4 ms·

What's the downside? I don't have a clue about these things.

jariel 6y ago
It looks incredibly bad for nations to be playing 'vaccine nationalism' and banning exports of anything, especially life medicine, to other nations. It looks possibly very petty and incompetent. The vaccine maker will claim that their commercial obligations are to Australia, the EU is literally overriding commercial deals for nationalist reasons, very bad, and exposes their own failure to negotiate a good deal, especially on home turf. The only upside is the PR to some local citizens who want to feel that 'The EU is doing their job protecting us'. Successful nations are not resorting to this. The EU is way behind and it's a really look. The UK is 33% vaccinated and is going to fully open up in a few months, once they are full-blown open, then the clock is ticking on Von Der Leyen's job and the credibility of the EU because every day that goes by while US/UK are full steam ahead is a slap in the face. If the EU is 6 months behind fully opening up then the consequences - were there actually any way for EU citizens to do anything about it - would be severe. Since the EU political system is shielded from populism like 'elections' and certainly 'referendums' they're probably safe. I suggest the elites will band together and put all the blame on Von Der Leyen. But it may not come to that, production is ramping up it may not be so bad. This is the biggest crisis of our era so the headline optics are really important, and the underlying materiality of lock-downs are felt by every citizen in the country. Imagine 60 million people under duress, looking next door, seeing how everything is open and happy? That's a political nightmare. The vaccination data is here [1] At the current rate, UK is open in a few months, US a bit thereafter. EU won't be able to open for technically 2 years (!!) so it's going to really depend on how vaccinations ramp up. Every politician is sweating. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations Edit: I should add, Italy blocking shipments to Australia is a completely different kind of communication than for example Trump, saying, earlier in the pandemic that he would 'prioritize Americans'. The later is a tough, but reasonable sounding policy. But actively blocking shipments especially when agreements have been made - it's bad. Honestly, if it were a remotely 'poorer country' like Brazil or whatever ... it would be even worse. It's just bad however you cut it. The headline you want is 'we'll be done by August' etc..
- Isinlor 6y ago
  UK banned export of some 100 medicines that could be possible treatment for COVID early last year. USA never intended to export vaccines under Trump administration, Biden is upholding it. The only difference really is that our EU politicians had big words, but when the rubber hit the read went the same route as everyone else. To be honest, EU politicians were naive. We should have banned all exports very early on as everyone else did and then graciously allow exports on case by case basis to the level we have now. It would have been a lot better optics, but the same practical outcome.
  - jariel 6y ago
    The EU is not 'behind' because of it's naive generosity to other nations. An export ban would have made hardly any difference as production would have probably been aligned around the fact. The EU is not 'naive' - it is 'failing' perhaps the most important test since it's inception. Being a 'few months behind' US/UK/China etc. will mostly ok, but if it's more than 6 months behind, then this failure will resonate for decades. Fair or not fair, right or wrong, the facts will be immaterial to the headlines that will ring for a very, very long time.
    - Isinlor 6y ago
      EU is not distributing vaccines. This is up to the states. For example Denmark is doing quite well, but Bulgaria is doing quite bad. So to repeat, healthcare is not a responsibility of the EU.
      - jariel 6y ago
        The end-point of distribution is besides the point. It's not part of the discussion and is not even a problem anywhere really. The EU is definitely the entity responsible for acquiring the vaccines on behalf of nation states - this is what is failing. The 'delay' is not due to Denmark inability to field nurses, it's in the EU's ability to secure product - for whatever reason. And in the end, it won't matter. If the EU ends up 6 months behind other nations 'there will be no excuses'. I think that they'll probably catch up, but there's a real possibility they don't.
kemiller2002 6y ago
People/Politicians etc. have a long memory. If you think of it as a "treat others how you would like to be treated," eventually it will come down to a situation where Italy or some other EU nation will need assistance. In a "my people first" scenario, it's always easy to find a reason why you should not help someone else while justifying that your aid is needed by your people. By blocking the vaccine, they are setting themselves up to be retaliated against sometime in the future.
- heavenlyblue 6y ago
  > have a long memory I would argue generally it’s agreed that humans have short memory.

It looks incredibly bad for nations to be playing 'vaccine nationalism' and banning exports of anything, especially life medicine, to other nations. It looks possibly very petty and incompetent. The vaccine maker will claim that their commercial obligations are to Australia, the EU is literally overriding commercial deals for nationalist reasons, very bad, and exposes their own failure to negotiate a good deal, especially on home turf. The only upside is the PR to some local citizens who want to feel that 'The EU is doing their job protecting us'. Successful nations are not resorting to this. The EU is way behind and it's a really look. The UK is 33% vaccinated and is going to fully open up in a few months, once they are full-blown open, then the clock is ticking on Von Der Leyen's job and the credibility of the EU because every day that goes by while US/UK are full steam ahead is a slap in the face. If the EU is 6 months behind fully opening up then the consequences - were there actually any way for EU citizens to do anything about it - would be severe. Since the EU political system is shielded from populism like 'elections' and certainly 'referendums' they're probably safe. I suggest the elites will band together and put all the blame on Von Der Leyen. But it may not come to that, production is ramping up it may not be so bad. This is the biggest crisis of our era so the headline optics are really important, and the underlying materiality of lock-downs are felt by every citizen in the country. Imagine 60 million people under duress, looking next door, seeing how everything is open and happy? That's a political nightmare. The vaccination data is here [1] At the current rate, UK is open in a few months, US a bit thereafter. EU won't be able to open for technically 2 years (!!) so it's going to really depend on how vaccinations ramp up. Every politician is sweating. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations Edit: I should add, Italy blocking shipments to Australia is a completely different kind of communication than for example Trump, saying, earlier in the pandemic that he would 'prioritize Americans'. The later is a tough, but reasonable sounding policy. But actively blocking shipments especially when agreements have been made - it's bad. Honestly, if it were a remotely 'poorer country' like Brazil or whatever ... it would be even worse. It's just bad however you cut it. The headline you want is 'we'll be done by August' etc..

Isinlor 6y ago
UK banned export of some 100 medicines that could be possible treatment for COVID early last year. USA never intended to export vaccines under Trump administration, Biden is upholding it. The only difference really is that our EU politicians had big words, but when the rubber hit the read went the same route as everyone else. To be honest, EU politicians were naive. We should have banned all exports very early on as everyone else did and then graciously allow exports on case by case basis to the level we have now. It would have been a lot better optics, but the same practical outcome.
- jariel 6y ago
  The EU is not 'behind' because of it's naive generosity to other nations. An export ban would have made hardly any difference as production would have probably been aligned around the fact. The EU is not 'naive' - it is 'failing' perhaps the most important test since it's inception. Being a 'few months behind' US/UK/China etc. will mostly ok, but if it's more than 6 months behind, then this failure will resonate for decades. Fair or not fair, right or wrong, the facts will be immaterial to the headlines that will ring for a very, very long time.
  - Isinlor 6y ago
    EU is not distributing vaccines. This is up to the states. For example Denmark is doing quite well, but Bulgaria is doing quite bad. So to repeat, healthcare is not a responsibility of the EU.
    - jariel 6y ago
      The end-point of distribution is besides the point. It's not part of the discussion and is not even a problem anywhere really. The EU is definitely the entity responsible for acquiring the vaccines on behalf of nation states - this is what is failing. The 'delay' is not due to Denmark inability to field nurses, it's in the EU's ability to secure product - for whatever reason. And in the end, it won't matter. If the EU ends up 6 months behind other nations 'there will be no excuses'. I think that they'll probably catch up, but there's a real possibility they don't.

kemiller2002 6y ago

People/Politicians etc. have a long memory. If you think of it as a "treat others how you would like to be treated," eventually it will come down to a situation where Italy or some other EU nation will need assistance. In a "my people first" scenario, it's always easy to find a reason why you should not help someone else while justifying that your aid is needed by your people. By blocking the vaccine, they are setting themselves up to be retaliated against sometime in the future.

heavenlyblue 6y ago
> have a long memory I would argue generally it’s agreed that humans have short memory.