The Australian public broadcaster ABC has additional details:
Prime Minister Scott Morrison is seeking to build an international coalition to give the World Health Organisation (WHO) — or another body — powers equivalent to those of a weapons inspector to avoid another catastrophic pandemic.
Mr Morrison has pitched the proposal to several world leaders in recent days, including United States President Donald Trump, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron.
There has been widespread international concern that China not only downplayed the seriousness of the virus, but had undue influence over the WHO, which did not declare the outbreak a global pandemic until March 11 — a fortnight after Australia declared it a pandemic.
The Government is somewhat dubious of the chances of reforming the WHO, which gives veto power to each of its 194 member states.
International law expert Don Rothwell said without China’s support, reform of the WHO faced considerable hurdles and suggested a better alternative might be using international treaties.
Do it that way, for sure…one thing I do think, if China gets pressed on this and they should be, they could act a bit dangerously. Just my view. In fact, I think they should be isolated from the community of nations.
I and others don’t consider The Duran a reliable source but Macron not happy with Australia was in the ABC link above and I wouldn’t be surprised China would say that about Australia (or any country) because most countries find the communist regime an abomination.
Yes it is a good move by Australia & I guess the thinking has to be;
Do we try fix the WHO or do we abandon it?
Yes I agree that this is extremely dangerous for Australia in particular as it could lead to a new type of cold war in the South-Pacific. With Australia heavily dependent on the USA alliance there is even more need for concern as the two great superpowers of USA & China already don’t like each other.
Australia has been duplicitous as it allies itself with China in an Economic sense & also allies itself with USA in a Political sense, in fact they will wear the main brunt of any conflict in the region.
As for Australia’s approach of bilateral engagement with other Western democracies has to be applauded, however restraint & caution must be exercised as too much pressure on China by rallying Western democracies to your cause may push the world closer to conflict.
I think we have to be inclusive with China even though I partially agree there is no room for differential economic trading systems on our planet. This is where western capitalism rubs up against eastern capitalism & causes way to much friction.
To be inclusive with China may be the only thing that prevents any type of war with them, lets never forget the red nations that will come to China’s defense. To exclude China & kick them out or severely impede their ability to function within the Western market place will most likely bring humanity much closer to WW3
I doubt Australia needs any lecturing from one of the cruellest regimes on the face of the earth.
He has urged Australia’s Federal Government to put aside “ideological bias and political games”, and to focus on the welfare of the Australian people and global public health security.
They did focus on the welfare of Australians. They didn’t cover up. They didn’t destroy evidence of the virus. The few blunders in Australia are being investigated. The nerve of a regime that got angry when both Australia and New Zealand imposed travel restrictions before the pandemic was officially called a pandemic lecturing anyone. Australia doesn’t need any lectures from communists.
And guess which country has started restricting travel from other countries? China. But guess what, that’s not the wrong thing to do under these circumstances. Apparently, hypocrisy is a key trait of communism
I agree that ALL global governments operate very differently & it may be OK to label any communist nation or totalitarian regime as something Western democracies don’t agree with. But to rubbish & totally discredit any nations achievements or activities is short sighted & closes many doors to positive outcomes for the entire human species.
What we all seem to forget is that Western democracies ARE NOT perfect either & even though difficult to see & understand our own short comings we must NEVER put ourselves in a position of superiority with anyone.
History would suggest that we all need to learn from each other & all work together, help each other co-exist & improve life for every single person on the planet no matter the different styles or stances. We as a human species have the chance to get it right for ALL at least a more positive balance for ALL not just our own.
In an ideal world. When there’s a regime that is hostile towards people (not just those outside the PRC, but inside the country too) for even raising questions, working together isn’t possible. When this regime refuses to even accept it made mistakes and even cover ups occurred, nothing will change. A regime that purposely pumps out misinformation on an industrial scale is another sign working together will not produce much for the benefit of humanity.
Again I talk about our own bias from our perspective ONLY is very short sighted. If we could only see beyond our own mistakes we can recognize that Western democracies are also like this.
Then we & others are not willing to change anything, inevitably leads to more death & destruction on ALL sides & pushes humanity much closer to WAR. Australia in particular relies on TRADE with China in fact it is her most important trading partner so working together seems to have been functioning well over the decades.
We as free Western democracies have the capacity to do the same & indeed we have done a lot of this through out history it is called PROPAGANDA a tool expertly used by all nations.
I believe the real problem comes down to how we all interact with each other & certainly agree that many things need to improve across the board.
No one has claimed we are perfect. In fact, I just pointed out Australia made a few mistakes. In another thread, I blasted my country.
No. You just ignore them. Work with what you have. War isn’t inevitable. No one is calling for war. Trade deals should have conditions for transparency and better standards rather than maximizing profits.
The difference here is we get to debate things. Authoritarian places don’t. Debate and discussion are suppressed. Telling the truth may not always be popular even in democracies but you don’t get jailed for it in democracies.
Our own imperfections should teach us humility towards others imperfections. To simply shut the door on other peoples mistakes is not humility.
We should always lean towards the positive & be inclusive as the current global market place is the main driver for all nations level of wealth. Does not every nation deserve the right to participate in generating health, well-being & security for their people?
We need to keep reminding ourselves that China is a very significant superpower & not to mention other significant nations that are similar to China (come to their aid in any event)
YES i totally agree with you & this is now working the problems…NOT just shutting them out. I am in favor of major, rapid, open & truly transparent change & this needs to happen together with ALL nations
This would easily translate to prosecutors shouldn’t be prosecuting rapists, murders and thieves because prosecutors aren’t perfect people.
Humility does not mean being a doormat or tolerating wrongs.
What is being asked of the communist regime is for transparency and let independent scientists to research. The regime refuses.
Inclusive doesn’t mean letting anything happen. Would it be acceptable to imprison over a million people based on ethnicity and religion? Of course not. Bad behaviour should come with consequences.
Trust is earned not entitled.
Russia is the only other country that is hostile to transparency and human dignity. When nations are cowed by another due to wealth, they have given up on morality.
All extremely balanced views, it is really good to see that we can all approach this with open minds & hearts.
I totally agree with you, however their are still many shady areas that would need much closer scrutiny & illumination, a small point
Yes we should not tolerate, however we would need to shine the light brightly on our own problems first, such as poverty, homelessness, environment, production & politics. Many questions remain over the effects of the current global market systems or could we agree that their are only 2, the Western market model & the Eastern market model.
I say it this way because the 2 major political mechanisms impact greatly on how life currently is, are Democracy & Communism & it seems that they create friction in too many ways. As with commerce & control over resources are the normal they seem to be coming to a peak where we either all share or just take control.
Totally right…but again we need to highlight the concept of “in accordance with what rules?” The 2 systems, of dare i say “commerce” & indeed politics, need to agree on the more transparent framework & work extremely hard to reach overall consensus. Any stalemate here & trouble could be on the horizon.
If humanity can work together to solve many of the core issues then we all GROW as a species, come closer to living in a world where fair, open & honest consensus leads to a safer, happier, fairer place for all people.
Poverty and environmental degradation are issues independent of asking a country for transparency. We don’t for example equate domestic abuse with petty theft or verbal abuse with physical abuse.
There are more than 2 models. Some are semi-democracies. Others are absolute monarchies.
The problem is some don’t want to participate in it unless they can do whatever they please. When they don’t want to participate then those who do have two choices: wait and do nothing or move ahead without those that don’t want to participate.
Yes to some extent, with the main causes being capitalism & politics, again lies within the sphere of a global marketing system. Very good point makes me believe the world needs one single global government (not so sure we do) is this the long term perspective of a totally reformed type of UNITED NATIONS? was the inception of the UN ever designed to think as a single global government? Could this be a long term solution or go part way to one?
Yes but all smaller ones within a larger construct & seem to function more favorably one way or the other. So true that the 2 more dominant ideologies are made up so many smaller ones or at least evolving ones.
This would seem to be how things have always been done & probably a big reason why the planet is the way it is. A different approach could help a lot here…humanity’s sentiment to reach out to others is what we all share, we as a species could do & be much greater.
DISCLAIMER: Catholic Answers has turned over the archive to Catholic-Questions.org and no longer owns, manages, or moderates the forums. For additional apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.