groups, with focus on vulnerable regions. This would help them address global healthcare issues better. However, territorial re-organisation alone will not be enough.

WHO needs to use Covid as a reference point for moving away from China and let Taiwan in as a full-fledged member If WHO’s non-aligned members clamour for making WHO apolitical, democratic and less beholden to aid-granting superpowers, it will signal the beginning of a real new global health order. If this happens, WHO will turn less susceptible to manipulation by a single China-like power. By assuring financial aid, particularly after America holding its aid back, China is trying hard now to annex WHO into its hegemony. Sadly for China, this will not happen now with the winds of organisational change set to blow across WHO’s Geneva corridors.

In Conclusion

When Chinese hegemonic attempts are foiled by the collective determination of healthcare democrats across the planet, a real new global health order will be birthed. The colour and complexion of such a new global health order will depend ultimately on who is the victor and who is the vanquished in the battle for global healthcare supremacy. Sure, China does not appear to be winning.