Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced a reduction in its headquarters leadership team from 14 to 7 members along with a 25% budget cut in response to the financial issues caused by the withdrawal of funding by the United States. The WHO is striving to secure donations from private charities and businesses to make up for the budget shortfall.
Such adjustments are common for businesses and households. These cuts will only take the WHO back to the era before the global COVID-19 pandemic. However, for an organization whose budget and power have been steadily increasing, this move has sparked outcry and doomsday-like frenzy.
So far, all these issues have been considered management and budget-related problems. However, the root cause of the problem goes much deeper. It involves a more profound philosophical level, which has become evident during the crisis of the past five years. In practice, there is a significant issue: the management of a global pandemic.
Looking back, at the beginning of the global COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, the WHO played a decisive role by approving large-scale coercive measures as a response to the new virus. In fact, the WHO’s so-called “health” vision has disrupted the social and economic functioning of the entire world.
The WHO’s leadership continues to deny that the organization orchestrated the lockdown actions, but a plethora of facts presents a different picture. Let’s review together.
The WHO arranged for a global health official visit to Wuhan, including representatives from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the United States, from February 16 to 24, 2020.
On February 28, 2020, the WHO expert team released a report titled “Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)” after visiting various cities in China, listening to the Chinese authorities guide them on how to control infectious diseases through shocking authoritarian measures.
At that time, the WHO made the following assessment:
“Faced with this unprecedented virus, China (the CCP) has taken the bravest, most flexible, and most aggressive prevention and control measures in history. At the beginning of the epidemic, based on the containment strategy, preventive and control measures such as widespread temperature testing, wearing masks, hand washing, etc., were extensively carried out nationwide. As the epidemic developed and the understanding of the disease deepened, more scientific and risk-based preventive and control measures were taken, provinces, counties, and even communities targeted preventive and control measures according to their characteristics, organizational capabilities, and the spread of the new coronavirus.”
Can you imagine this? The CCP prevented people from traveling, locked them in their homes, and welded doors shut with electric welding. Yet, the WHO approved of this, stating in the report:
“Faced with the common threat, the Chinese people have rallied in unity to implement prevention and control measures comprehensively and effectively.”
And there’s more:
“On a personal level, Chinese people have shown immense courage and faith in this epidemic. They’ve accepted and adhered to the most stringent containment measures — be it suspending public gatherings, home confinement for over a month, or travel restrictions. During the 9-day on-site inspection across China, the inspection team engaged in candid exchanges with community workers, frontline healthcare workers, top scientists, and governors and mayors, their sincerity and dedication deeply moved all members of the joint investigation team.”
The release of such a document shocked me. Even revisiting this article now still feels incomprehensible. What is worrying is that the United States representative signed this document, authored by a graduate of Stanford University who still works for the WHO.
This document had an explosive impact worldwide. Mainstream media treated it like a treasure and urged governments to follow its directives. It was a turning point in contemporary history. Overnight, the WHO embraced authoritarianism as the epitome of global public health.
Except for only a few countries (Sweden, Nicaragua, Tanzania), every country echoed the sentiment. Public health institutions pressured governments to do the same. When people questioned why their schools, churches, and businesses were closed, the answer was that the authorities mandated it. And when you questioned the authorities, they inevitably cited the WHO.
Even social media began mirroring the WHO’s demands. YouTube explicitly stated that it would not allow any content on its platform that contradicted the WHO’s policy recommendations. Owned by Google, the company tweaked its search algorithm to align with the WHO’s priorities.
I know someone closely connected to these events, a scientist who openly criticized the entire “lockdown before vaccination” model for infectious disease control. I asked him about the role of the WHO. In particular, I mentioned the impact of the WHO’s February 28, 2020 report. He replied that the report was a turning point that had the greatest impact on governments’ COVID-19 response measures.
Subsequent policies rolled out globally have devastated the health of people worldwide. Absurd lockdown measures have marginalized many young people, fueled drug abuse, nurtured digital addiction, and left billions feeling demoralized. Under these policies, ordinary people realized that all their rights and freedoms were precarious and could be completely stripped away in a day.
The WHO is the mastermind behind this global catastrophe. Moreover, it did so in close collaboration with the CCP, though it seems unbelievable.
Now, the reputation of the World Health Organization lies in tatters, which is a self-inflicted wound and not surprising at all. Given the global response to recent events, it’s only natural for all countries to fundamentally rethink their relationship with this organization.
Furthermore, the current top officials of the WHO are filled with some key architects of the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic at that time. They not only fail to apologize but also resort to defensiveness. This is utterly shameless.
The only question remaining is what countries can do for themselves outside the WHO. Undoubtedly, there is still much work to be done at the national and local levels. We need a new model for disease surveillance and treatment, along with a renewed focus on chronic diseases rather than obsessively relying on drugs to solve every problem.
This is a significant gap at present: what can countries do without the WHO? This continues to be a crucial missing piece of the puzzle.
It seems that the World Health Organization will not disappear anytime soon, but it will no longer be respected worldwide as a trustworthy health advocate. Will this organization exist in the long term? I have doubts about that.
Regardless of the handling of the global COVID-19 pandemic, just like many once-revered institutions, the WHO also faces its own set of problems. Perhaps it’s time for a thorough reckoning of this organization.
作者簡介：
Jeffrey A. Tucker is the founder and president of the Brownstone Institute based in Austin, Texas. He has published thousands of articles in academia and the mainstream media, authored 10 books published in five languages, with his latest work being “Liberty or Lockdown” (2020). He is also the editor of “The Best of Ludwig von Mises” (2019). He contributes regularly to the Epoch Times, writing columns on economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture. Contact: tucker@brownstone.org.