Covid-19: A Watershed Crisis for the EU

When the annals of the year 2020 are eventually written, it's inevitable that the terms 'pandemic', 'virus', 'lockdown' and 'social distancing' will feature heavily in these accounts. And there we were thinking it would be Season 4 of the Brexit Saga.

Nobody, certainly not in the EU, envisaged the scenario we now find ourselves in. We don't know when exactly this virus first emerged in Wuhan, China. Perhaps it was as early as November last year. The WHO was informed of a mysterious new virus, 'a novel coronavirus' by China on New Year's Eve. The WHO issued a statement on the 9th of January which didn't suggest any need for drastic measures at an international level. Indeed, the statement concluded by saying:

'WHO does not recommend any specific measures for travellers. WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions on China based on the information currently available.'

Meanwhile, life went on in the rest of the world largely unperturbed, even as it became apparent throughout January that the virus had indeed spread. Here in Ireland, our news was dominated by General Election coverage. Nine years on from the 2011 General Election that saw Fine Gael rise to power, it was clear that, despite a buoyant economy, people were fed up with the unsustainable cost of living, horrendous traffic congestion and a housing market that was dysfunctional and inaccessible. The United Kingdom officially withdrew from the EU on Friday night, January 31st. Such was the emphasis on Brexit Day that many didn't notice that the WHO had declared the virus a global emergency.

Ireland went to the polls on Saturday, February 8th. At no point during the campaign did anyone think that this mysterious virus in China would in any way impact on our lives here. It never came up in any of the debates. In fact, our general preparedness for a potential pandemic wasn't envisaged at any level. Ireland drafted a National Pandemic Influenza Plan in 2007. It is patently clear that the document is not up to date, and indeed, gives contradictory advice to what we have become accustomed to hearing. The document recommends stockpiling and washing hands for 10-15 seconds, when current guidelines recommend washing for 20-30 seconds. The plan was meant to be 'a live document', to be updated as new viruses and knowledge emerged. In the thirteen years since it was published, Swine Flu (2009-2010) and Ebola (2013-2016) broke out, but the plan wasn't updated.

While Ireland discussed coalition options and the UK embarked on a new phase in its history, we now know that the novel Coronavirus had already arrived in Europe and beyond. It still seemed distant though, there might be cases here and there but it would be controlled. We'd manage. It seems so naive now, with the benefit of hindsight, that there wasn't a greater sense of urgency about the situation. Alarming stories were coming from China, then Iran, and yet Europe seemed to flounder. It was almost as though Europe had to prove it needed to intervene, by allowing the situation to get worse and react rather than preempt the crisis it was facing and enact proactive measures. On February 21st, Italy reported its first cases of local transmission. Within less than two weeks, the focus had shifted from China to Iran and then to Italy. Lombardy, one of Italy's wealthiest regions containing Milan, the financial hub of Italy and the heart of European fashion, was now the heart of an emerging European health crisis.

The Nation State vs European Union

As the situation in Italy became more dire, nations started taking unilateral action. Rather than witnessing a collective European approach to deal with Covid-19, countries began to look inwards for solutions. People turned to their governments rather than to Brussels and before long, a haphazard and disjointed series of announcements, statements and measures emerged from European capitals. Some countries didn't seem perturbed by the statistics of rising cases and mortality figures in Italy, nor the images of coffins and desolate streets in towns like Bergamo and Cremona.

Alarmingly, the UK, the Netherlands and Sweden took an entirely different approach to containing the virus. Contradicting WHO advice, these three northern European nations listened instead to national experts who advocated a strategy of 'herd immunity'; allow the virus to 'run its course' among the population, perhaps shielding the most vulnerable if it comes to it, but the general population will be exposed and supposedly build immunity if the virus appeared again.

As the British, Swedes and Dutch dithered with their theory of herd immunity, other EU and EEA nations took matters into their own hands. Schools and universities started to close throughout Europe, but not in sync. Italy had already been well into its lockdown by the time France and Spain decided to close schools. Ireland announced that schools would close on March the 12th; Northern Ireland and the UK didn't shut theirs until March the 20th. The Schengen Area was gradually placed in hibernation unilaterally: Denmark shut its borders on March 13th, quickly followed by eight other states, despite opposition from experts in Germany and Sweden, and indeed the European Commission itself.

The EU Leaders held video conferences on the 17th and 26th of March. At that stage, most EU member states had already closed their borders and taken measures first implemented in China, such as enforcing lockdowns, halting air travel and ramping up testing. To say the EU institutions did nothing is incorrect and unfair; among a number of measures announced, the EU relaxed strict budgetary rules so member states can borrow to invest in their healthcare systems. The EU also relaxed state aid rules to support SMEs, and provided a fund for research to develop a vaccine.

However, it's quite clear that the role of the State has trumped that of the EU thus far in this crisis. Rather than turning to Brussels, citizens have turned to their national governments for solutions. Perhaps the emphasis on the number of cases on a country-by-country basis, as depicted by John Hopkins University, is one reason for this. Yet longstanding differences among member states in fiscal policy and a north vs south/centre vs periphery attitude has emerged that does not reflect well on European solidarity. The question of how to deal with the enormous debt this health and economic crisis will cause has become a serious impediment to collective EU action on this problem. Countries like the Netherlands and Germany oppose the idea of a collective shouldering of debt without preconditions, with the Dutch Government causing fury by questioning why countries such as Italy and Spain hadn't the financial resources to handle an economic shock. As of the time of writing, the question of 'corona bonds' has yet to be decided.

In the longer term, there has been no discussion about how the EU, or indeed the world, will cope with the virus until a vaccine has been created. If, say in two months time, Ireland, Malta and Denmark have managed to contain the virus domestically but Italy and Germany haven't, how do member states decide when to open their borders? How do they ensure the 14 day quarantine of people entering a country is enforced without some kind of monitoring device or compulsory stay in a supervised setting? Will we need Ellis Island style quarantine facilities at every port of entry? The situation is even more complex at the heart of Europe where people living in the borders of Austria-Czechia-Slovakia or Luxembourg-France-Germany crisscross multiple borders throughout their day-to-day lives. Will Schengen and indeed GDPR regulations for people travelling from state to state have to be temporarily suspended? These are questions that have to be decided at European level.

The chaos witnessed in recent weeks when borders were suddenly closed and the confusion as to why there was such a mismatch in policy from state to state cannot be allowed to manifest itself again as we cope with this crisis. Each member state will suffer the effects of Covid-19, but it will vary in severity, time and the human and economic toll in different ways. We have to accept that it's not going away anytime soon and start to plan for the immediate future. This will be a watershed moment in human history and some things will permanently change. It will take years for some industries like air transit to recover, and they likely will never reach the peak that they had only a month ago. How we work, where we work, how we travel, how we communicate complex scientific information and how we prepare for global crises will all change after this passes. It will pass, but the EU needs to plan for the next steps ahead, which may require a totally new approach as to how the EU works.

The risks of dithering, panicking and not preparing are stark. Already we are witnessing Hungary introduce rule by decree which threatens the legitimacy and principles of the EU if it is allowed to continue. The EU needs to revive its principles again and believe in its ability to solve problems, rather than waiting for China or the USA to solve them for us. The EU needs to be a success in a time of crisis like this. With solidarity and a belief in its own convictions, it can be.