Connect with us


Coronavirus: Why Singapore is so vulnerable to coronavirus spread



Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionCoronavirus: Singapore minister says the country is ‘vulnerable’

Several international cases of the coronavirus from the UK to South Korea can be traced back to Singapore and some countries are now advising against travel to the international hub. But while Singapore has been commended for its management of the crisis, the tiny city-state faces unique challenges.

Changi airport in Singapore is one of the most interconnected hubs in the world.

In fact, there’s a flight taking off and arriving every 80 seconds here, making it more connected than JFK and San Francisco in the US and Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

But the scenes there these days are very different.

Dozens of thermal scanners dot the terminals, automatically taking the temperature of passengers as they enter and exit Singapore.

Travellers are checked for fever, cold and cough symptoms – airport staff on the lookout for any sign of the coronavirus.

The country’s open borders and interconnectedness as well as its pro-active approach to testing means it has reported one of the highest tallies outside mainland China – 50.

“We are vulnerable, but we have to do everything that we can to contain that spread of the virus,” says Lawrence Wong, co-chair of Singapore’s task force on the coronavirus.

But when a virus comes to Singapore it won’t just affect this city. It can and has spread through Singapore to other countries around the world.

The meeting that infected the world

This became painfully obvious when one meeting held in a luxury hotel in mid-January spawned several coronavirus cases around the world.

More than 100 people attended the sales conference, including some from China.

About a week after that meeting, stories of confirmed coronavirus cases began popping up all over the world – from South Korea to Malaysia, the UK and even Spain.

The first Malaysian to catch the virus was a 41-year-old man who had attended the conference along with colleagues from China.

Subsequently, his sister and mother-in-law caught it from him.

Then, South Korea confirmed two infected cases of South Korean nationals who had also attended the meeting.

Singapore reported three cases: two Singaporean nationals and a permanent resident.

British national and super-spreader Steve Walsh was also at the Singapore conference.

After his meetings in the tropical city-state he flew to a French ski resort for a holiday, on his way back home.

He is thought to have infected 11 others while he was there – people who eventually flew elsewhere – leading to five cases in England, five in France, and one in Majorca, Spain.

This one meeting demonstrates how Singapore became a super-conductor for the virus.

And the worry is it’s not just one conference.

Singapore is at risk of spreading the virus precisely because it is a top destination for business meetings and international travellers.

The city-state is a big draw for Chinese businesses too, given the close economic links between the two countries – 3.62m Chinese visitors came to Singapore in 2019, making up the largest group.

Image copyright
Getty Images

Image caption

Singapore learnt lessons from the Sars crisis in 2002-3

With Chinese tourists shunning Hong Kong because of the anti-government protests there, many chose to come to Singapore over the Lunar New Year holidays – which coincided with the coronavirus outbreak.

“We are very mindful that we are indeed an open economy, we are an international travel hub,” Mr Wong says. “So we are doing all we can to contain that spread. We are putting out information in a very transparent manner and we continue to work with all health authorities overseas.”

Steps Singapore is taking

At home, Singapore is stepping up its coronavirus response by taking extreme measures.

It immediately understood the implications of spread in a densely-populated city. Indeed, eight of the 50 cases reported so far have no known links to clusters that had been in contact with Chinese travellers from Wuhan. That is likely to be of concern because it means the linking cases out there could yet pass on the illness to others.

That’s why Singapore has put in place a highly sophisticated contact tracing mechanism to hunt down every known possible contact of those infected so they can be quarantined or monitored.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionCoronavirus quarantine in US: ‘I haven’t had freedom for a month’

It was the first country after North Korea and Russia to shut its borders to China and has enforced a strict 14-day leave of absence for Chinese nationals returning from the mainland who are permanent residents or have work permits

It has a zero tolerance approach to any breaches of the measures it has put in – and this is of comfort to many Singaporeans. Employees caught breaking isolation rules saw their work permits revoked and were barred from working in Singapore permanently.

Meanwhile, their employers have been banned from hiring foreigners for two years.

Singapore also distributed masks to more than a million households and has started a government-run WhatsApp group that provides daily updates to subscribers on the number of infected.

It’s even cleared out university dorms to make room for quarantined patients, a move that was executed so quickly it took students by surprise.

Panic buying, shortage of masks

But while the measures have been applauded by international health experts, Singaporeans themselves have not always bought the government’s messaging.

Social media comments show many Singaporeans don’t believe the government’s advice to wear masks only when you’re unwell, suspecting a shortage of masks instead.

Many also complained Singapore didn’t close borders to China soon enough.

Image copyright
Getty Images

Image caption

Anti-fake news laws are being used to combat misinformation

And when authorities raised the health alert level last week, indicating the spread of the disease was severe, scores of Singaporeans rushed to the supermarkets to stock up on rice, instant noodles and toilet paper, worried the country was going into lockdown.

The panic abated only when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong released a recorded message assuring his citizens there were more than enough supplies.

This level of control is only achievable in Singapore because of its centralised form of decision-making and the massive parliamentary majority the ruling party enjoys.

There are also strict restrictions on what you can say in the public domain about the coronavirus, with the country’s anti-fake news law being used to curtail the spread of misinformation.

Lessons from Sars

Still, the main reason Singapore can move fast and quickly to fight the coronavirus is because it’s so small, and it is clear that there is a plan in place – one that has been crafted from the harsh lessons of the Sars (severe acute respiratory syndrome) crisis in 2002-2003.

“You would see your colleagues one day at lunch, and then a few days later, you would hear that they are in the ICU, or worse – dead,” says Dr Leong Hoe Nam, an infectious diseases specialist.

A Sars survivor, he was on the frontline treating people with the illness in a period that, he says, “scarred and traumatised Singaporeans”.

Some 238 people were infected and 33 lost their lives.

“We are such a vulnerable country, so small and well connected,” Dr Leong says.

“You could have a disease one day in China, or anywhere else in the world, and the next minute it could be in Singapore. Containment is actually unrealistic, I don’t think China will be able to control it.

“I think a weakened form of the virus will emerge, like a common cold. That will be the eventuality of this virus.”

Singapore has no choice but to be extra vigilant and transparent in its fight against this deadly disease. This country is dependent on the rest of the world for its economy, for its food, for its lifeline.

Its strict containment methods managed to stamp out Sars but in the last 10 years Singapore has become more – not less – integrated into the global economy, and more closely tied to China.

The stakes are much higher this time.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Experts fear false rumours could harm Chinese cooperation on coronavirus | World news




World-leading experts on the novel coronavirus have signed a statement of support for their Chinese colleagues, who are being attacked on social media and even threatened with violence as false rumours circulate about its origins.

There is a real risk that the open and transparent relationship between the Chinese scientists and their western counterparts will come to an abrupt end, impeding the sharing of data and the hunt for treatments and vaccines against Covid-19, warned Dr Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance in the United States, whose research into emerging diseases led to the identification of the bat origin of Sars, among others.

Daszak is one of 27 prominent public health scientists from nine countries who have signed the statement published by the Lancet medical journal. They include Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust in the UK, Jim Hughes, former director of the National Center for Infectious Diseases in the USA, Rita Colwell, former head of the US National Science Foundation and other leaders in infectious disease research and public health.

“We work very closely with the Chinese scientists. We have had incredible openness with the labs in China for the last 15 years, since Sars,” said Daszak. “We collaborate on what are dangerous viruses and get incredible information that helps public health around the world. That is all under threat right now.”

The Chinese scientists and their families have been abused on social media and threatened with violence. They are saying, said Daszak, “we are not going to talk, because every time we speak we get criticised and threatened”.

Conspiracy theories circulating on social media claim the coronavirus was artificially manufactured in a lab conducting bioweapons research. They are “crackpot theories that need to be addressed, but in the age of social media it is just impossible,” said Daszak.

As with the conspiracy theories around MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccination, those promulgating the rumours are in their own social media echo chambers.

And as with anti-vaxx theories, the unfounded rumours have then been amplified by mainstream politicians such as the US senator Tom Cotton, and international news platforms such as the Daily Mail.

The signatories to the statement, says Daszak, have put their reputations on the line in support of their Chinese counterparts who are being targeted. “There are scientists out there trying to save our lives,” he said. “They have been doing this for 15 years since the Sars outbreak.”

The Lancet letter is a “statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting Covid-19”.

“The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin. Scientists from multiple countries have published and analysed genomes of the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (Sars-CoV-2) and they overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife, as have so many other emerging pathogens,” it says, linking to all the scientific evidence published so far.

The director general of the World Health Organization, Dr Tedros Adhanom, has also warned against rumours and misinformation, speaking of the “infodemic” that needs to be fought alongside the epidemic.

The statement continues: “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus. We support the call from the director-general of WHO to promote scientific evidence and unity over misinformation and conjecture. We want you, the science and health professionals of China, to know that we stand with you in your fight against this virus.”

It calls on other scientists to sign up to the statement. The signatories have also launched a petition for public support.

Source link

Continue Reading


Hanau: ‘Eight dead’ in mass shooting in Germany




Police at scene of shooting in HanauImage copyright

Image caption

Police officers and helicopters are at the scene

Eight people are dead following two shootings in the western German city of Hanau, local media report.

Five others were reportedly injured after an unknown attacker opened fire on two shisha bars in the city.

The first shooting was at a bar in the city centre, while the second was in Hanau’s Kesselstadt neighbourhood, according to the reports.

Officials say the suspects fled the scene and are currently at large, Bild newspaper says.

Police officers and helicopters are patrolling both areas.

Three people were killed in the first shooting, and five in the second, regional broadcaster Hessenschau reports. The motive for the attack is unclear.

Hanau, in the state of Hessen, is about 25km (15 miles) east of Frankfurt.

Source link

Continue Reading


Tensions mount between EU members ahead of budget talks | World news




European Union leaders are preparing for acrimonious talks on the bloc’s seven-year budget, amid deepening divisions between the self-styled “frugal” club versus a larger number of countries fighting cuts.

The EU’s 27 leaders will attempt to agree a budget for 2021-27 at a special summit on Thursday, the first such exercise since Brexit blew a €70bn (£58bn) hole in the finances. “It is an exercise in the division of loss, a bit like Brexit,” a senior EU diplomat said.

European council president Charles Michel has taken the high-risk strategy of calling the special one-day summit, which could drag into the weekend if there is a chance of a deal. “We don’t have the intention to keep them imprisoned,” an EU official said. “They are there for the time it will take.”

Brussels budget squabbles are nothing new, but Thursday’s summit threatens to be the most difficult yet. The EU is seeking to spend more on tackling the climate emergency, research and border security, while facing demands to maintain spending on farmers and infrastructure for poorer member states, and dealing with the Brexit black hole. “The facts are the facts,” said the EU official. “We face a €60-75bn gap [over 2021-7] because of Brexit, we are facing new challenges and demands for which money is needed and … the member states have a tight budgetary situation. So realism is needed.”

Adding another layer of division, western countries want better oversight of EU funds, so governments that flout the rule of law, by weakening independent courts, would lose EU funds. Some claim that Michel has gone too far in weakening an original mechanism to ensure that recipients of cohesion funds act in accordance with the rule of law.

The budget battle pits the self-styled “frugal four” – net payers Austria, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands – against “the friends of cohesion”, 15 southern and eastern European countries that seek at least to preserve current agricultural and infrastructure spending.

The two largest net payers (by size of contribution) are outside both camps. France wants to maintain agricultural spending and boost EU defence funds. Germany wants a speedy agreement, to avoid having to solve the budget during EU presidency in the final six months of the year. “The Germans face a dilemma,” said the senior EU diplomat. “They don’t want to own this hot potato. But will they pay up just to avoid it?”

As well as the Brexit gap, the UK leaves another poisonous legacy: the rebate. After Margaret Thatcher secured the British rebate in 1984, some other countries were granted one, effectively a discount on their EU membership fee. While the European commission proposed sweeping away all “corrections”, Michel has proposed that five net payers should keep their rebates. “The rebate is not there just for fun. It is there, because otherwise, things would really get out of hand and off the scale,” said a diplomat from one country that gets a rebate.

Other countries, including net payers such as France, think the rebate has had its day. “Why these five countries? Just because they already had one [a rebate],” said another diplomat. “It is very unfortunate that we continued with this tinkering.”

Although the arguments are big, the sums are relatively small. The “frugal four” want to limit the EU budget to 1% of the EU’s economy, as measured by gross national income (GNI). The European commission proposed 1.11% GNI, while Michel has almost split the difference with his 1.07% compromise plan.

“We have a plan”, said an EU diplomat from one of the self-styled frugal member states. “Plan A is the 1% and the rebate. And we have a plan B which is 1% and the rebate”. The “frugal four” argue that while content to be net payers to the seven-year budget the additional contributions being sought by Michel put an intolerable burden on their taxpayers. The Dutch estimate that the proposals put forward would increase their contribution by 20%.

The battle threatens to be even more ferocious than 2013, when David Cameron helped force through the first-ever cut in the EU’s budget. EU diplomats, outside the frugal camp, argue the previous austerity budget means a low starting point. “Is there really a collective will to act?” asked one diplomat. “We are facing a failure of collective ambition.”

The diplomat said 22 countries think the Michel compromise is not enough, while five find it too much, adding: “the balance is not necessarily in the middle.”

But the frugal four insist they won’t compromise, despite being a minority: “Whose money are you going to spend? In any negotiation you need the investors on board otherwise you won’t get an agreement,” said one frugal diplomat.

Hours ahead of the summit, few EU insiders are banking on a deal. Michel has warned EU leaders in private meetings that failure to find agreement imperils current and new EU programmes due to start in 2021.

“It looks like quite a big gap to reach,” said one of the frugal diplomats. “If not, then we will have to come back a second time, which is not something special because it’s quite normal to not manage it.”

Another diplomat, worried about “unpleasant” media headlines, asked: “Do we want such a fiasco when the numbers are going to be the same in March and April?”

Source link

Continue Reading