Sars lessons not learned in fight against bird flu
The unattractive truth about the spread of bird flu in Asia is finally beginning to emerge. First it was Thailand reluctantly admitting it had an outbreak - after weeks of official denials. Then, in similar fashion, Indonesia revealed the virus has been killing its chickens in large numbers since November.
The Thai prime minister has now admitted his government suspected bird flu had struck 'a couple of weeks' before making this public. And in Indonesia, there are reports officials gave in to pressure from powerful businessmen who wanted bird flu covered up.
In both cases, the delay in alerting their own people and the world to the existence of a disease which could potentially cause a global pandemic is alarming. It should be a matter of international concern.
But while the two governments responsible have come under fire in their own countries, the reaction of the international community has been muted. No effective mechanism exists for holding the officials concerned accountable for their misguided and irresponsible attempts to avoid acknowledging the truth. As ministers from the countries in the region affected by bird flu prepare for a meeting in Bangkok tomorrow, urgent consideration should be given to ensuring there can be no repetition of such conduct in the future.
The grave danger these emerging infectious diseases pose to the world is - it appears - still not sufficiently understood or appreciated. This is difficult to believe given the terrible warning sounded by the Sars outbreak last year. But the handling of bird flu suggests it is the case. There are signs that the virus is mutating. If it finds a way of spreading through human-to-human transmission then we could be facing a pandemic capable of claiming millions of lives worldwide. Viruses of this kind should be seen as weapons of mass destruction. And they pose an even greater threat to life than the ones which have so preoccupied the world during the war against terror.
Around the globe, governments reacted speedily and decisively in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The United Nations passed anti-terror resolutions, governments enacted tough new laws and states suspected of harbouring terrorists or developing banned weapons came under the greatest scrutiny. The same sense of urgency has, however, not been evident in the war against infectious disease. Certainly, it existed during Sars and eventually steps were taken to at least ensure a co-ordinated approach was adopted. But as the bird flu outbreaks have shown, a greater international effort is needed to ensure governments act transparently and remain alert.
This may require the establishment of an effective independent monitoring and testing system. Perhaps there should be an international convention which places legally binding obligations on states to meet the highest standards in this regard.
The nature of the problem makes punitive measures difficult to apply. Once an outbreak is admitted, the priority must be to tackle it. This requires co-operation and understanding - not the pointing of fingers. International pressure played a big part last year in China's U-turn on Sars, and led to a more honest and open approach. Once this had been achieved, the international focus was rightly on working with China to beat the virus.
But lessons have clearly not been learned. There is a need to ensure nations understand it is ultimately in their interests - and those of the rest of the world - to waste no time in making public even the suspicion that a dangerous virus has struck. And this may require the international community taking steps which go beyond simply trusting national governments to do what is right.
